SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Ball, D.L. (1996). Teacher learning and the mathematics reforms: What we think we know and what we need to learn. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 500508.
  • Basista, B. & Mathews, S. (2002). Integrated science and mathematics professional development programs. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 359370.
  • Birman, B.F., Desimone, L., Porter, A.C., & Garet, M.S. (2000). Designing professional development that works. Educational Leadership, 57, 2833.
  • Borland, J., Johnson, C., Crumpton, T., Thomas, T., Altizer, S., & Oberhauser, K. (2004). Characteristics of fall migratory monarch butterflies,Danaus plexippus in Minnesota and Texas. In K.S.Oberhauser & M.J.Solensky (Eds.), The monarch butterfly: Biology and conservation (pp. 97104). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
  • Chinn, C.A. & Malhotra, B.A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175218.
  • Cohen, D.K. & Hill, H.C. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102, 294343.
  • Crawford, B.A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 916937.
  • Creswell, J. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five traditions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Darling-Hammond, L. & McLaughlin, M. (1995). Policies that support professional development in an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 597604.
  • Dewey, J. (1910). Science as subject-matter and as method. Science, 121127.
  • Freeman, C. & Jeanpierre, B. (2001). Monarch monitoring: A teacher/student/scientist research project. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Center for Applied Research and Educational Improvement (http://education.umn.edu/CAREI/Reports/default.html).
  • Fullan, M. (1996). Turning systemic thinking on its head. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 420423.
  • Fullan, M. & Miles, M. (1992). Getting reform right: What works and what doesn't. Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 745752.
  • Garet, M., Porter, A.C., Desimone, L., Birman, B., & Yoon, K.S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 915945.
  • Gay, L.R. & Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research competencies for analysis and applications ( 7th ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
  • Greenwood, A.N. (2003). Factors influencing the development of career-change teachers' science teaching orientation. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 14, 217234.
  • Kennedy, M.M. (1999). Form and substance in mathematics and science professional development. NISE Brief, 3, 18.
  • Lieberman, A. (1995). Practices that support teacher development. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 591596.
  • Little, J.W. (1997). Excellence in professional development and professional community. Paper presented at a planning meeting of the U.S. Department of Education Blue Ribbon Schools Program, Washington, DC.
  • Loucks-Horsley, S. (1998). The role of teaching and learning in systemic reform: A focus on professional development. Science Educator, 7, 16.
  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P.W., Love, N., & Stiles, K.E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Stiles, K., & Hewson, P. (1996). Principles of effective professional development for mathematics and science education: A synthesis of standards. NISE Brief, 1, 16.
  • Luft, J.A. (2001). 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, 23, 517534.
  • McCarty, R.V. (2001). Scientist–teacher interactions: Generation of theory leading to a three-fold model of professional development for practicing science in field, K-12 classroom, and university contexts. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
  • Merriam, S.B. (1990). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. In S.Olson & S.Loucks-Horsley (Eds.), Committee on the Development of an Addendum to the National Science Education Standards on Scientific Inquiry. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Nelson, C.R. & Hanegan, N.L. (2003). Professional development for secondary science: Teachers in a contextual setting. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Duschl, R.A., Schulze, S., & John, J. (1995). Students' understanding of the objectives and procedures of experimentation in the science classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 131166.
  • Toppins, K., Tippins, D., & Gallard, A. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In D.L.Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning(pp. 4593). New York: Macmillian.
  • Weiss, T. & Hartle, F. (1997). Reengineering performance management. Boca Raton, FL: St. Lucie Press.
  • Yin, R. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., & Hyde, A. (1998). Best practice: New standards for teaching and learning in America's schools. Portsmouth, NH: Reed Elsevier.