Inquiry-based science in the middle grades: Assessment of learning in urban systemic reform

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 41, Issue 10, 2004, Pages 1063-1080

  Marx, Ronald W ^a   Blumenfeld, Phyllis C ^b   Krajcik, Joseph S ^b   Fishman, Barry ^b   Soloway, Elliot ^b   Geier, Robert ^b   Tal, Revital Tali ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SCIENCE EDUCATION; URBAN STUDENTS; URBAN SYSTEMIC REFORMS;

CURRICULA; LEARNING SYSTEMS; PROFESSIONAL ASPECTS; STUDENTS;

EDUCATION;

EID: 10844281959     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.20039     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Amati, K., Singer, J., & Carrillo, R. (1999, April). What affects the quality of air in my community? Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy, Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
4. Berends, M., Kirby, S.N., Naftel, S., & McKelvey, C. (2001). Implementation and performance in New American Schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
5. Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B., Krajcik, J.S., Marx, R.W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling-up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educational Psychologist, 35, 149-164.
6. Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J.S., Marx, R.W., & Soloway, E. (1994). Lessons learned: How collaboration helped middle grade science teachers learn project-based instruction. The Elementary School Journal, 94, 539-551.
7. Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26, 369-398.
8. Bouillion, L. & Gomez, L. (2001). Connecting school and community with science learning: Real world problems and school-community partnerships as contextual scaffolds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 878-898.
9. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32, 9-13.
10. Cohen, D.K. (1995). What is the system in systemic reform? Educational Researcher, 24,11-17, 31.
11. Cohen, D.K. & Ball, D.L. (1999). Instruction, capacity, and improvement (CPRE Research Report Series No. RR-043). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Consortium for Policy Research in Education. Retrieved March 30, 2003 (http://www.cpre.org/publications/rr43.pdf).
12. Cronbach, L.J. (1971). Test validation. In R.L. Thorndike (Ed.), Educational measurement. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
13. Edelson, D.C., Gordin, D.N., & Pea, R.D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 391-450.
14. Fishman, B., Fogleman, J., Kubitskey, B., Peek-Brown, D., & Marx, R. (2003, March). Taking charge of innovations: Fostering teacher leadership in professional development to sustain reform. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research on Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA. Retrieved November 11, 2003 (http://www.umich.edu/~fishman/papers/ FishmanFoglemanNARST2003.pdf).
15. Fishman, B., Marx, R., Best, S., & Tal, R. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 643-658.
16. Fishman, B., Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J.S., & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 43-76.
17. Fuhrman, S.H. (Ed.). (2001). From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states. 100th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part II). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
18. Garet, M.S., Porter, A.C., Desimone, L., Birman, B.F., & Yoon, K.S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915-945.
19. Hannaway, J. & Kimball, K. (2001). Big isn't always bad: School district size, poverty, and standards-based reform. In S.H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states. 100th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part II) (pp. 99-123). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20. Hug, B. & Krajcik, J.S. (2002). Students' scientific practices using a scaffolded inquiry sequence. In P. Bell, R. Stevens, & T. Satwicz (Eds.), International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) (pp. 167-174). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Jackson, S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A design retrospective. In M. Jacobson & R. Kozma (Eds.), Advanced designs for the technologies of learning: Innovations in science and mathematics education (pp. 77-116). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Kahle, J.B., Meece, J., & Scantlebury, K. (2000). Urban African-American middle school science students: Does standards-based teaching make a difference? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 1019-1041.
23. Klein, S., Hamilton, L., McCaffrey, D., Stecher, B., Robyn, A., & Burroughs, D. (2000). Teaching practices and student achievement: Report of the first year findings of the "Mosaic" study of systemic initiatives in mathematics and science. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
24. Krajcik, J.S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R.W., Bass, K., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). First attempts at inquiry strategies in middle school, project-based science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313-350.
25. Krajcik, J.S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R.W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. Minstrell & E.H.v. Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 283-315). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
26. Lee, O. (2002). Science inquiry for elementary students from diverse backgrounds. In W. Secada (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 26, pp. 23-69). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
27. Linn, M.C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J.D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87, 517-538.
28. Marx, R.W. (2003, April). Partnerships for urban systemic reform: The effects of inquiry curriculum developed by the Center for Learning Technologies in Urban Schools. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
29. Marx, R.W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J.S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science. Elementary School Journal, 97, 341-358.
30. Marx, R.W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J.S., & Soloway, E. (1998). New technologies for teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 33-52.
31. Moje, E., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R.W. (2001). "Maestro, what is 'quality'?": Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 469-498.
32. Moje, E., Peek-Brown, D., Sutherland, L., Marx, R., Blumenfeld, P., & Krajcik, J.S. (2004). Explaining explanations: Developing scientific literacy in middle-school project-based reforms. In D. Strickland & D.E. Alvermann (Eds.), Bridging the gap: Improving literacy for preadolescent and adolescent learners in grades 4-12 (pp. 227-251). New York: Teachers College Press.
33. Moll, L.C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 31, 132-141.
34. National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
35. Porter, A.C. & Smithson, J.L. (2001). Are content standards being implemented in the classroom? A methodology and some tentative answers. In S.H. Fuhrman (Ed.), From the capitol to the classroom: Standards-based reform in the states. 100th Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (Part II) (pp. 60-80). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
36. Rivet, A. & Krajcik, J.S. (2002, April). Project-based science curricula: Achieving national standards in urban systemic reform. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
37. Roth, W.M. (1995). Authentic school science. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
38. Ruiz-Primo, M.A., Shavelson, R.J., Hamilton, L., & Klein, S. (2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 369-393.
39. Rutherford, F.J. & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford.
40. Schneider, R.M., Krajcik, J.S., & Blumenfeld, P. (2002, April). Exploring the role of curriculum materials to support teachers in education reform. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
41. Singer, J., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., & Clay-Chambers, J. (2000a). Constructing extended inquiry projects: Curriculum materials for science education reform. Educational Psychologist, 35, 165-178.
42. Singer, J., Rivet, A., Schneider, R.M., Krajcik, J.S., Amati, K., & Marx, R.W. (2000b, April). Setting the stage: Engaging students in water quality. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
43. Smith, M.S. & O'Day, J. (1991). Systemic school reform. In S.H. Fuhrman & B. Malen (Eds.), The politics of curriculum and testing (pp. 233-267). New York: Falmer.
44. Soloway, E., Guzdial, M., & Hay, K. (1994). Learner-centered design: The challenge for HCI in the 21st century. Interactions, 1, 36-48.
45. Songer, N.B., Lee, H.-S., & McDonald, S. (2002). Research towards an expanded understanding of inquiry science beyond one idealized standard. Science Education, 87, 490-516.
46. Supovitz, J.A., Mahyer, D.P., & Kahle, J.B. (2000). Promoting inquiry-based instructional practice: The longitudinal impact of professional development in the context of systemic reform. Educational Policy, 14, 331-356.
47. Supovitz, J.A. & Turner, H.M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 963-980.
48. Warren, B., Ballenger, C., Ogonowski, M., Rosebery, A., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2001). Rethinking diversity in teaching science: The logic of everyday sense-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 529-552.
49. Wilson, S.M. & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An examination of research on contemporary professional development. In A. Iran-Nejad & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (pp. 173-209). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
50. Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2001). Promoting conceptual understanding of chemical representations: Students' use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 821-842.