Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Putting the science back into science education through the science education program and leadership (SEPAL) model

  • Model Programs
  • Published:
Journal of Science Teacher Education

Summary

None of the SEPAL teachers had undergraduate degrees in science, and most were afraid of science before they became involved with the project. Although gains in content knowledge were modest, progress toward other instructional goals were made, indicating that improved pedagogical content knowledge is not entirely dependent on content knowledge.

Currently, funding is being sought for future programs which incorporate the belief in the role of peer interaction, nonthreatening environments for learning, and the importance of ascertaining teachers’ pedagogical beliefs if inservice work is to be transferred to the classroom. Additionally, we will continue to model the Circle of Inquiry which encourages conceptual change and provides teachers with an approach for use in their own classrooms.

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

  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989).Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baird, W., Ellis, J., & Kuerbis, P. (1989). ENLIST micros: Training science teachers to use microcomputers.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26, 587–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haury, D. (1993). Teaching science through inquiry. In L. E. Gronlund (Ed.),Striving for excellence: The national education goals, Volume II (pp. 71–72). Washington, DC: Educational Resources Information Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haury, D. (1995, April).Study of a field-developed model of scientific inquiry. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.

  • Hewson, P., & Hewson, M. G. A’B. (1988). Appropriate conception of teaching science: Studies of science learning.Science Education, 72(5), 597–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, L., & Johnston, M. (1989). Graduate education and teachers’ understandings: A collaborative case study of change.Teaching and Teacher Education, 5(2), 81–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutson, H. (1981). Inservice best practices: The learning of general education.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 14, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (1980). Improving inservice training: The messages of research.Educational Leadership, 37(5), 379–385.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keams, J. (1982). An inservice model for improving elementary science teaching. (Doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina-Greensboro, 1981).Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 5091.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lombard, A., Konick, R., & Schultz, K. (1985). Description and evaluation of an inservice model for implementation of a learning cycle approach in the secondary science classroom.Science Education, 69, 491–500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loucks-Horsley, S., Harding, C., Arbuckle, M., Murray, L. Dubea, C., & Williams, M. (1987).Continuing to learn: A guidebook for teacher development. Andover, MA: Regional Laboratory for Education Improvement of the Northeast and Islands and the National Staff Development council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. (1981). Teacher influence in the classroom: A context for understanding curriculum translation.Instructional Science, 10, 259–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parish, R., & Aquila, F. (1983). Comments on school improvement study: The whole is more than the sum of the parts.Educational Leadership, 41(3), 34–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change.Science Education, 66(2), 211–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R., & Easley, J. (1978).Case studies in science education. Urbana: Center for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation, University of Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wade, R. (1984). What makes a difference in inservice teacher education? A meta-analysis of research.Educational Leadership, 42(4), 48–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walch, W. (1981). Inquiry in school science. In N. Harms & R. Yager (Eds.),What research says to the science teacher, Volume 3 (pp. 53–72). Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, University of Massachusetts, 01854, Lowell, Massachusetts

    Anita Greenwood

  2. Ohio State University, USA

    David Haury

Authors
  1. Anita Greenwood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David Haury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This material is based upon work supported in part by a grant from the Dwight D. Eisenhower Mathematics and Science Education funds (Grant No. AC-RGT-UMS-93460). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, and/or recommendations expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the granting organization.

About this article

Cite this article

Greenwood, A., Haury, D. Putting the science back into science education through the science education program and leadership (SEPAL) model. J Sci Teacher Educ 6, 153–157 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02614574

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02614574

Keywords

Search

Navigation