Multimedia resources to bridge the praxis gap: Modeling practice in elementary science education

Journal of Science Teacher Education

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 349-375

  Watters, James J ^a   Diezmann, Carmel M ^a  

^a QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34249655170     PISSN: 1046560X     EISSN: 15731847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10972-007-9051-x     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Abel, S. K., & Roth, M. (1992). Constraints to teaching elementary science. A case study of a science-enthusiast student teacher. Science Education, 76, 581-595.
2. Alexander, P. A., & Murphy, P. K. (1998). The research base for APA's learner-centered psychological principles. In N. L. Lambert & B. L. McCombs (Eds.), Issues in school reform: A sampler of psychological perspectives on learner-centered schools (pp. 25-60). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
3. Australian Education Council (1994). A statement on science for Australian schools. Carlton, VIC: Australia Curriculum Corporation.
4. Awaya, A., McEwan, H., Heyler, D., Linsky, S., Lum, D., & Wakukawa, P. (2003). Mentoring as a journey. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(1), 45-56.
5. Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is - or might be - the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6-8, 14.
6. Bandura, A. (1977). Self efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215.
7. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.
8. Barnett, M., Harwood, W., Keating, T., & Saam, J. (2002). Using emerging technologies to help bridge the gap between university theory and classroom practice: Challenges and successes. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6), 299-313.
9. Batterham, I. (2000). The chance to change: The final report by the Chief Scientist. Canberra: AGPS.
10. Borko, H., Bellamy, M. L., & Sanders, L. (1992). A cognitive analysis of patterns in science instruction. In T. Russell & H. Munby (Eds.), Teachers and teaching: from classroom to reflection (pp. 49-70). London: Falmer Press.
11. Bryan, L. A., & Abell, S. K. (1999). Development of professional knowledge in learning to teach elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 121-139.
12. Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
13. Ciardiello, A. (1998). Did you ask a good question today? Alternative cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42, 210-219.
14. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educator, Winter, 6-46.
15. Debski, R. 1997. Support of creativity and collaboration in the language classroom: A new role for technology. In R. Debski, J. Gassin & M. Smith (Eds.), Language learning through social computing. Applied Linguistics Association of Australia Occasional Papers 16.
16. deLaat, J., & Watters, J. J. (1995). Science teaching self-efficacy in a primary school: A case study. Research in Science Education, 25(4), 453-464.
17. Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2001a). Learning science in lower primary: Floating and sinking [video]. Brisbane, Australia: Queensland University of Technology.
18. Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2001b). Teaching science in lower primary [CDROM]. Brisbane, Australia: Queensland University of Technology.
19. Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2002a). A theoretical framework for multimedia resources: A case from science education. In Proceedings of the Australian Association for Research in Education Conference, December, 2002, Brisbane.
20. Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2002b). Focus on learning science [video]. Brisbane, Australia: Queensland University of Technology.
21. Eggers, J. H., & Clark, D. (2000). Executive coaching that wins. Ivey Business Journal, 65(1), 66-70.
22. Fensham, P. J. (2002). Time to change drivers for scientific literacy. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 2(1), 9-24.
23. Fenstermacher, G. D. (1986). Philosophy of research on teaching: Three aspects. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 37-49). New York: Macmillan.
24. Flinders, D. J., & Eisner, E. W. (1994). Educational criticism as a form of qualitative inquiry. Research into the teaching of English, 28(4), 341-361.
25. Gale, T., & Jackson, C. (1997). Preparing professionals: Student teachers and their supervisors at work. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 25(2), 177-191.
26. Gattis K. W. (1998). Listening: An overlooked teaching skill? URL: http://www.ncsu.edu/sciencejunction/route/professional/listen.html [Accessed 20 May 2002].
27. Ginns, I. S., & Watters, J. J. (1999). Beginning elementary school teachers and the effective teaching of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(4), 287-313.
28. Glaserfeld, E. V. (1996). Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp. 3-7). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
29. Goodrum, D., Cousins, J., & Kinnear, A. (1992). The reluctant primary school teacher. Research in Science Education, 22, 163-169.
30. Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., & Rennie, L. (2001). The statua and quality of teaching and learning of science in Australian schools. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs, [http:// www.dest.gov.au/schools/publications/2001/science/index.htm#pdf] (Accessed 17 July 2003).
31. Grabe, M., & Grabe, C. (1998). Integrating technology into meaningful learning (2nd Ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
32. Harlen, W. (1997). Primary teachers understanding in science and its impact on the classroom. Research in Science Education, 27(3), 323-337.
33. Harlen, W., & Simon, S. (2001). Elementary school science and the rise and rise of primary science. School Science Review, 82(300), 49-57.
34. Henry, J. J., & Clements, D. H. (1999). Challenges for teachers attempting to integrate a mathematics innovation. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 31(3), 240-260.
35. Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645-670.
36. Jacobson, M. J., & Jacobson, P. C. (1998). Lessons learned and lessons to be learned: An overview of innovative network learning environments. In Ed-Media/Ed-Tececom 98 World Conference on Educational Telecommunications, Proceedings. Freiburg, Germany (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 428 676).
37. Jonassen, D., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. (1998). Computers as mind resources for engaging learners in critical thinking. Techtends (March), 24-32.
38. Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., & Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning with technology: Constructivist perspective. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
39. Kearsley, G. (n.d.). Explorations in learning & instruction: The theory into practice database. Retrieved 24 March 2004 from http://www.tip.psychology.org/.
40. Kelly, J. (2000). Rethinking the elementary science methods course: A case for content, pedagogy, and informal science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 755-777.
41. Kozma, R. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179-212.
42. Krajcik, J., & Starr, M. (2001). Learning science content in a project-based environment. In R. Tinker & J. S. Krajcik (Eds.), Portable technologies: Science learning in context (pp. 121-146). Netherlands: Kluwer Publishers.
43. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65-99.
44. Laurillard, D. (1999). Using communications and information technology effectively. In W. J. McKeachie (Ed.), McKeachie's teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers (10th Ed.) (pp. 183-200). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
45. Lee, J., Dineen, F., McKendree, J., Mayes, T. (1999). Vicarious learning: Cognitive and linguistic effects of observing peer discussion. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, April 19-23 [ERIC Reproduction Services ED 432603].
46. Lee, C., & Krapfl, L. (2002). Teaching as you would have them teach: An effective elementary science teacher preparation program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3), 247-265.
47. Linn, M. C., & Hsi, S. (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum.
48. Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49. Luft, J. A., & Patterson, N. C. (2002). Bridging the gap: Supporting beginning teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14(4), 267-282.
50. Masingila, J., Ochanji, M., & Pfister, C. (2004). Learning from the process: The making of a multimedia case study. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 4(3), 269-283.
51. Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions?. Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
52. Mellado, V., Blanco, L., & Ruiz, C. (1998). A framework for learning to teach science in initial primary teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9, 195-219.
53. Merseth, K. K., & Lacey, C. A. (1993). Weaving stronger fabric: The pedagogical promise of hypermedia and case methods in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(3), 283-299.
54. Murphy, C., & Beggs, J. (2003). Children's perceptions of school science. School Science Review, 84(308), 109-116.
55. National Science Board (1999). Preparing our children: math and science education in the national interest. Washington, DC: Author.
56. Northfield, J. (1998). Teacher educators and the practice of science teacher education. In B. J. Fraser, & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 695-706). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
57. Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (1996). Primary science: Past and future directions. Studies in Science Education, 26, 99-147.
58. Ost, D. H. (1989). The culture of teaching: Stability and change. The Educational Forum, 53(2), 163-181.
59. Papert, S. (1997). Looking at technology through school-colored spectacles. Available: http://www.papert.org/articles/ LookingatTechnologyThroughSchool.html (20/3/2004)].
60. Pea, R. D. (1985). Beyond amplification: Using the computer to reorganize mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20(4), 167-182.
61. Print, M. (1993). Situational analysis. In Curriculum development and design (pp.109-120). St Leonards, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin.
62. Reeves, T. C. (1998). The impact of media and technology in schools. Available: http://www.athensacademy.org/instruct/media_tech/ reeves0. html 16/02/00].
63. Robertson, J. W. (2003). Stepping out of the box: Rethinking the failure of ICT to transform schools. Journal of Educational Change, 4, 323-344.
64. Rodriques, S. (1997). Fitness for purpose: A glimpse at when, why and how to use information technology in science lessons. Australian Science Teachers' Journal, 43(2), 38-39.
65. Roschelle, J., & DiGiano C. (2002). The educational software components of tomorrow (ESCOT) Project. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
66. Schulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
67. Simmons, P. E., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., & Crockett, D. et al (1999). Beginning teachers: Beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 930-954.
68. Stemler, L. K. (1997). Educational characteristics of multimedia: A literature review. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 6(3/4), 339-359.
69. Stevens, C., & Wenner, G. (1996). Elementary preservice teachers' knowledge and beliefs regarding science and mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 96(1), 2-9.
70. Tilgner, P. (1990). Avoiding science in the elementary school. Science Education, 74, 421-431.
71. Wang, J., & Odell, S. J. (2002). Mentored learning to teach according to standards-based reform: A critical review. Review of Educational Research, 72(3), 481-546.
72. Watters, J. J., & Diezmann, C. M. (2001a). Learning science in upper primary: Finding out about the past. Brisbane, Australia: Queensland University of Technology.
73. Watters, J. J., & Diezmann, C. M. (2001b). Teaching science in upper primary [CDROM]. Brisbane, Australia: Queensland University of Technology.
74. Watters, J. J., & Diezmann, C. M. (2002). Teaching science in the primary years. http://www.education.qut.edu.au/science/.
75. Watters, J. J. & Ginns, I. S. (1995). Origins of, and changes in preservice teachers' science teaching self-efficacy. Paper presented at the Annual NARST Meeting, San Francisco, CA, April (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 383 570).
76. Watters, J. J., & Ginns, I. S. (2000). Developing motivation to teach elementary science: Effect of collaborative and authentic learning practices in preservice education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11(4), 277-313.
77. Watters, J. J., Keys, P. M., Rogers, G. A., Gibson, K., Alargic, M., & Doyle, C. (2004). From Kansas to Queensland: Global learning and internationalisation in preservice elementary teacher education. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Education Research Association Conference, San Diego.
78. Wilson B. G. (Ed.). (1996). Constructivist learning environments: Case studies instructional design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publication.
79. Yerrick, R. K., & Hoving, T. J. (2003). One foot on the dock and one foot on the boat: Differences among preservice science teachers' interpretations of field-based science methods in culturally diverse contexts. Science Education, 87(3), 390-418.