Interacting with a suite of educative features: Elementary science teachers' use of educative curriculum materials

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 53, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 422-449

  Arias, Anna Maria ^a   Bismack, Amber Schultz ^a   Davis, Elizabeth A ^a   Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

curriculum development; inquiry; science education; teacher education practicing teachers

Indexed keywords

CURRICULA; EDUCATION; STUDENTS;

CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT; EDUCATIVE CURRICULUMS; ELEMENTARY CLASSROOMS; ELEMENTARY TEACHERS; INQUIRY; QUALITATIVE CASE STUDIES; SCIENCE EDUCATION; TEACHER EDUCATION;

TEACHING;

EID: 84956839519     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: 10982736     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.21250     Document Type: Article

References (89)

1. Abell, S. K., (2007). Research on science teacher knowledge. In, S. K. Abell, &, N. Lederman, (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 1105-1149). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Appleton, K., (2007). Elementary science education. In, S. K. Abell, &, N. Lederman, (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 493-535). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Arzi, H. J., &, White, R. T., (2008). Change in teachers' knowledge of subject matter: A 17-year longitudinal study. Science Education, 92, 221-251.
4. Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2013). Australian curriculum: Science.
5. Ball, D. L., &, Cohen, D. K., (1996). Reform by the book: What is-or might Be-the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reforms? Educational Researcher, 25 (9), 6-8, 14.
6. Ball, D. L., &, Cohen, D. K., (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 3-31). San Francisco: Jossey-BAss.
7. Banilower, E. R., Smith, P. S., Weiss, I. R., Malzahn, K. A., Campbell, K. M., &, Weis, A. M., (2013). Report of the 2012 national survey of science and mathematics education. Chapell Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.
8. Ben-Peretz, M., (1990). The teacher-curriculum encounter: Freeing teachers from the tyranny of Texts. Albany: State University of New York Press.
9. Berland, L. K., &, McNeill, K. L., (2012). For whom is argument and explanation a necessary distinction? A response to Osborne and Patterson. Science Education, 96 (5), 808-813.
10. Beyer, C. J., &, Davis, E. A., (2008). Fostering second graders' scientific explanations: A beginning elementary teacher's knowledge, beliefs, and practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17 (3), 381-414.
11. Beyer, C. J., &, 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, 517-536.
12. Beyer, C. J., &, Davis, E. A., (2009b). Using educative curriculum materials to support preservice elementary teachers' curricular planning: A comparison between two different forms of support. Curriculum Inquiry, 39 (5), 679-703.
13. Beyer, C. J., Delgado, C., Davis, E. A., &, Krajcik, J. S., (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.
14. Biggers, M., Forbes, C. T., &, Zangori, L., (2013). Elementary teachers' curriculum design and pedagogical reasoning for supporting students' comparison and evaluation of evidence-based explanations. The Elementary School Journal, 114 (1), 48-72. DOI:10.1086/670738
15. Bismack, A. S., Arias, A. M., Davis, E. A., &, Palincsar, A. S., (2015). Examining student work for evidence of teacher uptake of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
16. Bismack, A. S., Arias, A. M., Davis, E. A., &, Palincsar, A. S., (2014). Connecting curriculum materials and teachers: Elementary science teachers' enactment of a reform-based curricular unit. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 489-512.
17. Borko, H., Jacobs, J., Eiteljorg, E., &, Pittman, M. E., (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24 (2), 417-436.
18. Brown, M. W., (2009). The teacher-tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In, J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, &, G. M. Lloyd, (Eds.), Mathematics Teachers at Work: Connecting Curriculum Materials and Classroom Instruction. New York and London: Routledge.
19. Cervetti, G. N., Kulikowich, J. M., &, Bravo, M. A., (2015). The effects of educative curriculum materials on teachers' use of instructional strategies for English language learners in science and on student learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 86-98.
20. Charalambous, C. Y., &, Hill, H. C., (2012). Teacher knowledge, curriculum materials, and quality of instruction: Unpacking a complex relationship. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44 (4), 443-466.
21. Collopy, R., (2003). Curriculum materials as a professional development tool: How a mathematics textbook affected two teachers' learning. The Elementary School Journal, 103 (3), 287-311.
22. Connelley, F. M., &, Clandinin, D. J., (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners: Narratives of experience. Columbia University: Teachers College Press.
23. Davis, E. A., &, Krajcik, J. S., (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34 (3), 3-14.
24. Davis, E. A., Palincsar, A. S., Arias, A. M., Bismack, A. S., Marulis, L. M., &, Iwashyna, S., (2014). Designing educative curriculum materials: A theoretically and empirically driven process. Harvard Educational Review, 84 (1), 24-52.
25. Diamond, B. S., Maerten-Rivera, J., Rohrer, R. E., &, Lee, O., (2014). Effectiveness of a curricular and professional development intervention at improving elementary teachers' science content knowledge and student achievement outcomes: Year 1 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51 (5), 635-658. DOI:10.1002/tea.21148
26. Dietz, C. M., &, Davis, E. A., (2009). Preservice elementary teachers' reflection on narrative images of inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 20 (3), 219-243. DOI:10.1007/s10972-009-9132-0
27. Drake, C., Land, T. J., &, Tyminski, A. M., (2014). Using educative curriculum materials to support the development of prospective teachers' knowledge. Educational Researcher, 43 (3), 154-162.
28. Enfield, M., Smith, E. L., &, Grueber, D. J., (2008). A sketch is like a sentence": Curriculum structures that support teaching epistmeic practices of science. Science Education, 92, 608-630.
29. Erduran, S., Simon, S., &, Osborne, J., (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88 (6), 915-933.
30. Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., Frank, M. L., Levi, L., Jacobs, V. R., &, Empson, S. B., (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children's thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 25 (4), 400-434.
31. Fishman, B. J., Marx, R. W., Best, S., &, Revital, T. T., (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 643-658.
32. Forbes, C. T., Biggers, M., &, Zangori, L., (2013). Investigating essential characteristics of scientific practices in elementary science learning environments: The practices of science observation protocol (P-SOP). School Science and Mathematics, 111 (4), 180-190.
33. Gotwals, A. W., &, Songer, N. B., (2009). Reasoning up and down a food chain: Using an assessment framework to investigate students' middle knowledge. Science Education, 239-281.
34. Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., &, Williamson, P., (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111 (9), 2055-2100.
35. Grossman, P., Loeb, S., Cohen, J., Hammerness, K., Wyckoff, J., Boyd, D., &, Lankford, H., (2010). Measure for measure: The relationship between measures of instructional practice in middle school English language arts and teachers' value-added scores. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w16015.pdf
36. Grossman, P., &, Thompson, C., (2008). Learning from curriculum materials: Scaffolds for teacher learning? Teaching and Teacher Education, 24 (3), 2014-2026.
37. Heller, J. I., Daehler, K. R., Wong, N., Shinohara, M., &, Miratrix, L. W., (2012). Differential effects of three professional development models on teacher knowledge and student achievement in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49 (3), 333-362. DOI:10.1002/tea.21004
38. Herbel-Eisenmann, B. A., (2007). From intended curriculum to written curriculum: Examining the "voice" of a mathematics textbook. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38 (4), 344-369.
39. Herrenkohl, L. R., &, Cornelius, L., (2013). Investigating elementary students' scientific and historical argumentation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22, 413-461.
40. Herrenkohl, L. R., Tasker, T., &, White, B., (2011). Pedagogical practice to support classroom cultures of scientific inquiry. Cognition and Instruction, 29 (1), 1-44.
41. Hill, H. C., &, Charalambous, C. Y., (2012). Teaching (un) Connected Mathematics: Two teachers' enactment of the Pizza problem. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44 (4), 467-487.
42. Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., &, Ball, D. L., (2005). Effects of teachers' mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42 (2), 371-406.
43. 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.
44. Kanter, D. E., &, Konstantopoulos, S., (2010). The impact of a project-based science curriculum on minority student achievement, attitudes, and careers: The effects of teacher content and pedagogical content knowledge and inquiry-based practices. Science Education, 94 (5), 855-887. DOI:10.1002/sce.20391
45. Kesidou, S., &, 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.
46. Lee, O., &, Buxton, C., (2008). Science curriculum and student diversity: A framework for equitable learning opportunities. The Elementary School Journal, 109 (2), 123-137. DOI:10.1086/590522
47. Lee, O., Hart, J. E., Cuevas, P., &, Enders, C., (2004). Professional development in inquiry-based science for elementary teachers of diverse student groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (10), 1021-1043.
48. Lehrer, R., &, Schauble, L., (2006). Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education. In The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Science (pp. 371-387). Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
49. Lehrer, R., &, Schauble, L., (2010). What kind of explanation is a model. Instructional Explanations in the Disciplines, 1, 9-22.
50. Lin, S. F., Lieu, S. C., Chen, S., Huang, M. T., &, Chang, W. H., (2012). Affording explicit-reflective science teaching by using an educative teachers' guide. International Journal of Science Education, 34 (7), 999-1026.
51. Lortie, D., (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
52. Loucks-Horsley, S., Styles, K., &, Hewson, P., (1996). Principles of effective professional development for mathematics and science education: A synthesis of standards. NISE Brief 1(!), Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin.
53. Marx, R. W., &, Harris, C. J., (2006). No Child Left Behind and science education: Opportunities, Challenges, and Risks. Elementary School Journal, 106 (5), 467-477.
54. Maxwell, J. A., (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
55. McNeill, K. L., (2009). Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena. Science Education, 93 (2), 233-268.
56. McNeill, K. L., (2011). Elementary students' views of explanation, argumentation, and evidence, and their abilities to construct arguments over the school year. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (7), 793-823.
57. Merriam, S. B., (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
58. Metz, K. E., (1997). On the complex relation between cognitive developmental research and children's science curricula. Review of Educational Research, 1, 151-163.
59. Metz, K. E., (2000). Young children's inquiry in biology: Building the knowledge bases to empower independent inquiry. In Inquiry into inquiring learning and teaching in science (pp. 371-404). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
60. Miles, M. B., &, Huberman, A. M., (1994). Qualitative data analysis (Second). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
61. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
62. National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academics.
63. National Science Resources Center. (2005). Science technology and children ecosystems (Second). Burlington, NC: Carolina Biological Supply Company.
64. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
65. Nowicki, B. L., Sullivan-Watts, B., Shim, M. K., Young, B., &, Pockalny, R., (2013). Factors influencing science content accuracy in elementary inquiry science lessons. Research in Science Education, 43 (3), 1135-1154. DOI:10.1007/s11165-012-9303-4
66. O'Donnell, C. L., (2008). Defining, conceptualizing, and measuring fidelity of implementation and its relationship to outcomes in K-12 curriculum intervention research. Review of Educational Research, 78 (1), 33-84. DOI:10.3102/0034654307313793
67. Osborne, J., &, Patterson, A., (2012). Authors' response to "For whom is argument and explanation a necessary distinction? A response to Osborne and Patterson" by Berland and McNeill. Science Education, 96 (5), 814-817.
68. Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., &, Gallagher, L. R., (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44 (4), 921-958.
69. Pinar, W. F., (2004). What is Curriculum Theory?. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
70. Pintõ, R., (2005). Introducing curriculum innovations in science: Identifying teachers' transformations and the design of related teacher education. Science Education, 89, 1-12.
71. Prawat, R. S., (1993). The role of the teacher in reforming curriculum: Adaptation or reformulation? Teaching and Teacher Education, 9 (4), 425-430.
72. 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.
73. Remillard, J. T., (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers' use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75 (2), 211-246.
74. Remillard, J. T., &, Bryans, M. B., (2004). Teachers' orientations toward mathematics curriculum materials: Implications for teacher learning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35 (5), 352-388.
75. 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.
76. Rosebery, A. S., &, Puttick, G. M., (1998). Teacher professional development as situated sense-making: A case study in science education. Science Education, 82, 649-677.
77. Roth, K., Garnier, H., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K., &, Wickler, N., (2011). Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science PD for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48 (2), 117-148.
78. Schneider, R. M., &, Krajcik, J., (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13 (3), 221-245.
79. Schwartz, M., (2006). For whom do we write the curriculum? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38 (4), 449-457.
80. Sherin, M. G., &, Drake, C., (2009). Curriculum strategy framework: Investigating patterns in teachers' use of a reform-based elementary mathematics curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41 (4), 467-500.
81. Shulman, L., (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15 (2), 4-14.
82. Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Hanley, P., &, Thurston, A., (2014). Experimental evaluations of elementary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51 (7), 870-901. DOI:10.1002/tea.21139
83. Songer, N. B., &, Gotwals, A., (2012). Guiding explanation construction by children at the entry points of learning progressions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49 (2), 141-165.
84. 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 (4), 468-489. DOI:10.1002/sce.10084
85. Stake, R. E., (2000). Case studies. In, N. K. Denzen, &, Y. S. Lincoln, (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
86. Stylianides, G. J., (2007). Investigating the guidance offered to teachers in curriculum materials: The case of proof in mathematics. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 6, 191-215.
87. United Kingdom Department for Education. (2014). National curriculum in England: Science programmes of study (No. DFE-00182-2013) London, England: Crown Publishing.
88. Welch, W. W., (1979). Twenty years of science curriculum development: A look back. Review of Research in Education, 7, 282-306.
89. Zangori, L., Forbes, C. T., &, Biggers, M., (2013). Fostering student sense making in elementary science learning environments: Elementary teachers' use of science curriculum materials to promote explanation construction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50 (8), 989-1017. DOI:10.1002/tea.21104