Using Prompted Praxis to Improve Teacher Professional Development in Culturally Diverse Schools

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 105, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 352-362

  Rodriguez, Alberto J ^a   Zozakiewicz, Cathy ^a   Yerrick, Randy ^a  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 78449240009     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18054.x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Abell, S. K., Bryan L.A., & Andersen, M. A. (1998). Investigating preservice elementary science teacher reflective thinking using integrated media case-based instruction in elementary science teacher preparation. Science Education, 82, 491-510.
2. Baker, L., & Saul, W. (1994). Considering science and language arts connections: A study of teacher cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 1023-1037.
3. Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. M. Holquist (Ed.). C. Emerson (Trans.). Austin : University of Texas Press.
4. Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.). V. W. McGee (Trans.). Austin : University of Texas Press.
5. Becker, H. J., & Riel, M. M. (2000). Teacher professional engagement and constructive-compatible computer usage (Report No. 7) [Online]. Available: http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings.html.
6. Cuban, L. (1986). Teachers and machines: The classroom use of technology since 1920. New York : Teachers College Press.
7. Cuban, L. (1999). So much high-tech money invested, so little use: How come? The Education Digest, 64, 53-55.
8. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, England : Harvard University Press.
9. Endeavor Research Group. (1999). Evaluation of the school design model (SDM) at Brewster Academy [Online]. Available: http://www.theendeavourgroup.net/research.html.
10. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research or teaching. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. New York : Macmillan.
11. Fennema, E., Carpenter, T., Franke, M., Levi, L., Jacobs, V., & Empson, S. (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children's thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 27, 403-434.
12. Franke, M.L., Fennema, E., & Carpenter, T. (1997). Teachers creating change: Examining evolving beliefs and classroom practice. In E. Fennema & B.S. Nelson (Eds.), Mathematics teachers in transition (pp. 255-282). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.
13. Glenn Commission. (2000). Before it's too late: A report to the nation from the National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching. Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Education.
14. Gunstone, R. F. (1994). The importance of specific science content in the enhancement of metacognition. In P. Fensham, R. F. Gunstone, & R. White (Eds). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. (pp. 131–146). Bristol, PA : The Falmer Press, Taylor & Francis, Inc.
15. Johnston, M., Brosnan, P., Cramer, D., & T. Dove, T. (2000). Collaborative reform and other improbable dreams. New York : State University of New York Press.
16. Lee, O. (2004). Teacher change in beliefs and practices in science and literacy instruction with English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 65-93.
17. Lee, O., Hart, J. E., Cuevas P., & Enders C., (2004). Professional development in inquiry-based science for elementary teachers of diverse student groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1021-1043.
18. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, California : Sage Publications.
19. The Mendoza Commission. (2000). Land of plenty: Diversity as America's competitive edge in science, engineering and technology. (Report of the Congressional Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering and Technology Development). Washington, DC : Author.
20. The National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America's future [Online]. Available: http://www.tc.colimbia.edu/~teachcomm.
21. Nellen, T. (2002, February). Why hasn't technology changed education? [Online] Available: http://edtechnot.com/archarticle.html.
22. Peck, C., Cuban, L., & Kirkpatrick, H (2002). High-tech's high hopes meet student realities. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 472-481.
23. Pedersen, J. E., & Yerrick, R. K. (2000). Technology in science teacher education: A survey of current uses and desired knowledge among science educators. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 131-153.
24. Pflaum, W. D. (2001). The technology fix: The promise and reality of computers in our schools. Alexandria, VA : Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
25. Rockman. (2000, June). The laptop program research [Online]. Available: http://rockman.com/projects/laptop/.
26. Rodriguez, A. J. (1998). Strategies for counterresistance: Toward sociotransformative constructivism and learning to teach science for diversity and for understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36.(6), 589-622.
27. Rodriguez, A. J. (2002). Using sociotransformative constructivism to teach for understanding in diverse classrooms: A beginning teacher's journey. American Educational Research Journal. 39(4), 1017–1045.
28. Rodriguez, A. J. (2004). Turning despondency into hope: Charting new paths to improve students' achievement and participation in science education [Online]. Tallahassee, Florida : Southeast Eisenhower Regional Consortium for Mathematics and Science Education. Available: http://www.serve.org/_downloads/publications/Despondency.pdf
29. Rodriguez, A.J., & Kitchen, R. (2005). Preparing prospective mathematics and science teachers to teach for diversity: Promising strategies for transformative pedagogy. Mahwah, New Jersey : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
30. Rodriguez, A.J., & Zozakiewicz, C. (2005). Using Sociotransformative Constructivism (sTc) to unearth gender identity discourses in upper elementary schools. Penn GSE Perspectives on Urban Education [Online], 3(2). Available: http://www.urbanedjournal.org/index.html.
31. Sandholtz, J. H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D. C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York : Teachers College Press.
32. Spradley, J. P. (1979). The ethnographic interview. New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
33. Stoddart, T., Pinal, A., Latzke, M., & Canaday, D. (2002). Integrating inquiry science and language development for English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 664-687.
34. Yerrick, R., & Hoving T. (1999). Obstacles confronting technology initiatives as seen through the experience of science teachers: A comparative study of science teachers' beliefs, planning, and practice. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8, 291-307.