Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 799–810 | Cite as

Mary Budd Rowe: a storyteller of science

Key Contributors

Abstract

This article examines Mary Budd Rowe’s groundbreaking and far-reaching contributions to science education. Rowe is best known for her research on wait-time: the idea that teachers can improve the quality and length of classroom discussions by waiting at least 3 s before and after student responses. Her wait-time research grew from and helped inform her staunch advocacy of science education as inquiry; Rowe saw wonder and excitement as central to the teaching and learning of science. She spent much of her professional life designing professional development experiences and innovative curriculum materials to help teachers, particularly elementary school teachers, enact inquiry in their classrooms.

Keywords

Mary Budd Rowe Wait-time Fate control Inquiry NSF-funded curricula 

References

  1. Main, J. D., & Rowe, M. B. (1993). The relation of locus-of-control orientation and task structure to problem-solving performance of sixth-grade student pairs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 401–426. doi:10.1002/tea.3660300407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Patrick, C. (1992, February 18). Science “a special kind of story-making” to educator Rowe. Stanford University Campus Report.Google Scholar
  3. Rowe, M. B. (1964). The influence of context-learning on solution of task-oriented science problems which share concepts: A study in elementary science education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
  4. Rowe, M. B. (1969). Science, silence, and sanctions. Science and Children, 6(6), 11–13.Google Scholar
  5. Rowe, M. B. (1974a). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic, and fate control: Part one—wait-time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11, 81–94. doi:10.1002/tea.3660110202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Rowe, M. B. (1974b). Reflections on wait-time: Some methodological questions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11, 263–279. doi:10.1002/tea.3660110309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Rowe, M. B. (1974c). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic, and fate control: Part two—rewards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 11, 291–308. doi:10.1002/tea.3660110403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Rowe, M. B. (1977). Teachers who care. The Science Teacher, 44(5), 37–38.Google Scholar
  9. Rowe, M. B. (1978). Teaching science as continuous inquiry: A basic 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  10. Rowe, M. B. (1983a). Getting chemistry off the killer course list. Journal of Chemical Education, 60, 954–956.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rowe, M. B. (1983b). Science Education: A framework for decision makers. Daedalus, 112(2), 123–142.Google Scholar
  12. Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up!. Journal of Teacher Education, 37(1), 43–50. doi:10.1177/002248718603700110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Rowe, M. B. (1995, May). Teach your child to wonder. Reader’s Digest, 177–184.Google Scholar
  14. Rowe, M. B. (1996). Science, silence, and sanctions. Science and Children, 34(1), 34–37.Google Scholar
  15. Rowe M. B., Montgomery J. E., Midling M. J., & Keating T. M. (1997). ChemCom’s evolution: Development, spread, and adaptation. In S. A. Raizen & E. D. Britton (Eds.), Bold ventures. Volume 2. Case studies of US innovations in science education (pp. 519–584). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  16. Rowe, M. B. (2000). Teachers who care. The Science Teacher, 67(1), 30–31.Google Scholar
  17. Rowe, M. B. (2003). Wait-time and rewards as instructional variables, their influence on language, logic, and fate control: Part one—wait-time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(Supplement), S19–S32.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CaliforniaSanta BarbaraUSA

Personalised recommendations