SSM Table of Contents & Abstracts

Volume 102 (6), October 2002

---

Table of Contents

Abstracts

Previous Issue

Volume 102(6)

Next Issue

Table of Contents

Abstracts

Measuring Reform Practices in Science and Mathematics Classrooms: The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol

 

Daiyo Sawada, University of Alberta

Michael D. Piburn and Eugene Judson, Arizona State University

 

Jeff Turley, Kathleen Falconer, Russell Benford and Irene Bloom

Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers

 

The National Science Foundation has funded 22 Collaboratives for Excellence in Teacher Preparation. Despite the remarkable allocation of resources to this effort, it has proven exceptionally difficult to demonstrate the effectiveness of collaborative reform. In large part, this has resulted because of the difficulty of defining and measuring reform. The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) was designed by the Evaluation Facilitation Group of the Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers (ACEPT). It is a 25-item classroom observation protocol that is (a) standards based, (b) inquiry oriented, and (c) student centered. This instrument has provided the definition for reform and the basis for evaluation of the ACEPT collaborative. The data upon which this report is based were collected over a period of more than 2 years from 153 public school, college, and university mathematics and science classrooms. A trained team of observers consisting of two faculty members and seven graduate students was able to achieve exceptionally high levels of interrater reliability. Internal consistency, as estimated by Cronbachâs alpha, was also remarkably high. Correlation coefficients ranging from 0.88 to 0.97 between RTOP scores for classrooms, and mean normalized gain scores for students in those classrooms on achievement measures demonstrate that reform, as defined by ACEPT and measured by the RTOP, has been effective.

 

Go to Table of Contents

 

Exploring Graduate-Level Scientistsâ Participation in a Sustained K-12 Teaching Collaboration

 

Stephen L. Thompson, University of South Carolina

Angelo Collins, The Knowles Science Teaching Foundation

 

Vicki Metzgar, Melvin D. Joeston, and Virginia Shepherd

Vanderbilt University School of Medicine

 

To increase scientific literacy in America, the National Science Foundation has implemented the Graduate Teaching Fellows in K-12 Initiative (GK-12). In these programs graduate level scientists, known as Graduate Teaching Fellows (GTFs), act as resources for science teachers (Partner Teachers). This research examines the influence of participation in this program on the GTFs involved in one GK-12 sustained collaboration that emphasizes the codevelopment and co-implementation of hands-on, inquiry-based activities. Qualitative data in the form of interviews and observations were collected from a single cohort of Partner Teachers, GTFs, and the academic advisors of the GTFs for one academic year. The GTFs identified three benefits they received from working in the GK-12 program: enhanced understanding of science content, fuller understanding of the complexities of teaching science, and understanding of inquiry-based science teaching and its value. At the same time the GTFs experienced tensions related to differing views of science and science teaching held by the GTFs and the Partner Teachers. The GTFs also experienced professional risks in at least two ways due to their involvement in this program. One risk was the result of the time commitment required to be a GTF. The other was the result of what was termed competing foci. Illustrated in this case by the difficulties encountered as GTFs attempted to learn how to teach in a secondary science classroom while still learning to become research scientists.

 

Go to Table of Contents

 

Reforming and Assessing Undergraduate Science Instruction Using Collaborative Action-Based Research Teams

 

Gerald H. Krockover and Daniel P. Shepardson, Purdue University      

Paul E. Adams, Fort Hays State University

David Eichinger and Mary Nakhleh, Purdue University

 

Faculty members at Purdue University in the departments of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Biological Sciences, and Chemistry conducted a reform effort for the undergraduate curriculum utilizing action-based research teams. These action-based research teams developed, implemented, and assessed constructivist approaches to teaching undergraduate science content in each department. This effort utilized a partnership of scientists, science educators, master teachers, graduate students, and undergraduate students. Results indicated that the project partners were able to (a) implement more inquiry-based teaching that emphasized conceptual understanding, (b) provide opportunities for cooperative learning experiences, (c) use models as an ongoing theme, (d) link concepts and models to real-world situations, e.g., field trips, (e) provide a more diverse range of assessment strategies, and (f) have students present their understandings in a variety of different forms. Further, we found that we were able to (a) involve graduate and undergraduate students, classroom teachers, scientists, and science educators together to work on the reform in a collaborative manner, (b) bring multiple perspectives for teaching and for science to support instruction and, (c) provide scientists and graduate science students (who will become university professors) with more effective teaching models. We also found that the collaborative action-based research process was effective for contributing to the reform of undergraduate teaching.

 

Go to Table of Contents

 

Building Bridges and Crossing Borders: Using Service Learning to Overcome Cultural Barriers to Collaboration Between Science and Education Departments

 

Kevin Carr, George Fox University

 

Powerful preparation of elementary educators in teaching science involves significant contributions from both scientists and teacher educators. Ironically, faculty and students in science and teacher education departments are often isolated from one another not only across the physical boundaries of the university, but across the cultural boundaries of academe. Coordination and collaboration between science and education faculty and students requires a careful negotiation of these cultural boundaries. This paper presents several illustrations of both successful and unsuccessful collaborative episodes documented during the creation of an interdepartmental service learning project, Science Outreach. The illustrations are interpreted in terms of a cultural difference model, and recommendations are made for successful interdepartmental collaboration.

 

Go to Table of Contents

 

Using Emerging Technologies to Help Bridge the Gap Between University Theory and Classroom Practice: Challenges and Successes

 

Michael Barnett, Boston College          

William Harwood, Indiana University-Bloomington

Thomas Keating, Tech Museum                  

Julie Saam, Indiana University-Kokomo

 

This article describes and illuminates the challenges that the authors faced as we integrated a web-supported professional development system into elementary science methods courses housed at three different universities. Using a design experiment framework, the challenges and difficulties encountered while attempting to develop and sustain effective discussions about inquiry-based teaching are discussed. Three main issues were identified through this analysis: (a) creating meaningful interactions for preservice teachers, (b) supporting preservice teacher reflection and articulation of their belief systems, and (c) technical, social, and institutional challenges of using a World Wide Web based professional development system. The article closes with recommendations concerning the implementation of a web-based professional development system into elementary methods science courses and describes what appear to be successful strategies for fostering a collaborative atmosphere between teacher educators, preservice teachers, and in-service teachers.

 

     Go to Table of Contents