Advertisement

Pacific Crystal Centre For Science, Mathematics, And Technology Literacy

Lessons Learned
Chapter
  • 443 Downloads

Abstract

The Centres for Research in Youth, Science Teaching and Learning (CRYSTAL; Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada [NSERC], 2009) were funded by NSERC as a 5-year pilot project (2005–2010) to foster science and mathematics education research and development (R&D). These five Canadian centres (see Notes) focused on science, mathematics, and technology (SMT), including engineering and computer science, in response to the widespread and growing recognition that the SMT literacies are vital skills in the 21st century economy. CRYSTAL has provided a forum for the many partners who share an interest in developing and enhancing the skills of and resources available to teachers, nongovernmental agencies, and public awareness educators and in enriching the SMT preparation of young Canadians.

Keywords

Professional Learning Mathematics Education Research Informal Environment Leadership Capacity Instructional Resource 
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. Adey, P. S., & Shayer, M. (1990). Accelerating the development of formal thinking in middle and high school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3), 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  3. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, J. O., Chiu, M.-H., & Yore, L. D. (2010). First cycle of PISA (2000–2006)—International perspectives on successes and challenges: Research and policy directions [Special issue]. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(3), 373–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  6. Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W.H. Freeman.Google Scholar
  7. Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (1998a). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Black, P. J., & Wiliam, D. (1998b). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. London, England: King’s College.Google Scholar
  9. Cohn, D. (2006). Jumping into the political fray: Academics and policy-making. Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP) Matters, 7(3), 8–36. Retrieved from http://www.irpp.org/pm/archive/pmvol7no3.pdf
  10. 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/
  11. de Abreu, G. (2002). Mathematics learning in out-of-school contexts: A cultural psychology perspective. In L. D. English (Ed.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp. 323–353). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  12. Enochs, L. G., & Riggs, I. M. (1990). Further development of an elementary science teaching efficacy belief instrument: A preservice elementary scale. School Science and Mathematics, 90(8), 694–706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Enochs, L. G., Smith, P. L., & Huinker, D. (2000). Establishing factorial validity of the mathematics teaching efficacy beliefs instrument. School Science and Mathematics, 100(4), 194–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fensham, P. J. (2008). Science education policy-making: Eleven emerging issues. Paris, France: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  15. Ford, C. L., Yore, L. D., & Anthony, R. J. (1997, March). Reforms, visions, and standards: A cross-curricular view from an elementary school perspective. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Oak Brook, IL, USA. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED406168)Google Scholar
  16. Hand, B. (Ed.). (2007). Science inquiry, argument and language: A case for the science writing heuristic. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.Google Scholar
  17. 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
  18. Hayward, D. V., & Phillips, L. M. (2009). Considering research quality and applicability through the eyes of stakeholders. In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 139–148). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  19. Henig, J. R. (2008). The evolving relationship between researchers and public policy. Phi Delta Kappan, 89(5), 357–360.Google Scholar
  20. Henriques, L. (1997). A study to define and verify a model of interactive-constructive elementary school science teaching. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA.Google Scholar
  21. International Technology Education Association. (2007). Standards for technological literacy: Content for the study of technology (3rd ed.). Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  22. 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
  23. Koballa, T. R., Jr., & Glynn, S. M. (2007). Attitudinal and motivational constructs in science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 75–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  24. Lerman, S. (2010, January 26). Looking through theories in mathematics education research. [Svend Pederson Award Lecture]. University of Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  25. 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
  26. Millar, R., & Osborne, J. (2009). Research and practice: A complex relationship? In M. C. Shelley II, L. D. Yore, & B. Hand (Eds.), Quality research in literacy and science education: International perspectives and gold standards (pp. 41–61). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  27. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada. (2009). Centres for research in youth, science teaching and learning pilot program. Retrieved from http://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/Promoter-Promotion/CRYSTAL-CREAS_eng.asp
  28. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (n.d.). Homepage. Retrieved from http://www.pisa.oecd.org
  29. Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections. London, England: Nuffield Foundation.Google Scholar
  30. Rees, W. E. (2008, April-May). Science, cognition and public policy. Academic Matters, 9–12.Google Scholar
  31. Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henriksson, H., & Hemmo, V. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Luxembourg, Belgium: European Commission.Google Scholar
  32. Rowe, M. B. (1974a). Relation of wait-time and rewards to the development of language, logic, and fate control: Part II - Rewards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11(4), 291–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rowe, M. B. (1974b). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic, and fate control: Part I - Wait-time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11(2), 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 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
  35. Shymansky, J. A., Yore, L. D., Annetta, L. A., & Everett, S. A. (2008). Missouri-Iowa science cooperative (Science Co-op): Rural schools-urban universities collaborative project. The Rural Educator, 29(2), 1–3.Google Scholar
  36. Society for Research in Child Development. (n.d.). Homepage. Retrieved from http://www.srcd.org/
  37. United States National Academy of Engineering. (2010). Standards for K–12 engineering education? Committee on Standards for K–12 Engineering Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  38. United States National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.Google Scholar
  39. United States National Research Council. (1996). The national science education standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  40. United States National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school—Expanded edition (J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown, & R. R. Cocking, Eds.). Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning. Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  41. United States National Research Council. (2005a). How students learn: Mathematics in the classroom. Committee on How people learn (M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford, Eds.). A Targeted Report for Teachers. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  42. United States National Research Council. (2005b). How students learn: Science in the classroom (M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford, Eds.). Committee on How people learn. A Targeted Report for Teachers. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  43. United States National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8 (R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, & A. W. Shouse, Eds.). Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten through Eighth Grade. Board on Science Education, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  44. 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.). Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments. Board on Science Education, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  45. 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
  46. Yore, L. D. (2003). Quality science and mathematics education research: Considerations of argument, evidence and generalizability [Guest editorial]. School Science and Mathematics, 103(1), 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yore, L. D., Pimm, D., & Tuan, H.-L. (Eds.). (2007). Language—An end and a means to mathematical literacy and scientific literacy [Special issue]. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 5(4), 557–769.Google Scholar
  48. Yore, L. D., & Treagust, D. F. (2006). Current realities and future possibilities: Language and science literacy—empowering research and informing instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 28(2/3), 291–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2011

Authors and Affiliations

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

Personalised recommendations