Professional Development Programs for Teaching with Visualizations
Previous research suggests the value of technology-enhanced materials that guide learners to use dynamic, interactive visualizations of science phenomena. The power of these visualizations to improve student understanding depends on the teacher. In this chapter we provide two exemplars of professional development programs that focus on teaching with visualizations. The programs differ in intensity but follow the same basic philosophy. We show that the more intense professional development approach results in more effective teacher implementation of visualizations and greater student learning gains. We identify specific strategies that other educators can use to improve students’ knowledge integration with interactive visualizations.
This material is based upon work supported by National Science Foundation (NSF) grant numbers 0455877 and 0334199. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the NSF. The authors gratefully acknowledge support and feedback from participating MODELS and TELS teachers and the members of the Technology-Enhanced Learning in Science Center.
- Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & Hanson, D. L. (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, 46, 1090–1113. doi: 10.1002/tea.20303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Chiu, J. L. (2009). The impact of feedback on student learning and monitoring with dynamic visualizations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
- Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Henze, I., van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2008). Development of experienced science teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge of models of the solar system and the universe [Special issue]. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1321–1342. doi: 10.1080/09500690802187017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (Eds.). (2004). Internet environments for science education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B. (2011). Science learning and instruction: Taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Linn, M. C., & Hsi, S. (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- McElhaney, K. W., & Linn, M. C. (2011). Orchestrating inquiry using the knowledge integration framework. In K. Littleton, E. Scanlon, & M. Sharples (Eds.), Orchestrating inquiry learning (pp. 48–68). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Sato, E. (2011). Developing criteria for explanations in science: Scaffolding peer critique and feedback in technology-enhanced instruction. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), New Orleans, LA.Google Scholar
- Zertuche, A., Gerard, L., & Linn, M. C. (in press). How do Openers contribute to student learning? International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education.Google Scholar