ImprovingMathematics and Science Instruction: A Program for the Professional Development of Teachers

Competence Oriented Teacher Training: Old Research Demands and New Pathways

Volumn , Issue , 2006, Pages 79-96

  Prenzel, Manfred ^a   Ostermeier, Christian ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 72449136446     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1163/9789087903374_007     Document Type: Chapter

References (49)

1. Anderson, R. D., & Helms, J. V. (2001). The ideal of standards and the reality of schools: Needed research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 3-16.
2. Baumert, J., Bos, W., & Lehmann, R. (Eds.). (2000). TIMSS/III. Dritte Internationale Mathematik- und Naturwissenschaftsstudie. Mathematisch und naturwissenschaftliche Bildung am Ende der Schul-laufbahn. Band 1 [TIMSS/III. Mathematics and science literacy at the end of school education. Volume 1]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
3. Baumert, J., Lehmann, R., Lehrke, M., Schmitz, B., Clausen, M., Hosenfeld, I., Köller, O., & Neubrand, J. (1997). TIMSS - Mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht im internationalen Vergleich. Deskriptive Befunde [TIMSS - Mathematics and science instruction in international comparison. Descriptive findings]. Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
4. Beaton, A. E., Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzales, E. J., Smith, T. A., & Kelly, D. L. (1996). Science achievement in the middle school years: IEA ‘s Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill: Boston College.
5. Beaton, A. E., Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Gonzales, E. J., Kelly, D. L., & Smith, T. A. (1996). Mathematics achievement in the middle school years: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill: Boston College.
6. Black, P. (1998). Formative assessment: Raising standards inside the classroom. School Science Review, 80(291), 39-46.
7. Black, P., & Wiliams, D. (1998). Inside the black box - Raising standards through classroom assessment. London: King’s College.
8. BLK (Ed.). (1997). Gutachten zur Vorbereitung des Programms”Steigerung der Effizienz des mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts” [Expertise”Increasing the efficiency of mathematics and science instruction”]. Bonn: BLK [Federal and State Commission for Educational Planning and Research].
9. Brown, A. L. (1997). Transforming schools into communities of thinking and learning about serious matters. American Psychologist, 52, 399-413.
10. Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 438-481.
11. Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (Eds.). (1999). Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12. DeCorte, E., Greer, B., & Verschaffel, L. (1996). Mathematics teaching and learning. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 491-547). New York: Macmillan.
13. Duit, R., & Treagust, D. (1998). Learning in science - From behaviorism towards social constructivism and beyond. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3-25). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
14. Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
15. 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(4), 915-945.
16. Häußler, P., & Hoffmann, L. (2000). A curricular frame for physics education: development, comparison with student interests, and impact on students’ achievement and self-concept. Science Education, 84(6), 689-705.
17. Hiebert, J., Gallimore, R., & Stigler, J. W. (2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like and how can we get one? Educational Researcher, 31(5), 3-15.
18. Hoffmann, L. (2002). Promoting girls’ interest and achievement in physics classes for beginners. Learning and Instruction, 12(4), 447-465.
19. Klieme, E., Neubrand, M., & Lüdtke, O. (2001). Mathematische Grundbildung: Testkonzeption und Ergebnisse [Mathematical literacy: Test conception and results]. In J. Baumert, et al., (Ed.), PISA 2000: Basiskompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich (pp. 139-190). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
20. Knapp, M. S. (1997). Between systemic reforms and the mathematics and science classroom: The dynamics of innovation, implementation, and professional learning. Review of Educational Research (61),227-266.
21. Lampert, M. (1990). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal (27), 29-63.
22. Lazarsfeld, P. F., & Henry, N. W. (1968). Latent structure analysis. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
23. Linn, M. C., Songer, N. B., & Eylon, B.-S. (1996). Shifts and convergences in science learning and instruction. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 438-490). New York: Macmillan.
24. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Beaton, A. E., Gonzales, E. J., Kelly, D. L., & Smith, T. A. (1998). Mathematics and science achievement in the final year of secondary school: IRA ‘s Third International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill: Boston College.
25. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
26. Oser, F. (1994). Zu-Mutung: Eine basale pädagogische Handlungsstruktur [Demand and encouragement: On a basic structure of instructional actions]. In N. Seibert & H. Serve (Eds.), Bildung und Erziehung an der Schwelle zum dritten Jahrtausend (pp. 773-800). München: PimS.
27. Oser, F. (1997). Standards in der Lehrerbildung. Teil 1: Berufliche Kompetenzen, die hohen Qualitätsmerkmalen entsprechen [Standards in teacher education. Part 1: Professional competencies that meet high quality characteristics]. Beiträge zur Lehrerbildung, 15 (1), 26-37.
28. Oser, F., Hascher, T., & Spychiger, M. (1999). Lernen aus Fehlern. Zur Psychologie des –negativen— Wissens [Learning from mistakes. On the psychology of –negative— knowledge]. In W. Althof (Ed.), Fehlerwelten. Vom Fehlermachen und Lernen aus Fehlern (pp. 11-41). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
29. Ostermeier, C. (2003). Kooperative Qualit&tsentwicklung in Schulnetzwerken am Beispiel des BLK-Modellversuchsprogramms –Steigerung der Effizienz des mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts— [Cooperative quality development in school networks - elaborated on by the example of the pilot program "Increasing the efficiency of mathematics and science instruction]. (Unpublished dissertation thesis) Kiel: IPN.
30. Ostermeier, C., & Prenzel, M. (2002, April). Opportunities for teachers to learn: A study investigating teachers’ acceptance of support measures within a national quality development program. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the AERA, New Orleans.
31. Prawat, R. S. (1989). Teaching for understanding: Three key attributes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 315-328.
32. Prenzel, M. (1997). Sechs Möglichkeiten, Lernende zu demotivieren [Six possibilities to de-motivate learners]. In H. Gruber & A. Renkl (Eds.), Wege zum Können. Determinanten des Kompetenzerwerbs(pp. 32-44). Bern: Huber.
33. Prenzel, M. (2000). Steigerung der Effizienz des mathematisch-naturwissenschaftlichen Unterrichts: Ein Modellversuchsprogramm von Bund und Ländern [Increasing the efficiency of mathematics and science education: A nationwide quality development program]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 28(2), 103-126.
34. Prenzel, M., Rost, J., Senkbeil, M., Häußler, P., & Klopp, A. (2001). Naturwissenschaftliche Grundbildung: Testkonzeption und Ergebnisse [Scientific literacy: Test conception and results]. In J. Baumert, et al., (Ed.), PISA 2000: Basiskompetenzen von Schülerinnen und Schülern im internationalen Vergleich (pp. 191-248). Opladen: Leske + Budrich.
35. Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.
36. Reusser, K., & Reusser-Weyeneth, M. (Eds.). (1994). Verstehen - Psychologischer Prozess und didaktische Aufgabe [Understanding - Psychological process and educational challenge]. Bern: Huber.
37. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Schultz, S. E., Li, M., & Shavelson, R. J. (2001). Comparison of the reliability and validity of scores from two concept-mapping techniques. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2), 260-278.
38. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.
39. Sammons, P. (1999). School effectiveness: Coming of age in the twenty-first century. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.
40. Sammons, P., Hillman, J., & Mortimore, P. (1995). Key characteristics of effective schools: A review of school effectiveness research. London: Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED).
41. Seidel, T. (2003). Lehr-Lernskripts im Unterricht [Teaching and learning scripts in classroom instruction]. Münster: Waxmann.
42. Seidel, T., & Prenzel, M. (2006, in press). Stability of teaching patterns in physics instruction. Learning and Instruction.
43. Shavelson, R. J., & Ruiz-Primo, M. A. (1999). Leistungsbewertung im naturwissenschaftlichen Unterricht [Assessment of performance in science instruction]. Unterrichtswissenschaft, 27, 102-127.
44. Stake, R., Burke, M., Flores, C., Whiteaker, M., & Irizarry, K. (1997). Renewal and transformation. Chicago: Teachers Academy for Mathematics and Science.
45. Stigler, J. W., Gallimore, R., & Hiebert, J. (2000). Using video surveys to compare classrooms and teaching across cultures: Examples and lessons from the TIMSS video studies. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 87-100.
46. Stigler, J. W., Gonzales, P., Kawanaka, T., Knoll, S., & Serrano, A. (1999). The TIMSS videotape classroom study. Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth-grade mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan, and the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education.
47. Terhart, E. (1987). Kommunikation im Kollegium [Communication among teachers]. Die deutsche Schule,79, 440-450.
48. Weinert, F. E. (1998). Neue Unterrichtskonzepte zwischen gesellschaftlichen Notwendigkeiten, pädagogischen Visionen und psychologischen Möglichkeiten [New instructional concepts between necessities of society, pedagogical visons and psychological possibilities]. In Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Unterricht Kultus Wissenschaft und Kunst (Ed.), Wissen und Werte für die Welt von morgen (pp. 101-125). München: Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Unterricht, Kultus, Wissenschaft und Kunst.
49. White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. London: The Falmer Press.