Curriculum design for inquiry: Preservice elementary teachers' mobilization and adaptation of science curriculum materials

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 47, Issue 7, 2010, Pages 820-839

  Forbes, Cory T ^a   Davis, Elizabeth A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

Curriculum materials; Inquiry; Pedagogical design capacity; Preservice elementary teachers

Indexed keywords

BEGINNING ELEMENTARY TEACHERS; CURRICULUM DESIGNS; DESIGN CAPACITY; ELEMENTARY TEACHERS; INQUIRY; INQUIRY-BASED SCIENCE; LARGE PARTS; PEDAGOGICAL DESIGN CAPACITY; PRE-SERVICE TEACHER; QUANTITATIVE METHOD; ROBUST CAPACITY; SCIENCE CURRICULUM; SCIENCE TEACHING; STUDENT LEARNING; TEACHER EDUCATION;

DECISION MAKING; DESIGN; MATERIALS; TEACHING;

CURRICULA;

EID: 77956943438     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: 10982736     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.20379     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy, Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Abell, S. K. (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105-1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
3. Appleton, K. (2002). Science activities that work: Perceptions of primary school teachers. Research in Science Education, 32(3), 393-410.
4. Beyer, C, & Davis, E. A. (2009). Using educative curriculum materials to support preservice elementary teachers' curricular planning: A comparison between two different forms of support. Curriculum Inquiry, 39(5), 679-703.
5. Beyer, C, Delgado, C, Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Investigating high school biology texts as educative curriculum materials: Curriculum review process. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(9), 977-998.
6. Bodzin, A. M., & Beerer, K. M. (2003). Promoting inquiry-based science instruction: The validation of the science teacher inquiry rubric (STIR). Journal of Elementary Science Education, 15(2), 39-49.
7. Brown, M. (2009). Toward a theory of curriculum design and use: Understanding the teacher-tool relationship. In J. Remillard, B. Herbel-Eisenman, & G. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17-37). New York: Routledge.
8. Bryan, L. A. (2003). Nestedness of beliefs: Examining a prospective elementary teacher's belief systems about science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(9), 835-868.
9. Bryan, L. A., & Abell, S. K. (1999). Development of professional knowledge in learning to teach elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 121-139.
10. Chi, M. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271-315. (Pubitemid 127493191)
11. Crawford, B. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry-based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(3), 175-194.
12. Crawford, B. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613-642.
13. Davis, E. A. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers' critique of instructional materials for science. Science Education, 90(2), 348-375.
14. Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3-14.
15. Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607-651.
16. Davis, E. A., & Smithey, J. (2009). Beginning teachers moving toward effective elementary science teaching. Science Education, 93(4), 745-770.
17. Dietz, C, & Davis, E. A. (2009). Preservice elementary teachers' reflection on narrative images of inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(3), 219-243.
18. Drake, C, & Sherin, M. G. (2006). Practicing change: Curriculum adaptation and teacher narrative in the context of mathematics education reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36(2), 153-187.
19. Enyedy, N, & Goldberg, J. (2004). Inquiry in interaction: How local adaptations of curricula shape classroom communities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(9), 905-935.
20. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055.
21. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2008). The development of preservice elementary teachers' curricular role identity for science teaching. Science Education, 92(5), 909-940.
22. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2010). Beginning elementary teachers' beliefs about the use of anchoring questions in science: A longitudinal study. Science Education, 94(2), 365-387.
23. Ford, D. J. (2006). Representations of science within children's' trade books. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(2), 214-235.
24. Gess-Newsome, J. (2002). The use and impact of explicit instruction about the nature of science and science inquiry in an elementary science methods course. Science & Education, 11(1), 55-67.
25. Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2004). Curriculum materials: Scaffolds for teacher learning? (No. R-04-1). Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy
26. Haefner, L. A., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2004). Learning by doing? Prospective elementary teachers' developing understandings of scientific inquiry and science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1653-1674.
27. Howes, E. V. (2002). Learning to teach science for all in the elementary grades: What do preservice teachers bring? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(9), 845-869.
28. Kauffman, D., Johnson, S. M., Kardos, S. M., Liu, E., & Peske, H. (2002). "Lost at sea": New teachers' experiences with curriculum and assessment. Teachers College Record, 104(2), 273-300.
29. Kesidou, S., & Roseman, J. (2002). How well do middle school science programs measure up? Findings from Project 2061's curriculum review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 522-549.
30. Luft, J. A. (1999). Assessing science teachers as they implement inquiry lessons: The Extended Inquiry Observational Rubric. Science Educator, 8(1), 9-18.
31. Milton, S. (1986). A sample size formula for multiple regression studies. Public Opinion Quarterly, 50(1), 112-118.
32. National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Digest of Education Statistics, 2003. Retrieved September 23, 2006, from http://nces.ed.gov/ programs/digest/d03/index.asp.
33. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
34. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
35. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
36. Nye, B., Hedges, L. V., & Konstantopoulos, S. (2004). How large are teacher effects? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2, 237-257.
37. Osborne, J. W., & Waters, E. (2002). Four assumptions of multiple regression that researchers should always test. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 8(2), 1-5. Retrieved October 19, 2008 from http://PAREonline. net/getvn.asp?v=8&n=2.
38. Pine, J., Aschbacher, P., Roth, E., Jones, M., McPhee, C, Martin, C, Phelps, S., Kyle, T, & Foley, B. (2006). Fifth graders' science inquiry abilities: A comparative study of students in hands-on and textbook curricula. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 467-484.
39. Pinto, R. (2004). Introducing curriculum innovations in science: Identifying teachers' transformations and the design of related teacher education. Science Education, 89, 1-12.
40. 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.
41. Remillard, J. T (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), 315-342.
42. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246.
43. Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J., & Blumenfeld, P. (2005). Enacting reform-based science materials: The range of teacher enactments in reform classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(3), 283-312.
44. Schwarz, C, Gunckel, K., Smith, E., Covitt, B., Enfield, M., Bae, M., & Tsurusaki, B. (2008). Helping elementary pre-service teachers learn to use science curriculum materials for effective science teaching. Science Education, 92(2), 345-377.
45. Sim, C. (2006). Preparing for professional experiences-Incorporating pre-service teachers as 'communities of practice'. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 77-83.
46. Southerland, SA., & Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Preservice teachers' views of inclusive science teaching as shaped by images of teaching, learning, and knowledge. Science Education, 83, 131-150.
47. Windschitl, M. (2003). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87(1), 112-143.
48. Windschitl, M. (2004). Folk theories of 'inquiry': How preservice teachers reproduce the discourse and practices of an atheoretical scientific method. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 481-512.
49. Zembal-Saul, C, Blumenfeld, P., & Krajcik, J. (2000). Influence of guided cycles of planning, teaching andreflection on prospective elementary teachers' science content representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 318-339.
50. Zembal, C, Starr, M., & Krajcik, J. (1999). Constructing a framework for elementary science teaching using pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 237-256). The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
51. Zientek, L. R., Capraro, M. M., & Capraro, R. M. (2008). Reporting practices in quantitative teacher education research: One look at the evidence cited in the AERA panel report. Educational Researchers, 37(4), 208-216.