Preservice elementary teachers' adaptation of science curriculum materials for inquiry-based elementary science

Science Education

Volumn 95, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 927-955

  Forbes, Cory T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79961128737     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20444     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. 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: Erlbaum.
2. Appleton, K. (2002). Science activities that work: Perceptions of primary school teachers. Research in Science Education, 32(3), 393-410.
3. Avraamidou, L., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2010). In search of well-started beginning science teachers: Insights from two first-year elementary teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(6), 661-686.
4. Ball, D. L., & Forzani, F. M. (2009). The work of teaching and challenge of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 497-511.
5. Ball, D. L., & Lampert, M. (1999). Multiples of evidence, time, and perspective: Revisiting the study of teaching and learning. In E. C. Lagemann & L. S. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 371-398). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6. Beyer, C., & Davis, E. A. (2009a). Supporting preservice elementary teachers' critique and adaptation of science lesson plans using educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(6), 517-536.
7. Beyer, C., & Davis, E. A. (2009b). Using educative curriculum materials to support preservice elementary teachers' curricular planning: Acomparison between two different forms of support. Curriculum Inquiry, 39(5), 679-703.
8. Biggers, M., & Forbes, C. T. (accepted). Preservice elementary teachers' learning about the five essential features of classroom inquiry. Poster to be presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Orlando, FL, April 3-6, 2011.
9. Brown, M. (2009). Toward a theory of curriculum design and use: Understanding the teacher-tool relationship. In J. Remillard, B. Herbel-Eisenman, and G. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17-37). New York: Routledge.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1999). Instruction, capacity, and improvement (CPRE Research Report No. RR-043). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. Davis, E. A. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers' critique of instructional materials for science. Science Education, 90(2), 348-375.
16. Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3-14.
17. Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607-651.
18. Davis, E. A., & Smithey, J. (2009). Beginning teachers moving toward effective elementary science teaching. Science Education, 93(4), 745-770.
19. Dietz, C., & Davis, E. A. (2009). Preservice elementary teachers' reflection on narrative images of inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20(3), 219-243.
20. 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.
21. Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children's ideas in science. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
22. 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.
23. Feiman-Nemser, S. (2001). From preparation to practice: Designing a continuum to strengthen and sustain teaching. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 1013-1055.
24. Fishman, B., Marx, R., Best, S., & Tal, R. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 643-658.
25. Fishman, B. J., & Krajcik, J. (2003). What does it mean to create sustainable science curriculum innovations? A commentary. Science Education, 87, 564-573.
26. Fogleman, J., McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2010). Examining the effect of teachers' adaptations of a middle school science inquiry-oriented curriculum unit on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 149-169.
27. Forbes, C. T., Biggers, M., & Zangori, L. (accepted). Supporting elementary teachers' evaluation and adaptation of science curriculum materials: The PIESC3 professional development model. Poster to be presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Orlando, FL, April 3-6, 2011.
28. 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.
29. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2010a). Curriculum design for inquiry: Preservice elementary teachers' mobilization and adaptation of science curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), 365-387.
30. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2010b). Beginning elementary teachers' curriculum design and development of pedagogical design capacity for science teaching: A longitudinal study. In L. E. Kattington (Ed.), Handbook of curriculum development (pp. 209-232). New York: Nova Science.
31. Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2010c). Beginning elementary teachers' beliefs about the use of anchoring questions in science: A longitudinal study. Science Education, 94(2), 365-387.
32. Forbes, C. T., Madeira, C. A., & Slotta, J. D. (2010). Activity-theoretical research on science teachers' expertise and learning. In International perspectives in the learning sciences: Learning in the Disciplines. Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of the Learning Sciences-ICLS 2010. Chicago: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
33. Grandy, R., & Duschl, R. A. (2007). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Analysis of a conference. Science & Education, 16, 141-166.
34. Grossman, P., McDonald, M., Hammerness, K., & Ronfeldt, M. (2008). Dismantling dichotomies in teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith (Ed.), The handbook of teacher education: A project of the Association of Teacher Educators (pp. 243-248). New York: MacMillan.
35. Gunckel, K. (2011). Mediators of preservice teacher's use of the Inquiry-Application Instructional Model. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 79-100.
36. 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.
37. 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.
38. 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.
39. Krajcik, J., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2006). Using driving questions to motivate and sustain student interest in learning science. In K. Tobin (Ed.), Teaching and learning science: An encyclopedia (pp. 317-327). Westport, CT: Greenwood.
40. Loughran, J., Mulhall, P., & Berry, A. (2004). In search of pedagogical content knowledge in science: Developing ways of articulating and documenting professional practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(4), 370-391.
41. Marx, R., & Harris, C. (2006). No Child Left Behind and science education: Opportunities, challenges, and risks. Elementary School Journal, 106(5), 467-477.
42. Metz, K. (2000). Young children's inquiry in biology: Building the knowledge bases to empower independent inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 371-404). Washington, DC: AAAS.
43. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
44. National Center for Education Statistics. (2003). Digest of education statistics, 2003. Retrieved September 23, 2006, from
45. National Research Council (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
46. National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
47. National Research Council (2007). Taking science to school: Leaning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
48. Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49. Pintó, R. (2004). Introducing curriculum innovations in science: Identifying teachers' transformations and the design of related teacher education. Science Education, 89, 1-12.
50. 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.
51. Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers' curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 29(3), 315-342.
52. Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers' learning? Two fourth-grade teachers' use of a new mathematics text. Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331-350.
53. Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246.
54. Roehrig, G. H., & Kruse, R. A. (2005). The role of teachers' beliefs and knowledge in the adoption of a reform-based curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 105(8), 412-422.
55. Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 883-907.
56. 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.
57. Schwarz, C. (2009). Developing preservice elementary teachers' knowledge and practices through modeling-centered scientific inquiry. Science Education, 93(4), 720-744.
58. Schwarz, C., Gunckel, K., Smith, E., Covitt, B., Enfield, M., Bae, M., et al. (2008). Helping elementary pre-service teachers learn to use science curriculum materials for effective science teaching. Science Education, 92(2), 345-377.
59. Sim, C. (2006). Preparing for professional experiences-Incorporating pre-service teachers as "communities of practice." Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 77-83.
60. Spillane, J. P., Diamond, J. B., Walker, L. J., Halverson, R., & Jita, L. (2001). Urban school leadership for elementary science instruction: Identifying and activating resources in an undervalued school subject. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(8), 918-940.
61. Squire, K. D., MaKinster, J. G., Barnett, M., Luehmann, A. L., & Barab, S. L. (2003). Designed curriculum and local culture: Acknowledging the primacy of classroom culture. Science Education, 87, 468-489.
62. Valencia, S., Place, N., Martin, S., & Grossman, P. (2006). Curriculum materials for elementary reading: Shackles and scaffolds for four beginning teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 107(1), 93-120.
63. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research:Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
64. Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to teach elementary school science as argument. Science Education, 93(4), 687-719.
65. Zembal-Saul, C., Blumenfeld, P., & Krajcik, J. (2000). Influence of guided cycles of planning, teaching and reflection on prospective elementary teachers' science content representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 318-339.