Running Head: DESIGN-BASED RESEARCH AS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Design-based
Research as Professional Development: Case Study of a Reading Teacher in a
Science Inquiry Project
Erin
E. Peters
Brenda
Bannan-Ritland
John
Baek
Patricia
Martinez
Jolin
Qutub
Qing
Xia
Abstract
This study investigates the
involvement of one teacher in a unique, 9-month, graduate-level, design-based
research experience who was challenged to design a technology-based system
collaboratively with five science teachers that intersects inquiry-based
science and reading comprehension. This
immersive, long-term professional development experience involving teachers
directly in design research represents an emerging area of study. Individual teacher
interviews conducted at multiple points during the academic year as well as
video data from weekly class sessions and other design and reflective artifacts
provided multiple data sources. The case study investigates the unique
characteristics that emerge when a reading teacher is immersed in a
professional development experience that revolves around the scientific
discipline of geomorphology (Yin, 2003). The investigation of this design
research experience yielded a growth in understanding regarding inquiry and
learning science, a development of the connections between reading and science,
positive aspects to the design-research process as professional development,
and a conduit for connecting research to the classroom.
Theoretical
Framework
Integration
of Inquiry-based Science and Reading Comprehension
The progression toward
inquiry-based instruction and integration of appropriate text-based materials
to improve reading comprehension of science instruction represent two
nationally significant challenges for teachers (NRC, 2000; Snow, 2002). Further complicating the problem, inquiry
processes are defined and implemented differently by both teachers and
researchers (Anderson, 2002; Haury, 1993).
In order to better define inquiry teaching and promote improved
professional development, researchers are calling for additional studies on
teachers’ views, beliefs and implementation of inquiry processes and also how
these processes may intersect with appropriate science reading strategies
(Keys, 1999; Keys & Bryan, 2001; Palincsar & Magnussen, 2000). An
emerging line of research that involves teachers’ participation in complex collaborative
experiences that a) acknowledge their existing knowledge and beliefs; b)
promote reflection on their practices; c) engage them in a long-term,
reform-based immersive professional development experiences and d) incorporate
teachers in the role of collaborative designers and researchers may have the
potential to more explicitly define inquiry processes, promote teacher
conceptual change and influence classroom practice (Van Zee, Lay & Roberts,
2003; Loucks-Horsley, Love, Stiles, Mundry & Hewson, 2003).
Teachers
Practical Knowledge and Research
Hiebert, Gallimore and Stigler
(2002) cite the difficulty of bridging the gap between traditional research
knowledge and teachers’ practice. The role of teachers’ practical knowledge has
traditionally been undervalued in research, professional development and reform
efforts in science education failing to take teachers’ existing knowledge,
beliefs and attitudes into account (van Driel, Beijaard & Verloop,
2001). However, researchers are
beginning to incorporate teacher perspectives and participation in studies
related to science education. Keys &
Bryan (2001) studied teachers’ beliefs, knowledge and practices of inquiry-based
science as well as student learning and called for additional research in these
areas. In particular, these researchers
call for additional studies involving the co-construction of inquiry-based
instruction by teachers and researchers (Keys & Bryan, 2001).
Design
Research and Teacher Practical Knowledge
The instructional design process provides a rich framework for teacher-researcher collaboration and may provide for the articulation of practitioner-based knowledge of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, 1986). Van Driel, Beijaard and Verloop (2001) refer to this knowledge as “practical knowledge” that experienced teachers possess comprised of integrated knowledge and beliefs about science, subject matter and teaching and learning. Studying the collaborative instructional design process of a group of teacher-designers and researchers can provide insight into how teachers integrate research and practical knowledge in a design-based research effort. In addition, the instructional design process can provide insight into Hiebert et al.’s (2002) characterization of practitioner knowledge integrated and organized around problems of practice involving teachers in the following activities: a) elaborating the problem and developing a shared language for describing the problem, b)analyzing classroom practice in light of the problem, c) envisioning alternatives, or hypothesizing solutions to the problem, d) testing alternatives in the classroom, and reflecting on their effects, and e)recording what is learned in a way that is shareable with other practitioners. (p.6).
Teachers’ involvement in design-based research efforts that integrate instructional design and research activities as professional development experiences are just beginning to emerge. Design-based research is characterized by the generation of models or theories about teaching and learning in the context of the iterative design, development and evaluation of an innovative learning environment (Kelly, 2004; Sloane & Gorard, 2003; Bannan-Ritland, 2003). Zawojewski, Chamberlin, Hjalmarson & Lewis (2004) promote the use of design-based research to support mathematics teachers’ professional development through specific cases of teacher designed materials such as the testing and revision of an algebra lesson and teacher development of student thinking sheets that closely examine student cognitive processes. However, complex collaborative professional development experiences that involve teachers as collaborators and co-researchers in long-term, instructional design and design-based research activities in science education have not yet been investigated. This paper will extend an emerging program of research to focus on investigating teachers’ beliefs and practical knowledge before, during and after engagement in a 9-month complex, collaborative design-based experience with researchers designing and developing a technology-based system integrating inquiry-based science and reading comprehension at the fourth grade level.
Elementary
Teachers’ Understandings of Inquiry
As most elementary teachers do not focus on a particular discipline, they generally do not have adequate background in the epistemology of science. Effective inquiry is characterized by experiences that are authentic to the experiences of scientists (Bybee, 2004), thus requiring an understanding of the operations of science as a discipline. Adb-El-Khalick and Akerson (2004) cite that preservice elementary teacher’s views of the nature of science as measured by the VNOS-B were naïve. After intervention, the preservice elementary teachers had a more substantial understanding of science as a way of knowing, and they were mediated by preexisting motivational, cognitive and worldview factors. Even when explicitly taught the nature of science, many elementary teachers showed only a limited understanding (Akerson, Abd-El-Khalick & Lederman, 2000). Geological inquiries are particularly difficult because this type of inquiry refers to objects with histories. That is, direct observations do not answer most questions in geomorphology, rather the prior movements of material must be inferred based on indirect evidence, which contain more ambiguity (Ault, 1998). An effective professional development for elementary teachers involving both scientific inquiry and geologic reasoning would require a great deal of cognitive change on the part of the participants, which design-based research could provide.
Purpose/Objectives
The purpose of this study is to investigate the involvement of a reading teacher in an intensive, long-term (9-months), collaborative, design-based research professional development experience in science and the impact of that experience on her knowledge of science, reading and teaching and learning. The design research experience was structured to intensively involve teachers in the process of integrated instructional design and research activities that would promote the development of teacher-generated design ideas for an effective technology-based system for the fourth grade classroom integrating inquiry science and reading comprehension. The objective of the emerging practice of design research is to promote the generation of knowledge related to teaching and learning while engaged in the design of a classroom intervention (Kelly, 2004). This five year design-based research grant funded by the National Science Foundation has concluded year two which has culminated in the direct involvement of teachers in the design research process across an academic year along with a six-member research team. The objective of this phase of data collection and analysis is to investigate the nature and impact of teacher involvement in design research specifically related to the intersection of inquiry-based science and reading comprehension. The literacy-science connection is a significant area of concern for teachers and researchers alike (see Saul, 2004). This study will illuminate a) teacher practical knowledge about the science-reading connection and earth science; b) the impact of participation in design research as a professional development experience on teacher practical knowledge and c) the nature of collaboration and co-construction of technology-based science curriculum by teachers and a research team.
Methods
The
Design-based Research Experience
The
design-based research experience generally followed an emerging process model
that attempts to intersect systematic instructional design processes with
rigorous research investigation of cognitively-based theories about teaching
and learning entitled the Integrative Learning Design Framework (see
Bannan-Ritland, 2003). Six teachers
(five elementary and one middle school teacher) were involved in two 9-credit
instructional design courses across the 2004-2005 academic year that were
specifically designed to investigate teaching and learning issues related to
science inquiry and reading comprehension as well as participate in the design
of a technology system that integrated these concepts at the fourth grade level.
In exchange for their participation, the teachers were offered free tuition for
the total of 18 credits that counted toward their Masters or Doctoral work. The
teachers were recruited from schools in the greater
Involvement
in the instructional design process allowed the teachers time and space to
collaboratively and individually articulate their practical knowledge, beliefs
and understanding about science/reading teaching, student learning and
perceived obstacles in their environment. Focus on the design of a technology
system seems to prompt explicit discussion of teacher practical knowledge when
struggling with the complex task of identifying what is most important for
students and attempting to collaboratively design a solution for the
classroom. In this design-based research
experience, teachers were instructed to consider their prior knowledge,
synthesize current research literature and collectively translate theoretical
constructs, earth science content and research findings into technology-based
design prototypes. The teachers also participated in data collection and
analysis of their students’ prior knowledge and reading abilities in earth
science employing a think aloud procedure as well as interviewed colleagues
about their perspectives on inquiry science teaching that informed subsequent
design ideas.
These challenging
tasks engaged the teachers with the research team in a design problem-based
experience that well aligned with Loucks-Horsely et al.’s (2003) description of
a long-term, reform-based immersive professional development experience. Questions remain, however, as to the benefits
and drawbacks of such an experience. Specifically, does participation in an
intensive, long-term design research experience hold benefit for teachers? If
so, what are their perspectives on the value of this experience? Can a long
term systematic design research process promote teacher professional
development? In what ways? To investigate these questions, 32 class sessions of
this collaborative design research experience were videotaped and will be
qualitatively analyzed along with other data (discussed below) to uncover how
engagement in a design-based research experience may elicit teachers’ views,
beliefs and practical knowledge related to inquiry-based science processes and
also how these processes may intersect with appropriate science reading
strategies. It is hoped that these exploratory findings will shed light not
only on teacher perspectives on teaching inquiry science and reading
comprehension but also on the co-construction of instruction by teachers and
researchers in this area as well as the potential of directly involving teachers
in an intensive design-based research experience for purposes of professional
development.
Research
Questions
This
study is intended to investigate the emerging field of design-based research as
well as explore the experience of a reading teacher in science inquiry
professional development. The following
research questions will be asked: How does involvement in an intensive
design-based research experience in science impact a reading teacher’s
practical knowledge related to the intersection of inquiry-based science and
reading comprehension? How does a reading teacher engage in a collaborative
design-based research experience as co-constructor of an instructional
technology-based system in science?
The study began with the formation of the six-member research team, consisting of principal investigator, content specialists, computer graphic specialist, and computer design specialists. The team met to develop content in the two-semester graduate course, which would be the platform for design, before any design work began. Students in the course would be challenged to develop a computer learning tool with the support of the research team that intersected inquiry and reading in science. Six graduate students, who were also full-time teachers, attended the course and became the primary design team. During the course the researchers contributed sporadically to the design, but the main task of the research team was to teach the course and take field notes during the class discussions. The course content consisted of four facets: reading and reporting on research that supported ideas developed in the design process, investigating the processes of a geomorphologist in the field, exploring the pedagogy of scientific inquiry, and exploring the pedagogy of reading in science. The course began with an emersion into the literature of design-based research and the intersection of inquiry and reading in science. Once the teachers felt adept in teaching science inquiry and teaching reading in science, they turned their attention toward learning how a scientist researches and attempts to answer a question. The purpose of having the teachers learn how a scientist operates was to provide an authentic science inquiry model. Design of the computer began with the selection of an objective, and then proceeded with the incorporation of inquiry and reading in the content. Discussions in the course were conducted face-to-face during the weekly five-hour course, online using Blackboard as a tool, and through a blog site. At the end of each semester, the design team presented their work to an advisory committee consisting of experts in design-based research, geomorphology, and science education.
The approach
used in this study was informed by ethnographic methods that relied on semi-structured
interviews before, during and after the professional development experience
(Weiss, 1994; Emerson, Fretz & Shaw, 1995) as well as transcripts from
videotapes of the class sessions, field notes from the class sessions, and
researcher memos (Maxwell, 1996). The
method was useful in distinguishing the unique experiences of a reading teacher
accomplishing a professional development activity designed primarily for
science teachers. The approach also informed the nature of collaboration and
co-construction of inquiry-based curriculum as an identified need in science
education by Keys and
Participants
The participants of the
research project were the students in the graduate-level course offered at a
mid-Atlantic university. All of the six students were teachers from the same
public school system and five taught science in grade four. The other student
was a grade six reading teacher, who was the focus for this case study. Tuition
for the course was funded through the National Science Foundation grant as an
incentive for participating in the study. The curriculum supervisor for the
teachers encouraged targeted teachers to participate, and contacted them about
the opportunity. Teachers were chosen as informed designers for the computer
tool because they are directly involved with the intended audience.
Setting
The
face-to-face course was offered once a week in the evenings for five hour
segments, with a one hour break. The pedagogy as well as the content was
constantly being revised as is the nature of design-based research. As the
teachers considered different issues in developing the computer tool, their
learning needs changed. Course materials included reading relevant research and
content, peer review of student work, interviewing teachers and students to find
needs of the intended audience, and producing prototypes of their designs. The
iterative process of design included assessing the needs of the audience,
identifying the processes of a scientist through field work, considering the
intersection of science inquiry and reading, selecting content material, and
designing the computer tools to convey the content and processes. In addition
to the weekly face-to-face meetings, teachers were required to contribute to an
online discussion each week regarding design issues.
This
was the researcher’s first experience with design-based research, so
understanding the amorphous nature of this type of research took some time.
Researcher memos were necessary in this process because the researcher was also
part of the design team, as well as being asked to contribute to the teaching
of the course. Researcher memos helped to distinguish the different
observations and reflections made in the different roles. The researcher was
also a teacher in the same district as the participants in the class, although
at a different grade level. This helped give perspective on the amount of
workload that each participant teacher could be expected to accomplish, as well
as the general student population in the area.
Data Collection Methods
Various sources of
data have been collected over the last year and are currently being analyzed.
Data includes multiple teacher interviews, video recordings from weekly class
sessions (4 hours across two 16-week sessions for a total of 128 hours of video
data), online discussions, online journal reflections, individual
teacher-produced artifacts (individual concept maps, colleague interview
transcripts and data analyses, student think aloud protocol, transcription and
analyses), collaborative teacher-produced artifacts (collective design
brainstorming concept maps), research team memos and multiple surveys related
to teacher practice, content knowledge and design knowledge. Individual interviews were conducted with the
teacher approximately one month into the nine-month experience as well as
during the fourth month and at the conclusion of the experience. The interview
data is used as the primary source of data with the classroom video, online
journals and multiple artifacts used to triangulate the data.
Data Analyses
Transcribed
interviews from the reading teacher involved in the design-based research
project were read in entirety, then examined and coded line by line for each
idea expressed using verbatim statements when possible. Ideas from the line by
line coding were grouped into the following categories: ideas about learning
science, ideas about inquiry, intersections of reading and science,
design-based research, connecting research in the classroom, and the role of
design in lesson planning. A matrix was developed to compare statements for
each category in the before intervention interview, the mid-point interview,
and the after intervention interview. The matrix also included statements from
the surveys, researcher memos, course discussions, online discussions, and
products from the course. Analyses of data were shown to the research team and
their input was considered as well as member checks during interviews. Consistencies
in the statements across data sources and across time were noted. Change in the
reading teacher’s ideas over time was also considered in the results and
conclusions.
Preliminary
Results and Conclusions
Given the volume of data, the analysis phase of this study is continuing. Preliminary analyses point to teacher perspectives that demonstrate expanded definitions of inquiry-based science and more complex connections to reading as well as improved content knowledge. The case-study of the reading teacher, Deb, in science professional development experience has led to evidence of the teacher’s growth in several areas. Deb had been co-teaching science for three years prior to the experience, yet had no comments about how students learn science at the beginning of the project. At approximately the mid-point of the course, Deb regarded science as a process without regard to content. When asked about teaching content, at the beginning of the project, Deb states her role as a reading teacher, “I teach them strategies or they can learn strategies along the way to help them get that information.” Her contact with the scientist during the course greatly affected her perception of the interaction between content and process in science. She began examining her own environment in terms of erosion and deposition, and expressed that her conversations with her students in science were deeper. “Now I see it as you have to be knowledgeable about your topic, you have to know enough to ask a researchable question and to lead you in that direction.” After the design-based research experience has an understanding that process and content is most effective when taught simultaneously. “It’s made me really focus on content in that there’s specific strategies that are applicable to certain content.” Deb also expressed her growth in her own understanding of geomorphology. When asked about her learning with regard to science content, Deb stated, “It didn’t click for me until this semester, the second semester. . . . Instead of being more general I was able to be more specific. . . I need to be more knowledgeable in that content. And I think that was a big, big learning ah-ha for me that I’m just, I’m a better teacher.” The experience as designer on a team helped Deb to expand from her role as teaching the reading process to one where process and content interact.
Deb’s ideas about
inquiry developed though the design-based research experience from generally
asking questions to invoking the habits of scientists. Prior to the experience,
as a reading teacher, Deb thought that inquiry was a general process of
questioning and finding answers, and that inquiry always meant that students
initiate the questions. “It means giving students a choice in their learning
and the direction they are going to go. . . . Inquiry is questioning and their
(the students’) questions change. . . It’s an ongoing learning process in a
sense, because they are trying to learn more information . . . It (the
question) totally changes, but you know, that’s what learning is all about.” By
the mid-point of the design experience, Deb articulated that building
background knowledge through research was part of the process and she learned
how standards could be reached using inquiry. She expressed her change in
understanding by describing her own inquiry experience in the course, “We
brainstormed about what we knew and kind of built up our background knowledge
and then we asked questions, things we were curious about. . . . It all centers
about what you’re curious about, what questions do you have, and then how are
you going to find those answers and why, what’s the purpose of finding them.”
Deb’s ideas about inquiry changed from generally asking questions to asking
purposeful questions and developing a process to answer the questions. Deb
stated in an online reflection, “I was confused the first half of how inquiry
would work in science when you’re trying to meet all these standards and how
are you going to do that through just kids asking questions. Well the way it’s
done is that you have this common base – so at least in my mind – you have the
base and then from that you start of ask your question, or even a question can
be given . . . As so it just gets really specific.” After the experience she
had an epiphany that inquiry is what scientists carry out and there are more specific
processes that take place in inquiry. “My ah-ha moment there was when I
realized it’s like, well, it was the whole scientist thing. Scientists, yes
they ask questions and they do things (experiments), but they have that whole
level of background knowledge. . . . Now I see it as you have to be
knowledgeable about your topic, you have to know enough to ask a researchable
question . . . that will lead you in that direction.” Deb’s understanding of
inquiry developed from mainly a general process to an additional understanding
of scientific inquiry.
Before her
design-based research experience, the teacher understood that there were
parallels between science and reading, but her interactions with a scientist
involved with the project helped her to understand that reading to learn was a
natural process in a scientific endeavor. Before the experience, Deb considered
the parallels between science and reading to be mainly thinking skills. “I do a
lot in reading and science with thinking skills. . . . Some of the strategies
that I work with are making predictions. That’s like hypothesis. . . . Compare
and contrast, cause and effect, all of those things that, it’s just being a
good thinker. You have to do it in every subject.” At the mid-point of the
design-based research experience, Deb reconsidered her understanding about the
connections between reading and science. She now understood that it was useful
to use specific strategies geared to science reading and that there are more
sources than just non-fiction text, such as maps and diagrams. Deb also
recognized when she transferred her knowledge learned through the design
experience to her teaching that some students asked questions during inquiry
that were not answerable. During an interview, Deb reflected on this
realization, “So after the first day, I sat with the group . . . and they
started, and they realized it, I didn’t want to give it to them, they were
like, are you going to be able to find any information on this or do you have
some way that you can conduct an experiment? We had to reformulate their
question.” After the design experience, Deb found that in her teaching the
integration between science and reading was more natural.
Deb found that
design-based research as a professional development tool to be more authentic
than other professional development experiences she has had in the past. “It’s
(the design-based research experience) really practical and we’re asked to do
things for a purpose; it’s authentic. . . . It’s kind of like inside of me
changing what I do. . . learning the content before I expect my student to do
it, thinking about just this idea of inquiry and how can I get my students engaged.
. . . It helped me as a teacher to take notice of things.” She found that other
professional development activities ask teachers to implement isolated lessons
into their curriculum, while a design-based research provided a deeper
understanding of the material and insight into student learning issues which
led to more authentic learning. The element of collaboration incorporated into
design-based learning aided in her ability to articulate science concepts and
to have empathy for the diverse issues the other members of the team faced in
accomplishing the learning goals of the project. “While other people were
presenting their ideas to you, you were developing your own ideas from them. .
. . I’m a lot more empathetic than I was.” The professional development experience also
changed the way Deb develops lesson plans. “Now I couldn’t just pretend like
these things (problems with student learning) weren’t here . . . put a bunch of
nice things on paper that look good on paper. But looking back and reflecting,
that’s pretty much what happened last year.” The iterative nature of the design
process demonstrated to Deb how concepts are built with layers rather than
directly targeted, “in the way you’re building layers instead of just directly
teaching that thing. . . . (in planning my lessons) I did all the different
components and looked at them all and tried to mesh them. And I don’t have day
to day lessons done, but I will. These things build on each other.” The requirement of reading research in the
course demonstrated to Deb other methods of teaching and made her think more
in-depth about the design of current programs she uses in her classroom. The
methods employed in the professional development experience persuaded the
teachers to think as designers and has evoked change in how the reading teacher
currently plans lessons.
Overall,
design-based research as a professional development experience has elicited an
expansion of the reading teacher’s ideas regarding learning in science,
inquiry, reading comprehension, reading resources, and the role of research in
the classroom. She has a deeper understanding of the processes involved in
designing a learning tool and evokes these skills in her own lesson planning.
She compares this professional development experience as more authentic than
previous professional development experiences.
Educational
Importance of Study
The importance of a long-term professional development process is evident. On the basis of a literature review, van Driel, Beijjard & Verloop (2001) conclude that long-term professional development is required because prior reform efforts do not take into account teachers’ existing knowledge, beliefs and attitudes. Deb mentioned in her interviews, online reflections, and in class discussions that learning about geomorphology and inquiry simultaneously required a lot of integration on her part. The integration of her prior understanding and the new information sometimes took the entire year. Her understanding of inquiry progressed from general questioning to building background knowledge by the mid-point of the year, but progressed even further by the end of the second semester. By the end of the research-design experience, Deb understood inquiry to be what scientist do, and admitted it took the full-second semester to reach that point. Teachers are often presented with professional development opportunities that last one day and require no follow-up. This study gives evidence for the importance of long-term professional development experiences in evoking genuine change in cognition regarding content and pedagogy.
Involving teachers
in the process of design helped to explicate how teachers think about their
presentation of material in their classrooms. This study shows one teachers
growth from merely covering topics in a day-to-day fashion to interconnecting
topics through layering and revisiting concepts. Each teacher has his or her
own personal way to implement lessons which is difficult to change if found
ineffective. The design-based research process gives teachers the opportunity
to work together as a design team, helping teachers to expand their repertoire
along with their content knowledge. This type of long-term intense experience
has shown to be effective in expanding the pedagogical knowledge a reading teaching
has regarding science inquiry intersects with reading and in increasing her
content knowledge in geomorphology. Research-based design as professional
develop could provide teachers with the skills needed to constantly think about
their rationale when designing lessons.
Involving teachers as collaborators in design research represents a new direction of research in teacher professional development. Borko (2004) characterizes current professional development for teachers as “woefully inadequate” (p.3). Participation in design research experiences may promote a context for studying teacher practical knowledge as well as provide for a high-quality professional development experience. Aligned with this goal, this study investigates teacher perspectives on the value and nature of participating in design research as a professional development experience and the impact of this experience on teacher practical knowledge of inquiry-based science and reading instruction. The study also sheds light on the process of co-construction of technology-based curriculum between teachers and researchers in the area of science education.
References
Abd-El-Khalick, F., Akerson, V. L. (2004).
Learning as conceptual change: Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary
teachers’ views of the nature of science. Science
Education, 10, 101-143.
Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F. &
Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a reflective explicit activity-based
approach on elementary teachers’ conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37,
295-317.
Alexander, B. K. (2005). Performance
ethnography: The reeinacting the inciting of culture. In N. K. Denzin and Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research.
Ault, Jr., C. R. (1998). Criteria of excellence for geological inquiry: The necessity of ambiguity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 189-212.
Bannan-Ritland, B. (2003). The role
of design in research: The Integrative Learning Design Framework, 32(1), 21-24.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional
development and teacher learning: Mapping the Terrain. Educational Researcher,
33(8), 3-15.
Bybee, R. W. (2004). Scientific
inquiry and science teaching. In L. B. Flick and N. G. Lederman (eds.), Scientific Inquiry and the Nature of Science
(pp. 1-14).
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I. &
Shaw. L. L. (1995). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes.
Hamilton, M.L. & Richardson, V.
(1995). Effects of the culture in two schools on the process and outcomes of
staff development. Elementary School
Journal, 95(4), 367-85.
Haury (1993). Teaching science
through inquiry. Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED)
Heibert, Gallimore & Stigler
(2002). A knowledge base for the teaching profession: What would it look like
and how can we get one? Educational
Researcher, 3(5), 3-15.
Hoogveld, A., Paas, F., Jochems, W.
& van Merrienboer, J.G. (2002). Exploring teachers’ instructional design
practices from a systems design perspective. Instructional Science, 30,
291-305.
Kelly, A.E. (2004). Design research
in education: Yes, but is it methodological?
The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 115-128.
Keys, C.W. (1999). Revitalizing
instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing
to learn in science. Science Education, 83, 115-130.
Keys, C.W. & Bryan,
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative
research design: An interactive approach.
National Research Council (2000).
Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and
learning.
Palincsar, A.S. & Magnusson,
S.J. (2000). The interplay of firsthand and text-based investigations in
science education. The Center for
the Improvement of Early
Shulman, L.S. (1986). Those who
understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 30(7),
3-9.
Sloane, F. & Gorard, S. (2003).
Exploring modeling aspects of design experiments. Educational Researcher,
32(1), 29-31.
Van Driel, J.H., Beijaard, D. &
Verloop, N. (2001). Professional development and reform in science education:
The role of teachers’ practical knowledge.
Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 38(2), 137-158.
Van Zee, E., Lay, D., &
Roberts, D. (2003). Fostering collaborative inquiries by prospective and
practicing elementary and middle school teachers. Paper presented at the annual
meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Learning from
strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study
research: Design and methods.
Zawojewski, J., Chamberlin, M.,
Hjalmarson, M., & Lewis, C. (2004). Designing design studies for
professional development in mathematics education: Studying teachers’
interpretive systems. Manuscript submitted for publication.