The Impact on Incorporating Collaborative Concept Mapping with Coteaching Techniques in Elementary Science Classes

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 110, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 86-97

  Jang, Syh Jong ^a  

^a CHUNG YUAN CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878375834     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.00012.x     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction modes in pairs and fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 1099-1114.
2. Bennett, R. V., Ishler, M. F., & O'Loughlin, M. (1992). Effective collaboration in teacher education. Action in Teacher Education, 14(1), 52-56.
3. Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
4. Briscoe, C., & Prayaga, C. S. (2004). Teaching future K-8 teachers the language of Newton: A case study of collaboration and change in university. Science Education, 88, 947-969.
5. Brown, D. S. (2003). High school biology: A group approach to concept mapping. The American Biology Teacher, 65, 192-198.
6. Cook, L., & Friend, M. (1996). Coteaching: Guidelines for creating effective practices. In E. L. Meyen, G. A. Vergason, & R. J. Whelan (Eds.), Strategies for teaching exceptional children in inclusive settings (pp. 155-182). Denver, CO: Love.
7. Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 597-604.
8. Dieker, L., & Murawski, W. (2003). Coteaching at the secondary level: Unique issues, current trends, and suggestions for success. The High School Journal, 86(4), 1-13.
9. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. Handbooks of research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan.
10. Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2003). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
11. Firestone, W. A., & Rosenblum, S. (1998). Building commitment in urban high schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 10, 285-299.
12. Gijlers, H., & De Jong, T. (2005). The relation between prior knowledge and students' collaborative discovery learning processes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 264-282.
13. Guastello, E. F., Beasley, T. M., & Sinatra, R. C. (2000). Concept mapping effects on science content comprehension of low-achieving inner-city seventh graders. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 356-365.
14. Gunstone, R., & Mitchell, I. (1998). Metacognition and conceptual change. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view (pp. 133-163). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15. Jang, S. J. (2006a). The effects of incorporating web assisted learning with team teaching in seventh-grade science classes. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 615-632.
16. Jang, S. J. (2006b). Research on the effects of team teaching upon two secondary school teachers. Educational Research, 48, 177-194.
17. Jang, S. J. (2007). A study of the students' construction of science knowledge: Talk and writing in a collaborative group. Educational Research, 49, 65-81.
18. Kelly, G., & Crawford, T. (1997). An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science. Science Education, 81, 533-559.
19. Keys, C. W. (1996). Writing collaborative laboratory reports in ninth grade science: Three case studies of social interactions. School Science and Mathematics, 96, 178-186.
20. Kittleson, J. M., & Southerland, S. A. (2004). The role of discourse in group knowledge construction: A case study of engineering students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 267-293.
21. Lieberman, A., Saxl, E. R., & Miles, M. B. (1988). Teaching leadership: Ideology and practice. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), Building a professional culture in schools (pp. 148-166). New York: Teachers College Press.
22. Liu, X. (2004). Use concept mapping for assessing and promoting relational conceptual change in science. Science Education, 88, 373-396.
23. McClure, J. R., Sonak, B., & Suen, H. K. (1999). Concept map assessment of classroom learning: Reliability, validity, and logistical practicality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 475-492.
24. Ministry of Education (2001). The implementation outline of program in the nine-year innovatory curriculum. Taipei: Ministry of Education.
25. Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., & Novak, J. D. (1997). Teaching science for understanding. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
26. Miller, L. (1988). Unlikely beginnings: The district office as a starting point for developing a professional culture for teaching. In A. Lieberman (Ed.), Building a professional culture in schools (pp. 167-184). New York: Longman.
27. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
28. Newman, D., Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1989). The construction zone: Working for cognitive change in school. Cambridge, MA: University Press.
29. Novak, J. (1998). Learning, creating and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
30. Novak, J. (2002). Meaningful learning: The essential factor for conceptual change in limited or inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to empowerment of learners. Science Education, 88, 548-571.
31. Novak, J. (2005). Results and implications of a 12-year longitudinal study of science concept learning. Research in Science Education, 35, 23-40.
32. Novak, J., & Gowin, B. D. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
33. Okebukola, P. A. (1992). Attaining meaningful learning of concepts in genetics and ecology: An examination of the potency of the concept-mapping technique. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 493-504.
34. Palincsar, A. S., Anderson, C., & David, Y. M. (1993). Pursuing scientific literacy in the middle grades through collaborative problem solving. The Elementary School Journal, 93, 643-658.
35. Richmond, G., & Striley, J. (1996). Making meaning in classrooms: Social processes in small group discourse and scientific knowledge building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 839-858.
36. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
37. Roth, W. M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1993). The concept map as a tool for the collaborative construction of knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 503-534.
38. Roth, W-M., Tobin, K., Zimmermann, A., Bryant, N., & Davis, C. (2002). Lessons on and from the dihybrid cross: An activity-theoretical study of learning in coteaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 253-282.
39. Roth, W-M., Tobin, K., Carambo, C., & Dalland, C. (2005). Coordination in coteaching: Producing alignment in real time. Science Education, 89, 675-702.
40. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 569-600.
41. Solomon, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupils' understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14, 63-82.
42. Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.
43. Sykes, G. (1996). Reform of and as professional development. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 465-467.
44. Tobin, K., Roth, W-M., & Zimmermann, A. (2001). Learning to teach science in urban schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 941-964.
45. Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. M. (2002). “Mapping to know”: The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86, 264-286.
46. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
47. Wellington, J., & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
48. Yin, Y., Vanides, J., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Ayala, C. C., & Shavelson, R. J. (2005). Comparison of two concept-mapping techniques: Implications for scoring, interpretation, and use. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 166-184.