SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Anastasi, A. & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Baiocco, S.A., & DeWaters, J.N. (1998). Successful college teaching. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Anderson, D.L., Fisher, K.M., & Norman, G.J. (2003). Development and evaluation of the conceptual inventory of natural selection. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 952978.
  • Bell, C., & Denniston, K.J. (Eds.). (2002). Journeys of transformation II: The impact of the Maryland Collaborative for teacher preparation on science and mathematics instruction. Successful strategies and results of a reformed-based effort to improve science and mathematics instruction and teacher preparation. http://www.towson.edu/csme/mctp/journeys2/JourneysII.pdf
  • Chickering, A.W., & Gamson, Z.F. (1999). Development and adaptations of the seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 80, 7581.
  • Churchill, G.A. (1979). A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. Journal of Marketing Research, 16, 6473.
  • Cross, K.P. (2001). Leading-edge efforts to improve teaching and learning. Change, 33, 3137.
  • Deese, W.C., Ramsey, L.L., Walczyk, J.J., & Eddy, D. (2000). Using demonstration assessments to improve learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 77, 15111516.
  • Fey, J. (2003). Guiding principles: New thinking in mathematics and science teaching. In C.Bell & K.J.Denniston (Eds.), Journeys of transformation II: The impact of the Maryland Collaborative for teacher preparation on science and mathematics instruction. Successful strategies and results of a reformed-based effort to improve science and mathematics instruction and teacher preparation. http://www.towson.edu/csme/mctp/journeys2/JourneysII.pdf
  • Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, B.M., & Black, W.C. (1995). Multivariate data analysis with readings (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Harwood, W.S. (2003). Course enhancement: A road map for devising active-learning and inquiry-based science courses. Journal of Developmental Biology, 47, 213221.
  • Hays, W.L. (1994). Statistics. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
  • Kardash, C.M., & Wallace, M.L. (2001). The Perceptions of Science Classes Survey: What undergraduate science reform efforts really need to address. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 199210.
  • Kezar, A., & Eckel, P.D. (2002). The effect of institutional culture on change strategies in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 73, 435460.
  • Klionsky, D.J. (2002). Constructing knowledge in the lecture hall: A quiz-based group learning approach to introductory biology. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31, 246251.
  • Lawson, A., Benford, R., Bloom, I., Carlson, M., Falconer, C., Judson, E., Piburn, M., Sawada, D., Turley, J., & Wyckoff, S. (2002). Evaluating college science and mathematics instruction: A reform effort that improves teaching skills. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31, 388393.
  • Marsh, H.W. (2001). Distinguishing between good (useful) and bad workloads on students' evaluations of teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 183212.
  • Marsh, H.W., & Hattie, J. (2002). The relation between research productivity and teaching effectiveness: Complementary, antagonistic, or independent constructs? Journal of Higher Education, 73, 603641.
  • McGinnis, J.R. (2002). Research on teacher education. In C.Bell & K.J.Denniston (Eds.), Journeys of transformation II: The impact of the Maryland collaborative for teacher preparation on science and mathematics instruction. Successful strategies and results of a reformed-based effort to improve science and mathematics instruction and teacher preparation. http://www.towson. edu/csme/mctp/journeys2/JourneysII.pdf
  • National Research Council. (1999). Transforming undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • National Science Foundation. (1996). Shaping the future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (NSF Publication No. 96–139). Arlington, VA: Author.
  • National Science Foundation. (1999). Teacher preparation awards: NSF Collaboratives for Excellence in Teacher Preparation Awards. http:www.nsf.gov/pubs/1999/nsf9996.start.htm
  • Pearson, W., & Fechter, A. (Eds.). (1994). Who will do science? Educating the next generation. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University.
  • Seymour, E., & Hewitt, N.M. (1997). Talking about leaving: Why undergraduates leave the sciences. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  • Siebert, E.D., & McIntosh, W.J. (Eds.). (2001). College pathways to the science education standards. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
  • Snook, S.C., & Gorsuch, R.L. (1989). Component analysis versus common factor analysis: A Monte Carlo study. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 148154.
  • SPSS, Inc. (1998). SPSS advanced statistics 9.0. Chicago: Author.
  • Strenta, A.C., Elliott, R., Adair, R., Matier, M., & Scott, J. (1994). Choosing and leaving science in highly selective institutions. Research in Higher Education, 35, 513547.
  • Thorndike, R.M. (1997). Measurement and evaluation in psychology and education (6th ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
  • Uno, G.E. (1999). Handbook on teaching undergraduate sciences course: A survival training manual. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace.
  • Walczyk, J.J., & Ramsey, L.L. (2003). The use of learner-centered instruction in college science and mathematics classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 566584.
  • Wright, E.L., & Sunal, D.W. (2004). Reform in undergraduate science classrooms. In D.W.Sunal, E.L.Wright, & J.B.Day (Eds.), Reform in undergraduate science teaching for the 21st century (pp. 33–52). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
  • Wyckoff, S. (2001). Changing the culture of undergraduate teaching: Shifting from lecture to interactive engagement and scientific reasoning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 30, 306312.