A science lesson plan analysis instrument for formative and summative program evaluation of a teacher education program

Science Education

Volumn 92, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 1096-1126

  Jacobs, Christina L ^a,c   Martin, Sonya N ^b   Otieno, Tracey C ^a,d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b DREXEL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c Baldwin School   (United States)

^d Germantown Friends School   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 55849110392     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20277     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
2. Berger, J. (1990, December 14). Lesson plans: Rote review is forbidden. New York Times. Retrieved November 28, 2007, from http://www.nytimes.com
3. Brickhouse, N. W. (1990). Teachers' beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 53-62.
4. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (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 (pp. 289-325). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Brown, S. D. (1993). Descriptions of two novice secondary teachers' planning. Curriculum Inquiry, 23(1), 63-84.
6. Brown, S. D. (1998). Twelve middle-school teachers' planning. Elementary School Journal, 89(1), 69-87.
7. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175-218.
8. Crowther, D. T., Lederman, N. G., & Lederman, J. S. (2005). Understanding the true meaning of nature of science. Science and Children, 43(2), 50-52.
9. Danielson, C., & McNeal, T. L. (2000). Teacher evaluation to enhance professional practice.Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
10. Fleck, F. (2005). What successful teachers do!: 169 tips for principals. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
11. Hacker, R., & Sova, B. (1998). Initial teacher education: A study of the efficacy of computer mediated courseware delivery in a partnership context. British Journal of Educational Technology, 29(4), 333-341.
12. Halverson, R., Kelley, C., & Kimball, S. (2004). How principals make sense of complex artifacts to shape local instructional practice. In W. K. Hoy & C. G. Miskel (Eds.), Educational administration, policy, and reform: Research and measurement (pp. 153-188).Greenwich, CT: George F. Johnson.
13. Kagan, D. M., & Tippins, D. J. (1992). The evolution of functional plans among twelve elementary and secondary student teachers. Elementary School Journal, 92(4), 477-489.
14. Kahle, J. B., & Scantlebury, K. C. (2006). Evaluation of the University of Pennsylvania Science Teacher Institute-2005-6. Oxford, OH: Miami University, Ohio's Evaluation & Assessment Center for Mathematics and Science Education.
15. Kyle, D. (1980). Curriculum decisions: Who decides what? Elementary School Journal, 81(2), 77-85.
16. McCutcheon, G. (1980). How do elementary school teachers plan? The nature of planning and influences on it. Elementary School Journal, 81(1), 4-23.
17. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
18. National Research Council. (2006). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
19. Piburn, M., Sawada, D., Falconer, K., Turley, J., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2002). Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP): Reference manual (ACEPT Technical Report No. IN00-3). Retrieved December 8, 2006, from http://physicsed.buffalostate.edu/pubs/RTOP/RTOP-ref_man_IN003.pdf.
20. Porter, A. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
21. Roth, W. M. (1998). Science teaching as knowledgeability: A case study of knowing and learning during coteaching. Science Education, 82, 357-377.
22. Sawada, D., Piburn, M. D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, R., Benford, R., et al. (2002). Measuring reformed practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6), 245-253.
23. Sawada, D., Piburn, M., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R., Bloom, I., et al. (2002). Development of evaluation and strategies and methods. In D. Sawada (Ed.), Reformed teacher education in science and mathematics: An evaluation of the Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers (ACEPT) (pp. 13-46). Retrieved November 29, 2007, from Arizona State University, ACEPT Web site: http://acept.asu.edu/final_report/titlepg-toc.pdf
24. Scantlebury, K., Boone, W., Butler-Kahle, J., & Fraser, B. J. (2001). Design, validation, and use of an evaluation instrument for monitoring systemic reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(6), 646-662.
25. Scherpenzeel, A., & Saris, W. E. (1997). The validity and reliability of survey questions: A meta-analysis of MTMM studies. Sociological Methods and Research, 25(3), 341-383.
26. Sudman, S., Bradburn, N. M., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers: The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (2004). Development and use of the Approaches to Teaching Inventory. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 409-424.
28. Trigwell, K., Prosser, M., & Waterhouse, F. (1999). Relations between teachers' approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning. Higher Education, 37, 57-70.
29. University of Pennsylvania Science Teacher Institute (PennSTI). (n.d.). Institute home page. Accessed December 14, 2006, at http://www.sas.upenn.edu/ PennSTI/programs.shtml.
30. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2001). Understanding by design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
31. Yinger, R. Y. (1980). A study of teacher planning. Elementary School Journal, 80(3), 107-127.