Differential use of elementary science kits

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 34, Issue 15, 2012, Pages 2371-2391

  Jones, Gail ^a   Robertson, Laura ^b   Gardner, Grant E ^c   Dotger, Sharon ^d   Blanchard, Margaret R ^a  

^a NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Department of Science   (United States)

^c EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Curriculum; Teacher actions; Teacher development

Indexed keywords

EID: 84870262450     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2011.602755     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Abrams, E., Southerland, S.A., & Evans, C.A. (2007). Inquiry in the classroom: Identifying necessary components of a useful definition. In E. Abrams, S.A. Southerland, & P. Silva (Eds.), Inquiry in the classroom: Realities and opportunities (pp. xi-xlii)
2. Anderson, R.D. (2007). Inquiry as an organizing theme for science education. In S.K. Abell & N.G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 807-830). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
3. Bredderman, T. (1983). Effects of activity-based elementary science on student outcomes: A quantitative synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 499-518
4. Brown, M.W. (2002). Teaching by design: Understanding the interactions between teacher practice and the design of curricular innovation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL
5. Carlsen, W.S. (1992). Closing down the conversation: Discouraging student talk on unfamiliar science content. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 27(2), 15-21
6. Colburn, A. (2000). What teacher educators need to know about inquiry-based instruction. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science
7. Akron, OH., Connors, M. (2004). A decade of success in physics distance education at Athabasca University. Physics in Canada, 60(1), 49-54
8. Dickerson, D., Clark, M., Dawkins, K., & Horne, C. (2006). Using kits to construct content understandings in elementary schools. Journal of Elementary Education, 18(1), 43-56
9. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12
10. Fetters, M.K., Czerniak, C.M., Fish, L., & Shawberry, J. (2002). Confronting, challenging, and changing teachers' beliefs: Implications from a local systemic change professional development program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 101-130
11. Fuller, F.F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization. American Educational Research Journal, 6(2), 207-226
12. Hall, G.E., Wallace, R.C., & Dossett, W.F. (1973). A developmental conceptualization of the adoption process within educational institutions, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED095126)
13. Harlen, W., & Holroyd, C. (1997). Primary teachers' understanding of concepts of science: Impact on confidence and teaching. International Journal of Science Teaching, 19, 93-105
14. Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Duncan, R.G., & Chinn, C.A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Krischner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107
15. Houston, L.S., Fraser, B.J., & Ledbetter, C.E. (2003). An evaluation of elementary school science kits in terms of classroom environment and student attitudes, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED476657)
16. Jones, M.G., Jones, B., & Hargrove, T. (2003). The unintended consequences of high stakes testing. Boulder, CO: Rowman and Littlefield
17. Jones, M.T., & Eick, C.J. (2007). Implementing inquiry kit curriculum: Obstacles, adaptations, and practical knowledge development in two middle school science teachers. Science Education, 91(3), 492-513
18. Kelly, M.P., & Staver, J.R. (2005). A case study of one school system's adoption and implementation of an elementary science program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(1), 25-52
19. Mayer, D. (1999). Measuring instructional practice: Can policymakers trust survey data? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 21(2), 29-45
20. McNeill, K.L., Lizotte, D.J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R.W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191
21. Mikeska, J.N., Anderson, C.W., & Schwarz, C.V. (2009). Principled reasoning about problems of practice. Science Education, 93(4), 678-686
22. Moyer, P., & Jones, M.G. (2003). Controlling choice: Teachers, students, and manipulatives in mathematics classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 104(1), 16-31
23. National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press
24. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press
25. Porter, A.C., Kirst, M.W., Osthoff, E.J., Smithson, J.L., & Schneider, S.A. (1993). Reform up close: An analysis of high school mathematics and science classrooms. Madison: Wisconsin Center for Educational Research
26. Pringle, R.M., & Carrier Martin, S. (2005). The potential impacts of upcoming high-stakes testing on the teaching of science in elementary classrooms. Research in Science Education, 35(2-3), 347-361
27. Remillard, J.T. (1996). Changing texts, teachers, and teaching: The role of textbooks in reform in mathematics education, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing
28. Remillard, J.T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers' learning? Elementary School Journal, 100(4), 331-350
29. Remillard, J. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 211-246
30. Rennie, L.J., Howitt, C., Evans, R.S., & Mayne, F.E. (2009). Teaching and learning with a do-it-yourself science kit in schools. Paper presented at the meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Garden Grove, CA
31. Romberg, T.A. (1997). Mathematics in context: Impact on teachers. In E. Fennema & B.S. Nelson (Eds.), Mathematics teachers in transition (pp. 357-380). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
32. Rubino, A.N., Barley, Z.A., & Jenness, M. (1994). Effects of science kit/inservice and kit use on teachers' science knowledge, attitudes, and teaching, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED382442)
33. Rubino, A.N., Barley, Z.A., Jenness, M., Pearl, J., & Bonda, V. (1994). Effects of science kits on attitudes and accomplishment of students in science, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED382443)
34. Schwab, J.J. (1960). Inquiry, the science teacher, and the educator. The School Review, 68(2), 176-195
35. Schwartz, C. (2009). Developing preservice elementary teachers' knowledge and practices through modeling-centered scientific inquiry. Science Education, 93(4), 720-744
36. Settlage, J., & Meadows, L. (2002). Standards-based reform and its unintended consequences: Implications for science education within America's urban schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(2), 114-127
37. Settlage, J., & Southerland, S.A. (2007). Teaching science to every child: Using culture as a starting point. New York: Routledge
38. Sevilla, J., & Marsh, D.D. (1992). Inquiry-oriented science programs: New perspectives on the implementation process, (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED381371)
39. Shaver, A., Cuevas, P., Lee, O., & Avalos, M. (2007). Teachers' perceptions of policy influences on science instruction with culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 725-746
40. Shymansky, J.A., Hedges, L.V., & Woodworth, G. (1990). A reassessment of the effects of inquiry-based science curricula of the 60s on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(2), 127-144
41. Shymansky, J.A., Kyle, W.C., & Alport, J.M. (1983). The effects of new science curricula on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(5), 387-404
42. Smith, T.M., Desimone, L.M., Zeidner, T.L., Dunn, A.C., Bhatt, M., & Rumyantseva, N.L. (2007). Inquiry-oriented instruction in science: Who teaches that way? Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29(3), 169-199
43. Supovitz, J.A., & Turner, H.M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963-980
44. Valdez, J., & Freve, Y. (2001). The effect of inquiry-based teaching on standardized reading scores. Fresno, CA: Fresno Unified School District-Urban Systemic Program, Retrieved January 30, 2010, from http://sustainability2002.terc.edu/invoke.cfm/page/143
45. Weiss, I., Pasley, J., Smith, S., Banilower, E., & Heck, D. (2003). Looking inside the classroom: A study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc
46. Weiss, I.R., Banilower, E.R., McMahon, K.C., & Smith, S. (2000). Report of the 2000 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc
47. Young, B.J., & Lee, S.K. (2005). The effects of a kit-based science curriculum and intensive science professional development on elementary student science achievement. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(5-6), 471-481
48. Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to teach elementary school science as argument. Science Education, 93(4), 687-719
49. Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27(2), 172-223