Employing case-based pedagogy within a reflection orientation to elementary science teacher preparation

Elementary Science Teacher Education: International Perspectives on Contemporary Issues and Practice

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 299-315

  Bryan, Lynn A ^a   Tippins, Deborah J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77649088476     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781315045443     Document Type: Chapter

References (44)

1. Abell, S. (Producer). (1996). Levers: A fifth grade module by Mrs. Clark [Video case study, classroom 3]. (Available online at http://www.coe.missouri.edu/∼abells/roes/roes.html). Used with permission.
2. Abell, S. K., & Bryan, L. A. (1997). Reconceptualizing the elementary science methods course using a reflection orientation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 153-166.
3. Abell, S. K., Bryan, L. A., & Anderson, M. A. (1998). Investigating preservice elementary science teacher reflective thinking using integrated media case-based instruction in elementary science teacher preparation. Science Education, 82, 419-509.
4. Abell, S., Cennamo, K., Anderson, M., Bryan, L., Campbell, L., & Hug, J. W. (1996). Integrated media classroom cases in elementary science teacher education. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 15, 137-151.
5. Abell, S., Cennamo, K., & Campbell, L. (1996). The development of integrated video cases for use in elementary science methods courses. Tech Trends, 41(3), 20-23.
6. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Annenberg, C. P. B. (1997). Case studies in science education. Smithsonian Institution Astrophysical Observatory in association with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
8. Barnes, D. (1992). The significance of teachers’ frames for teaching. In T. Russell & H. Munby (Eds.), Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection (pp. 9-32). New York: Falmer.
9. Bryan, L. A. (1997). A case of learning to teach elementary science: Investigating beliefs, experiences, and tensions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
10. Bryan, L. A. (2000). Science education in the Japanese classroom: A video case. University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
11. Bryan, L. A., & McLaughlin, H. J. (2002). Everyday life in a rural Mexican escuela unitaria: A video case. University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
12. Clark, C. (1988). Asking the right questions about teacher preparation: Contributions of research on teacher thinking. Educational Researcher, 17(2), 5-12.
13. Clark, C, & Peterson, P. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255-296). New York: Macmillan.
14. Cosgrove, M., & Osborne, R. (1985). Lesson frameworks for changing children’s ideas. In R. Osborne & P. Freyberg (Eds.), Learning in science: Implications of children’s science (pp. 101-111). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
15. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. New York: Heath.
16. Duschl, R. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (1991). Epistemological perspectives on conceptual change: Implications for educational practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28,839-858.
17. Georgia Department of Education. (1999). Georgia learning connections—Quality core curriculum standards introduction. Retrieved April 14, 2002, from http://www.glc.kl2.ga.us/qstd-int/homepg.htm
18. Greenwood, G., & Parkway, F. (1989). Case studies for teacher decision-making. New York: Random House.
19. Hewson, P. W., & Thorley, N. R. (1989). The conditions of conceptual change in the classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 541-553.
20. Howe, A. C, & Nichols, S. E. (2001). Case studies in elementary science: Learning from teachers. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
21. Kagan, D. (1993). Contexts for the use of classroom cases. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 703-723.
22. Koballa, T., Jr., & Tippins, D. (2000). Cases in middle and secondary science education: The promise and dilemmas. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
23. Kowalski, T., Weaver, R., & Henson, K. (1990). Case studies on teaching. New York: Longman.
24. Krajcik, J., Ladewski, B., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (1995, April). Multiple perspectives on designing, developing, and using integrated multimedia for teacher enhancement. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
25. Ladewski, B. (1996). Integrated multimedia learning environments for teacher education: Comparing and contrasting four systems. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 15, 173-197.
26. Lampert, M., & Eshelman, A. (1995, April). Using technology to prepare effective and responsible educators: The case integrated multimedia in mathematics methods courses. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
27. Lanier, J., & Little, J. (1986). Research on teacher education. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 527-569). New York: Macmillan.
28. Lederman, N. G., Gess-Newsome, J., & Zeidler, D. L. (1993). Summary of research in science education—1991. Science Education, 77, 465-559.
29. McAninch, A. (1993). Teacher thinking and the case method: Theory and future directions. New York: Teachers College Press.
30. Merseth, K. (1991). The case for cases in teacher education. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Education and American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
31. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
33. Osborne, R. J., & Wittrock, M. C. (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 76, 489-508.
34. Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
35. Shulman, J. (Ed.). (1992). Case methods in teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
36. Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
37. Shulman, J. H., & Mesa-Bains, A. (Eds.). (1993). Diversity in the classroom: A casebook for teachers and teacher educators. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
38. Silverman, R., Welty, W., & Lyon, S. (1992). Case studies for teacher problem solving. New York: McGraw-Hill.
39. Smyth, J. (1989). Developing and sustaining critical reflection in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 2-9.
40. 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, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
41. Tippins, D. J., Koballa, T. R., & Payne, B. D. (2002). Learning from cases: Unraveling the complexities of elementary science teaching. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
42. Wasserman, S. (1993). Getting down to cases: Learning to teach with case studies. New York: Teachers College Press.
43. Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C, & Smith, P. S. (2001, December). Report of the 2000 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Retrieved September 5, 2002, from http://2000survey.horizon-research.com/reports/status/complete.pdf
44. Zeichner, K., & Tabachnick, R. (1991). Reflections on reflective teaching. In R. Tabachnick & K. Zeichner (Eds.), Issues and practices in inquiry-oriented teacher education (pp. 1-21). London: Falmer.