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.