Preservice teachers and technology integration: Rethinking traditional roles

Journal of Science Teacher Education

Volumn 18, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 955-984

  Singer, Jonathan ^a   Maher, Michelle A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 35948985447     PISSN: 1046560X     EISSN: 15731847     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10972-007-9072-5     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aleven, V., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26, 147-179.
2. Alters, B. J., & Nelson, C. E. (2002). Perspective: Teaching evolution in higher education. Evolution, 56, 1891-1901.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Becker, H. J. (2001). How are teachers using computers in curriculum? Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
5. Brumby, M. (1984). Misconceptions about the concept of natural selection by medical biology students. Science Education, 68, 493-503.
6. Buckley, B. C., Gobert, J. D., & Christie, M. T. (2002). Model-based teaching and learning with hypermodels: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know? Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
7. Buckley, B. C., Gobert, J. D., Kindfield, A., Horwitz, P., Tinker, R., Gerlits, B., Wilensky, U., Dede, C., & Willett, J. (2004). Model-based teaching and learning with BioLogica™: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 23-41.
8. Cochran-Smith, M. (1991). Reinventing student teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 42(2), 104-118.
9. Corcoran, T. B., Shields, P. M., & Zucker, A. A. (1998). Evaluation of NSF's Statewide Systemic Initiatives (SSI) program. The SSI's and professional development for teacher. Washington, DC: Report by SRI for NSF's Directorate for Education and Human Resources.
10. Crawford, B. A. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10, 175-194.
11. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach (2nd edn.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12. Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of a reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 597.
13. Doering, A., Hughes, J., & Huffman, D. (2003). Preservice teachers: Are we thinking with technology? Journal of Research on Technology Education, 35(2), 34-55.
14. Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 391-450.
15. Fishman, B. J. (1996). High-end high school communication: Tool use practices of students in a networked environment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
16. Fishman, B, Marx, R. W., Best, S., & Tal, R. T. (2002). A design approach to professional development: Linking teacher and student learning in systemic reform. Paper presented at annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
17. 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.
18. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 64-74.
19. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National education technology standards for teachers (3rd edn.). Eugene, OR: Author.
20. Jackson, S. S., Stratford, S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1996). Making system dynamics modeling accessible to precollege science students. Interactive Learning Environments, 4, 233-257.
21. Levin, J. A. (1992). Electronic networks and the reshaping of teaching & learning: The evolution of teleapprenticeships and instructional tele-task forces. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
22. Linn, M. C. (1996). Key to the information highway. Communications of the ACM, 39, 34-35.
23. Luft, J. A., Kurdziel, J. P., Roehrig, G. H., Turner, J., & Wertsch, J. (2004). Growing a garden without water: Graduate teaching assistants in introductory science laboratories at a doctoral/research university. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 211-233.
24. Margerum-Leys, J., & Marx, R. (2002). Teacher knowledge of educational technology: A case study of student/mentor teacher pairs. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26, 427-462.
25. Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J., Blunk, M., Crawford, B., Kelly B., & Meyer, K. (1994). Enacting project-based science: Experiences of four middle grade teachers. Elementary School Journal, 94, 499-516.
26. Marx, R. W., Freeman, J. G., Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P.C. (1998). Professional development of science teachers. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 667-680). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
27. Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case-study applications in education (2nd edn.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
28. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29. Mouza, C. (2002). Learning to teach with new technology: Implications for professional development. Journal of Research on Technology Education, 4, 272-289.
30. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
31. Northfield, J., Gunstone, R., & Erickson, G. (1996). A constructivist perspective on science teacher education. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit, & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics (pp. 201-211). New York: Teachers College Press.
32. Pea, R. D., Edelson, D. C., & Gomez, L. M. (1994). Distributed collaborative science learning using scientific visualization and wideband telecommunications. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
33. Pelaez, N. J. (2002). Problem-based writing with peer review improves academic performance in physiology. Advances in Physiology Education, 26, 174-184.
34. Ramaswamy, S., Harris, I., & Tshirner, U. (2001). Student peer teaching: An innovative approach to instruction in science and engineering education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10, 165-171.
35. Richardson-Koehler, V. (1988). Barriers to the effective supervision of student teaching: A field study. Journal of Teacher Education, 39(2), 28-34.
36. Rivard, L. P., & Straw, S. B. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study. Science Education, 84, 566-593.
37. Rubin, A. (1993). Video laboratories: Tools for scientific investigation. Communications of the ACM, 36, 64-65.
38. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 249-268). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2002). Performance of students in project-based science classrooms on a national measure of science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 410-422.
40. Schoon, K. J., & Sandoval, P. A., (1997). The seamless field experience model for secondary science teacher preparation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 127-140.
41. Shymansky, J. A., Kyle, W. C. Jr., & Alport, J. M. (1983). The effects of new science curricula on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 387-404.
42. Simmons, P. E., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., Crocket, D., et al. (1999). Beginning teachers: Beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 930-954.
43. Sparks, D., & Hirsh, S. (2000). A national plan for improving professional development. Retrieved May 1, 2005, from http://www.nsdc.org/ library/authors/NSDCPlan.cfm.
44. 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.
45. Tatel, E. S. (1996). Improving classroom practice: Ways experienced teachers change after supervising student teachers. In M. W. McLaughlin & I. Oberman (Eds.), Teacher learning: New policies, new practices (pp. 48-52). New York: Teachers College Press.
46. Wallace, R., Kupperman, J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E., (2000). Science on the web: Students online in a sixth-grade classroom. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 9(1), 75-104.
47. Yarrow, A., Millwater, J., & Fraser, B. J. (1997). Improving university and primary school classroom environments through preservice teachers' action research. International Journal of Practical Experiences in Professional Education, 1(1), 68-93.
48. Yildirim, S. (2000). Effect of an educational computing course on preservice and inservice teachers: A discussion and analysis of attitudes and use. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32, 479-495.