Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

BUILDING A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE AROUND INQUIRY INSTRUCTION THROUGH A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

  • Published:
International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we investigated the impact of teaming school-based instructional coaches with science or mathematics middle school teachers to build a community of practice around inquiry instruction. This professional development model began with a 2-week summer institute and continued with four follow-up sessions during the academic school year for the teacher and instructional coach participants. The teachers’ participation in this professional development program with (1) content instruction through inquiry lessons, (2) practice teaching to middle school students, and (3) coach-led reflection improved their understanding of inquiry-based practices and the quality of their classroom inquiry implementation. Professional development experiences that prepare teachers and coaches simultaneously in inquiry and content may help build a shared language for reform and accelerate inquiry instructional changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

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, 49, 1090–1113.

    Article  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: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bogdan, R. C. & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borko, H., Jacobs, J., Eiteljorg, E. & Pittman, M. (2008). Video as a tool for fostering productive discussions in mathematics professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 417–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S., Carter, R. & Richards, J. (1999). Dilemmas of constructivist mathematics teaching: Instances from classroom practice. In B. Jarworski & T. Wood & S. Dawson (Eds.), Mathematics teacher education: Critical international perspectives. London: Falmer Press.

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Common Core State Standards Initiative (2010). Common core state standards for mathematics. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf

  • Costa, A. L. & Garmston, R. J. (2002). Cognitive coaching: A foundation for renaissance schools (2nd ed.). Norwood: Christopher-Gordon Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. S. (2003). “Change is hard”: What science teachers are telling us about reform and teacher learning of innovative practices. Science Education, 87, 3–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dempsey, N. (2007). 5 elements combine in a formula for coaching. National Staff Development Council, 28(2), 10–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Education Development Center, Inc (EDC) (2005). MathScape: Seeing and thinking mathematically. New York: McGraw-Hill Glencoe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernandez, C. (2002). Learning from Japanese approaches to professional development: The case of lesson study. Journal of Teacher Education, 53, 393–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedrichsen, P. M., Munford, D. & Orgill, M. (2006). Brokering at the boundary: A prospective science teacher engages students in inquiry. Science Education, 90, 522–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., Green, L. S. & Rynsaardt, J. (2010). Developmental coaching for high school teachers: Executive coaching goes to school. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 62(3), 151–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, T. (2004). Literature review for school-based staff developers and coaches. National Staff Development Counsel. Retrieved September 1, 2005 from http://www.nsdc.org/library/schoolbasedlitreview.pdf

  • Gunstone, R. F. & White, R. T. (1981). Understanding of gravity. Science Education, 65(3), 291–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hepburn, G. & Gaskell, P. J. (1998). Teaching a new science and technology course: A sociocultural perspective. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 777–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, B. (1994). Investigating mathematics teaching: A constructivist enquiry. London: Falmer Press.

  • Jaworkski, B. (2006). Theory and practice in mathematic teaching development: Critical inquiry as a mode of learning in teaching. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9(2), 187–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lesnick, J., Jiang, J., Sporte, S., Sartain, L. & Hart, H. (2010). A study of Chicago new teacher center induction coaching in Chicago public schools: 2009–2010. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research.

    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(5), 517–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacIsaac, D. & Falconer, K. (2002). Reforming physics instruction via RTOP. The Physics Teacher, 40, 479–485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, J. C., Horton, R., Igo, B. L. & Switzer, D. M. (2009). K-12 science and mathematics teachers’ beliefs about and use of inquiry in the classroom. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 575–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGatha, M. (2008). Levels of engagement in establishing coaching relationships. Teacher Development, 12(2), 139–150.

    Article  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 

  • National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (2011). A framework for k-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. (2008). Teachers’ collaborative inquiry and professional growth: Should we be optimistic? Science Education, 93, 548–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, T. T. & Dew, T. R. (2011). Virtual mentoring: A response to the challenge of change. In D. A. Scigliano (Ed.), Telementoring in the K-12 Classroom: Online Technologies for Learning (pp. 173–185). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, K., Garnier, H., Chen, C., Lemmens, M., Schwille, K. & Wickler, N. (2011). Videobased lesson analysis: Effective science professional development for teacher and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 117–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruby, A. (2006). Improving science achievement at high-poverty urban middle schools. Science Education, 90, 1005–1027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rushton, G., Lotter, C. & Singer, J. (2011). Chemistry teachers’ emerging expertise in inquiry teaching: the effect of a professional development model on beliefs and practice. Journal of Science Teacher Education. 22(1) 23–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Savasci, F. & Berlin, D. F. (2012). Science teachers beliefs and classroom practice related to constructivism in different school settings. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(1), 65–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sawada, D., Piburn, M., Judson, E., Turley, J., Falconer, K., Russell, B., et al (2002). Measuring reform practices in science and mathematics classrooms: The reformed teaching observation protocol. School Science and Mathematics, 102(6), 245–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Showers, B. & Joyce, B. (1982). The coaching of teaching. Educational Leadership, 40 (1), 4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, 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.

  • Vogt, F. & Rogalla, M. (2009). Developing adaptive teaching competency through coaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 1051–1060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, I., Pasley, J., Smith, S., Banilower, E. R. & Heck, D. (2003). Looking inside the classroom: A study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Chapel Hill: Horizon Research, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructism 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zwart, R. C., Wubbels, T., Bolhuis, S. & Bergen, T. C. M. (2008). Teacher learning through reciprocal peer coaching: An analysis of activity sequences. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 982–1002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA

    Christine Lotter & Jan A. Yow

  2. South Carolina’s Coalition for Mathematics & Science, 100 Technology Dr, Clemson, SC, 29634-0977, USA

    Thomas T. Peters

Authors
  1. Christine Lotter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan A. Yow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Thomas T. Peters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christine Lotter.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(DOC 122 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lotter, C., Yow, J.A. & Peters, T.T. BUILDING A COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE AROUND INQUIRY INSTRUCTION THROUGH A PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM. Int J of Sci and Math Educ 12, 1–23 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9391-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-012-9391-7

Key words

Search

Navigation