Participation in a Multi-institutional Curriculum Development Project Changed Science Faculty Knowledge and Beliefs About Teaching Science

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Deborah A. Donovan (1)
  Emily J. Borda (2)
  Daniel M. Hanley (3)
  Carolyn C. Landel (4)
  
  1. Biology Department and Science Education Group ; Western Washington University ; Bellingham ; WA ; 98225 ; USA
  2. Chemistry Department and Science Education Group ; Western Washington University ; Bellingham ; WA ; 98225 ; USA
  3. Science ; Mathematics ; and Technology Education ; Western Washington University ; Bellingham ; WA ; 98225 ; USA
  4. The Charles A. Dana Center ; University of Texas ; Austin ; Austin ; TX ; 78705 ; USA
  
• 关键词：Higher education faculty ; Curriculum development ; Science content courses ; K12 collaboration
• 刊名：Journal of Science Teacher Education
• 出版年：2015
• 出版时间：March 2015
• 年：2015
• 卷：26
• 期：2
• 页码：193-216
• 全文大小：253 KB
• 参考文献：Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press, New York
  Benchmarks for science literacy. Oxford University Press, New York
  Blueprints for reform. Oxford University Press, New York
  Atlas of science literacy. Oxford University Press, New York
  Designs for science literacy. Oxford University Press, New York
  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (2011). / Vision and change in undergraduate biology education: A call to action. Retrieved from http://www.visionandchange.org/
  2. Argyris, C, Putnam, R, McLain Smith, D (1985) Action science. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
  3. Ballone-Duran, L, Czerniak, CM, Haney, JJ (2005) A study of the effects of a LSC project on scientists鈥?teaching practices and beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education 16: pp. 159-184 CrossRef
  4. Baviskar, SN, Hartle, RT, Whitney, T (2009) Essential criteria to characterize constructivist teaching: Derived from a review of the literature and applied to five constructivist-teaching method articles. International Journal of Science Education 31: pp. 541-550 CrossRef
  5. Blackwell, P. J. (2002). / Putting the pieces of teacher education together: Lessons learned by the Eisenhower initial teacher professional development programs. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA, April 1鈥?, 2002.
  6. Bransford, JD, Brown, AL, Pellegrino, JW (2000) How people learn. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
  7. Caton, E, Brewer, C, Brown, F (2001) Building teacher鈥搒cientist partnerships: Teaching about energy through inquiry. School Science and Mathematics 100: pp. 7-15 CrossRef
  8. Caton, EL, Brewer, CA, Manning, M (1997) Teaching with inquiry: Scientist/teacher partnerships for ecological and energy education. Supplement to Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 78: pp. 65
  9. Chaplin, S. B., & Manske, J. M. (2005). A theme-based approach to teaching nonmajors biology. / Journal of College Science Teaching, / 35, 47鈥?1.
  10. Dancy, M, Henderson, C (2007) Framework for articulating instructional practices and conceptions. Physical Review Special Topics鈥擯hysics Education Research 3: pp. 010103-010101-010103-010115
  11. Donovan, DA, Atkins, LJ, Salter, IY, Gallagher, DJ, Kratz, RF, Rousseau, JV, Nelson, GD (2013) Advantages and challenges of using physics curricula as a model for reforming an undergraduate biology course. CBE鈥擫ife Sciences Education 12: pp. 215-229
  12. Donovan, D. A., Rousseau, J. V., Salter, I. Y., Atkins, L. J., Acevedo-Gutierrez, A., Kratz, R. F., 鈥?Pape-Lindstrom, P. (2014) / Life science and everyday thinking. New York: It鈥檚 About Time.
  13. Driver, R, Squires, A, Rushworth, P, Wood-Robinson, V (1994) Making sense of secondary science: Research into children鈥檚 ideas. Routledge-Farmer, London
  14. Druger, M, Allen, G (1998) A study of the role of research scientists in K-12 science education. American Biology Teacher 60: pp. 344-349 CrossRef
  15. Ebert-May, D, Dertling, TL, Hodder, J, Momsen, JL, Long, TM, Jardeleza, SE (2011) What we say is not what we do: Effective evaluation of faculty professional development programs. BioScience 61: pp. 550-558 CrossRef
  16. Entwistle, N, Walker, P (2000) Strategic alertness and expanded awareness within sophisticated conceptions of teaching. Instructional Science 28: pp. 335-361 CrossRef
  17. Fedock, P, Zambo, R, Cobern, W (1996) The professional development of college science professors as science teacher educators. Science Education 80: pp. 5-19 CrossRef
  18. Garmston, B, Wellman, B (1999) The adaptive school: A sourcebook for developing and collaborative groups. Christopher-Gordan, Norwood, MA
  19. Goldberg, F., Robinson, S., & Otero, V. (2008). / Physics and everyday thinking. Armonk, NY: Herff Jones Education Division.
  20. Hake, RR (1998) Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics 66: pp. 64-74 CrossRef
  21. Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R., 鈥?Wood, W. B. (2004). Scientific teaching. / Science, 304, 521鈥?22.
  Handler, MG, Ravid, R eds. (2001) The many faces of school鈥搖niversity collaboration: Characteristics of successful partnerships. Teacher Ideas Press, Englewood, CO
  22. Horizon Research (2000). / Inside the classroom observation and analytic protocol. Retrieved from http://www.horizon-research.com/instruments/clas/cop.php
  23. Jones, MG, Carter, G Science teacher attitudes and beliefs. In: Abell, SK, Lederman, NG eds. (2007) Handbook of research on science education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 1067-1104
  24. Kane, R, Sandretto, S, Heath, C (2002) Telling half the story: A critical review of research on the teaching beliefs and practices of university academics. Review of Educational Research 72: pp. 177-228 CrossRef
  25. Kaser, J. S., Dougherty, M. J., & Bourexis, P. S. (2013). Unexpected outcomes: Impacting higher education teaching practice via high school outreach. / Journal of College Science Teaching, / 43, 43鈥?7.
  26. Kember, D, Kwan, K-P (2000) Lecturers鈥?approaches to teaching and their relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science 28: pp. 469-490 CrossRef
  27. Kingsley, G. & O鈥橬eill, D. (2001). / Performance measurement in public鈥?em class="a-plus-plus">private partnerships: Learning from Praxis, constructing a conceptual model. Presentation given at the American Society for Public Administration 65th National Conference, Portland, OR, March 27鈥?0, 2004.
  28. Krockover, G, Adams, P, Eichinger, D, Nakhleh, M, Shepardson, D (2001) Action based research teams: Collaborating to improve science instruction. Journal of College Science Teaching 30: pp. 313-317
  29. Krockover, GH, Shepardson, DP, Adams, PE, Eichenger, D, Nakhleh, M (2002) Reforming and assessing undergraduate science instruction using collaborative action-based research teams. School Science and Mathematics 102: pp. 266-284 CrossRef
  30. Laws, PW (1996) Workshop physics activity guide. Wiley, San Francisco
  31. Lawson, A., Benford, R., Bloom, I., Carlson, M., Falconer, K., Hestenes, D., 鈥?Wyckoff, S. (2002). Evaluating college science and mathematics instruction. / Journal of College Science Teaching, / 31, 388鈥?93.
  32. Liu, CH, Matthews, R (2005) Vygotsky鈥檚 philosophy: Constructivism and its criticisms examined. International Education Journal 6: pp. 386-399
  33. Luera, GR, Otto, CA (2005) Development and evaluation of an inquiry-based elementary science teacher education program reflecting current reform movements. Journal of Science Teacher Education 16: pp. 241-258 CrossRef
  34. Maloney, PA (2007) Partnerships, policy, and educational change: The role of mathematics and science in K-16 reform. Florida Journal of Educational Administration and Policy 1: pp. 1-10
  35. McAlpine, L, Weston, C, Timmermans, J, Berthiaume, D, Fairbank-Roch, G (2006) Zones: Reconceptualizing teacher thinking in relation to action. Studies in Higher Education 31: pp. 601-615 CrossRef
  36. McDermott, LC (1996) Physics by inquiry. Wiley, San Francisco
  37. Mitchell, J., Levine, R., & Bitter, C. (2004). / University and K- / 12 school partnerships: How does one make these happen? American Institutes for Research. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 16, 2004.
  National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
  Science teacher preparation in an era of standards-based reform. National Academy Press, Washington, DC
  Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. NSF Division of Undergraduate Education, Washington, DC
  38. Ohana, C (2003) Partnerships in math education: The power of university鈥搒chool collaboration. Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH
  39. Pedrosa-de-Jesus, MH, Lopes, BD (2011) The relationship between teaching and learning conceptions, preferred teaching approaches and questioning practices. Research Papers in Education 26: pp. 223-243 CrossRef
  40. Piaget, J (1978) Success and understanding. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA
  41. Redish, EF, Saul, JM, Steinberg, RN (1997) On the effectiveness of active-engagement microcomputer-based laboratories. American Journal of Physics 65: pp. 5-54 CrossRef
  42. Roehrig, GH, Luft, JA (2004) Inquiry teaching in high school chemistry classrooms: The role of knowledge and beliefs. Journal of Chemical Education 81: pp. 1510-1516 CrossRef
  43. Rosenbaum, PR (1995) Observational studies. Springer, New York CrossRef
  44. Schulman, LS (1986) Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher 15: pp. 4-14 CrossRef
  45. Staver, JR (1998) Constructivism: Sound theory for explicating the practice of science and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 35: pp. 501-520 CrossRef
  46. Stokstad, E (2001) Reintroducing the intro course. Science 293: pp. 1608-1610 science.293.5535.1608" target="_blank" title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
  47. Strauss, AL (1987) Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge University Press, New York CrossRef
  48. Strauss, AL, Corbin, J (1990) Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory, procedures and techniques. Sage, Newbury Park, CA
  49. Sunal D. W., Hodges, J., Sunal, C. S., Whitaker, K. W., Freeman, L. M., Edwards, L., 鈥?Odell, M. (2001). Teaching science in higher education: Faculty professional development and barriers to change. / School Science and Mathematics, 101, 246鈥?57.
  50. Sunal, DW, Wright, EL, Bland Day, J (2004) Reform in undergraduate science for the 21st century. Information Age, Greenwich, CT
  51. Trigwell, K, Prosser, M (1996) Changing approaches to teaching: A relational perspective. Studies in Higher Education 21: pp. 275-284 CrossRef
  52. Vygotsky, LS (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
  53. Weber, RP (1990) Basic content analysis. Sage, Newbury Park, CA
  54. Weld, J, Funk, L (2005) 鈥淚鈥檓 not the science teacher type鈥? Effect of an inquiry biology content course on preservice elementary teachers鈥?intentions about teaching science. Journal of Science Teacher Education 16: pp. 189-204 CrossRef
  55. Wiggins, G, McTighe, J (1998) Understanding by design. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA
  56. Zhang, X., McInerney, J., Frechtling, J., Michie, J., Wells, J., Miyaoka, A., & Nyre, G. (2009) / Who benefits? The effects of STEM faculty engagement in MSP. Report prepared for the National Science Foundation by Westat. Rockville, MD. Retrieved from http://hub.mspnet.org/index.cfm/18052
  
• 刊物类别：Humanities, Social Sciences and Law
• 刊物主题：Education
  Science Education
  Teacher Education
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1573-1847

文摘

Despite significant pressure to reform science teaching and learning in K12 schools, and a concurrent call to reform undergraduate courses, higher education science content courses have remained relatively static. Higher education science faculty have few opportunities to explore research on how people learn, examine state or national science teaching standards for K12 schools, or learn and practice research-based instructional strategies. The contrast between what is expected of future and practicing teachers in their K12 classrooms and what they experience in content and instruction in typical college or university science courses can be striking. This paper describes a multi-institutional collaboration among content-area science faculty and K12 teachers to develop undergraduate content courses for future elementary teachers in life and Earth science. Using data from the project evaluation, we report evidence of change in faculty knowledge and beliefs about science teaching and learning, and how that this translated into pedagogical practice in their courses.