Guidelines for effective elementary science teacher inservice education

Ansari, S. I. K. (1978). An analysis of the perceptions and attitudes of teachers, principals, and administrators, regarding the effectiveness of inservice education programs, in grades K-6, in five selected county school systems in the state of Tennessee (Doctoral Dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, 1978).Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 4610A-4611A. (University Microfilms No. 7902486, 101)

Bethel, L. J. (1989). Science teacher preparation and professional development. In D. Holdzkom & P. Lutz (Eds.),Research within reach: A research guided response to the concerns of educators (pp. 143–157). Washington, DC: Appalachia Educational Laboratory, Inc., National Institute of Education, and National Science Teachers Association.

Bonnstetter, R. J., Penick, J. E., & Yager, R. E. (1983).Teachers in exemplary programs: How do they compare. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.

Bonnstetter, R. J., & Yager, R. E. (1985, May). What research says: A profile of excellence: Teachers of exemplary programs in elementary science.Science and Children, 22, 45–46.

Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993).The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Calabrese, R. L. (1989). The principal’s role in community building through staff development.Journal of Staff Development, 10(1), 18–21.

Carleton, R. (1961). Editorial.The Science Teacher, 28(7), 4.

Craig, G. S. (1932). The program of science in the elementary school. In G. M. Whipple (Ed.),The thirty-first yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education: A program for teaching science (pp. 133–162). Bloomington, IL: Public School Publishing Company.

Crawley, F. E. (1987). the continuing education of science teachers: An essential ingredient in educational reform. In J. P. Barufaldi (Ed.),Improving preservice/inservice science teacher education: Future perspectives (pp. 131–160). Columbus, OH: Association for the Education of Teachers in Science and SMEAC Information Reference Center.

Curtis, F. D. (1932). Some contributions of educational research to the solution of teaching problems in science classrooms. In G. M. Whipple (Ed.),The thirty-first yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education: A program for teaching science (pp. 77–90). Bloomington, IL: Public School Publishing Company.

Dass, P. D. (1999). Evaluation of a district-wide inservice professional development program for teaching science: Challenges faced and lessons learned.Electronic Journal of Science Education,4(4). Available online: <unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/ejsev4n4.html>.

Dawani, K. S. (1972). A study of the cooperative development of an in-service education program for the Churchill Area School District (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1972).Dissertation Abstracts International, 33, 6763A–6764A. (University Microfilms No. 73-13, 231, 113)

Driver, R., & Oldham, V. (1986). A constructivist approach to curriculum development in science.Studies in Science Education, 13, 105–122.

Ellis, B. J. (1975). A study of in-service education programs in the New Hampshire Public Schools (Doctoral Dissertation, Boston University School of Education, 1975).Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 5718A.

Evans, T. P. (1986). Guidelines for effective science teacher inservice education programs: Perspectives from research. In B. S. Spector (Ed.),A guide to inservice science teacher education: Research into practice (pp. 13–56). Columbus, OH: Association for the Education of Teachers in Science and SMEAC Information Reference Center.

Fraser-Abder, P. (1992). How can teacher education change the downhill trend of science education?Journal of Science Teacher Education, 3(1), 21–26

Hall, G. E. (1992). The local educational change process and policy implementation.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(8), 877–904.

Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987).Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany: SUNY Press.

Haney, J. J., & Lumpe, A. T. (1995). A teacher professional development framework guided by reform policies, teachers’ needs, and research.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 6(4), 187–196.

Henry, N. B. (Ed.). (1947).The forty-sixth yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education: Science education in American schools. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Howe, A. C., & Stubbs, H. S. (1997). Empowering science teachers: A model for professional development.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8(3), 167–182.

Hussey, N. L. (1989). The elementary principal as manager and facilitator.Journal of Staff Development, 10(1), 22–25.

Hutson, H. M. (1981). Inservice best practices: The learning of general education.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 14(3), 1–10.

Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (1983).Power in staff development through research on training. Reston, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

King, J. C., Hayes, P. C., & Newman, I. (1977). Some requirements for successful inservice education.Phi Delta Kappan, 58(9), 686–687.

Lacey, A. L. (1966).Guide to science teaching for secondary schools. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Luke, R. A. (1980).Teacher-centered in-service education: Planning and products. Washington, DC: National Education Association.

Lumpe, A. T., Czerniak, C. M., & Haney, J. J. (1999). Supporting the implementation of inquiry-based elementary science programs: Setting the stage for local reform.Electronic Journal of Science Education,3(4). Available online: <unr.edu/homepage/crowther/ejse/ejsev3n4.html>.

Marcuccio, P. (1987, January). Forty-five years of elementary school science: A guided tour.Science and Children, 24, 12–14.

Mechling, K. R., & Oliver, D. L. (1983).What research says about elementary school science. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.

Mitchell, E. R. (1978). A comparison of two approaches to inservice training and subsequent teaching behavior and attitudes (Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, 1978).Dissertation Abstracts International, 40, 806A. (University Microfilms No. 7917387, 107)

Moore, J. R. (1988). Guidelines concerning adult learning.Journal of Staff Development, 9(3), 2–5.

National Research Council (NRC). 1996).National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Neatherly, M. F., Glynn, J., & Long, K. (1998). Professional development for elementary teachers: A collaborative effort involving a university, a forest learning center, industry, and state agencies.Electronic Journal of Science Education,2(4). Available online: <unr.edu/homepage/jcannon/ejse/ejsev2n4.html>.

O’Brien, T. (1992). Science inservice workshops that work for elementary teachers.School Science and Mathematics, 92(8), 422–426.

Orlich, D. C. (1986). A paradigm for staff development planning. In B. S. Spector (Ed.),A guide to inservice science teacher education: Research into practice (pp. 73–93). Columbus, OH: Association for the Education of Teachers in Science and SMEAC Information Reference Center.

Prather, J. P. (1993a). A model for inservice science teachers’ enhancement through collaboration of rural elementary schools and universities. In P. A. Rubba, L. M. Campbell, & T. M. Dana (Eds.),Excellence in educating teachers of science (pp. 131–150). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.

Prather, J. P. (1993b). Reform revisited: The trend toward constructivist learning.Journal of Elementary Science Education, 5(2), 52–70.

Pratt, H. (1981). Science education in the elementary school. In N. C. Harms & R. E. Yager (Eds.),What research says to the science teacher (pp. 73–93). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.

Purifoy, T. J. (1981). In-service follow-up: Impact on the teaching behavior of the classroom teacher (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Austin, 1980).Dissertation Abstract International, 41, 4684A. (University Microfilms No. 8109228, 152)

Ryan, R. L. (1987).The complete inservice staff development program. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Schiller, B. T. (1979). Variables influencing the effectiveness of inservice education for educators (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Michigan, 1975).Dissertation Abstracts International, 39, 60A-61A. (University Microfilsm No. 77-14, 752, 302)

Shroyer, M. G., Wright, E. L., & Ramey-Gassert, L. (1996). An innovative model for collaborative reform in elementary school science teaching.Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7(3), 151–168.

Timms, A. F. (1975). An analysis of classroom teachers’ translations of the ideas gained from in-service experiences into classroom procedures (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1975).Dissertation Abstracts International, 36, 2151A-2152A. (University Microfilms No. 75-22, 469, 243)

Tobin, K., Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994). Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.),Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 45–93). New York: Macmillian Publishing Company.

Underhill, O. E. (1941).The origins and development of elementary-school science. Chicago: Scott, Foresman, and Company.

Weiss, I. R. (1978).Report of the 1977 national survey of science, mathematics, and social studies education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Wilen, W. W., & Kindsvatter, R. (1978).Implications of research for effective inservice education. Austin: Austin Science Education Center, Texas University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 021 807)

Yager, R. E. (1992). Viewpoint: What we did not learn from the 60s about science curriculum reform.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(8), 905–910.

Zigarmi, P., Betz, L., & Jensen, D. (1977). Teachers’ preferences in and perceptions of in-service education.Educational Leadership, 34(7), 545–551.