Golan, Tal. (2004). Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Pp. 325. ISBN-10 0-674-02580-6 (pbk.). $22.95
Abstract:
Tal Golan’s book Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America is a relatively brief and thoroughly engaging treatment of an important yet mostly neglected topic, and should be of interest to students, teachers, and practitioners of both science and law.
Book Review:
In light of the public’s recent interest in the intersections of science and the law, as well as the incorporation of forensics into many science classes, Tal Golan’s Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America (2004, Harvard University Press) is a fascinating, well-written, and thoroughly researched perspective on this neglected topic, covering the last few centuries. Comprised (disappointingly) of only six chapters, it is a relatively brief, yet engrossing and clever history that leaves the reader wanting more, particularly from this author, who has an engaging but scholarly writing style. Chronological and yet contextual in style, the first chapter of the book deals with the earliest appearances of science in matters of law in Europe, while chapters two and three address legal and scientific issues in Victorian England and later across the Atlantic in America, as the industrial revolution brings about a deluge of litigation. The remaining chapters are concerned with, in order, the development, utilization, and acceptance into the courts of microscopic blood analysis techniques, x-ray images, and polygraph technology.
According to Golan, recurrent themes that seemed to resonate vividly concerning scientific expert testimony in American and English courts of law, both in the Victorian and modern eras, were the conundrum of conflicting scientific opinions, as well as the financial issue of whether scientists should be paid for their testimony or not. In addition, the ability of jurors, judges, and lawyers to understand and effectively utilize scientific concepts in courts of law to achieve fair and accurate legal outcomes was an essential issue. For science educators, this book should reinforce that a general public that is equipped with a fair degree of scientific literacy, coupled with critical thinking skills, is a highly desired and valuable product. This principle is the same over the centuries and across the oceans, regardless of whether a case involves heating whale oil, patent litigation over a chemical process, medical malpractice, advances in microscopy, x-ray technology, DNA, or polygraph tests.
The “professionalization” of science was a hastened tremendously in Victorian times. Meetings, journals, societies, correspondences between scientists, and industrialization of scientific developments all contributed to this, but surprisingly the paid testimony of scientists in court cases seemed to also be one of the most prominent factors. Up to this point in time, the practice of science was mostly limited to landed gentlemen and aristocracy who took up science as a way to spend their otherwise idle time, since they did not have to work for a living, and this group seemed particularly critical of what they perceived as the “prostitution” of science in the courtroom. This divide, particularly in England, between the wealthy gentlemen who indulged their spare time as scientists and those who actually made their living from testifying, collecting, writing, and experimenting, continued to grow. In America, on the other hand, the use of science to make a living or even achieve great wealth was not seen as being a danger to the “purity” of science and its quest for knowledge and understanding of the natural world.
Another major theme of this book is the visual nature of much of the scientific evidence and testimony in a legal setting, and the potential for variability, or even unscrupulousness, in its interpretation. The author discusses how photographs, microscopic evidence, and x-ray exposures could be interpreted from both a subjective and objective view point. Is such evidence to be taken at face value for what it represents, or should the human element of the production and interpretation of this type of evidence be given precedence? Who is qualified to obtain such evidence, and further, to interpret and explain it? Golan’s answer is that some types of visual evidence, such as surveillance camera footage, can stand alone and essentially speak for it self, while other types, such as x-ray images, require a trained and trusted specialist to produce the image and clarify its meaning. Golan discusses in an enlightening manner how new technologies such as lie-detectors were gradually accepted by the courts and society in general, and how scientific court room testimony sometimes contributed to the creation of entirely new disciplines and specializations in science and medicine, with new knowledge often originating when experiments were recreated for the benefit of the courts.
Was it the adversarial nature of the courts, or the moral and ethical degradation of the scientists involved that created the greatest problems for expert scientific testimony over the centuries? The apparent conflict between the procedures of law and methods of science seem to Golan to be the root cause, especially that lawyers, judges, and jurors who lacked scientific backgrounds and knowledge were being asked to decide cases on their scientific merit. The author goes further, expounding that scientists were not entirely at fault, when they appeared to be at odds on the witness stand. The vagaries of science, from differing methods and interpretations, are part of what make it a unique enterprise. One never “closes the books” on any scientific topic, believing that we know everything there is to know about it. The reproducibility and nature of continuous questioning in science served to instigate many of the apparent conflicts with the absolute nature of law and the legal system. This is not to say that there were not some devious charlatans or even legitimate, well-meaning scientists who in effect did indeed sell their testimony to the highest bidder at times.
One of the few reservations about this book was the absence of any in-depth treatment on DNA technology and its role in the modern courtroom. It is also possible the author did the reader a disservice by not presenting and discussing at least some of the major cases in which the “mad doctors” of insanity trials played a role. Golan unfortunately glosses over these potentially significant episodes by stating they are covered sufficiently elsewhere, and it would have been enlightening to see how the “soft sciences” played out in court, especially in relation to how the “hard sciences” were involved, both in the Victorian and modern ages. Of course, Golan devotes an entire chapter to the development and early use of lie-detectors or polygraph machines, which again seems incongruous to me, in terms of discussing one aspect of psychology and the law and not the other. Nevertheless, chapters five and six, on the use of x-ray images and polygraph results in court, illuminate the greatest difference in the early and later chapters. As the twentieth century dawned, new technologies like these created a demand for specialists to administer, supervise, and explain the results in court and likewise for the courts to accept them as the valid procedures and evidence they were. This continues even today with new medical imaging, DNA, and other forensic technologies.
Overall Laws of Men and Laws of Nature is a fascinating and informative read on a mostly neglected yet important topic, and it will definitely enhance anyone’s knowledge of the history of expert scientific testimony in courts of law. For science educators, this reading also reinforces that teachers have the responsibility of being sure their students understand that science is an inquiry-based and dynamic process, and not just a static collection of facts. Just as there is historically no one definitive “scientific method”, students must be aware that science is open-ended, accomplished through a variety of techniques, its results are subject to interpretation, and its theories are subject to change as new data become available. Scientists, science teachers and students, and productive and responsible citizens in general should all be open-minded and receptive of new thoughts and points of view on any given topic. At the same time, the population should also be scientifically literate and prepared to think critically and be skeptics if necessary. Golan’s book brings to mind the long-running advertisements that suggest that “four of five dentists recommend product X”. Students need to be aware that these dentists and their opinions, like many of the scientific expert witnesses and their testimony in this book, should be subject to scrutiny and must be considered in the context in which they and their opinions are presented. This includes the dynamic nature of science, possible financial entanglements, and the social and legal climate of the time and place in question. This book is heartily recommended for science educators, students, attorneys and anyone interested in forensics, law, or science.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Summer Science Institutes Literature Review
Introduction
The Need for More Effective Science Teaching
Every week the news media is full of stories describing concerns about America’s competitiveness in a global economy and decline in our standing as a world leader in science and technology. Entities ranging from the president to the National Science Board to local school boards and even individual teachers have pointed to the lack of student proficiency on national and international tests of mathematics and science and the decline of students pursuing science and engineering degrees from universities nationwide as a cause for economic and societal apprehension and concern. It is also evident that some of the most critical and fastest growing occupations are dependent upon a knowledge base in science and mathematics. Solutions to these concerns include starting students as early as possible in inquiry-based science programs taught by proficient and knowledgeable teachers comfortable with the use of technology and the nature of science and inquiry. This can partially be brought about by effective constructivist, inquiry-based professional development workshops and institutes and with mentorship by practicing scientists particularly in the summer months and in association with institutions such as natural history museums, school districts, and universities.
Science teacher self-efficacy, science literacy, and understanding of the nature of science all seem to be strongly linked to an understanding of the nature of inquiry (Akerson and Hanuscin, 2006). Professional development workshops and institutes with an emphasis on research activities and constructivist, inquiry-based science likewise seem to be the most effective and practical ways to bring this about (Radford, 1998). Both pre-service and in-service teachers seem to benefit from these types of activities, particularly in the summer and in association with institutions such as museums and universities, as do their schools and their individual students (Melber and Cox-Peterson, 2005). Loucks-Horsley and Matsumoto (1999) have emphasized the link between effective professional development and its impact on student achievement. It is imperative to undertake more studies of this type to reinforce and support this viewpoint, and then to design and implement workshops of this nature and encourage as much active participation by our nation’s science teachers as possible (Johnson, 2007).
Discussion
Science Professional Development Models
Low science teacher self-efficacy, failure to employ learning cycles in lesson development, technology deficits, and a lack of understanding of the nature of inquiry in scientific disciplines may contribute to lowered student achievement. Relevant components of competent science teaching may be increased through effective professional development workshops and summer science institutes. Methods of remediation in summer science workshops may include participation in generating and carrying out learning cycles, authentic scientific research projects with an expert mentor, utilization of appropriate technologies, and presentations on the effectiveness and types of learning cycles. It may also be possible to follow up in subsequent months and years with the targeted teachers, schools, and even monitor specified corresponding levels of student achievement. General models of science professional development used previously include curriculum development, mentoring, lesson study, teacher-directed study groups, action-research programs, and immersion experiences (Loucks-Horsley, et al, 2003).
This model proposes to incorporate elements of immersion, technology, curriculum generation and development, and mentoring of research projects by practicing scientists to create and implement a truly effective professional development model for K-12 science educators. Howe and Stubbs (1996) developed a useful and promising constructivist/sociocultural model for the professional development of science teachers. The central vehicle of their model is a series of institutes where teachers first listen to scientists present recent research findings and then write classroom activities using and adapting the information and ideas presented. Their results indicate that many of these teachers have now become empowered to assume responsibility for their own professional development, and even assume positions of leadership in their schools, districts, and state organizations. In another study (Westerlund, et al, 2002) clearly indicated that a professional development model of prolonged engagement in research activity mentored by practicing scientists can be successful at promoting teacher change towards more inquiry teaching, enhance their knowledge of science content, and increase their enthusiasm for teaching science. Morrison and Estes (2007) stated that using scientists and real-world scenarios in professional development for middle school science teachers was an effective strategy for encouraging them to teach science as a process and help them strengthen their science content understanding. A study from Australia found that a professional development model mentoring of elementary school teachers by university science professors has positive short-term implications for implementing constructivist science teaching strategies and facilitating the understanding of science content by the teachers (Koch and Appleton, 2007).
Problems with Traditional Science Teaching Methods and Professional Development Activities
The literature suggests that students need to “learn more than can be absorbed from simply reading about science-they need to do science, becoming critical thinkers and evaluators of what they observe and learn” to compete in today’s rapidly changing world (Rhoton and Bowers, 2001, p. 13). The state of Oklahoma’s Priority Academic Student Skills (PASS) and the National Science Education Standards (NSES) recommend an inquiry approach to science teaching. Unfortunately many new and even experienced teachers feel ill-equipped to meet this challenge. Many K-12 school teachers have never been involved in a science inquiry investigation (Kielborn & Gilmer, 1999). Teachers use textbooks or cookbook type laboratories to teach science to their students. Textbook readings, note-taking, and cookbook lab activities give students the impression that science is scripted and that every experiment provides the correct answer. These types of activities do not accurately reflect the investigative and historically varied nature of scientific inquiry and do not require students to develop the critical thinking skills needed to compete in our changing world.
Evidence of Effectiveness of Inquiry-Based Science Professional Development
There is much in the scientific educational research literature to support the idea that inquiry-based science instruction can be extremely effective. Chun and Oliver (2000) found significant gains in science teacher self-efficacy during a two-year study involving participation in inquiry-based professional development workshops. In 2004, Jarvis and Pell demonstrated similar increases in science teachers’ attitudes and cognition and corresponding student achievement gains during and after professional development activities. Likewise, a seven-year study in Iowa found tremendous gains in student achievement when science teachers designated as team leaders undertook ongoing training in constructivist teaching strategies advocated by the National Science Education Standards (Kimble, Yager, and Yager, 2006). Raudenbush, Rowan, and Cheong (1992) found that the level of teacher preparation was a strong predictor of self-efficacy in the science classroom, and engaging in highly collaborative environments such as professional development workshops and institutes helped to facilitate this. Luft (2001) noted that an inquiry-based professional development program positively impacted both the beliefs and practices of secondary science teachers. Supovitz and Turner (2000) indicated a strong link between the quantity of professional development in which teachers participate and the level of inquiry-based teaching practice and investigative classroom culture. Another study found that professional development linking theory and practice through curriculum decision making had a profound influence on decisions concerning classroom environments, especially when the teachers were engaged and mentored by university scientists and science educators, and informed by theoretical perspectives of science teaching (Parke and Coble, 1998).
Summary/Conclusion
This review of the literature supports a professional development model that expects to 1) increase the scientific literacy and efficacy of K-12 school teachers by providing authentic scientific inquiry experiences with technology that promote an understanding of the nature of inquiry in scientific disciplines and 2) present teachers with an approach to science teaching that translates this genuine inquiry experience into classroom practice. Clearly, the evidence provided by prior research suggests that such a model should be effective in achieving these goals. The author’s own personal experience also suggests that this type of professional development, with an emphasis on authentic, mentored research and generation of inquiry-based curricula, can have a profound impact on both a personal, as well as a school or district-wide basis. This involves shifting from a traditional didactic and textbook-driven science curriculum to a more inquiry-based, constructivist one and professional development institutes and workshops are the most practical and appropriate means to achieve these goals.
References
Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 653-680.
Chun, S., & Oliver, J. (2000). A quantitative examination of teacher self-efficacy and knowledge of the nature of science. 2000 Annual Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science.
Howe, A. C., & Stubbs, H. S. (1996). Empowering science teachers: a model for professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 167-182.
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2004). Primary teachers’ changing attitudes and cognition during a two-year in-service programme and their effect on pupils. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1787-1811.
Johnson, C. C. (2007). Effective science teaching, professional development and No Child Left Behind: barriers, dilemmas, and reality. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 133-136.
Johnson, C. C., Kahle, J. B., & Fargo J. D. (2006). A study of the effect of sustained, whole –school professional development on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 10, 1-12.
Kielborn, T., Gilmer, P., & Southeastern Regional Vision for Education (SERVE), T. (1999). Meaningful science: teachers doing inquiry + teaching science. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED434008) Retrieved June 13, 2007, from ERIC database.
Kimble, L. L., Yager, R. E., & Yager, S. O. (2006). Success of a professional-development model in assisting teachers to change their teaching to match the more emphasis conditions urged in the National Science Education Standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 1007-1021.
Koch, J. & Appleton, K. (2007). The effect of a mentoring model for elementary science professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 209-231.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, S. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics: second edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Loucks-Horsley, S. & Matsumoto, C. (1999). Research on professional development for teachers of mathematics and science: the state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 213-233.
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, 517-534.
Melber, L. M., & Cox-Peterson, A. M., (2005). Teacher professional development and informal learning environments: investigating partnerships and possibilities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 103-120.
Morrison, J. A., & Estes, J. C. (2007). Using scientists and real-world scenarios in professional development for middle school science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 165-184.
Parke, H. M. & Coble, C. R. (1998). Teachers designing curriculum as professional development: a model for transformational science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 773-789.
Radford, D. L. (1998). Transferring theory into practice: a model for professional development for science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 73-88.
Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Cheong, Y. F., (1992). Contextual effects on the self-perceived efficacy of high school teachers. Sociology of Education, 65, 150-167.
Rhoton, J., Bowers, P., & National Science Teachers Association, A. (2001). Professional development planning and design. Issues in science education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED449040) Retrieved June 13, 2007, from ERIC database.
Supovitz, J. A. & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 963-980.
Westerlund, J. F., Garcia, D. M., Koke, J. R., Taylor, T. A., & Mason, D. S. (2002). Summer scientific research for teachers: the experience and its effect. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 63-83.
The Need for More Effective Science Teaching
Every week the news media is full of stories describing concerns about America’s competitiveness in a global economy and decline in our standing as a world leader in science and technology. Entities ranging from the president to the National Science Board to local school boards and even individual teachers have pointed to the lack of student proficiency on national and international tests of mathematics and science and the decline of students pursuing science and engineering degrees from universities nationwide as a cause for economic and societal apprehension and concern. It is also evident that some of the most critical and fastest growing occupations are dependent upon a knowledge base in science and mathematics. Solutions to these concerns include starting students as early as possible in inquiry-based science programs taught by proficient and knowledgeable teachers comfortable with the use of technology and the nature of science and inquiry. This can partially be brought about by effective constructivist, inquiry-based professional development workshops and institutes and with mentorship by practicing scientists particularly in the summer months and in association with institutions such as natural history museums, school districts, and universities.
Science teacher self-efficacy, science literacy, and understanding of the nature of science all seem to be strongly linked to an understanding of the nature of inquiry (Akerson and Hanuscin, 2006). Professional development workshops and institutes with an emphasis on research activities and constructivist, inquiry-based science likewise seem to be the most effective and practical ways to bring this about (Radford, 1998). Both pre-service and in-service teachers seem to benefit from these types of activities, particularly in the summer and in association with institutions such as museums and universities, as do their schools and their individual students (Melber and Cox-Peterson, 2005). Loucks-Horsley and Matsumoto (1999) have emphasized the link between effective professional development and its impact on student achievement. It is imperative to undertake more studies of this type to reinforce and support this viewpoint, and then to design and implement workshops of this nature and encourage as much active participation by our nation’s science teachers as possible (Johnson, 2007).
Discussion
Science Professional Development Models
Low science teacher self-efficacy, failure to employ learning cycles in lesson development, technology deficits, and a lack of understanding of the nature of inquiry in scientific disciplines may contribute to lowered student achievement. Relevant components of competent science teaching may be increased through effective professional development workshops and summer science institutes. Methods of remediation in summer science workshops may include participation in generating and carrying out learning cycles, authentic scientific research projects with an expert mentor, utilization of appropriate technologies, and presentations on the effectiveness and types of learning cycles. It may also be possible to follow up in subsequent months and years with the targeted teachers, schools, and even monitor specified corresponding levels of student achievement. General models of science professional development used previously include curriculum development, mentoring, lesson study, teacher-directed study groups, action-research programs, and immersion experiences (Loucks-Horsley, et al, 2003).
This model proposes to incorporate elements of immersion, technology, curriculum generation and development, and mentoring of research projects by practicing scientists to create and implement a truly effective professional development model for K-12 science educators. Howe and Stubbs (1996) developed a useful and promising constructivist/sociocultural model for the professional development of science teachers. The central vehicle of their model is a series of institutes where teachers first listen to scientists present recent research findings and then write classroom activities using and adapting the information and ideas presented. Their results indicate that many of these teachers have now become empowered to assume responsibility for their own professional development, and even assume positions of leadership in their schools, districts, and state organizations. In another study (Westerlund, et al, 2002) clearly indicated that a professional development model of prolonged engagement in research activity mentored by practicing scientists can be successful at promoting teacher change towards more inquiry teaching, enhance their knowledge of science content, and increase their enthusiasm for teaching science. Morrison and Estes (2007) stated that using scientists and real-world scenarios in professional development for middle school science teachers was an effective strategy for encouraging them to teach science as a process and help them strengthen their science content understanding. A study from Australia found that a professional development model mentoring of elementary school teachers by university science professors has positive short-term implications for implementing constructivist science teaching strategies and facilitating the understanding of science content by the teachers (Koch and Appleton, 2007).
Problems with Traditional Science Teaching Methods and Professional Development Activities
The literature suggests that students need to “learn more than can be absorbed from simply reading about science-they need to do science, becoming critical thinkers and evaluators of what they observe and learn” to compete in today’s rapidly changing world (Rhoton and Bowers, 2001, p. 13). The state of Oklahoma’s Priority Academic Student Skills (PASS) and the National Science Education Standards (NSES) recommend an inquiry approach to science teaching. Unfortunately many new and even experienced teachers feel ill-equipped to meet this challenge. Many K-12 school teachers have never been involved in a science inquiry investigation (Kielborn & Gilmer, 1999). Teachers use textbooks or cookbook type laboratories to teach science to their students. Textbook readings, note-taking, and cookbook lab activities give students the impression that science is scripted and that every experiment provides the correct answer. These types of activities do not accurately reflect the investigative and historically varied nature of scientific inquiry and do not require students to develop the critical thinking skills needed to compete in our changing world.
Evidence of Effectiveness of Inquiry-Based Science Professional Development
There is much in the scientific educational research literature to support the idea that inquiry-based science instruction can be extremely effective. Chun and Oliver (2000) found significant gains in science teacher self-efficacy during a two-year study involving participation in inquiry-based professional development workshops. In 2004, Jarvis and Pell demonstrated similar increases in science teachers’ attitudes and cognition and corresponding student achievement gains during and after professional development activities. Likewise, a seven-year study in Iowa found tremendous gains in student achievement when science teachers designated as team leaders undertook ongoing training in constructivist teaching strategies advocated by the National Science Education Standards (Kimble, Yager, and Yager, 2006). Raudenbush, Rowan, and Cheong (1992) found that the level of teacher preparation was a strong predictor of self-efficacy in the science classroom, and engaging in highly collaborative environments such as professional development workshops and institutes helped to facilitate this. Luft (2001) noted that an inquiry-based professional development program positively impacted both the beliefs and practices of secondary science teachers. Supovitz and Turner (2000) indicated a strong link between the quantity of professional development in which teachers participate and the level of inquiry-based teaching practice and investigative classroom culture. Another study found that professional development linking theory and practice through curriculum decision making had a profound influence on decisions concerning classroom environments, especially when the teachers were engaged and mentored by university scientists and science educators, and informed by theoretical perspectives of science teaching (Parke and Coble, 1998).
Summary/Conclusion
This review of the literature supports a professional development model that expects to 1) increase the scientific literacy and efficacy of K-12 school teachers by providing authentic scientific inquiry experiences with technology that promote an understanding of the nature of inquiry in scientific disciplines and 2) present teachers with an approach to science teaching that translates this genuine inquiry experience into classroom practice. Clearly, the evidence provided by prior research suggests that such a model should be effective in achieving these goals. The author’s own personal experience also suggests that this type of professional development, with an emphasis on authentic, mentored research and generation of inquiry-based curricula, can have a profound impact on both a personal, as well as a school or district-wide basis. This involves shifting from a traditional didactic and textbook-driven science curriculum to a more inquiry-based, constructivist one and professional development institutes and workshops are the most practical and appropriate means to achieve these goals.
References
Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 653-680.
Chun, S., & Oliver, J. (2000). A quantitative examination of teacher self-efficacy and knowledge of the nature of science. 2000 Annual Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science.
Howe, A. C., & Stubbs, H. S. (1996). Empowering science teachers: a model for professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 167-182.
Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2004). Primary teachers’ changing attitudes and cognition during a two-year in-service programme and their effect on pupils. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1787-1811.
Johnson, C. C. (2007). Effective science teaching, professional development and No Child Left Behind: barriers, dilemmas, and reality. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 133-136.
Johnson, C. C., Kahle, J. B., & Fargo J. D. (2006). A study of the effect of sustained, whole –school professional development on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 10, 1-12.
Kielborn, T., Gilmer, P., & Southeastern Regional Vision for Education (SERVE), T. (1999). Meaningful science: teachers doing inquiry + teaching science. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED434008) Retrieved June 13, 2007, from ERIC database.
Kimble, L. L., Yager, R. E., & Yager, S. O. (2006). Success of a professional-development model in assisting teachers to change their teaching to match the more emphasis conditions urged in the National Science Education Standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 1007-1021.
Koch, J. & Appleton, K. (2007). The effect of a mentoring model for elementary science professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 209-231.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, S. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics: second edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Loucks-Horsley, S. & Matsumoto, C. (1999). Research on professional development for teachers of mathematics and science: the state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 213-233.
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, 517-534.
Melber, L. M., & Cox-Peterson, A. M., (2005). Teacher professional development and informal learning environments: investigating partnerships and possibilities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 103-120.
Morrison, J. A., & Estes, J. C. (2007). Using scientists and real-world scenarios in professional development for middle school science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 165-184.
Parke, H. M. & Coble, C. R. (1998). Teachers designing curriculum as professional development: a model for transformational science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 773-789.
Radford, D. L. (1998). Transferring theory into practice: a model for professional development for science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 73-88.
Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Cheong, Y. F., (1992). Contextual effects on the self-perceived efficacy of high school teachers. Sociology of Education, 65, 150-167.
Rhoton, J., Bowers, P., & National Science Teachers Association, A. (2001). Professional development planning and design. Issues in science education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED449040) Retrieved June 13, 2007, from ERIC database.
Supovitz, J. A. & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 963-980.
Westerlund, J. F., Garcia, D. M., Koke, J. R., Taylor, T. A., & Mason, D. S. (2002). Summer scientific research for teachers: the experience and its effect. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 63-83.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)