Structures and improvisation for inquiry-based science instruction: A teacher's adaptation of a model of magnetism activity

Science Education

Volumn 94, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 142-163

  Harlow, Danielle Boyd ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77952006224     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20348     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Abd-el-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-701.
2. Abell, S., & Roth, M. (1995). Reflections on a fifth-grade life science lesson: Making sense of children's understanding of scientific models. International Journal of Science Education, 17(1), 59-74.
3. Appleton, K. (2006). Science pedagogical content knowledge and elementary school teachers. In K. Appleton (Ed.), Elementary science teacher education: International perspectives on contemporary issues and practice (pp. 31-54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Ball, D. (2000). Bridging practices: Intertwining content and pedagogy in teaching and learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 241-247.
6. Ball, D., & Cohen, D. (1996). Reform by the book: What is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6-8.
7. Berliner, D. (1986, August/September). In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher, 15(7), 5-13.
8. Berliner, D. (2000). A personal response to those who bash teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(5), 358-371.
9. Bhushan, N., & Rosenfeld, S. (1995). Metaphorical models in chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 72(7), 578.
10. Bleicher, R., Tobin, K. G., & McRobbie, C. J. (2003). Opportunities to talk science in a high school chemistry classroom. Research in Science Education, 33(319-339).
11. Borko, H.,&Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and Improvisation: Difference in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26(4), 473-498.
12. Borko, H., & Putnam, R. T. (1996). Learning to teach. In D. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 673-708). New York: Macmillan.
13. Brown, B. A., & Spang, E. (2008). Double talk: Synthesizing everyday and science language in the classroom. Science Education, 92(2), 708-732.
14. Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., Franke, M., Levi, L., & Empson, S. (2003). Cognitively guided instruction: A research-based teacher professional development program for elementary school mathematics (Research Report No. NCILA-RR-00-3, pp. 1-9). Madison: Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, School of Education.
15. Castanheira, M., Crawford, T., Dixon, C., & Green, J. (2001). Interactional ethnography: An approach to studying the social construction of literate practices. Linguistics and Education, 11(4), 353-400.
16. Cazden, C. B. (2001). Traditional and nontraditional lessons. In The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed., chap. 3). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
17. Cheng, M.-F., & Brown, D. E. (2007, April 9-13). Model construction, critique and revision in magnetism: The importance of integrating conscious and intuitive knowledge. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
18. Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2000). Learning in science: A comparison of deep and surface approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 109-138.
19. Chinn, C., & Malhotra, B. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218.
20. Coll, R., France, B., & Taylor, I. (2005). The role of models and analogies in science education: Implications from research. International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 183-198.
21. Davis, E.,&Krajcik, J. (2005).Designing educative curriculummaterials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3-14.
22. Davis, E., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607-651.
23. Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (Eds.). (1985). Children's ideas in science. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
24. Erickson, F. (1982). Classroom discourse as improvisation: Relationships between academic task structure and social participation structure in lessons. In L. C. Wilkinson (Ed.), Communicating in the classroom (pp. 153-181). New York: Academic Press.
25. Gess-Newsome. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge: An introduction and orientation. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 320). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
26. Goldberg, F., Kruse, R., Robinson, S., Otero, V., & Thomson, N. (2007). Physical science and everyday thinking. Armonk, NY: It's About Time.
27. Goldberg, F., Robinson, S., & Otero, V. (2006). Physics and everyday thinking. Armonk, NY: It's About Time.
28. Grossman, P., Smagorinsky, P., & Valencia, S. (1999). Appropriating tools for teaching English: A theoretical framework for research on learning to teach. American Journal of Education, 108, 1-25.
29. Gumperz, J. (1986). Interactional sociolinguistics in the study of schooling. In J. Cook-Gumperz (Ed.), The social construction of literacy (pp. 45-68). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
30. Hammer, D. (2001). Practices of inquiry in teaching and research. Cognition and Instruction, 19(4), 441-478.
31. Hammer, D. (2004). The variability of student reasoning, lectures 1-3. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the International School of Physics, "Enrico Fermi,"Course CLVI (pp. 279-340). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
32. Harrison, A., & Treagust, D. (1998). Modelling in science lessons: Are there better ways to learn with models? School Science and Mathematics, 98(8), 420-429.
33. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. A. H. Stevenson & K. Hakuta (Eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262-272). New York: Freeman.
34. Johnson, A. (1999). Students' development of models of magnetic materials, patterns of group activity, and social norms in a physics classroom. Unpublished dissertation, SDSU and UCSD, San Diego, CA.
35. Jurow, A. S., & Creighton, L. (2005). Improvisational science discourse: Teaching science in two K-1 classrooms. Linguistics and Education, 16, 275-297.
36. Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers' understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.
37. Machamer, P., Darden, D., & Caraver, C. F. (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67, 1-25.
38. McDermott, L. (1996). Physics by inquiry. New York: Wiley.
39. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards.Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
40. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
41. Otero, V., & Nathan, M. (2008). Pre-service elementary teachers' views of their students' prior knowledge of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(4), 497-523.
42. Polman, J., & Pea, R. D. (2001). Transformative communication as a cultural tool for guiding inquiry science. Science Education, 85(223-238).
43. Remillard, J. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics educational reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), 315-342.
44. Remillard, J. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curriculum. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246.
45. Russ, R., Scherr, R., Hammer, D., & Mikeska, J. (2008). Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science. Science Education, 92(3), 499-425.
46. Sawyer, K. (2004). Creative teaching: Collaborative discussion as disciplined improvisation. Educational Researcher, 33(2), 12-30.
47. Schwartz, C., & White, B. (2006). Meta-modeling knowledge: Developing students' understanding of scientific modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 23(2), 165-205.
48. Schwartz, D., Bransford, J.,&Sears, D. (2005). Efficiency and innovation in transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 1-51). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
49. Schwartz, R., & Lederman, N. G. (2002). "It's the nature of the beast": The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 205-236.
50. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Paradigms and research in the study of teaching: A contemporary perspective. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 3-36). New York: MacMillan Reference Books.
51. Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
52. Van Driel, J., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers' pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 637-695.
53. Windschitl, M., & Thompson, J. (2004). Generating scientific models of natural phenomenon to ground authentic investigations: How do beginning secondary teachers reason about and enact canonical science practices? Paper presented at the National Association of Research on Science Teaching, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
54. Windschitl, M., & Thompson, J. (2006). Transcending simple forms of school science investigation: The impact of preservice instruction on teachers' understanding of model-based inquiry. American Educational Research Journal, 43(4), 783-835.
55. Yinger, R. J. (1987). By the seat of your pants: An inquiry into improvisation and teaching. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.