Advertisement

Epilogue of Pacific Crystal—Lessons Learned About Science, Mathematics, and Technology Literacy, Teaching and Learning

Chapter

Abstract

Pacific CRYSTAL involved a diverse collection of investigators and projects within the first-ever Centres for Research into Youth, Science Teaching and Learning (CRYSTAL) funded by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC). Being a new endeavour for the funding agency and many of the researchers—in terms of the scope and size of the project as well as the breadth of disciplines and cultures involved with the CRYSTAL program—meant that refinements and revisions to the goals, policy interpretations, procedures, organization, and operations were inerrable.

Keywords

Professional Development Science Teacher Pedagogical Content Knowledge Environmental Education Teacher Education Program 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Banilower, E. R., Boyd, S. E., Pasley, J. D., & Weiss, I. R. (2006). Lessons from a decade of mathematics and science reform: A capstone report for the local systemic change through teacher enhancement initiative. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Brickhouse, N. W. (2006). Celebrating 90 years of science education: Reflections on the gold standard and ways of promoting good research [Editorial]. Science Education, 90(1), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carruthers, S. (2010). Grasping graphs. Master’s thesis, University of Victoria. Retrieved from http://www.hdl.handle.net/1828/3193
  4. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes, K to 12 Pan-Canadian protocol for collaboration on school curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.publications.cmec.ca/science/framework/
  5. Czerniak, C. M., Beltyukova, S., Struble, J., Haney, J. J., & Lumpe, A. T. (2005). Do you see what I see? The relationship between a professional development model and student achievement. In R. E. Yager (Ed.), Exemplary science in grades 5–8: Standards-based success stories (pp. 13–44). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.Google Scholar
  6. de Oliveira Jayme, B. (2008). Elementary students’ and teachers’ interactions during out-of-classroom activities. Master’s thesis, University of Victoria. Retrieved from http://www.hdl.handle.net/1828/1027
  7. Florence, M. K., & Yore, L. D. (2004). Learning to write like a scientist: Coauthoring as an enculturation task. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(6), 637–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., et al. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 922–939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gunion, K. (2010). FUNdamentals of CS: Designing and evaluating computer science activities for kids. Master’s thesis, University of Victoria. Retrieved from http://www.hdl.handle.net/1828/2750
  10. Hand, B., Yore, L. D., Jagger, S., & Prain, V. (2010). Connecting research in science literacy and classroom practice: A review of science teaching journals in Australia, the UK, and the United States, 1998–2008. Studies in Science Education, 46(1), 45–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hill, C., Corbett, C., & St. Rose, A. (2010). Why so few? Women in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Washington, DC: AAUW.Google Scholar
  12. Hsu, P.-L. (2008). Understanding high school students’ science internship: At the intersection of secondary school science and university science. Doctoral dissertation, University of Victoria. Retrieved from http://www.hdl.handle.net/1828/1096
  13. Hughes, J. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learning experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2), 277–302.Google Scholar
  14. Jagger, S. (2009). The influence of participation in a community mapping project on grade four students’ environmental worldviews. Master’s thesis, University of Victoria. Retrieved from http://www.hdl.handle.net/1828/2816
  15. Jagger, S., & Yore, L. D. (2010). Evidence-based practice in science literacy for all: A case study of 1998–2009 NSTA articles as self-directed professional development [Manuscript submitted for publication].Google Scholar
  16. Johnson, C. C., Fargo, J., & Kahle, J. B. (2010). The cumulative and residual impact of a systemic reform program on teacher change and student learning of science. School Science and Mathematics, 110(3), 144–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Love, K. (2009). Literacy pedagogical content knowledge in secondary teacher education: Reflecting on oral language and learning across the disciplines. Language and Education, 23(6), 541–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ma, L. (2010). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics: Teachers’ understanding of fundamental mathematics in China and the United States (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. Marks, R. (1990). Pedagogical content knowledge: From a mathematical case to a modified conception. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Milford, T. M., Jagger, S., Yore, L. D., & Anderson, J. O. (2010). National Influences on science education reform in Canada. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 10(4), 370–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Revak, M., & Kuerbis, P. J. (2008, January). The link from professional development to K-6 student achievement in science, math, and literacy. Paper presented at the annual international meeting of the Association for Science Teacher Education, St. Louis, MO, USA.Google Scholar
  23. Roberts, D. A. (2007). Scientific literacy/science literacy. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 729–780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Romance, N. R., & Vitale, M. R. (1992). A curriculum strategy that expands time for in-depth elementary science instruction by using science-based reading strategies: Effects of a year-long study in grade four. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(6), 545–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shelley, M. C., II. (2009). Speaking truth to power with powerful results: Impacting public awareness and public policy. In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 443–466). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.Google Scholar
  27. Shymansky, J. A., Yore, L. D., & Anderson, J. O. (2004). Impact of a school district’s science reform effort on the achievement and attitudes of third- and fourth-grade students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(8), 771–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Tippett, C. D. (in progress). Exploring middle school students’ representational competence in science: Development and verification of a framework for learning with visual representations. Doctoral dissertation, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
  29. United States National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  30. United States National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits (P. Bell, B. Lewenstein, A. W. Shouse, & M. A. Feder, Eds.). Board on Science Education, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  31. United States National Research Council. (2010). A framework for science education (H. Quinn & H. A. Schweingruber, Eds.). [Preliminary public draft]. Board on Science Education, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  32. van Driel, J. H., Verloop, N., & de Vos, W. (1998). Developing science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(6), 673–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Veal, W. R., & MaKinster, J. G. (1998). Pedagogical content knowledge taxonomies. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(4).Google Scholar
  34. Western and Northern Canadian Protocol for Collaboration in Education. (2006). The common curriculum framework for K–9 mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.wncp.ca/english/subjectarea/mathematics/ccf.aspx
  35. Willers, M. (2005). Enriched mathematics 10/11: Focus on the NCTM process standards. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.Google Scholar
  36. Yore, L. D., Kottová, A., & Jagger, S. (2010). Review of the book Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits by P. Bell, B. Lewenstein, A. W. Shouse, & M. A. Feder (Eds.). International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 5(3), 377–382.Google Scholar
  37. Yore, L. D., Shelley, M. C., II, & Hand, B. (2009). Reflections on beyond the Gold Standards era and ways of promoting compelling arguments about science literacy for all. In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 623–649). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Curriculum and InstructionnUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada
  2. 2.School of Earth and Ocean SciencesUniversity of VictoriaVictoriaCanada

Personalised recommendations