Preparing teachers to design sequences of instruction in earth systems science: A comparison of three professional development programs

American Educational Research Journal

Volumn 48, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 996-1025

  Penuel, William R ^a   Gallagher, Lawrence P ^a   Moorthy, Savitha ^a  

^a SRI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Computers and learning; Educational policy; Evaluation; Instructional practices; Networking; Social context

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960337871     PISSN: 00028312     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/0002831211410864     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Alozie N.M.,Moje E.B.,Krajcik J.S.An analysis of the supports and constraints for scientific discussion in high school project-based science.Science Education. 2010;94:395-427.
2. Atkin J.M.,Black P.Inside science education reform: A history of curricular and policy change. New York, NY: Teachers College Press; 2003:.
3. Ball D.L.,Cohen D.K.Teaching as the learning profession. Darling-Hammond L.Sykes G., ed. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 1999:3-31.
4. Baron R.M.,Kenny D.A.The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1986;51:1173-1182.
5. Barron B.J. S.,Schwartz D.L.,Vye N.J.,Moore A.,Petrosino A.,Zech L.,Bransford J.D.Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem and project-based learning.Journal of Learning Sciences. 1998;7:271-312.
6. Bauer D.J.,Preacher K.J.,Gil K.M.Conceptualizing and testing random indirect effects and moderated mediation in multilevel models: New procedures and recommendations.Psychological Methods. 2006;11:142-163.
7. Blumenfeld P.,Soloway E.,Marx R.W.,Guzdial M.,Palincsar A.Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning.Educational Psychologist. 1991;26:369-398.
8. Borman G.D.,Gamoran A.,Bowdon J.A randomized trial of teacher development in elementary science: First-year achievement effects.Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness. 2008;1:237-264.
9. Bransford J.D.,Schwartz D.L.Review of research in education. Iran-Nejad A.Pearson P.D., ed. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association; 1999:61-100.
10. Brown J.L.Making the most of Understanding by Design. Washington, DC: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 2004:.
11. BrownM. W. (2002). Teaching by design: Understanding the intersection between teacher practice and the design of curricular innovations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
12. Brown M.W.Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction. Remillard J.T.Herbel-Eisenman B.A.Lloyd G.M., ed. New York, Routledge:; 2009:17-36.
13. Brown M.W.,Edelson D.Teaching as design: Can we better understand the ways teachers use materials so we can better design materials to support their changes in practice. Evanston, IL: Center for Learning Technologies in Urban Schools; 2003:.
14. Bybee R.W.Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann; 1997:.
15. Bybee R.W.Scientific inquiry and nature of science. Flick L.B.Lederman N.G., ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2004:1-14.
16. Bybee R.W.,Taylor J.A.,Gardner A.,Van Scotter P.,Powell J.C.,Westbrook A.,Landes N.The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins, effectiveness, and applications. Colorado Springs, CO: Biological Sciences Curriculum Study; 2006:.
17. Cochran-Smith M.Teaching quality matters.Journal of Teacher Education. 2003;54:95-98.
18. Cohen D.K.,Hill H.C.Learning policy: When state education reform works. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press; 2001:.
19. Cohen D.K.,Raudenbush S.W.,Ball D.L.Resources, instruction, and research.Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. 2003;25 (2): 1-24.
20. Davis E.A.,Krajcik J.Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning.Educational Researcher. 2005;34 (3): 3-14.
21. Davis E.A.,Varma K.Designing coherent science education. Kali Y.Linn M.C.Roseman J.E., ed. New York, NY: Teachers College Press; 2008:94-122.
22. Desimone L.M.Improving impact studies of teachers' professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures.Educational Researcher. 2009;38 (3): 181-199.
23. Enyedy N.,Goldberg J.Inquiry in interaction: How adaptations of curricula shape classroom communities.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2004;41:905-935.
24. Fishman B.J.,Marx R.W.,Best S.,Tal R.Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform.Teaching and Teacher Education. 2003;19:643-658.
25. Geier R.,Blumenfeld P.,Marx R.W.,Krajcik J.,Fishman B.J.,Soloway E.Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2008;45:922-939.
26. Gray J.T.,Camp P.J.,Holbrook J.,Owensby J.,Hyser S.,Kolodner J.L.Learning by Design technical report: Results of performance assessments for 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. Atlanta: Georgia Institute of Technology, College of Computing; 2001:.
27. Green D.P.,Ha S.E.,Bullock J.G.Enough already about "black box" experiments: Studying mediation is more difficult than most scholars suppose.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2010;628:200-208.
28. CFDA 84.305A education research grants. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education; 2009:.
29. Kennedy M.M.Form and substance in mathematics and science professional development.National Institute for Science Education Brief. 1999;3 (2): 1-7.
30. Kesidou S.,Roseman J.E.How well do middle school science programs measure up? Findings from Project 2061's curriculum review.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2002;39:522-549.
31. Krajcik J.S.,Blumenfeld P.C.Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Sawyer R.K., ed. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2006:317-333.
32. Krajcik J.S.,Czerniak C.M.Teaching science in elementary and middle school: A project-based approach. 3rd ed.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2007:.
33. Krajcik J.S.,Marx R.W.,Blumenfeld P.C.,Soloway E.,Fishman B.J.,Middleton M.Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association; New Orleans, LA;.
34. Krajcik J.S.,McNeill K.L.,Reiser B.J.Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy.Science Education. 2008;92:1-32.
35. Lin H.-T.,Fishman B.J.Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Barab S.A.Hay K.E.Hickey D.T., ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006:432-438.
36. Liu X.,Congdon R.,Raudenbush S.W.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Survey Research Center of the Institute of Social Research; 2001:.
37. Marx R.W.,Harris C.J.No Child Left Behind and science education: Opportunities, challenges, and risks.Elementary School Journal. 2006;106:467-477.
38. McNeill K.L.Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena.Science Education. 2009;93:233-268.
39. McNeill K.L.,Pimentel D.S.Scientific discourse in three urban classrooms: The role of the teacher in engaging high school students in argumentation.Science Education. 2010;94:203-229.
40. McTigheJ.SeifE. (2003). A summary of underlying theory and research base for understanding by design. Unpublished manuscript.
41. McTighe J.,Wiggins G.The Understanding by Design handbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 1999:.
42. McWilliams H.,McAuliffe C.,Lockwood J.,Larsen J.,Rosenberg M.,Hoover M.Earth Science by Design: A handbook for professional developers. Cambridge, MA: TERC; 2006:.
43. Minstrell J.,Kraus P.How students learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2005:475-514.
44. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 1999:.
45. Systems for state science assessment. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2006:.
46. Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007:.
47. A framework for science education: Preliminary public draft. Washington, DC: Committee on Conceptual Framework for New Science Education Standards, Board on Science Education, National Research Council; 2010:.
48. Penuel W.R.,Gallagher L.P.Comparing three approaches to preparing teachers to teach for deep understanding in Earth science: Short-term impacts on teachers and teaching practice.Journal of the Learning Sciences. 2009;18:461-508.
49. Raudenbush S.W.,Bryk A.S.Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002:.
50. Reiser B.J.,Spillane J.P.,Steinmuler F.,Sorsa D.,Carney K.,Kyza E.Fourth International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Fishman B.O'Connor-Divelbiss S., ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2000:342-349.
51. Reiser B.J.,Tabak I.,Sandoval W.A.,Smith B.K.,Steinmuller F.,Leone A.J.Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress. Carver S.M.Klahr D., ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2001:263-305.
52. Remillard J.T.Can curriculum materials support teachers' learning? Two fourth-grade teachers' use of a new mathematics text.Elementary School Journal. 2000;100:331-350.
53. Remillard J.T.Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula.Review of Educational Research. 2005;75:211-246.
54. Rivet A.Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Barab S.A.Hay K.E.Hickey D.T., ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2006:578-584.
55. Schneider R.M.,Krajcik J.Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials.Journal of Science Teacher Education. 2002;13:221-245.
56. Schneider R.M.,Krajcik J.,Blumenfeld P.Enacting reform-based science materials: The range of teacher enactments in reform classrooms.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2005;42:283-312.
57. Shavelson R.J.,Webb N.M.,Burstein L.Handbook of research on teaching. Whittrock M., ed. New York, NY: Macmillan; 1986:50-91.
58. Songer N.B.,Lee H.-S.,Kam R.Technology-rich inquiry science in urban classrooms: What are the barriers to inquiry pedagogy?.Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 2002;39:128-150.
59. Spillane J.P.External reform initiatives and teachers' efforts to reconstruct their practice: The mediating role of teachers' zones of enactment.Journal of Curriculum Studies. 1999;31:143-175.
60. Squire K.D.,MaKinster J.G.,Barnett M.,Luehmann A.L.,Barab S.Designed curriculum and local culture: Acknowledging the primacy of classroom culture.Science Education. 2003;87:467-489.
61. Tabak I.,Reiser B.J.Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Learning. Hall R.Miyake N.Enye N.N., ed. Toronto, Ontario: International Society of the Learning Sciences; 1997:292-301.
62. Thissen D.,Chen W.-H.,Bock D.Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International; 2003:.
63. Wartofsky M.Models: Representation and the scientific understanding. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Riedl; 1979:.
64. Wayne A.J.,Yoon K.S.,Zhu P.,Cronen S.,Garet M.S.Experimenting with teacher professional development: Motives and methods.Educational Researcher. 2008;37 (8): 479-479.
65. Wertsch J.V.Mind as action. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1998:.
66. Wiggins G.,McTighe J.Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 1998:.