Using Inquiry to Improve Pedagogy through K-12/University Partnerships

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 107, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 311-324

  Huziak Clark, Tracy ^a   Van Hook, Stephen J ^b   Nurnberger Haag, Julie ^a   Ballone Duran, Lena ^a  

^a BOWLING GREEN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350741258     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2007.tb17796.x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Abraham, M. R. (1997, April). The learning cycle approach to science instruction. Research matters-to the science teacher, No. 9701. Reston, VA: The National Association for Research in Science Teaching.
2. Adams, T. (1998) Prospective elementary teachers' mathematics subject matter knowledge: The real number system. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20, 35–48.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Ball, D. (1990). The mathematical understandings that preservice teachers bring to teacher education. Elementary School Journal, 90, 449–466.
5. Barba, R. (1995). Science in the multicultural classroom. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
6. Bartolo, L. M., & Palffy-Muhoray, P. (2001). iSAM-Net (SCIENCE and MATH on the Net): Connecting students and teachers to scientific research through scientific communication and electronic networking. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 17 (2–3), 133–147.
7. Bell, J. A., & Buccino, A. (Eds.). (1997) Seizing opportunities: Collaborating for excellence in teacher preparation. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
8. Borko, H., Eisenhart, M., Brown, C., Underhill, R., Jones, D., & Agard, P. (1992). Learning to teach hard mathematics: Do novice teachers and their instructors give up too easily Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 23, 194–222.
9. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
10. Bybee, R. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
11. Dewey, J. (1910). The school and society. The child and the curriculum. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
12. Donovan, M.S., Bransford, J.D. & Pellegrino, J.W. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Bridging research and practice. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
13. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23 (7), 5–12.
14. Duggan-Haas, D., Smith, E., & Miller, J. (1999, April). The collaborative vision for science and mathematics education: Connecting scientists and science educators, Paper presented at the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST) annual conference, Boston.
15. Duran, E., & Ballone-Duran, L. (2005). Project ASTER: A model staff development program and its impact on early childhood teachers' self-efficacy. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17 (2), 1–2.
16. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). London: Macmillan.
17. Etheredge, S., & Rudnitsky, A. (2003). Introducing students to scientific inquiry: How do we know what we know? New York: Pearson Education.
18. Gess-Newsome, J., & Lederman, N. (1993). Preservice biology teachers' knowledge structures as a function of professional teacher education: A year-long assessment. Science Education, 77 (1), 25–45.
19. Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
20. Haney, J. J., & Lumpe, A. T. (1995). A teacher professional development framework guided by reform policies, teachers’ needs, and research. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 6, 187-196.
21. Horizon Research, Inc. (1997). Classroom observation protocol. Local Systemic Change 1997–98 Core Evaluation Data Collection Manual. Chapel Hill, NC: Author.
22. Johnson, D.W & Johnson, R.T (1975). Learning together and alone. New Jersey:Prentice Hall.
23. Kagan, S. (1997) Cooperative learning, Kagan Cooperative Learning.
24. Loucks-Horseley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
25. Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N.G. Lederrman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95–132). Boston: Kluwer.
26. National Research Council. (1996a). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
27. National Research Council. (1996b). The role of scientists in the professional development of science teachers. Committee on Biology Teacher Inservice Programs. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29. National Science Foundation. (1996). Activities in support of two-year college science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education. Retrieved January 20, 2006, from http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/stis1996/nsf9683/nsf9683.txt.
30. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000) Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
31. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991) Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
32. Ohio Department of Education. (2003). Academic content standards K-12 science. Columbus, OH: Ohio Department of Education.
33. Roth, W., Masciotra, D., & Boyd, N. (1999). Becoming-in-the-classroom: A case study of teacher development through coteaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 771-784.
34. Rutherford, F. J., & Ahlgren, A. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
35. Stoddart, T., Connell, M., Stofflett, R., & Peck, D. (1993). Reconstructing elementary teacher candidates’ understanding of mathematics and science content. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9, 229-241.
36. Tafoya, E. Sunal, & Knecht. (1980). Assessing inquiry potential: A tool for curriculum decision makers. School Science and Mathematics, 80, 43-48.
37. Tobin, K., McRobbie, C., & Anderson, D. (1997). Dialectical constraints to the discursive practices of a high school physics community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 491-507.
38. Trowbridge, L. W., & Bybee, R. W. (1990). Becoming a secondary school science teacher (5th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
39. Uno, G. (1999). Handbook on teaching undergraduate science courses: A survival training manual. Thomson Custom. (NEED LOCATION).
40. Zembal-Saul, C., Krajcik, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (2002). Elementary student teachers’ science content representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39, 443-463.