Abstract
Critiquing and adapting curriculum materials are essential teaching practices but challenging for many preservice teachers. This study explores the use of educative curriculum materials—materials intended to support both teacher and student learning—to help preservice elementary teachers develop their pedagogical design capacity for critiquing and adapting lessons. Preservice teachers received educative supports highlighting pedagogical principles and rationales for those principles. When provided with educative supports, most individuals attended to the principles targeted in the supports, engaged in an in-depth analysis with regard to the principles, and used the rationales from the supports to justify their analyses. However, few continued to do so in subsequent analyses when they no longer received support. Implications for science teacher education and curriculum design are discussed.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abell, S. K., & Roth, M. (1992). Constraints to teaching elementary science: A case study of a science enthusiast student teacher. Science Education, 76, 581–595.
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
Anderson, L. M., Smith, D. C., & Peasley, K. (2000). Integrating learner and learning concerns: Prospective elementary science teachers’ paths and progress. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 547–574.
Appleton, K., & Kindt, I. (2002). Beginning elementary teachers’ development as teachers of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 43–61.
Ball, D. L., & Cohen, D. K. (1996). Reform by the book: What is—or might be—the role of curriculum materials in teacher learning and instructional reform? Educational Researcher, 25(9), 6–8, 14.
Ball, D. L., & Feiman-Nemser, S. (1988). Using textbooks and teachers’ guides: A dilemma for beginning teachers and teacher educators. Curriculum Inquiry, 18, 401–423.
Barab, S. A., & Luehmann, A. L. (2003). Building sustainable science curriculum: Acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Science Education, 87, 454–467.
Beyer, C. J., & Davis, E. A. (2009). Using educative curriculum materials to support preservice elementary teachers’ curricular planning: A comparison between two different forms of support. Curriculum Inquiry (in press).
Brown, M. W. (2009). The teacher-tool relationship: Theorizing the design and use of curriculum materials. In J. T. Remillard, B. A. Herbel-Eisenmann, & G. M. Lloyd (Eds.), Mathematics teachers at work: Connecting curriculum materials and classroom instruction (pp. 17–36). New York, NY: Routledge.
Chi, M. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analyses of verbal data: A practical guide. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 271–315.
Davis, E. A. (2006). Preservice elementary teachers’ critique of instructional materials for science. Science Education, 90, 348–375.
Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. (2005). Designing educative curriculum materials to promote teacher learning. Educational Researcher, 34(3), 3–14.
Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76, 607–651.
Davis, E. A., Smithey, J., & Petish, D. (2004). Designing an online learning environment for new elementary science teachers: Supports for learning to teach. In Y. Kafai, W. Sandoval, N. Enyedy, A. Nixon & F. Herrera (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th international conference of the learning sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
diSessa, A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105–225.
Drake, C., & Sherin, M. G. (2006). Practicing change: Curriculum adaptation and teacher narrative in the context of mathematics education reform. Curriculum Inquiry, 36, 153–187.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
Ericsson, K., & Simon, H. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (2nd ed.). Boston: MIT.
Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record, 111(9).
Grossman, P., & Thompson, C. (2004). Curriculum materials: Scaffolds for new teacher learning?. Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy and Center on English Learning & Achievement (CELA)
Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (1992). Models standards for beginning teacher licensing and development: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers.
Johnson, R. B. (1997). Examining the validity structure of qualitative research. Education, 118, 282–292.
Kesidou, S., & Roseman, J. E. (2002). How well do middle school science programs measure up? Findings from Project 2061’s curriculum review. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 522–549.
Lederman, N., Gess-Newsome, J., & Latz, M. (1994). The nature and development of preservice science teachers’ conceptions of subject matter and pedagogy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 129–146.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage.
Lloyd, G. M., & Behm, S. L. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers’ analysis of mathematics instructional materials. Action in Teacher Education, 26(4), 48–62.
Magnusson, S., Krajcik, J., & Borko, H. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science education (pp. 95–132). The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Morrison, J. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Science teachers’ diagnosis and understanding of students’ preconceptions. Science Education, 87, 849–867.
Mulholland, J., & Wallace, J. (2005). Growing the tree of teacher knowledge: Ten years of learning to teach elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 767–790.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Digest of education statistics, 2007. Retrieved July 22, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education. (1987). NCATE standards, procedures, and policies for the accreditation of professional education units: The accreditation of professional education units for the preparation of professional school personnel at basic and advanced levels. Washington, DC: Author.
National Council for the Social Studies. (1994). Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for social studies. Washington, DC: Author.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1991). Professional teaching standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nicol, C. C., & Crespo, S. M. (2006). Learning to teach with mathematics textbooks: How preservice teachers interpret and use curriculum materials. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 62, 331–355.
Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995). Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Remillard, J. T. (1999). Curriculum materials in mathematics education reform: A framework for examining teachers’ curriculum development. Curriculum Inquiry, 19, 315–342.
Remillard, J. T. (2000). Can curriculum materials support teachers’ learning? Two-fourth-grade teachers’ use of a new mathematics text. The Elementary School Journal, 100, 331–350.
Remillard, J. T. (2005). Examining key concepts in research on teachers’ use of mathematics curricula. Review of Educational Research, 75, 211–246.
Schneider, R., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 221–245.
Schwarz, C., Gunckel, K., Smith, E., Covitt, B., Bae, M., Enfield, M., et al. (2008). Helping elementary preservice teachers learn to use science curriculum materials for effective science teaching. Science Education, 92, 345–377.
Sherin, M. G., & Drake, C. (2009). Curriculum strategy framework: Investigating patterns in teachers’ use of a reform-based elementary mathematics curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 41, 467–500.
Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.
Smith, D. (1999). Changing our teaching: The role of pedagogical content knowledge in elementary science. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: The construct and its implications for science teacher education (pp. 163–198). The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Smith, J., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 115–163.
Smith, D., & Neale, D. (1989). The construction of subject matter knowledge in primary science teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 5, 1–20.
Stern, L., & Roseman, J. E. (2004). Can middle-school science textbooks help students learn important ideas? Findings from project 2061’s curriculum evaluation study: Life science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 538–568.
Weiss, I., Banilower E., McMahon K., & Smith, P. (2001). Report of the 2000 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Retrieved August 31, 2008 from http://www.horizon-research.com.
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by a PECASE/CAREER Award, grant number REC-0092610, and by the Center for Curriculum Materials in Science, CLT grant number 0227557, both from the National Science Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors. The authors thank the CASES research team for their feedback and the preservice teachers for their interest and participation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Beyer, C., Davis, E.A. Supporting Preservice Elementary Teachers’ Critique and Adaptation of Science Lesson Plans Using Educative Curriculum Materials. J Sci Teacher Educ 20, 517–536 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9148-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9148-5