Frostburg Document Summer 95 May 31, 1995 MCTP SUMMER 1995 What Do We Believe? What Progress Toward Belief? Conceptual Framework for The Project MCTP Frostburg Manifesto (Genevieve Knight, John Layman) Introduction With the advent of our third summer we are now far enough along the MCTP project time and experience line that we should be able to negotiate and reach a common agreement on an MCTP Conceptual Framework. (What we as project participants know and are able to do) As we complete this summer's work and the remainder of the project, each of us must honor this Conceptual Framework so that the outside world will easily perceive our common approach and commitment. Since the first summer we have spoken of the MCTP as a visionary collaborative project. As we continue the work in our respective institutions, and as we write articles and continue speaking at professional meetings it should always be under the umbrella of the Conceptual Framework statement forged this summer. Role of the Readings There have been a wide array of readings available during the project. We are referring to some of these in our document and providing new readings as well. Each person has an obligation to be familiar with this set of readings so that we can effectively collaborate in attaining a common project Conceptual Framework. Seamlessness and Integration The project has claimed the need for a seamlessness between mathematics and science so participants should have read much of the literature "from the other side," as well as within their own discipline. We have claimed in interest in integration as well. Integration has not been a major element in of some of the introductory courses, but must be realized in our intermediate and capstone courses.The articles shown in the bibliography (with some annotation) and the new articles appended to this document should be read by all. Pre-Frostburg Reading & Review Reaching an MCTP Conceptual Framework agreement should be a major concern during Summer III. Accessing common information is an excellent way of assuring success in this venture. A series of documents will be provided: * A set of "Official Pronouncements" for review. These "official pronouncements" are found in our original NSF Proposal and in the Cooperative Agreement negotiated with the NSF which represents our final formal set of agreements. * Highlights from the NCTM Mathematics Teaching Standards * Highlights from the NRC Draft Science Standards * American Psychological Association Draft Learner- Centered Psychological Principles: Guidelines for School Redesign and Reform. (From the NRC DRAFT Science Standards.) * The MCTP Readings Reference Set Containing a full MCTP reference set with some new entries. Copies of all articles will be available at the Frostburg meeting, and two articles are enclosed for pre-meeting reading. * A DRAFT CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK statement. This will be provided by Genevieve Knight and John Layman. This statement is to be dissected, its RNA and DNA adjusted until it emerges as a statement supported by all stakeholders at the Frosburg meeting. "Official Pronouncements" Guiding Principles (Excerpts from the MCTP NSF Proposal) In designing and developing the course and field experience components of this program, we will be guided by the following basic principles: * Prospective teachers should learn science and mathematics themselves through instruction that models the best practice that they will be expected to employ in their own subsequent teaching careers. * Courses and field experiences to develop understanding and skill in science and mathematics will make every effort to integrate the disciplines so that prospective teachers know and can take advantage of the very fruitful connections between the sciences and mathematics. * The programs of all prospective special teachers will include substantial field experiences that involve them in genuine research activities of business, industrial, or scientific research institutions and informal science and mathematics teaching activities of educational institutions like science centers, zoos, or museums. * The content and teaching methods preparation and field experiences of all teacher candidates will focus on developing their ability to use modern technologies as standard tools for research and problem solving as well as for imaginative classroom instruction. * The courses and field experiences provided for the prospective teachers will have as a central goal preparing those teachers to deal effectively with the broad range of students who are in public schools today. This means special attention to understandings and skills needed to help students from diverse cultural backgrounds succeed in and continue taking science and mathematics. * The "special" teacher candidates will receive their preparation for teaching science and mathematics through courses and field experiences that are carefully integrated. The field experiences will be provided in school settings that have been specially developed as models of science and mathematics teaching and which enroll children of below average and average ability, as well as those in gifted and talented programs. * Finally, the special teachers will be given placement assistance and sustained support during the critical first years of their induction to the teaching profession "Official Pronouncements" From the Cooperative Agreement (1): (limited references to areas germane to summer work) A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2. The overall mission of the Project is to promote reform in the teaching and learning of mathematics and the sciences by improvement in the preparation of science and mathematics K-8 educators. 3. The objectives of the Project are: a. To increase the number of teachers well-prepared in mathematics and science by improving the quality of teacher preparation programs, with attention paid to the entire course of study including changes in course content and method of delivery in science and mathematics classes, the related methods classes, and changes in filed experiences for teachers. In order to effect these changes the following activities are planned: i. To develop a team approach to effect changes in curriculum and courses: in depth planning by groups to include college and university faculty (scientists, mathematicians, science and mathematics educators) and K-8 teachers. ii. To insure that courses at the college and universities and experiences at the teaching internship sites reflect effective, creative strategies for teaching mathematics and science: in- service workshops for mentor teachers: faculty enhancement workshops for university, four-year and two-year college faculty. iii. To ensure that prospective teachers understand the processes of science and mathematics: provide substantial field experiences that involve the student in the research activities of business, industrial or scientific institutions, and in the informal education activities of museums, science centers, and zoos. iv. To strengthen student internships at each teaching site: developing ties between the school districts and partner institutions in the Maryland Collaborative; including teaching site mentor teachers in the planning phases of curriculum and course reform. b. Underrepresented groups 4. Design and implementation of objectives over 5 years. 5. The Project shall be structured to ensure continual dialogue, planning and participation among scientists, science educators, mathematicians, mathematics educators and classroom teachers so as to effect a change in the content and method of delivery of courses and curriculum as concerns the science and mathematics preparation of K-8 teachers. There will be evidence of strong leadership from the Science and Mathematics Departments concerned, working closely with appropriate components of the Colleges of Education and of cooperating school districts. "Official Pronouncements" Maryland Collaborative for Teacher Preparation (Excerpts from the MCTP NSF Proposal) Course Descriptions Introductory Courses From the array of existing introductory courses in mathematics and the traditional branches of physical and life sciences, a set of completely redesigned introductory courses will be designed to emphasize: (1) A limited number of the most important core concepts, principles, and processes; (2) Engagement of students in active construction of mathematical and scientific understanding through genuine problem solving and experimentation as they search for explanations of interesting phenomena; (3) Student reflection on the progress of their personal conceptual understanding; (4) Appropriate use of technology for problem solving and investigative learning. Development of these new introductory science and mathematics courses is prompted by the desire to provide optimal background for prospective teachers. However, we believe that the courses will constitute models of content and instruction that are appropriate for and attractive to a wide range of students. Intermediate Courses If our "special" teachers are to be capable of effective teaching in elementary and middle school mathematics and science and the integration of both subjects, they need knowledge and understanding beyond the level of introductory courses. Thus the development team will design, pilot test, field-test, and evaluate a collection of intermediate level courses in mathematics, life science, and physical science that extend and deepen student knowledge of those domains. These courses will also be part of the core taken by all of our "special" teacher candidates. Capstone Course All "special" teacher candidates will be expected to integrate their content preparation by participation in an interdisciplinary capstone seminar that will engage them in an extended project, working cooperatively with other students to design, conduct, analyze, and report an independent investigation of some complex problem. We expect that the capstone seminar will be led by a team of faculty representing science, mathematics, and education expertise and that, in addition to the scientific features, it will engage students in reflection on structures and methods of the disciplines and their own personal cognitive processes and growth. Pedagogy - Integrated Methods Courses Beginning from the basis of existing science and mathematics teaching methods courses, a set of redesigned courses will be planned that integrate the two content areas and also emphasize the following themes: teaching for personal construction of science and mathematics understanding, using technology for instruction, and teaching students from diverse backgrounds. Development of these courses will require careful consideration of what is common ground in the cognitive bases for learning mathematics and science, how important themes in the content area can be integrated, and what exemplary activities are useful in demonstrating, for example, active learning, use of technology, cooperative learning, and techniques of authentic assessment. While these courses will be designed for our "special" elementary and middle school science and mathematics teachers, it is likely that they can be adapted for all elementary teachers. Coordination of Methods Courses and Experience in Schools The development plan calls for careful selection of field sites, involving outstanding classroom teachers in development of the methods courses and field experiences, and provision of inservice support to mentor teachers. Students will have internship and student teaching experiences in schools that are models of excellent science and mathematics teaching and have diverse student bodies. A key feature of the methods courses will be frequent contact with school practicum experiences, and classroom teachers will take part in the methodology instruction. Science and Mathematics Internships Scientists and mathematicians from several of the outstanding research facilities in the University of Maryland as well as representatives of Maryland businesses and industries have enthusiastically supported the concept of having future teachers engage in meaningful scientific and/or mathematical laboratory and field experiences through internships. A subgroup of the content course development team will work through the project liaison staff to design, arrange, field test, and implement a regular program of such internship experiences that would take each prospective teacher into a field placement for time equivalent to at least one regular university course. These will take the form of summer internships or part-time internships during the academic year. The internship program will be guided by the UM - Baltimore County and College Park campuses, with assistance from faculty members of the Center for Environmental and Estuarine Studies, the Maryland Biotechnology Institute, and the UM Medical SchoolÑall of whom can draw on their extensive background with just such experiences. Informal Science and Mathematics Teaching Internships A great deal of science learning takes place in museums, nature centers, zoos, and parks. But the typical pattern of teaching in those settings is quite different from traditional classroom instruction. We believe that development of flexible and confident teaching styles that engage students in genuine scientific and mathematical investigations will be greatly enhanced by experiences in the exciting variety of informal science education opportunities available in Maryland and the nearby District of Columbia. We plan to develop for our prospective special science and mathematics teachers extended experiences in the informal science education settings near each of the university campuses. Informal School-based Field Experiences The prospective "special" science and mathematics teachers will also participate in informal school-based field experiences, with defined responsibilities for instruction, prior to their extended student teaching field experiences. While the exact timing and nature of these experiences needs to be developed during the project, we expect them to take place in carefully selected schools. Placement criteria will include: (1) the school has a philosophy of teaching and learning is similar to that of the project; and (2) the cooperating teachers have inservice opportunities that enrich their content and methodological backgrounds and provide them with guidance in their role as mentors. Some of the cooperating teachers will come from those who participate in the development of the content or methodology courses. Formal School-based Field Experiences MCTP students will be placed in classrooms of Schools Colleagues who have been participants in the MCTP project or who have attended one of the 1995 or 1996 Mentoring Workshops. Students will experience their field experience as an integral part of their whole program. Placement criteria will include: (1) the school has a philosophy of teaching and learning is similar to that of the project; and (2) the cooperating teachers have inservice opportunities that enrich their content and methodological backgrounds and provide them with guidance in their role as mentors. Some of the cooperating teachers will come from those who participate in the development of the content or methodology courses. Support in the Early Years of Teaching Having passed the threshold requirements of coping with classroom management and basic instruction during student teaching, most newly hired teachers must then assume responsibility for full teaching assignments with very little support in the induction-to-teaching period. Research indicates that, all too commonly, this results in regression to content goals and instructional strategies which fall short of the ambitious models demonstrated in teacher preparation programs and recommended by leadership in science and mathematics professional organizations (Borko et. al., 1992). Our support for beginning teachers will extend beyond the traditional preparation period, through a network of institutional support seminars the provide new teachers with continuing help as they refine their mathematics and science teaching skills. HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE MATHEMATICS TEACHING STANDARDS The Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics rests on two ASSUMPTIONS: * Teachers are key figures in changing the ways in which mathematics is taught and learned in schools. * Such changes require that teachers have the long-term support and adequate resources. Woven into the fabric of the Teaching Standards is an explicit description of how the environment of mathematics classrooms must changes to reflect active learning. There must be major shifts to: * classrooms as mathematical communities * logical and mathematical evidence as verification * mathematical reasoning * conjecturing, inventing, and problem solving * connecting mathematics, its ideas, and its applications The development of teachers of mathematics is a life- long activity generated from the following assumptions: * Teachers are influenced by the teaching they see and experience * Learning to teach is a process of integration * The education of teachers of mathematics is an ongoing process * There are level-specific needs for the education of teachers of mathematics EXCELLENT opening comment: "Prospective teachers must be taught in a manner similar to how they are to teach - by exploring, conjecturing, communicating, reasoning and so forth." In addition, "all teachers need an understanding of both the historical development and current applications of mathematics. Furthermore, they should be familiar with the power of technology." NCTM Curriculum and Evaluation Standards, p.253. Highlights from the NRC DRAFT National Science Standards Goals for Students Students who can: * use scientific principles and processes appropriately in making personal decisions; * experience the richness and excitement of knowing about and understanding the natural world * increase their economic productivity; and * engage intelligently in public discourse and debate about matters of scientific and technological concern Principle: Active Process In learning science, students describe objects and events, ask questions, construct explanations of natural phenomena, test those explanations in many different ways, and communicate their ideas to others. Physical and mental activity. In inquiry oriented investigations students: * interact with teacher and peers * establish connections between their current knowledge and the scientific knowledge found in many sources; * apply science content to new problems; * engage in problem solving, planning, decision making, group discussions; * experience assessments that are consistent with the active approach to learning. There is a tension between the perceived need to include all the topics , vocabulary, and information in textbooks and having students learn scientific knowledge with understanding. Principle: Less is More Goal: Students are to understand the "big ideas" of science necessitating: less vocabulary, fewer topics, reduced memorization of information more emphasis on fundamental knowledge, concepts, processes of science utilizing additional investigations, and greater understanding of science. Science Teaching Standards * What people learn is greatly influenced by how they are taught * The action of teachers are deeply influenced by their vision of science as an enterprise and as a subject to taught and learned in school * Cognitive research indicates that knowledge is actively constructed by a student through a process that is individual and social * Actions of teachers are deeply influenced by their understanding of their students and the relationships they have with them * Teachers are continuous learners inquiring into the understanding of science, their students, and their teaching practice Teaching Standard B - Guiding and Facilitating Learning - Teachers: * focus on and support inquiry * orchestrate discourse * challenge students to take responsibility for their own learning and to work collaboratively * teachers challenge students to accept and share responsibility for their won learning * recognize and respond to student diversity and encourage all students to participate fully * encourage and model the skills of scientific inquiry as well as curiosity, openness to new ideas, and skepticism Teaching Standard D: Designing and Managing the Physical Environment: To provide students with time, space, and the resources needed for leaning science. Teachers provide: * time for extended investigations * flexible and supportive of science inquir * safe working environment * insure the availability of tools, materials, print resources, etc.. * resources outside the schools * engage students in designing the learning environment Teaching Standard E -- Building Learning Communities: That reflect the intellectual rigor of scientific inquiry and the attitudes and social values conducive to science learning. Done by: * displaying and demanding respect for the ideas and skills of all students * giving students a significant voice in decisions about the content and context of their work and require students to take responsibility for the learning of all members of the community. * nurture collaboration among students * structure and facilitate ongoing formal and informal discussion based on a shared understanding of rules of scientific discourse American Psychological Association APPENDIX A of the NRC DRAFT Science Standards November 1995 Draft Learner-Centered Psychological Principles: Guidelines for School Redesign and Reform. The first 10 principles include metacognitive and cognitive, affective, developmental, and social factors. The final two principles address individual differences. These principles were written to encompass all students. Metacognitive and cognitive factors Principle 1 The nature of the learning process. Learning is a natural process of pursuing personally meaningful goals, and it is active, volitional , and internally mediated; it is a process of discovering and constructing meaning from information and experience, filtered through the learner's unique perceptions, thought, and feelings. Principle 2 Goals of the learning process. The learner seeks to create meaningful, coherent representations of knowledge regardless of the quantity and quality of data available. Principle 3 The construction of knowledge. The learner links new information with existing and future- oriented knowledge in uniquely meaningful ways. Principle 4 Higher-order thinking. Higher-order thinking strategies for "thinking about thinking" - for overseeing and monitoring mental operations- facilitate creative and crucial thinking and the development of expertise. Affective factors Principle 5 Motivational influences on learning. The depth and breadth of information processed, and what and how much is learned and remembered, are influenced by (a) self-awareness and beliefs about personal control, competence, and ability; (b) clarity and saliency of personal values, interests, and goals; (c) personal expectations for success or failure; (d) affect, emotion, and general states of mind; and (e) the resulting motivation to learn. Principle 6 Intrinsic motivation to learn. Individuals are naturally curious and enjoy learning, but intense negative cognitions and emotions (e.g., feeling insecure, worrying about failure, being self-conscious or shy, and fearing corporal punishment, ridicule, or stigmatizing labels) thwart this enthusiasm. Principle 7 Characteristics of motivation-enhancing learning tasks. Curiosity, creativity, and higher-order thinking are stimulated by relevant, authentic learning tasks of optimal difficulty and novelty for each student. Developmental factors Principle 8 Developmental constraints and opportunities. Individuals progress through stages of physical, intellectual, emotional, and social development that are a function of unique genetic and environmental factors. Personal and social factors Principle 9 Social and cultural diversity. Learning is facilitated by social interactions and communication with others in flexible, diverse (in age, culture, family background, etc.) and adoptive instructional settings. Principle 10 Social acceptance, self-esteem, and learning. Learning and self-esteem are heightened when individuals are in respectful and caring relationships with others who see their potential, genuinely appreciate their unique talents, and accept them as individuals. Individual differences Principle 11 Individual differences in learning. Although basic principles of learning, motivation, and effective instruction apply to all learners (regardless of ethnicity, race, gender, physical ability, religion, or socioeconomic status), learners have different capabilities and preferences for learning mode and strategies. These differences are a function of environment (what is learned and communicated in different cultures or other social groups) and heredity (what occurs naturally as a function of genes). Principle 12 Cognitive filters. Personal beliefs, thoughts, and understandings resulting from prior learning and interpretations become the individual's basis for constructing reality and interpreting life experience. MCTP Readings Reference Set We can not begin our review of the MCTP agreements nor reach a consensus on an MCTP Conceptual Framework without reference to the readings that should have played a major role in informing our work. A few of these readings are new and copies will be supplied to each area. All participants should have completed readings from both mathematics and science and many of these readings were supplied in past summers. Copies of these references will be available at the Frostburg meeting and at other times through the regional and College Park offices. Mathematics References (Genevieve Knight) Artzt, A.F. and C.M. Newman. How to Use Cooperative Learning in the Mathematics Classroom. Reston, Va.: NCTM, 1990. Case, R. and C. Bereiter. " From Behaviorism to Cognitive Development." Instructional Science 13(1984): 141-158. Cobb, P. and L.P. Steffe. "The Constructivist Researcher as Teacher and Model Builder." Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 14(1983) 83-94. Corfrey, J. "What Constructivism Implies for Teaching." In Constructivist View of the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics, edited by R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, and N. Noddings. Reston, Va.: NCTM, 1980. Cooperative Learning: the magazine for cooperation in education (1993) Cooperative learning and mathematics. 14(1). Santa Cruz, CA:IASCE. Davidson, N. Cooperative Learning in Mathematics: A Handbook for Teachers. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1990. Davis, R.B. Learning Mathematics: The Cognitive Science Approach to Mathematics Education. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex, 1984. Feldt, C. C., "Becoming a Teachers of Mathematics: A Constructive, Interactive Process", The Mathematics Teacher, Vol. 86, No. 5, May 1993. Gadanidis, G., "Deconstructing Constructivism", In The Mathematics Teacher, Vol. 87., No. 2, February 1994, 91-96. Golden, G. A. "Epistemology, Constructivism, and Discovery." In Constructivist View of the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics, edited by R. B. Davis, C. A. Maher, and N. Noddings. Reston, Va.: NCTM,1980. Hanson, J. R., "MEtacognition: Strategies for Fourthought", In Teaching and Problem Solving, Harmin, M. Inspiring Active Learning: A Handbook for Teachers. Alexandria, Va.: ASCD, 1994. Hiebert, J.,Ed. Conceptual and Procedural Knowledge: The Case of Mathematics. Hillisdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1986. Noddings, N., "Constructivism in Mathematics Education," in Constructivist View of the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Monograph No 4, 1990, 7-18. NCTM, Constructivist View of the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Monograph No 4, 1990. NCTM Curriculum and Evaluation Standards For School Mathematics, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA, March 1989. NCTM, Professional Standards for Teaching Mathematics, National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Reston, VA, March 1991. Richardson, V., "Constructivist Teaching: Theory and Practice", Teaching Thinking & Problem Solving, Vol. 16, Issue 6, 1994 Ross, R. and R. Kurtz. "Making Manipulatives Work: A Strategy for Success." Arithmetic Teacher, January 1993, 254-257. Simon, M.A. "Reconstructing Mathematics Pedagogy From a Constructivist Perspective."Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 26(1995) 114-145. Sowell,E.J. "Effects of Manipulative Materials in Mathematics Instruction." Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 20(1989) 498-505. Steffe, L. P., "On The Knowledge of Mathematics Teachers," in Constructivist View of the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, Monograph No 4, 1990, 167-184. Science (John Layman) Andersson, B. "Some aspects of children's understanding of boiling point". Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics, ed. W. F. Archenhold Driver R. H., Orton, A., and Wood-Roginsion C. Leeds: University of Leeds Printing Service, 1979. Arons, A. B. A Guide To Introductory Physics Teaching. First ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1990. Arons, A. B. "Guiding Insight and Inquiry in the Introductory Physics Laboaratory." The Physics Teacher 31 (May 1993): 278- 282. Driver, R. and T. Russell. An investigation of ideas of heat, temperature and change of state of children aged between 8 and 14 years. Leeds: University of Leeds and Chelsea College London, 1982. Driver, R. "Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies." In International Workshop on Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, edited by R. Duit, F. Goldberg, and H. Niedderer, IPN/Institute for Science Education, 403, 1992. Driver, R. and Bell, B., (1986). Students' Thinking and the Learning of Science: A Constructivist View. School Science Review, 67(240), March 1986: 443-456. Garfalo, F., and LoPresti, V., "Evolution of an Integrated College Freshman Curriculum," Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 70, No. 5, May 1993, 352-359. Greeno, J. G., "Mathematical and Scientific Thinking in Classrooms and Other Situations," Enhancing Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics, Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 39-61,1992. Gunstone, R. F. "Constructivism and metacognition: Theoretical issues and classroom studies." In Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, edited by R. Duit, F. Goldberg, and H. Niedderer, IPN/Institute for Science Education , 129-140, 1992. Halpern, D. F Ed., Enhancing Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics, Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1992. Halpern, D., "A Cognitive Approach to Improving Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics," Enhancing Thinking Skills in the Sciences and Mathematics, Laurence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1-14, 1992., Hewson, P. & Hewson, M. "The status of students' conceptions" In Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies edited by R. Duit, F. Goldberg, and H. Niedderer, IPN/Institute for Science Education , 59-73, 1992. Hewson, P. W., & Hewson, M. G., "Analysis and Use of a Task for Identifying Conceptions of Teaching Science." Journal of Education for Teaching, Vol 15, No. 3, 1989 Hewson, P. W., and Thorley, N. R., "The Conditions of Conceptual Change in the Classroom," International Journal of Science Education, Vol. 11, Special Issue, 1989, 541- 553. McDermott, L. C.& Shaffer, P. S. "Research as a guide for curriculum development: An example from introductory electricity. Part II: Design of instructional strategies". American Journal of Physics 60(11), 1003 - 1013 (1992). Mestre, J., "Why Should Mathematics and Science Teachers be Interested in Cognitive Research Findings?", Academic Connections, College Bord Publication, Summer 1987, 3-11. National Research Council, Draft National Science Standards, National Academy of Science, November 1995. Needham, R. and P. Hill. "Teaching strategies for developing understanding in science." In Center for Studies in Science and Mathematics Education, 1-39. The University of Leeds, 1987. Operation Physics, ."Operation Physics - Heat." . American Institute of Physics, One Physics Ellipse, College Park, MD 20740, 1990 Pfundt, H. & Duit, R. (eds) (1991) "Bibliography: Students' Alternative Frameworks and Science Education". IPN/Institute for Science Education, University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany . (an extensive bibliography accessable through John Layman) Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., and Gertzog, W. A., "Accommodation of a Scientific Conception: Toward a Theory of Conceptual Change," Science Education, Vol. 66, 1982, 211-227. Resnick, L. B. Education and Learning to Think. National Acadamy Press, 1987. Scott, P. H., H. M. Asoko, and R. H. Driver. "Teaching for conceptual change: A review of strategies." In Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies, edited by R. Duit, F. Goldberg, and H. Niedderer, IPN/Institute for Science Education, 310-329, 1992. Scott, P. H., Dayson, T., and Gater, S., "A Constructivist View of Learning and Teaching in Science," Childrens Learning in Science Project, Center for Studies in Mathematics and Science, The University of Leeds, June 1987, 1-24. Tiberghien, A., ed. "Modes and conditions of learning. An Example: The learning of some aspects of the concepts of heat". Cognitive Development Research in Science and Mathematics. Leeds: University of Leeds Printing Service, 1980. Tobias, S. They're Not Dumb, They're Different. Research Corporation, Tuscon, AZ, 1990. von Glassersfeld, E., "A Constructivist's View of Learning and Teaching," source unknown at this time. Watson, B., & Konicek, R., "Teaching for Conceptual Change: Confronting Children's Experience." Phi Beta Kappan, May 1990, 681-685 Neutral References Brandt, R., "On Research on Teaching: A Conversation with Lee Shulman," Educational Leadership, April 1992, 14-19. Brooks, J. G., and Brooks, M. G., In Search of Understanding, The Case for Constructivist Classrooms, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA. 1993. Elmore, R. F., "Why Restructering Alone Won't Improve Teaching," Educational Leadership, April 1992, 44-48. Leinhardt, G., "What Research on Learning Tells Us About Teaching," Educational Leadership, April 1992, 20-25. Rosenshine, B., and Meister, C., "The Use of Scaffolds for Teaching HIgher -Level Cognitive Strategies," Educational Leadership, April 1992, 26-33. (1) The final agreement signed with the NSF that sets forth the most formal details of the operation and expected accomplishments of the project.