Constraints and contributors to becoming a science teacher-leader

Science Education

Volumn 90, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 331-347

  Lewthwaite, Brian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645696218     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20093     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Appleton, K., & Kindt, I. (1999). Why teach primary science? Influences on beginning teachers'practice. International Journal of Science Education, 21(2), 155-168.
2. Briscoe, C., & Peters, J. (1996). Teacher collaboration across and within schools: Supporting individual change in elementary science teaching. Science Education, 81 (1), 51-67.
3. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasla (Ed.), Six theories of child development. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
5. Davis, K. S. (2003). "Change is hard": What science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science Education, 87(1), 3-31.
6. Dillon, J., Osborne, J., Fairbrother, R., & Kurina, L. (2000). A study into the professional views and needs of science teachers in primary and secondary schools in England. London: Council for Science and Technology.
7. Edmonds, G., & Lewthwaite, B. E. (2002). Primary science curriculum delivery evaluation: A means to improvement. In R. K.Coll (Ed.). SAMEpapers 2002 (pp. 122-139). Hamilton, New Zealand: Centre for Science & Technology Education Research, University of Waikato.
8. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.
9. Fullan, M. (1991). The NEW meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
10. Fullan, M. (1992). Successful school improvement. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
11. Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. London: The Falmer Press.
12. Gulliver, P., & Lewthwaite, B. E. (2003). Improving science program delivery: A school-based study. Science Educational International, 13(2), 25-29.
13. Harlen, W. (1997). Primary teachers' understandings in science and its impact in the classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 323-337.
14. Hoffman, L., Paris, S., & Hall, E. (1994). Developmental psychology today (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
15. Jonnassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
16. Lewthwaite, B. E. (2001). The development, validation and application of a primary science curriculum implementation questionnaire. Unpublished ScEdD Thesis, Curtin University of Technology, Perth. http://adt.curtin.edu.au/theses/ available/adt-WCU20030717.155648/
17. Lewthwaite, B. E. (2004). "Are you saying I'm to blame?" An analysis of a principal's role in influencing science program delivery. Research in Science Education, 34(2), 155-170.
18. Lewthwaite, B. E. (2005). "It's more than knowing the science." A case study in elementary science curriculum review. Canadian Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 5(2), 170-186.
19. Lewthwaite, B. E. (in press). "There's growth-but it's not that evident. A longitudinal study in science program improvement." Journal of Research in Science Teacher Education.
20. Lewthwaite, B. E., & Fisher, D. L. (2004). The application of a primary science curriculum evaluation questionnaire. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 55-70.
21. Lewthwaite, B. E., & Fisher, D. L. (2005). The development and validation of a primary science curriculum delivery evaluation questionnaire. International Journal of Science Education, 27(5), 593-606.
22. Lewthwaite, B. E., & MacIntyre, W. R. (2003). Professional science knowledge, interest and self-efficacy: A vignette study. In R. K. Coll (Ed.), STERpapers 2003 (pp. 53-80). Hamilton, New Zealand: Centre for Science & Technology Education Research, University of Waikato.
23. Lewthwaite, B. E, Stableford, J., & Fisher, D. L. (2001). Enlarging the focus on primary science delivery in New Zealand. In R. K.Coll (Ed.), SAMEpapers 2001 (pp. 213-238). Hamilton, New Zealand: Centre for Science & Technology Education Research, University of Waikato.
24. Lieberman, A., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1992). Networks for educational change: Powerful and problematic. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 673-677.
25. Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of mathematics and science. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
26. McAdams, D. P. (1989). The development of narrative identity. In D. M. Bass & N. Cantor (Eds.), Personality psychology: Recent trends and emerging directions (pp. 160-174). New York: Springer-Verlag.
27. Moen, P. (1995). Introduction. In P. Moen, G. H. Elder, & K. Lusher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
28. Payne, K., & Lewthwaite, B. E. (2002). Systematic curriculum review: A procedure for analysis. New Zealand Principal - Te Temuaki O Aotearoa, 18(2), 30-34.
29. Peers, E. P., Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. T. (2003). Supports and concerns for teacher professional growth during the implementation of a science curriculum innovation. Research in Science Education, 33, 89-110.
30. Rutter, M. (1977). Protective factors in children's responses to stress and disadvantage. In M. W. Kent & J. E. Rolf (Eds.), Primary prevention of psychopathology, Vol. III: Social competence in children. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.
31. Rutter, M. (1987). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. In J. Rolf, A. Masten, D. Cichetti, K. Nuechterlein, & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the development of psychopathology (pp. 181-214). New York: Cambridge University Press.
32. Stewart, T., and Prebble, T. (1985). Making it happen: a school development process. Palmerston North, New Zealand: Dunmore Press.
33. Suppovitz, J. A., Mayer, 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(3), 331-356.
34. Suppovitz, 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(9), 963-980.
35. van den Berg, R. (2001). Impact of inservice education in elementary science: Participants revisited a year later. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12(1), 29-45.
36. Venville, G., Wallace, J., & Louden, W. (1998). A state-wide initiative: The Primary Science Teacher-Leader Project. Research in Science Education, 8(1), 17-38.