Affording Explicit-Reflective Science Teaching by Using an Educative Teachers' Guide

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 34, Issue 7, 2012, Pages 999-1026

  Lin, Shu Fen ^a   Lieu, Sang Chong ^b   Chen, Sufen ^c   Huang, Mao Tsai ^d   Chang, Wen Hua ^e  

^a NATIONAL SUN YAT SEN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^b NATIONAL DONG HWA UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

^c NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

^d National Academy for Educational   (Taiwan)

^e NATIONAL TAIWAN NORMAL UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Nature of science; Professional development; Reflection

Indexed keywords

EID: 84860715636     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2012.661484     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Abd-El-Khalick, F. 2001. Embedding nature of science instruction in preservice elementary science courses: Abandoning scientism, but. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12: 215-233.
2. Abd-El-Khalick, F. and Lederman, N. G. 2000. The influence of history of science courses on students' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10): 1057-1095.
3. Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A. and Hanson, D. L. 2009. Fostering a community of practice through a professional development programme to improve elementary teachers' views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10): 1090-1113.
4. Akerson, V. L. and Hanuscin, D. L. 2007. Teaching nature of science through inquiry: Results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5): 653-680.
5. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. 1989. Science for all American: Project 2061, New York: Oxford University Press.
6. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. 1998. Blueprints for reform: Science, mathematics, and technology education, New York: Oxford University Press.
7. Ball, D. L. and Cohen, D. K. C. 1996. Reform by the book: What is-or might be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform?. Educational Researcher, 25(9) 6-8, 14
8. Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A. and Lederman, N. G. 2003. Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high school students' understandings of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(5): 487-509.
9. Beyer, C. J., Delgado, C., Davis, E. A. and Krajcik, J. 2009. Investigating teacher learning supports in high school biology curricular programs to inform the design of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(9): 977-998.
10. Bianchini, J. and Colburn, A. 2000. Teaching the nature of science through inquiry to prospective elementary teachers: A tale of two researchers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2): 177-209.
11. Carmines, E. G. and Zeller, R. A. 1979. Reliability and validity assessment, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
12. Chen, S. (2006). Development of an instrument to assess views on nature of science and attitudes toward teaching science. Science Education, 90(5), 803-819.
13. Clough, M. P. 2006. Learners' responses to the demands of conceptual change: Considerations for effective nature of science instruction. Science & Education, 15(5): 463-494.
14. Clough, M. P. and Olson, J. K. 2008. Teaching and assessing the nature of science: An introduction. Science & Education, 17(2-3): 143-145.
15. Davis, E. A. and Krajcik, J. S. 2005. Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3): 3-14.
16. Doyle, W. 1990. "Classroom knowledge as a foundation for teaching". In Foundational studies in teacher education: Reexamination, Edited by: Tozer, S., Anderson, T. H. and Armbruster, B. B. 49-60. New York: Teachers College Press.
17. Grossman, P. and Thompson, C. 2008. Learning from curriculum materials: Scaffolds for teacher learning?. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(8): 2014-2026.
18. Hanuscin, D. L., Lee, M. H. and Akerson, V. L. 2011. Elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge for teaching the nature of science. Science Education, 95(1): 145-167.
19. Hipkins, R. and Barker, M. 2005. Teaching the 'nature of science': Modest adaptions or radical reconceptions?. International Journal of Science Education, 27(2): 243-254.
20. Kesidou, S. and Roseman, J. E. 2002. How well do middle school science programs measure up? Findings from project 2061's curriculum review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6): 522-549.
21. Khishfe, R. and Abd-El-Khalick, F. 2002. Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7): 551-578.
22. Kim, S. Y. and Irving, K. E. 2010. History of science as an instructional context learning in genetics and nature of science. Science & Education, 19(2): 187-215.
23. Lederman, N. G. 1992. Students' and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4): 331-359.
24. Lederman, N. G. 2006a. Research on nature of science: Reflections on the past, anticipations of the future. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 7(1): 1-11.
25. Lederman, N. G. 2006b. "Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science instruction". In Scientific inquiry and nature of science, Edited by: Flick, L. B. and Lederman, N. G. 301-317. Dordrecht,The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
26. Lederman, N. G. and Zeidler, D. L. 1987. Science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: Do they really influence teacher behavior?. Science Education, 70(5): 721-734.
27. Lin, S.F., Chang, W.H., & Cheng, Y.J. (2011). The perceived usefulness of teachers' guides for science teachers. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9(6), 1367-1389.
28. Lin, C.-Y., Cheng, J.-H., & Chang, W.-H. (2010). Making science vivid: Using a historical episodes map. International Journal of Science Education, 32(18), 2521-2531.
29. Liu, S.-Y. and Lederman, N. G. 2007. Exploring prospective teachers' worldviews and conceptions of nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29(10): 1281-1307.
30. Martin, A. M. and Hand, B. 2009. Factors affecting the implementation of argument on the elementary science classroom: A longitudinal case study. Research in Science Education, 39(1): 17-38.
31. Matthews, M. (1994). Science teaching; The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
32. Maxwell, J. A. 1996. Qualitative research design: An interactive approach, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.
33. McNeill, K. L. and Krajcik, J. 2008. Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers' instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1): 53-78.
34. Ministry of Education [MOE]. 2006. Guideline for grade 1-9 science and technology curriculum, Taipei: Author.
35. National Assessment of Educational Progress [NAEP]. 1989. Science objectives: 1990 assessment, Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
36. National Research Council [NRC]. 1996. National science education standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
37. Piburn, M., & Sawada, D. (2009). Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP): Reference manual. ACEPT IN-003.
38. Piburn, M., Sawada, D., Falconer, K., Turley, J. Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2000). Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP). ACEPT IN-003.
39. Posner, G. J. 2004. Analyzing the curriculum, 3, New York: McGraw Hill.
40. Powell, J. C. and Anderson, R. D. 2002. Changing teachers' practice: Curriculum materials and science education reform in the USA. Studies in Science Education, 37(1): 107-136.
41. Remillard, J. T. 2000. Can curriculum materials support teachers' learning? Two fourth-grade teachers' use of a new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100(4): 331-350.
42. Remillard, J. T. 2005. Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2): 211-246.
43. Sawada, D., Piburn, M. D., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Benford, R. and Bloom, I. 2002. Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6): 245-253.
44. Schneider, R. M. and Krajcik, J. 2002. Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(3): 167-217.
45. Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J. and 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.
46. Schwartz, M. 2006. For whom do we write the curriculum?. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(4): 449-457.
47. Schwartz, R. S. and Lederman, N. G. 2002. It's the nature of the beast: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3): 205-236.
48. Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G. and Crawford, B. A. 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. Science Education, 88(4): 610-645.
49. Shkedi, A. 1995. Teachers' attitudes toward a teachers' guide: Implementations for the roles of planners and teachers. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 10(2): 155-170.
50. Tsai, C. C. 2002. Nested epistemologies: Science teachers' beliefs of teaching, learning and science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8): 771-783.
51. Van Den Akker, J. 1998. "The science curriculum: Between ideals and outcomes". In International handbook of science education, Edited by: Fraser, B. J. and Tobin, K. G. Vol. 1, 421-447. Dordrecht,The Netherlands: Kluwer.
52. Yore, L. and Shymansky, J. A. 1992. Effective use of textual materials in elementary and middle school science classrooms. Leslie Johnstone B.C. Catalyst,: 11-17.