The impact of a professional development model on middle school science teachers' efficacy and implementation of inquiry

References

• Akerson, V., Cullen, T., & Hanson, D. (2009). Fostering a community of practice through a professional development program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 1090–1113. doi:10.1002/tea.20303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amanti, K. (2000). Constructing scientific models in middle school. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiry into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 316–330). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. D. (2007). Inquiry as an organizing theme for science curricula. In: S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 807–830). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Ashton, P. T. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A motivational paradigm for effective teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 35(5), 28–32. doi:10.1177/002248718403500507
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W.H. Freeman and Company.
   Google Scholar
• Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., & Granger, E. (2009). No silver bullet for inquiry: Making sense of teacher change following an inquiry-based research experience for teachers. Science Education, 93, 322–360. doi:10.1002/sce.20298
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., Osborne, J., Sampson, V., Annetta, L., & Granger, E. (2010). Is inquiry possible in light of accountability? A quantitative comparison of the relative effectiveness of guided inquiry and verification laboratory instruction. Science Education, 94, 577–616. doi:10.1002/sce.20390
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & DuGuid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. doi:10.3102/0013189X018001032
   Google Scholar
• Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013a). Inquiry-based instruction and teaching about nature of science: Are they happening? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 497–526. doi: 10.1007/s10972-012-9314-z
   Google Scholar
• Capps, D. K., & Crawford, B. A. (2013b). Inquiry-based professional development: What does it take to support teachers in learning about inquiry and nature of science? International Journal of Science Education, 35, 1947–1978. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2012.760209
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Capps, D. K., Crawford, B. A., & Constas, M. A. (2012). A review of empirical literature on inquiry professional development: Alignment with best practices and a critique of the findings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 291–318. doi:10.1007/s10972-012-9275-2
   Google Scholar
• Dira-Smolleck, L. A. (2004). The development and validation of an instrument to measure preservice teachers’ self-efficacy in regards to the teaching of science as inquiry (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University.
   Google Scholar
• Enochs, L. G., Scharmann, L. C., & Riggs, I. M. (1995). The relationship of pupil control to preservice elementary science teacher self-efficacy and outcome expectancy. Science Education, 79, 63–75. doi:10.1002/sce.3730790105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Research, 38, 47–65. doi: 10.1080/0013188960380104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feldman, A. (2000). Decision making in the practical domain: A model of practical conceptual change. Science Education, 84, 606–623. doi:10.1002/1098-237X(200009)84:5<606::AID-SCE4>3.0.CO;2-R
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishman, B., Marx, R., Best, S., & Revital, T. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19, 643–658. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00059-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goddard, R., Hoy, W., & Hoy, A. (2000). Collective teacher efficacy: Its meaning, measure, and impact on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 479–507. doi:10.3102/00028312037002479
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 5–17.
   Google Scholar
• Gregoire, M. (2003). Is it a challenge or a threat? A dual-process model of teachers’ cognition and appraisal processes during conceptual change. Educational Psychology Review, 15, 147–179. doi:10.1023/A:1023477131081
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15, 5–12. doi:10.3102/0013189X015005005
   Google Scholar
• Henson, R. A. (2001). The effects of participation in teacher research on teacher efficacy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 819–836. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00033-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hessling, R., Traxel, N., & Schmidt, T. (2004). Ceiling effect. In M. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman, & T. Liao (Eds.), Encyclopedia of social science research methods (pp. 106–107). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Horizon Research, Inc. (2006). Local systemic change through teacher enhancement questionnaire. Retrieved from http://www.horizon-research.com/local-systemic-change-through-teacher-enhancement-science-6-12-teacher-questionnaire/
   Google Scholar
• Hoy, A. W., & Spero, R. B. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 343–356. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingvarson, L., Meiers, M. & Beavis, A. (2005). Factors affecting the impact of professional development programs on teachers’ knowledge, practice, student outcomes & efficacy. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(10). Retrieved July 28, 2016, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n10/
   Google Scholar
• Klassen, R. M., Tze, V. M. C., Betts, S. M., & Gordon, K. A. (2010). Teacher efficacy research 1998-2009: Signs of progress or unfulfilled promise? Educational Psychology Review, 23, 21–43. doi: 10.1007/s10648-010-9141-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleine, K., Brown, B., Harte, B., Hilson, A., Malone, D., & Moller, K. (2002). Examining inquiry. Principal Leadership, 3(3), 36–39.
   Google Scholar
• Knoblauch, D., & Woolfolk Hoy, A. (2008). ‘Maybe I can teach those kids.’ The influence of contextual factors on student teachers’ efficacy beliefs. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 166–179. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2007.05.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. Mistrell, & e. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 283–315). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
   Google Scholar
• Kraska, M. (2010). Repeated measures design. In N. Salkind (Eds.), Encyclopedia of research design. (pp. 1244–1248). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Lakshmanan, A., Heath, B., Perlmutter, A., & Elder, M. (2011). The impact of science content and professional learning communities on science teaching efficacy and standards-based instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 534–551. doi:10.1002/tea.20404
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lotter, C., Harwood, H., & Bonner, J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on teachers’ use of inquiry teaching practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9): 1318–1347. doi: 10.1002/tea.20191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lotter, C., Thompson, S., Dickenson, T., Smiley, W., Bilue, G., & Rea, M. (in press). The impact of a practice-teaching professional development model on teachers’ inquiry instruction and inquiryefficacy beliefs. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1–19. doi:10.1007/s10763-016-9779-x
   Google Scholar
• Lotter, C., Yow, J., & Peters, T. (2014). Building a community of practice around inquiry instruction through a professional development program. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 12, 1–23. doi: 07/s10763-012-9391-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loughran, J. (2014). Developing understandings of practice: Science teacher learning. In N. G. Lederman & S. K. Abell (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (Vol. II, pp. 811–829). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 517–534. doi:10.1080/09500690121307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lumpe, A., Czerniak, C., Haney, J., & Beltyukova, S. (2012). Beliefs about teaching science: The relationship between elementary teachers’ participation in professional development and student achievement. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 153–166. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2010.551222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magnusson, S., Krajick, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge (pp. 95–132). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Marco-Bujosa, L. M., McNeill, K. L., González-Howard, M., & Loper, S. (2016). An exploration of teacher learning from an educative reform-oriented science curriculum: Case studies of teacher curriculum use. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, doi:10.1002/tea.21340
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, J. C. (2013, March). Giving up before the finish line: Teacher transformation resulting in improved student achievement takes time. Research paper presentation at National Association for Research in Science Teaching Conference, Puerto Rico.
   Google Scholar
• Marshall, J. C., Smart, J., & Horton, R. (2010). The design and validation of EQUIP: An instrument to assess inquiry-based instruction. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(2), 299–321. doi:10.1007/s10763-009-9174-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McNeil, K., & Krajcik, J. S. (2008). Inquiry and scientific explanations: Helping students use evidence and reasoning. In J. A. Luft, R. L. Bell, & J. Gess-Newsome (Eds.), Science as inquiry in the secondary setting. Arlington: NSTA press.
   Google Scholar
• Metz, K. E. (2000). Young children’s inquiry in biology: Building the knowledge bases to empower independent inquiry. In J. Minstrell, & E. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry in science learning and teaching (pp. 371–404). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, I., Ridenour, C., Newman, C., & DeMarco, G. M. P. (2003). A typology of research purposes and its relationship to mixed methods. In A. Tashakkori, & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 167–188). London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, T. (1992). Science in-service workshops that work for elementary teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 92(8), 422–426. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.1992.tb15622.x
   Google Scholar
• Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543–578. doi:10.3102/00346543066004543
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmer, D. (2011). Sources of efficacy information in an inservice program for elementary teachers. Science Education, 95, 577–600. doi:10.1002/sce.20434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15. doi: 10.3102/0013189X029001004
   Google Scholar
• Raudenbush, S. W. (1993). Hierarchical linear models as generalizations of certain common experimental designs. In L. Edwards (Eds.), Applied analysis of variance in behavioral science (pp. 459–496). New York, NY: Marcel Dekker.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula (Ed.), The handbook of research in teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 102–119). New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Riggs, I., & Enochs, L. (1990). Toward the development of an elementary teacher’s science teaching efficacy belief instrument. Science Education, 74, 625–637. doi:10.1002/sce.3730740605
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riveros, A., Newton, P., & Burgess, D. (2012). A situated account of teacher agency and learning: Critical reflections on professional learning communities. Canadian Journal of Education, 35, 202–216.
   Google Scholar
• Roehrig, G. H., Kruse, R. A., & Kern, A. (2007). Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(7), 883–907. doi:10.1002/tea.20180
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roehrig, G. H., & Luft, J. A. (2004). Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons. International Journal of Science Education, 26(1), 3–24. doi:10.1080/0950069022000070261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross, J., & Bruce, C. (2007). Professional development effects on teacher efficacy: Results of randomized field trial. The Journal of Educational Research, 101(1), 50–60. doi:10.3200/JOER.101.1.50-60
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schriver, M., & Czerniak, C. M. (1999). A comparison of middle and junior high science teachers’ level of efficacy and knowledge of developmentally appropriate curriculum and instruction. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10, 21–42. doi:10.1023/A:1009472629345
   Google Scholar
• Settlage, J., Southerland, S. A., Smith, L. K., & Ceglie, R. (2009). Constructing a doubt-free teaching self: Self-efficacy, teacher identity, and science instruction within diverse settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(1), 102–125. doi:10.1002/tea.20268
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sinclair, B., Naizer, G., & Ledbetter, C. (2011). Observed implementation of a science professional development program for K-8 classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 579–594. doi:10.1007/s10972-010-9206-z
   Google Scholar
• Singer, J., Lotter, C., Gates, A., & Feller, R. (2011). Exploring a model of situated professional development: Impact on classroom practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 203–227. doi: 10.1007/s10972-011-9229-0
   Google Scholar
• Smolleck, L. A., & Yoder, E. P. (2008). Further development and validation of the Teaching Science as Inquiry (TSI) instrument. School Science and Mathematics, 108, 291–297. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2008.tb17842.x
   Google Scholar
• Smolleck, L. A., Zembal-Saul, C., & Yoder, E. P. (2006). The development and validation of an instrument to measure preserve teachers’ self-efficacy in regard to the teaching of science as inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 137–163. doi:10.1007/s10972-006-9015-6
   Google Scholar
• Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, C. L., & Zeuli, J. S. (1999). The frame and the tapestry. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession (pp. 341–375). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Tschannen-Moran, M., Hoy, A., & Hoy, W. (1998). Teacher efficacy: Its meaning and measure. Review of Educational Research, 68, 202–248. doi:10.3102/00346543068002202
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tschannen-Moran, M., & Hoy, A. W. (2007). The differential antecedents of self-efficacy beliefs of novice and experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 944–956. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogt, F., & Rogalla, M. (2009). Developing adaptive teaching competency through coaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 1051–1060. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.04.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallace, C. W., & Kang, N. (2004). An investigation of experienced secondary science teachers’ beliefs about inquiry: An examination of competing belief sets. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 936–960. doi:10.1002/tea.20032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weis, A. M. (2013). 2012 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education: Status of middle school science. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
   Google Scholar
• Wheatley, K. F. (2002). The potential benefits of teacher efficacy doubts for educational reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 5–22. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00047-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (2000). Metacognitive facilitation: An approach to making scientific inquiry accessible to all. In J. Minstrell, & E. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 331–370). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
   Google Scholar
• White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. Great Britain: Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M. (2002a). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experience reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 87, 112–143.
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M. (2002b). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131–175. doi:10.3102/00346543072002131
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwart, R., Wubbels, T., Bolhuis, S., & Bergen, T. (2008). Teacher learning through reciprocal peer coaching: An analysis of activity sequences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 982–1002. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2007.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar