Challenges in the transition to large-scale reform in chemical education

Thinking Skills and Creativity

Volumn 10, Issue , 2013, Pages 189-207

  Avargil, S ^a   Herscovitz, O ^b   Dori, Y J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MAINE   (United States)

^b TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

Author keywords

Assessment; Chemical education; Educational reform; Large scale study; Thinking skills

Indexed keywords

EID: 84886297069     PISSN: 18711871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tsc.2013.07.008     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science Benchmarks for science literacy 1993, Oxford University Press, New York.
2. Abed A., Dori Y.J. Fostering question posing and inquiry skills of high school Israeli Arab students in a bilingual chemistry learning environment. Proceedings of the annual meeting of the national association for research in science teaching (NARST CD) 2007.
3. Abed A., Dori Y.J. Inquiry, chemistry understanding levels, and bilingual learning. Educación química 2013, 24(1):37-43.
4. Avargil S., Herscovitz O., Dori Y.J. Perceived vs. actual knowledge of Students in chemical education. Paper presented at the 83rd annual meeting of the national association for research in science teaching (NARST) 2010.
5. Avargil S., Herscovitz O., Dori Y.J. Teaching thinking skills in context-based learning: Teachers' challenges and assessment knowledge. Journal of Science Education and Technology 2012, 21(2):207-225.
6. Baker D.R., Piburn M.D. Teachers' perceptions of the effects of a scientific literary course on subsequent learning in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 1990, 27(5):477-491.
7. Barak M., Ben-Chaim D., Zoller U. Purposely teaching for the promotion of higher order thinking skills: A case of critical thinking. Research in Science Education 2007, 37(4):353-369.
8. Barak M., Shakhman L. Fostering higher-order thinking in science class: Teachers' reflections. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 2008, 14(3):191-208.
9. Barnea N., Dori Y.J., Hofstein A. Development and implementation of inquiry-based and computerized-based laboratories: Reforming high school chemistry in Israel. Chemistry Education Research and Practice 2010, 11(3):218-228.
10. Bennett J., Lubben F., Hogarth S. Bringing science to life: A synthesis of the research evidence on the effects of context-based and STS approaches to science teaching. Science Education 2007, 91:347-370.
11. Blumenfeld P., Fishman B.J., Krajcik J., Marx R.W., Soloway E. Creating Usable Innovations in Systemic Reform: Scaling Up Technology-Embedded Project-Based Science in Urban Schools. Educational Psychologist 2000, 35:149-164.
12. Charalambous C.Y., Hill H.C. Teacher knowledge, curriculum materials, and quality of instruction: Unpacking a complex relationship. Journal of Curriculum Studies 2012, 44(4):443-466.
13. Cohen D., Ben-Zvi R., Hofstein A., Rahamimof R. On brain, medicines and drugs: A model for the "Science for All" program. The American Biology Teacher 2004, 66(1):9-19.
14. Cooper M.M., Sandi-Urena S., Stevens R. Reliable multi method assessment of metacognition use in chemistry problem solving. Chemistry Education Research and Practice 2008, 9(1):18-24.
15. Davis E.A., Krajcik J.S. Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher 2005, 34(3):3-14.
16. Denzin N.K., Lincoln Y.S. Handbook of qualitative research 1994, Sage Publications, Inc.
17. Dori Y.J., Barak M., Herscovitz O., Carmi M. Preparing pre- and in-service teachers to teach high school science with technology. Preparing teachers to teach with technology, 2nd Volume of the book series: Current perspectives on applied information technologies. 2005, Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT, USA. C. Vrasidas, G.V. Glass (Eds.).
18. Dori Y.J., Hameiri M. Multidimensional analysis system for quantitative chemistry problems: Symbol, macro, micro, and process aspects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2003, 40(3):278-302.
19. Dori Y.J. From nationwide standardized testing to school-based alternative embedded assessment in Israel: Students' performance in the matriculation 2000 project. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2003, 40(1):34-52.
20. Dori Y.J., Herscovitz O. Question-posing capability as an alternative evaluation method: Analysis of an environmental case study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 1999, 36(4):411-430.
21. Dori Y.J., Sasson I. Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case-based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: The value of bidirectional visual and textual representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2008, 45(2):219-250.
22. Dori Y.J., Kaberman Z. Assessing high school chemistry students' modeling sub-skills in a computerized molecular modeling learning environment. Instructional Science 2012, 40(1):69-91.
23. Dori Y.J., Sasson I., Kaberman Z., Herscovitz O. Integrating case-based computerized laboratories into high school chemistry. The Chemical Educator 2004, 9(1):4-8.
24. Duschl R. Science education in three-part harmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education 2008, 32(1):268-291.
25. Elmore R. Getting to scale with good educational practice. Harvard Educational Review 1995, 66:1-26.
26. Fullan M. The return of large-scale reform. Journal of educational Change 2000, 1:5-28.
27. Gabel D. The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. International Handbook of Science Education 1998, 1:233-248.
28. Gallagher C., Hipkins R., Zohar A. Positioning thinking within national curriculum and assessment systems: Perspectives from Israel, New Zealand and Northern Ireland. Thinking Skills and Creativity 2012, 7(2):134-143.
29. Hamilton L.S., McCaffrey D.F., Stecher B.M., Klein S.P., Robyn A., Bugliari D. Studying large-scale reforms of instructional practice: An example from mathematics and science. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 2003, 25:1-29.
30. Herscovitz O., Kaberman Z., Saar L., Dori Y.J. The relationship between metacognition and the ability to pose questions in chemical education. Metacognition in science education 2012, 165-195. Springer, Netherlands. A. Zohar, Y.J. Dori (Eds.).
31. Hofstein A., Kesner M. Industrial chemistry and school chemistry: Making chemistry studies more relevant. International Journal of Science Education 2006, 28(9):1017-1039.
32. Hofstein A., Navon O., Kipnis M., Mamlok-Naaman R. Developing students' ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry-type chemistry laboratories. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2005, 42(7):791-806.
33. Huffman D., Goldberg F., Michlin M. Using computers to create constructivist learning environments: Impact on pedagogy and achievement. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 2003, 22(2):151-168.
34. Johnston R.B., Onwuegbuzie A.J. Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher 2004, 33:14-26.
35. Jhonstone A.H. Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 1991, 7:75-83.
36. Kaberman Z., Dori Y.J. Question posing, inquiry, and modeling skills of chemistry students in the case-based computerized laboratory environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 2009, 7(3):597-625.
37. Katchevich D., Hofstein A., Mamlok-Naaman R. Argumentation in the chemistry laboratory: Inquiry and confirmatory experiments. Research in Science Education 2013, 43(1):317-345.
38. Keys C.W., Bryan L.A. Co-constructing inquiry-based science with teachers: Essential research for lasting reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2001, 38(6):631-645.
39. Kipnis M., Hofstein A. The inquiry laboratory as a source for development of metacognitive skills. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 2008, 6(3):601-627.
40. Lawrenz F. Science teaching techniques associated with higher-order thinking skills. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 1990, 27(9):835-847.
41. Lee O. Culture and language in science education: What do we know and what do we need to know?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2001, 38(5):499-501.
42. Lee O., Fradd S.H. Interactional patterns of linguistically diverse students and teachers: Insights for promoting science learning. Linguistics and Education 1996, 8(3):269-297.
43. Lee O., Krajcik J. Large-scale interventions in science education for diverse student groups in varied educational settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2012, 49(3):271-280.
44. Luft J.A. Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education 2001, 23(5):517-534.
45. Lynch S.J., Pyke C., Grafton B.H. A retrospective view of a study of middle school science curriculum materials: Implementation, scale-up, and sustainability in a changing policy environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2012, 49(3):305-332.
46. Marbach-Ad G., Rotbain Y., Stavy R. Using computer animation and illustration activities to improve high school students' achievement in molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2008, 45(3):273-292.
47. McBroom R., Oliver-Hoyo M.T. Food enzymes. Science Teacher 2007, 74(7):58-63.
48. Mintzes J.J., Wandersee J.H., Novak J.D. Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist view 2005, Academic Press.
49. National Research Council A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts and core ideas 2012, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
50. Pervin B. Large-scale education reform through system-wide teacher and leadership development. Assistant Deputy Minister Instruction and Leadership Development Division, Ontario Ministry of Education, Toronto, Ontario, Canadian Society for the Study of Education 2008.
51. Pilling G.M., Waddington D.J. Implementation of large-scale science curricula: A study in seven European countries. Journal of Science Education and Technology 2005, 14(4):393-407.
52. Prawat R.S. Teachers' beliefs about teaching and learning: A constructivist perspective. American Journal of Education 1992, 100(3):354-395.
53. Rivet A.E., Krajcik J.S. Achieving standards in urban systemic reform: An example of a sixth grade project-based science curriculum. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2004, 41(7):669-692.
54. Roehrig G.H., Kruse R.A., Kern A. Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2007, 44(7):883-907.
55. 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(3):283-312.
56. Schwartz A.T. Contextualized chemistry education: The American experience. International Journal of Science Education 2006, 28(9):977-998.
57. Schwartz R.S., Lederman N.G., Abd-El-Khalick F. Achieving the reforms vision: The effectiveness of a specialists-led elementary science program. School Science and Mathematics 2010, 100(4):181-193.
58. Shwartz Y., Ben-Zvi R., Hofstein A. Chemical literacy: What does it mean to scientists and school teachers?. Journal of Chemical Education 2006, 83(10):1557-1561.
59. Shwartz Y., Dori Y.J., Treagust D.F. How to outline objectives for chemistry education and how to assess them. Teaching chemistry-A studybook 2013, 37-65. Sense Publishers, The Netherlands. I. Eilks, A. Hofstein (Eds.).
60. Shwartz Y., Weizmann A., Fortus D., Sutherland L., Merritt J., Krajcik J. Classroom discussions and their role in inquiry-based learning environments. The Science Teacher Journal 2009, 76(5):44-47.
61. Shymansky J.A., Kyle W.C., Alport J.M. The effects of new science curricula on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 1983, 20:387-404.
62. Tal T., Krajcik J.S., Blumenfeld P.C. Urban schools' teachers enacting project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2006, 43(7):722-745.
63. Trey L., Khan S. How science students can learn about unobservable phenomena using computer-based analogies. Computers & Education 2008, 51(2):519-529.
64. Watanabe M., Nunes N., Mebane S., Scalise K., Claesgens J. "Chemistry for all, instead of chemistry just for the elite": Lessons learned from detracked chemistry classrooms. Science Education 2007, 91(5):683-709.
65. Yin R.K. Applications of case study research 2011, Vol. 34. Sage Publications, Incorporated.
66. Zohar A. Teachers' metacognitive knowledge and the instruction of higher order thinking. Teaching and Teacher Education 1999, 15(4):413-429.
67. Zohar A. Higher order thinking in science classroom: students' learning and teachers' professional development. Science & technology educational library 2004, Kluwer Academic Publishers, The Netherlands.
68. Zohar A. Teaching thinking on a national scale: Israel's pedagogical horizons. Thinking Skills and Creativity 2008, 3:77-81.