Impact of an integrated methods course on preservice teachers' perspectives of curriculum integration and faculty instructors' professional growth

Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 123-138

  Zhou, George ^a   Kim, Jinyoung ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960297235     PISSN: 14926156     EISSN: 19424051     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14926151003778266     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. Washington, DC: Author.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). The liberal art of science. Washington, DC: Author.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1998). Blueprints for reform. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Anders, P. L., & Pritchard, T. G. (1993). Integrated curriculum and instruction for the middle grades. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 611-624.
6. Applebee, A. N., Adler, M., & Flihan, S. (2007). Interdisciplinary curriculum in middle and high school classrooms: Case studies of approaches to curriculum and instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 1002-1039.
7. Beane, J. A. (1995). Curriculum integration and the disciplines of knowledge. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 616-622.
8. Berg, B. L. (2009). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
9. Bleicher, R. E., & Kirkwood-Tucker, T. F. (2004). Integrating science and social studies teaching methods with a global perspective for elementary preservice teachers. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 6(2), 115-124.
10. Bredekamp, S. (Ed.). (1987). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (Expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
11. Cumming, J. (1994). Catering for the needs of all young adolescents: Toward an integrated approach. Unicorn, 20(2), 12-20.
12. Czerniak, C. M., Weber, W. B., Sandmann, A., & Ahern, J. (1999). A literature review of science and mathematics integration. School Science and Mathematics, 99(8), 421-430.
13. Drake, S. (2000). Integrated curriculum: A chapter of the curriculum handbook. Alexandria, VA: Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development.
14. Gardner, H., & Boix-Mansilla, V. (1994). Teaching for understanding within and across the disciplines. Educational Leadership, 51, 14-18.
15. Grossman, P. L., & Stodolsky, S. S. (1995). Content as context: The role of school subjects in secondary school teaching. Educational Researcher, 24, 5-11.
16. Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Beers, S. (2000). Introduction: When theory meets practice in the world of school. In S. Wineburg & P. Grossman (Eds.), Interdisciplinary curriculum: Challenges to implementation (pp. 1-16). New York: Teacher College Press.
17. Hargreaves, A., Earl, L., Moore, S., & Manning, S. (2001). Learning to change: Teaching beyond subjects and standards. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18. Hatch, T. (1998). The differences in theory that matter in the practice of school improvement. American Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 3-31.
19. Hirst, P. H. (1974). Knowledge and the curriculum: A collection of philosophical papers. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
20. Jacobs, H. H. (1989). The growing need for interdisciplinary curriculum content. In H. H. Jacobs (Ed.), Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implantation (pp. 1-11). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
21. Koirala, H. P., & Bowman, J. K. (2003). Preparing middle level pre-service teachers to integrate mathematics and science: Problems and possibilities. School Science and Mathematics, 103(3), 145-154.
22. Lauritzen, C., & Jaegar, M. (1994). Language arts teacher education with a trans-disciplinary curriculum. Language Arts, 71, 581-587.
23. Lederman, N. G., & Niess, M. L. (1998). 5 Apples + 3 oranges +? School Science and Mathematics, 98(6), 281-284.
24. Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory. (1993). Learner-centered psychological principles: Guidelines for school redesign and reform. Denver, CO: Author.
25. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
26. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
27. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1995). Assessment standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
28. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
29. National Research Council. (1989). Everybody counts. A report to the nation on the future of mathematics education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
30. National Research Council. (1990). Reshaping school mathematics. A philosophy and framework for curriculum. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. National Science Teachers Association. (1992). Scope, sequence and coordination of secondary school science: Vol. 1. The content core: A guide for curriculum developers. Washington, DC: Author.
33. National Science Teachers Association. (1997). NSTA pathways to the science standards: Guidelines for moving the vision into practice, Elementary school edition. Arlington, VA: Author.
34. Pang, J., & Good, R. (2000). A review of the integration of science and mathematics: Implications for further research. School Science and Mathematics, 100(2), 73-82.
35. Perkins, D. (1991). Educating for insight. Educational Leadership, 49, 4-8.
36. Sands, D., & Drake, S. (1996). Exploring a process for delivering an interdisciplinary pre-service elementary education curriculum: Teacher educators practice what they preach. Action in Teacher Education, 18, 68-79.
37. Tylack, D., & Tobin, W. (1994). The grammar of schooling: Why has it been so hard to change? American Educational Research Journal, 31(3), 453-480.
38. Venville, G., Wallace, J., Rennie, L., & Malone, J. (1998). The integration of science, mathematics and technology in a discipline-based culture. School Science and Mathematics, 98(6), 294-302.
39. Venville, G. J., Wallace, J., Rennie, L. J., & Malone, J. A. (2002). Curriculum integrations: Eroding the high ground of science as a school subject? Studies in Science Education, 37, 43-84.
40. Wallace, J., & Wildy, H. (1995). Understanding teaching or teaching for understanding: Alternative frameworks for science classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(2), 143-156.
41. Young, D., & Gehrke, N. (1993). Curriculum integration for transcendence:Acritical reviewof recent books on curriculum for integration. Curriculum Inquiry, 23, 445-454.