Model Based Inquiry in the High School Physics Classroom: An Exploratory Study of Implementation and Outcomes

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 258-269

  Campbell, Todd ^a   Zhang, Danhui ^b   Neilson, Drew ^c  

^a UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BEIJING NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^c Logan High School   (United States)

Author keywords

Model based inquiry; Physics; Student science outcome measures; Traditional lecture and demonstrations

Indexed keywords

EID: 79957499273     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-010-9251-6     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Adamson AE, Banks D, Burtch M, Cox F III, Judson E, Turley JB, Benford R, Lawson AE (2003) Reformed undergraduate instruction and its subsequent impact on secondary school teaching practice and student achievement. J Res Sci Teach 40(10): 939-958.
2. Akindehin F (1988) Effect of an instructional package on preservice science teachers' understanding of the nature of science and acquisition of science-related attitudes. Sci Educ 72(1): 73-82.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1989) Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press, New York.
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993) Benchmarks for science literacy. Author, Washington.
5. Bland JM, Altman DG (1997) Statistics notes: Cronbach's alpha. Br Med J 314: 572.
6. Bybee RW, Carlson Powell J, Trowbridge LW (2008) Teaching secondary school science: strategies for developing scientific literacy, 9t edn. Pearson, Upper Saddle River.
7. Campbell T, Bohn C (2008) Science laboratory experiences of high school students across one state in the U. S.: descriptive research from the classroom. Sci Educator 17(1): 36-48.
8. Cavallo A, Laubach T (2001) Students' science perceptions and enrollment decisions in differing learning cycle classrooms. J Res Sci Teach 38(9): 1029-1062.
9. Chang C, Mao S (1999) Comparison of Taiwan science students' outcomes with inquiry-group versus traditional instruction. J Educ Res 92(6): 340-346.
10. Colburn A (2000) An inquiry primer. Sci Scope 23(6): 42-44.
11. Ertepinar H, Geban O (1996) Effect of instruction supplied with the investigative-oriented laboratory approach on achievement in a science course. Educ Res 38(3): 333-341.
12. Gobert J, Buckley B (2000) Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. Int J Sci Educ 22(9): 891-894.
13. Hakkarainen K (2003) Progressive inquiry in a computer-supported biology class. J Res Sci Teach 40(10): 1072-1088.
14. Hruby GG (2002) Social constructivism and social constructionism. In: Guzzetti B (ed) Encyclopedia of literacy research in America. ABCCLIO Press, Santa Barbara.
15. Johnston A (2008) Demythologizing or dehumanizing? A response to Settlage and the ideals of open inquiry. J Sci Teach Educ 19: 11-13.
16. Lawson A (n. d.) Assessments. Anton E. Lawson. 24 Jan 2009 http://www. public. asu. edu/~anton1/LawsonAssessments. htm.
17. Lederman N (1998) The state of science education: subject matter without context. Electron J Sci Educ 3(2): 1-24.
18. Martin-Hansen L (2002) Defining inquiry: exploring the many types of inquiry in the science classroom. Sci Teacher 69(2): 34-37.
19. National Research Council (NRC) (1996) The national science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington.
20. National Research Council (NRC) (2000) Inquiry and the national science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington.
21. National Research Council (NRC) (2007) Ready, set, science!: Putting research to work in K-8 science classrooms. National Academy Press, Washington.
22. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) (2007) NSTA position statement scientific inquiry. Retrieved 7 Nov 2008 from http://www. nsta. org/about/positions/inquiry. aspx.
23. O'Sullivan CY, Weiss AR (1999) Student work and teacher practices in science. US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 1999-455.
24. Ogunniyi MB (1983) Relative effects of a history/philosophy of science course on student teachers' performance on two models of science. Res Sci Technol Educ 1(2): 193-199.
25. Paris S, Yambor K, Packard B (1998) Hands-on biology: a museum-school-university partnership for enhancing students' interest and learning in science. Elem Sch J 98(3): 267-289.
26. Piburn M, Sawada D, Turley J, Falconer K, Benford R, Bloom I, Judson E (2000) Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP): Reference manual (ACEPT Technical Report No. INOO-3). Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers, Tempe (Eric Document Reproduction Service, ED 447 205).
27. Sawada D, Piburn M, Judson E, Turley J, Falconer K, Benford R, Bloom I (2002) Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: the reformed teaching observation protocol. Sch Sci Math 102(6): 245-253.
28. Schwartz R, Lederman N, Crawford B (2004) Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: an explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Sci Educ 88(4): 610-645.
29. Settlage J (2007) Demythologizing science teacher education: conquering the false ideal of open inquiry. J Sci Teach Educ 18: 461-467.
30. Weld J (2002) Learner-centered teaching. In: Bybee RW (ed) Learning science and the science of learning. NSTA Press, Arlington, pp 77-84.
31. Windschitl M (2003) Inquiry projects in science teacher education: what can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Sci Educ 87(1): 112-143.
32. Windschitl M, Thompson J (2006) Transcending simple forms of school science investigations: can pre-service instruction foster teachers' understandings of model-based inquiry? Am Educ Res J 43(4): 783-835.
33. Windschitl M, Thompson J, Braaten M (2008) Beyond the scientific method: model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Sci Educ 92(5): 941-967.