The roles of regional partners in supporting an international earth science education program

Science Education

Volumn 89, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 956-979

  Penuel, William R ^a   Shear, Linda ^a   Korbak, Christine ^a   Sparrow, Elena ^b  

^a SRI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA FAIRBANKS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 28444486390     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20079     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Assembly of Alaska Native Elders. (1998). Alaska standards for culturally responsive schools. Anchorage, AK: Alaska Native Knowledge Network.
2. Atkin, J. M., & Black, P. (2003). Inside science education reform: A history of curricular and policy change. New York: Teachers College Press.
3. Barstow, D., & Geary, E. (2002). Blueprint for change: Report for the National Conference on the Revolution in Earth and Space Science Education. Cambridge, MA: TERC.
4. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Brown, M., & Edelson, D. C. (1998). Software in context: Designing for students, teachers, and classroom enactment. In A. S. Bruckman, M. Guzdial, J. L. Kolodner, & A. Ram (Eds.), Proceedings of ICLS 98:International Conference on the Learning Sciences (pp. 63-69). Charlottesville, VA: AACE.
6. Carpenter, T. P., Blanton, M. L., Cobb, P., Franke, M. L., Kaput, J., & McClain, K. (2004). Scaling up innovative practices in mathematics and science. Madison, WI: National Center for Improving Student Learning and Achievement in Mathematics and Science, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
7. Cohen, D. K. (1988). Educational technology and school organization. In R. S. Nickerson & P. P. Zodhiates (Eds.), Technology in education: Looking toward 2020 (pp. 231-264). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Cohen, G. (2000). Lessons from the Annenberg Challenge: Intermediary organizations as persuasive agents of change. Unpublished master's thesis, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
9. Elmore, R. F. (1996). Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 1-26.
10. Feldman, A., Konold, C., & Coulter, B. (1999). Network science, a decade later. Hands On!, 22(2), 1-2,16-18.
11. Fullan, M. G. (2000). Three stories of education reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(8), 581-584.
12. 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(4), 915-945.
13. McDonald, J., McLaughlin, M. W., & Corcoran, T. (2000, April). Agents of reform: Role and function of intermediary organizations in the Annenberg Challenge. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
14. Means, B., Coleman, E. B., Baisden, K., Haertel, G. D., Korbak, C., Lewis, A., et al. (1999). GLOBE Year 4 evaluation: Evolving implementation practices. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
15. Means, B., Coleman, E. B., & Lewis, A. (1998). GLOBE Year 3 evaluation: Implementation and progress. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
16. Means, B., Korbak, C., Lewis, A., Michalchik, V., Penuel, W. R., Rollin, J., et al. (2000). GLOBE Year 5 evaluation. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
17. Means, B., Penuel, W. R., Korbak, C., Lewis, A., Murphy, B., Vinson, E., et al. (2001). GLOBE Year 6 evaluation: Explaining variation in implementation. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
18. Moore, G. A. (2002). Crossing the chasm: Marketing and selling products to mainstream customers. New York: Harper.
19. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
20. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
21. Nuefeld, B., & Guiney, E. (2000, April). Transforming events: A local education fund's efforts to promote largescale urban school reform. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
22. Penuel, W. R. (2003). Developing a rubric for characterizing curriculum integration in GLOBE. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
23. Penuel, W. R., Korbak, C., Lewis, A., Shear, L., Toyama, Y., & Yarnall, L. (2002). GLOBE Year 7 evaluation: Exploring student research and inquiry in GLOBE. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
24. Penuel, W. R., Korbak, C., Yarnall, L., Lewis, A., Toyama, Y., & Zander, M. (2004). GLOBE Year 8 Evaluation: Understanding diverse implementation contexts. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
25. Penuel, W. R., & Means, B. (2004). Implementation variation and fidelity in an inquiry science program: An analysis of GLOBE data reporting patterns. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(3), 294-315.
26. Reiser, B. J., Spillane, J. P., Steinmuler, F., Sorsa, D., Carney, K., & Kyza, E. (2000). Investigating the mutual adaptation process in teachers' design of technology-infused curricula. In B. Fishman & S. O'Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 342-349). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Songer, N. B., Lee, H.-S., & Kam, R. (2002). Technology-rich inquiry science in urban classrooms: What are the barriers to inquiry pedagogy? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 128-150.
28. 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(2), 963-980.
29. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.