Teaching for understanding and/or teaching for the examination in high school physics

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 26, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 447-462

  Geelan, David R ^a   Wildy, Helen ^b   Louden, William ^b   Wallace, John ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b EDITH COWAN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c CURTIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

PHYSICS;

EID: 1342269006     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0950069032000097398     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. AINLEY, J., GRAETZ, B., LONG, M. and BATTEN, M. (1995). Socioeconomic Status and School Education (Canberra: AGPS).
2. AMERICA 2000 (1991). An Educational Strategy to Move the American Educational System Ahead to Meet the Needs of the 21st Century (Washington, DC: US Department of Education).
3. AUSTRALIAN BUREAU OF STATISTICS (1998). 1996 Census of Population and Housing, Socioeconomic Indexes for Areas, Catalogue no. 2039.0 (Canberra: Australian Bureau of Statistics).
4. AUSTRALIAN COUNCIL FOR EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH (1987-1997). Australian Scaling Test (Camberwell, Vic.: Australian Council for Educational Research).
5. BLOOM, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain (New York: Longmans, Green & Co.).
6. BOND, L., SMITH, T., BAKER, W. K. and HATTIE, J. A. (2000). The Certification System of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards: A Construct and Consequential Validity Study (Greensboro, NC: Centre for Educational Research and Evaluation, The University of North Carolina at Greensboro).
7. COBB, P. (1989). Experiential, cognitive and anthropological perspectives in mathematics education. For the Learning of Mathematics, 9(2), 32-42.
8. COHEN, D. K. (1988). Teaching practice: plus que, ca change... In P. Jackson (ed.) Contributing to Educational Change: Perspectives on Research and Practice (Berkeley, CA: McCutcheon), 27-84.
9. COHEN, D. K., MCLAUGHLIN, M. W. and TALBERT, J. E. (1993). Teaching for Understanding: Challenges for Policy and Practice (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass).
10. FENSHAM, P. J. (ed.) (1988). Development and Dilemmas in Science Education (London: Taylor & Francis).
11. FENSHAM, P. J. (1995). One step forward... Australian Science Teachers Journal, 41(4), 24, 2629.
12. FITZ-GIBBON, C.T. (1997). From value added indicators to evidence based education: the task for the next decade. Incorporated Association of Registered Teachers of Victoria Seminar Paper 65.
13. GARNETT, P. J. (1987). Teaching for understanding: exemplary practice in high school chemistry. In K. Tobin and B. J. Fraser (eds.) Exemplary Practice in Science and Mathematics Education (Perth: Key Centre for Teaching and Research in Science and Mathematics Education).
14. GEE, P. (1992). The Social Mind: Language, Ideology and Social Practice (New York: Bergin & Garvey).
15. GEELAN, D., WILDY, H., LOUDEN, W. and WALLACE, J. (2000). 'They shall have abundance...': achievement and advantage in Year 12 physics. Paper presented at the 31st Annual Conference of the Australian Science Education Research Association, Fremantle, Western Australia, 26 June-1 July 2000.
16. GEELAN, D. R. (1997). Epistemological anarchy and the many forms of constructivism. Science & Education, 6(1-2), 15-28.
17. HATTIE, J., CLINTON, J., THOMPSON, M. and SCHMIDT-DAVIS, H. (1995). Identifying Highly Accomplished Teachers: A Validation Study, Research Report of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards Technical Analysis Group (Greensboro, NC: Centre for Educational Research and Evaluation, University of North Carolina at Greensboro).
18. HATTIE, J. A., CLINTON, J. C., THOMPSON, M. and SCHMIDT-DAVIS, H. (1996). Identifying expert teachers. Paper presented at the North Carolina Association for Research in Education, Chapel Hill, NC, February.
19. HILL, P. and ROWE, K. (1996). Multilevel modelling in school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(1), 1-34.
20. LEMKE, J. L. (1990). Talking Science: Language, Learning and Values (Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing).
21. MCLAUGHLIN, M. W. and TALBERT, J. E. (1993). Introduction: new visions of teaching. In D. K. Cohen, M. W. McLaughlin and J. E. Talbert (eds.) Teaching for Understanding: Challenges for Policy and Practice (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass).
22. MCROBBIE, C. and TOBIN, K. (1995). Restraints to reform: the congruence of teacher and student actions in a chemistry classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(4), 373-385.
23. NICKERSON, R. S. (1985). Understanding understanding. American Journal of Education, 43(2), 201-234.
24. ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION and DEVELOPMENT (1993). Teacher Quality: New Ways of Teaching and Learning (Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Centre for Educational Research and Innovation).
25. OSBORNE, R. and WITTROCK, M. (1985). The generative learning model and its implications for science education. Studies in Science Education, 12, 59-87.
26. PINES, A. L. and WEST, L. H. T. (1986). Conceptual understanding and science learning: the interpretation of research within a sources-of-knowledge framework. Science Education, 70(5), 583-604.
27. PRAWAT, R. S. (1989). Teaching for understanding: three key attributes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 315-328.
28. PRAWAT, R. S. (1993). The value of ideas: problems vs possibilities in learning. Educational Researcher, 22(6), 5-16.
29. ROWE, K. (1999). Assessment, performance indicators, 'league tables', 'value-added' measures and school effectiveness? Consider the issues and 'let's get real'! Paper presented at the 1999 joint conference of the Australian Association for Research in Education (MRE) and the New Zealand Association for Research in Education (NZARE), Melbourne, 29 November-2 December, 1999. Available at [http://www.swin.edu.au/aare/99pap/row99656.htm].
30. RUBEN, D-H. (1993). Explanation (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
31. RUDDOCK, J. (1988). Lessons, subjects and the curriculum: issues of 'Understanding' and 'coherence'. In J. Ruddock, R. Chaplain and G. Wallace (eds.) School Improvement: What can Pupils Tell Us? (London: David Fulton), 41-52.
32. RUTHERFORD, F. J. and AHLGREN, A. (1990). Science for All Americans (New York: Oxford University Press).
33. SAUNDERS, L. S. (1999). A brief history of educational 'value added': how did we get to where we are? School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 10(2), 233-256.
34. SHULMAN, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
35. SOLOMON, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupils' understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14, 63-82.
36. STIGLER, J. W. and HIEBERT, J. (1998). The TIMSS videotape study. American Educator, 22(4), 7, 43-45.
37. SUTTON, C. (1993). Figuring out a scientific understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1215-1227.
38. THOMAS, G. P. (1999). Student restraints to reform: conceptual change issues in enhancing students' learning processes. Research in Science Education, 29(1), 89-109.
39. TOBIN, K. and FRASER, B. J. (1987). Exemplary Practice in Science and Mathematics Education (Perth: Key Centre for Teaching and Research in Science and Mathematics Education).
40. TOBIN, K., DEACON, J. and FRASER, B. J. (1989). An investigation of exemplary physics teaching. The Physics Teacher, 27(3), 144-150.
41. TOBIN, K., KAHLE, J. B. and FRASER, B. J. (1990). Windows into Science Classrooms: Problems Associated with Higher Level Cognitive Learning (London: Falmer Press).
42. TREAGUST, D. F. and HARRISON, A. G. (1999). The genesis of effective scientific explanations for the classroom. In J. Loughran (ed.) Researching Teaching: Methodologies and Practices for Understanding Pedagogy (London: Falmer Press), 28-43.
43. TYMMS, P. (1993). Accountability - can it be fair? Oxford Review of Education, 19, 291-299.
44. US DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, NATIONAL CENTRE FOR EDUCATION STATISTICS (1999). In James W. Stigler, Patrick Gonzales, Takako Kawanaka, Steffen Knoll and Ana Serrano, The TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study: Methods and Findings from an Exploratory Research Project on Eighth-Grade Mathematics Instruction in Germany, Japan and the United States, NCES 99074 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office) [http://nces.ed.qov/timss].
45. VON GLASERSFELD, E. (1987). The Construction of Knowledge (Seaside, CA: Systems Inquiry Series, Intersystems Publication).
46. WALLACE J. and LOUDEN, W. (1998). Curriculum change in science: riding the waves of reform. In B. Fraser and K. Tobin (eds.) International Handbook of Science Education (Dordrecht: Kluwer), 471-485.
47. WHITE, R. and GUNSTONE, R. (1992). Probing Understanding (London: Falmer Press).
48. WHITE, R. and WALLACE, J. (1999). Heroism and science education reform. Research in Science Education, 29(4), 417-430.
49. WILDY, H. and WALLACE, J. (1994). Relearning to teach physics: in the midst of change. Research in Science and Technological Education, 12(1), 63-75.
50. WILDY, H. and WALLACE, J. (1995). Understanding teaching or teaching for understanding: alternative frameworks for science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(2), 43-56.
51. WISKE, M. S. (ed.) (1998). Teaching for Understanding: Linking Research with Practice (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass).