Abstract
In a highly collaborative process we developed an introductory science course sequence to improve science literacy especially among future elementary and middle school education majors. The materials and course features were designed using the results of research on teaching and learning to provide a rigorous, relevant and engaging, standard based science experience. More than ten years of combined planning, development, implementation and assessment of this college science course sequence for nonmajors/future teachers has provided significant insights and success in achieving our goal. This paper describes the history and iterative nature of our ongoing improvements, changes in faculty instructional practice, strategies used to overcome student resistance, significant student learning outcomes, support structures for faculty, and the essential and informative role of assessment in improving the outcomes. Our experience with diverse institutions, students and faculty provides the basis for the lessons we have learned and should be of help to others involved in advancing science education.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Project 2061 Benchmarks for Science Literacy, Oxford Press.
ACT Crisis at the Core: Preparing All Students for College and Work. (2004). ACT Inc. http://www.act.org/path/policy/pdf/crisis_report.pdf (Accessed January 2005).
Assessment Resource Center: Institute for Research and Assessment in Higher Education University of Maryland, University College http://www.umuc.edu/distance/odell/irahe/arc/6too.html (accessed January, 2005).
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals: Handbook I, Cognitive Domain, New York, Longmans, Toronto.
Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University (1998). Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America’s Research, Universities. Stony Brook, State University of New York at Stony Brook, NY.
BSCS Science T.R.A.C.S. (1999). Teacher’s How-To-Handbook Strategies and Methods Across the Curriculum, Kendall/Hunt pub.
Designed Instruction. (2003). Modeling for Student Learning: A Translational Meta-Analysis of Scientifically Based Education Research Evidence, Designed Instruction. Inc.
Druger, M. (2002). It all depends: A perspective on science teaching at all levels. Journal of College Science Teaching 31: 493–494.
Druit, R., and Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change; a powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education 25: 671–688.
Flateby, T. L., and Metzger, E. (1999). Writing Assessment Instrument for Higher Order Thinking Skills, Assessment Update, March–April, pp. 6–7.
Flateby, T. L., and Metzger, E. (2000). Cognitive Level and Quality of Writing Assessment: A Training Manual, USF Publishing, Tampa, FL.
Flateby, T. L., and Metzger, E. (2001). Instructional Implications of the Cognitive Level and Quality of Writing Assessment (CLAQWA), Assessment Update, January–February, pp. 4–11.
Grasha, A. F. (1996). Teaching with Style: A Practical Guide to Enhancing Learning by Understanding Teaching and Learning Styles, Pittsburg, Alliance Publishers, PA.
Griffin, M. (1995). You can’t get there from here: Situated learning, transfer, and map skills. Contemporary Educational Psychology 20: 65–87.
Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., and Smith, C. L. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 28: 799–822.
Holloway, J. H. (2003). Research link/student teamwork. Education Leadership 61: 91–92.
Klionsky, D. J. (2003). Why the scientific method matters: A cautionary tale. Teach. Prof. 17: 4.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as a Source of Learning and Development, Englewood Cliffs, Prentice Hall, NJ.
Leamnson, R. (1999). Thinking about teaching and learning developing habits of mind with first year in college students. Stylus, Sterling VI: 1–165.
Leamnson, R. (2000). Learning as biological brain change. Change 32: 34–40.
Marbach-Ad, G., and Sokolove, P. G. (2000). Good Science Begins with Good Questions. Journal of College Science Teaching 30: 192–195.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Research Council. (1997). Science Teaching Reconsidered: A Handbook, National Academy Press, Washington DC, pp. 1–87.
National Research Council. (1999a). Transforming Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology, Available on line through National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (1999b). How People Learn: Bridging Research and Practice, Brain, Mind, Experience and School, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
National Research Council. (2001a). Educating Teachers of Science, Mathematics, and Technology: New Practices for the New Millennium, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Research Council. (2001b). Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Research Council. (2001c). Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Research Council. (2003). Evaluating and Improving Undergraduate Teaching in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics, The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
National Research Council. (2005). How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom: Board on Behavioral, Cognitive, and Sensory Sciences and Education, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
National Science Teachers Association. (2003). Standards for Science Teacher Preparation.
Nazario, G. M., Burrowes, P. A., and Rodrigues, J. (2002). Persisting misconceptions: Using pre-and post tests to identify biological misconceptions. Journal of College Science Teaching 31: 292–295.
On Line Evaluation Resource (OLER) supported by the National Science Foundation http://oerl.sri.com/ (accessed January, 2005).
Palady, L. (2002). Science for citizens: Brand new century, same old dilemma. Journal of College Science Teaching 31: 422–423.
Penick, J. E., Crow, L. W., and Bonnstetter, R. J. (1996). Questions are the answer. The Science Teacher, January 27–29.
Rubin, L., and Hebert, C. (1998). Model for active learning: Collaborative peer teaching. College Teaching 46: 26–31.
Sarasin, L. C. (1998). Learning Style Perspectives: Impact in the Classroom Madison, WI Atwood Publishing.
Strong, R., Silver, H., Perini, M., and Tuculescu, G. (2003). Boredom and its opposite an understanding of natural human interests gives teachers tools for overcoming students’ reluctance to learn. Education Leadership 61: 24–29.
Tanner, K. D., Chatman, E. S., and Allen, D. E. (2003). Cooperative learning in the science classroom: Beyond students working in groups. Cell Biol. Educ. 2: 1–5.
USDOE -Glenn Commission. (2000). Before It’s Too Late: A Report to the Nation from The National Commission on Mathematics and Science Teaching for the 21st Century, Jessup, US Department of Education, Education Publication Center, MD.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Potter, R., Meisels, G. Enhancing Teacher Preparation and Improving Faculty Teaching Skills: Lessons Learned from Implementing “Science That Matters” a Standards Based Interdisciplinary Science Course Sequence. J Sci Educ Technol 14, 191–204 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-4421-7
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-4421-7