SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Anderson, R. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 112.
  • Arlin, M., & Webster, J. (1983). Time costs of mastery learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 187195.
  • Atkin, J. M., & Black, P. (2007). History of science curriculum reform in the United States and United Kingdom. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 781806). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Baines, E., Blatchford, P., & Chowne, A. (2007). Improving the effectiveness of collaborative group work in primary schools: Effects on science attainment. British Educational Research Journal, 33(5), 663680.
  • Bank Street. (1984). The voyage of the Mimi: Overview guide. New York, NY: Bank Street College of Education.
  • Barak, M., Ashkar, T., & Dori, Y. (2011). Learning science via animated movies: Its effect on students' thinking and motivation. Computers & Education, 56, 839846.
  • Bennett, J., Lubben, F., & Hogarth, S. (2006). Bringing science to life: A synthesis of the research evidence o the effects of context-based and STS approaches to science teaching. Science Education, 91(3), 347370.
  • Bennett, J., Lubben, F., Hogarth, S., & Campbell, B. (2004). A systematic review of the use of small-group discussions in science teaching with students aged 11–18, and their effects on students' understanding in science or attitude to science. In Research evidence in education library. London, UK: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
  • Borman, G., Gamoran, A., & Bowdon, J. (2008). A randomized trial of teacher development in elementary science: First-year achievement effects. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 1, 237264.
  • Borman, K., Boydston, T., Lee, R., Lanehart, R., & Cotner, B. (2009 , March). Improving elementary science instruction and student achievement: The impact of a professional development program. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness, Crystal City, VA.
  • Boyd, S., Banilower, E., Pasley, J., & Weiss, I. (2003). Progress and pitfalls: A cross-site look at local systemic change through teacher enhancement. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
  • Cervetti, G., Barber, J., Dorph, R., Pearson, P. D., & Goldschmidt, P. (2012). The impact of an integrated approach to science and literacy in elementary school classrooms. Journal of Research In Science Teaching, 49(5), 631658.
  • Cobern, W., & Loving, C. (2002). Investigation of pre-service elementary teachers' thinking about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 10161031.
  • Cooper, H. (1998). Synthesizing research. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  • Ebrahim, A. (2004). The effects of traditional learning and a learning cycle inquiry learning strategy on students' science achievement and attitudes toward elementary science (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Ohio University, Ohio.
  • Epstein, D., & Miller, R. T. (2011). Slow off the mark: Elementary school teachers and the crisis in science, technology, engineering and math education. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
  • Fortus, D. (2008). Science. In T. Good (Ed.), 21st century education: A reference handbook (Vol. 1, pp. 352359). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
  • Furtak, E., Hardy, I., Beinbrach, C., Shavelson, R., & Shemwell, J. (2010). A framework for analyzing evidence-based reasoning in science classroom discourse. Educational Assessment, 15(3-4), 175196.
  • Furtak, E., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 300329.
  • Gamoran, A., Borman, G. D., Bowdon, J., Shewakramani, V., & Kelly, K. A. (2012 , April). Implementing district-driven instructional reform: Overcoming barriers to change in a complex urban environment. Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, BC.
  • Gustafson, B., MacDonald, D., & d'Entremont, Y. (2007). Elementary science literature review. Edmonton, Alberta: Alberta Education.
  • Guthrie, J. T., Anderson, E., Alao, S., & Rinehart, J. (1999). Influences of Concept-oriented reading instruction on strategy use and conceptual learning from text. Elementary School Journal, 99(4), 343366.
  • Guthrie, J. T., VanMeter, P., Hancock, G. R., Alao, S., Anderson, E., & McCann, A. (1998). Does instruction increase strategy use and conceptual learning from text? Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 261278.
  • Harlen, W., & Qualter, A. (2008). The teaching of science in primary schools. London, UK: Fulton.
  • 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), 233302.
  • Hipkins, R., Bolstad, R., Baker, R., Jones, A., Barker, M., Bell, B., … Haigh, M. (2002). Curriculum, learning, and effective pedagogy: A literature review in science education. Wellington, NZ: New Zealand Ministry of Education.
  • Howe, C., Tolmie, A. K., Thurston, A., Topping, K. J., Christie, D., Livingston, K., … Donaldson, C. (2007). Group work in elementary science: Towards organisational principles for supporting pupil learning. Learning and Instruction, 17, 549563.
  • Jang, C. (2010). The impact on incorporating collaborative concept mapping with coteaching techniques in elementary science classes. School Science and Mathematics, 110(2), 8697.
  • Johnson, R., Johnson, D., Scott, L., & Ramolae, B. (1985). Effects of single-sex and mixed-sex cooperative interaction on science achievement and attitudes and cross-handicap and cross-sex relationships. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(3), 207220.
  • Kim, K. H., VanTassel-Baska, J., Bracken, B. A., Feng, A., Stambaugh, T., & Bland, L. (2012). Project Clarion: Three years of science instruction in Title I schools among k-third grade students. Research in Science Education, 42, 813829.
  • Kilpatrick, J., & Quinn, H. (2009). Science and mathematics education: Education policy white paper. Washington, DC: National Academy of Education.
  • Lazarowitz, R., & Hertz-Lazarowitz, R. (1998). Cooperative learning in the science curriculum. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • Leach, L. (1992). Full-option science system: Effects on science attitudes and achievement of female fifth-grade students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Texas Tech University, Texas.
  • Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oakes, CA: Sage.
  • Mant, J., Wilson, H., & Coates, D. (2007). The effect of increasing conceptual challenge in primary science lessons on pupils' achievement and engagement. International Journal of Science Education, 29(14), 17071719.
  • Marx, R. W. (2012). Large-scale interventions in science education: The road to utopia? Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 49, (3), 420427.
  • Miller, G., Jaciw, A., & Ma, B. (2007). Comparative effectiveness of Scott Foresman Science: A report of randomized experiments in five school districts. Palo Alto, CA: Empirical Education.
  • Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474496.
  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  • National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  • National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  • Newman, D., Finney, P. B., Bell, S., Turner, H., Jaciw, A. P., Zacamy, J. L., & Feagans Gould, L. (2012). Evaluation of the effectiveness of the Alabama Math, Science, and Technology Initiative (AMSTI). (NCEE 2012–4008). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
  • Nowicki, B. L., Sullivan-Watts, B., Shim, M. K., Young, B., & Pockalny, R. (2012). Factors influencing scientific content accuracy in elementary inquiry science lessons. Research in Science Education, 43, 11351154.
  • Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections: A report to the Nuffield Foundation. London, UK: The Nuffield Foundation.
  • Pell, A., & Jarvis, T. (2003). Developing attitude to science education scales for use with primary teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 25(10), 12731295.
  • Penuel, W. R., & Fishman, B. J. (2012). Large-scale science intervention research we can use. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(3), 281304.
  • Pine, J., Aschbacher, P., Roth, E., Jones, M., McPhee, C., Martin, C., … Foley, B. (2006). Fifth graders' science inquiry abilities: A comparative study of students in hands-on and textbook curricula. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 467484.
  • Powers, S., & Price-Johnson, C. (2007). Evaluation of the Waterford Early Math and Science Program for Kindergarten: First-year implementation in five urban low-income schools. Tucson, AZ: Creative Research Associates.
  • Rohrbeck, C. A., Ginsburg-Block, M. D., Fantuzzo, J. W., & Miller, T. R. (2003). Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 240257.
  • Romance, N., & Vitale, M. (1992). A curriculum strategy that expands time for in-depth elementary science instruction by using science-based reading strategies: Effects of a year-long study in grade four. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 545554.
  • Romance, N., & Vitale, M. (2011 , March). An interdisciplinary model for accelerating student achievement in science and reading comprehension across grades 3-8: Implications for research and practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Research in Educational Effectiveness, Washington, DC.
  • Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (2001). Implmenting an in-depth expanded science model in elementary schools: Multi-year findings, research issues, and policy implications. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 373404.
  • Rosebrock, M. (2007). The effect of systematic vocabulary instruction on the science achievement of fifth-grade science students (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Houston, Texas.
  • Rothman, A. (2000). The impact of computer-based versus “traditional” textbook science instruction on selected student learning outcomes (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Temple University, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (Eds.). (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention assessment, and adjustments. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
  • Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J., Hamilton, L., & Klein, S. (2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(5), 369393.
  • Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Huang, T.-Y., & Lee, Y.-H. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(10), 14361460.
  • SEG Research. (2009). A study of the effectiveness of BrainPOP. Retrieved January 10, 2012 from www.brainpop.com/about/research
  • Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston, MA: Houghton-Mifflin.
  • Shymansky, J. A., Hedges, L. V., & Woodworth, G. (1990). A reassessment of the effects of inquiry-based science curricula of the 60's on student performance. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(2), 127144.
  • Slavin, R. E. (2008). What works? Issues in synthesizing educational program evaluations. Educational Researcher, 37(1), 514.
  • Slavin, R. E. (2013). Classroom applications of cooperative learning. In S. Graham (Eds.), APA handbook of educational psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Slavin, R. E., & Lake, C. (2008). Effective programs in elementary mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 78(3), 427515.
  • Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., Chambers, B., Cheung, A., & Davis, S. (2009). Effective reading programs for the elementary grades: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 79(4), 13911465.
  • Slavin, R. E., Lake, C., & Groff, E. (2009). Effective programs in middle and high school mathematics: A best-evidence synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 839911.
  • Slavin, R. E., & Madden, N. A. (2011). Measures inherent to treatments in program effectiveness reviews. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 4(4), 370380.
  • Slavin, R. E., & Smith, D. (2009). The relationship between sample sizes and effect sizes in systematic reviews in education. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 31(4), 500506.
  • Sun, K., Lin, C., & Wang, S. (2009). A 3-D virtual reality model of the sun and the moon for e-learning at elementary schools. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 689710.
  • Sun, K., Lin, Y., & Yu, C. (2008). A study on learning effect among different learning styles in a web-based lab of science for elementary school students. Computers & Education, 50, 14111422.
  • The Royal Society. (2010). Science and mathematics education, 5–14: A ‘state of the nation’ report. London, UK: The Royal Society.
  • Thurston, A., Topping, K. J., Christie, D., Tolmie, A. K., Karagiannidou, E., & Murray, P. (2010). Cooperative learning in science: Follow-up from primary to high school. International Journal of Science Education, 32(4), 501522.
  • Treagust, D. F. (2007). General instructional methods and strategies. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 373391). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Trygstad, P. J., Smith, P. S., Banilower, E. R., & Nelson, M. M. (2013). The status of elementary science education: Are we ready for the next generation standards? Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research, Inc.
  • VanTassel-Baska, J. (1986). Effective curriculum and instructional models for talented students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 30, 164169.
  • Vitale, M. R., Romance, N. R., & Crawley, F. (2010). Trends in science education research published in the journal of Research on Science Teaching: A longitudinal policy perspective. Presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Vosnidau, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., & Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Learning and Instruction, 11, 381419.
  • Webb, N. M. (2008). Learning in small groups. In T. L. Good (Ed.), 21st century education: A reference handbook (pp. 203211). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
  • Weiss, I. R., Pasley, J. D., Smith, P. S., Banilower, E. R., & Heck, D. J. (2003). Looking inside the classroom: A study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the U.S. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
  • Wilson, M. (2009). Measuring progressions: Assessment structures underlying a learning progression. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 716730.
  • Zembal-Saul, C., Starr, M. L., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Constructing a framework for elementary science teaching using pedagogical content knowledge. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (Vol. 6, pp. 237256). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Springer.