Loading…
The Science ELF: Assessing the enquiry levels framework as a heuristic for professional development
This study utilized an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach to explore randomly assigned treatment and control participants' frequency of inquiry instruction in secondary science classrooms. Eleven treatment participants received professional development (PD) that emphasized a structur...
Saved in:
| Published in: | International journal of science education 2015-01, Vol.37 (1), p.55-81 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c427t-8fdb9ec1de95287a45238d0705267ddfcd1a50ba9cf66d709c2eb2ff8ca46d4c3 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c427t-8fdb9ec1de95287a45238d0705267ddfcd1a50ba9cf66d709c2eb2ff8ca46d4c3 |
| container_end_page | 81 |
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 55 |
| container_title | International journal of science education |
| container_volume | 37 |
| creator | Wheeler, Lindsay B. Bell, Randy L. Whitworth, Brooke A. Maeng, Jennifer L. |
| description | This study utilized an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach to explore randomly assigned treatment and control participants' frequency of inquiry instruction in secondary science classrooms. Eleven treatment participants received professional development (PD) that emphasized a structured approach to inquiry instruction, while 10 control participants received no PD. Two representative treatment participants were interviewed and observed to provide an in-depth understanding of inquiry instruction and factors affecting implementation. Paired t-tests were used to analyze quantitative data from observation forms, and a constant comparative approach was used to analyze qualitative data from surveys, interviews, purposeful observations and artifacts. Results indicated that treatment participants implemented inquiry significantly more frequently than control participants (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1080/09500693.2014.961182 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_infor</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1640561765</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ1046278</ericid><sourcerecordid>3537425721</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c427t-8fdb9ec1de95287a45238d0705267ddfcd1a50ba9cf66d709c2eb2ff8ca46d4c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM9LwzAYhoMoOKf_gULAc2eSpmnrRYZs_mDgwXkOWfLFZXbtlrTK_ntTqh495fC-z5eXB6FLSiaUFOSGlBkhokwnjFA-KQWlBTtCI8oFTzJWlMdo1FeSvnOKzkLYEEK4yMUI6eUa8Kt2UGvAs8X8Fk9DgBBc_Y7bGEG975w_4Ao-oQrYerWFr8Z_YBWwwmvovAut09g2Hu98Y3u0qVWFTQ80uy3U7Tk6saoKcPHzjtHbfLa8f0wWLw9P99NFojnL26SwZlWCpgbKODpXPGNpYUhOMiZyY6w2VGVkpUpthTA5KTWDFbO20IoLw3U6RtfD3Thk30Fo5abpfBwTJBWcZILmIostPrS0b0LwYOXOu63yB0mJ7HXKX52y1ykHnRG7GjDwTv8hs2caRbK8iPndkLs6utiqKKkyslWHqvHRWq1dkOm_P3wDCfaGgQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1640561765</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Science ELF: Assessing the enquiry levels framework as a heuristic for professional development</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>ERIC</source><source>Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection</source><creator>Wheeler, Lindsay B. ; Bell, Randy L. ; Whitworth, Brooke A. ; Maeng, Jennifer L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Lindsay B. ; Bell, Randy L. ; Whitworth, Brooke A. ; Maeng, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><description>This study utilized an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach to explore randomly assigned treatment and control participants' frequency of inquiry instruction in secondary science classrooms. Eleven treatment participants received professional development (PD) that emphasized a structured approach to inquiry instruction, while 10 control participants received no PD. Two representative treatment participants were interviewed and observed to provide an in-depth understanding of inquiry instruction and factors affecting implementation. Paired t-tests were used to analyze quantitative data from observation forms, and a constant comparative approach was used to analyze qualitative data from surveys, interviews, purposeful observations and artifacts. Results indicated that treatment participants implemented inquiry significantly more frequently than control participants (p < .01). Two treatment participants' instruction revealed that both used a similar structure of inquiry but employed different types of interactions and emphasized different scientific practices. These differences may be explained by the participants' understandings of and beliefs about inquiry and structuring inquiry. The present study has the potential to inform how methods of structuring inquiry instruction and teaching scientific practices are addressed in teacher preparation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0950-0693</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1464-5289</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2014.961182</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ISEDEB</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Routledge</publisher><subject>Academic Standards ; Best Practices ; Classroom Techniques ; Comparative Analysis ; Constructivism (Learning) ; Control Groups ; Experimental Groups ; Faculty Development ; Grounded Theory ; Inquiry ; Inquiry-based teaching ; Interaction ; Interviews ; Methods Courses ; Mixed methods ; Mixed Methods Research ; Observation ; Pretests Posttests ; Professional development ; Science Curriculum ; Science education ; Science Instruction ; Secondary school ; Secondary School Science ; Secondary School Teachers ; Surveys ; Teacher Improvement ; Teacher Student Relationship ; Teaching Methods ; United States (Mid Atlantic States)</subject><ispartof>International journal of science education, 2015-01, Vol.37 (1), p.55-81</ispartof><rights>2014 Taylor & Francis 2014</rights><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Group 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c427t-8fdb9ec1de95287a45238d0705267ddfcd1a50ba9cf66d709c2eb2ff8ca46d4c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c427t-8fdb9ec1de95287a45238d0705267ddfcd1a50ba9cf66d709c2eb2ff8ca46d4c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924,33222</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ1046278$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Lindsay B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bell, Randy L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitworth, Brooke A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maeng, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><title>The Science ELF: Assessing the enquiry levels framework as a heuristic for professional development</title><title>International journal of science education</title><description>This study utilized an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach to explore randomly assigned treatment and control participants' frequency of inquiry instruction in secondary science classrooms. Eleven treatment participants received professional development (PD) that emphasized a structured approach to inquiry instruction, while 10 control participants received no PD. Two representative treatment participants were interviewed and observed to provide an in-depth understanding of inquiry instruction and factors affecting implementation. Paired t-tests were used to analyze quantitative data from observation forms, and a constant comparative approach was used to analyze qualitative data from surveys, interviews, purposeful observations and artifacts. Results indicated that treatment participants implemented inquiry significantly more frequently than control participants (p < .01). Two treatment participants' instruction revealed that both used a similar structure of inquiry but employed different types of interactions and emphasized different scientific practices. These differences may be explained by the participants' understandings of and beliefs about inquiry and structuring inquiry. The present study has the potential to inform how methods of structuring inquiry instruction and teaching scientific practices are addressed in teacher preparation.</description><subject>Academic Standards</subject><subject>Best Practices</subject><subject>Classroom Techniques</subject><subject>Comparative Analysis</subject><subject>Constructivism (Learning)</subject><subject>Control Groups</subject><subject>Experimental Groups</subject><subject>Faculty Development</subject><subject>Grounded Theory</subject><subject>Inquiry</subject><subject>Inquiry-based teaching</subject><subject>Interaction</subject><subject>Interviews</subject><subject>Methods Courses</subject><subject>Mixed methods</subject><subject>Mixed Methods Research</subject><subject>Observation</subject><subject>Pretests Posttests</subject><subject>Professional development</subject><subject>Science Curriculum</subject><subject>Science education</subject><subject>Science Instruction</subject><subject>Secondary school</subject><subject>Secondary School Science</subject><subject>Secondary School Teachers</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Teacher Improvement</subject><subject>Teacher Student Relationship</subject><subject>Teaching Methods</subject><subject>United States (Mid Atlantic States)</subject><issn>0950-0693</issn><issn>1464-5289</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM9LwzAYhoMoOKf_gULAc2eSpmnrRYZs_mDgwXkOWfLFZXbtlrTK_ntTqh495fC-z5eXB6FLSiaUFOSGlBkhokwnjFA-KQWlBTtCI8oFTzJWlMdo1FeSvnOKzkLYEEK4yMUI6eUa8Kt2UGvAs8X8Fk9DgBBc_Y7bGEG975w_4Ao-oQrYerWFr8Z_YBWwwmvovAut09g2Hu98Y3u0qVWFTQ80uy3U7Tk6saoKcPHzjtHbfLa8f0wWLw9P99NFojnL26SwZlWCpgbKODpXPGNpYUhOMiZyY6w2VGVkpUpthTA5KTWDFbO20IoLw3U6RtfD3Thk30Fo5abpfBwTJBWcZILmIostPrS0b0LwYOXOu63yB0mJ7HXKX52y1ykHnRG7GjDwTv8hs2caRbK8iPndkLs6utiqKKkyslWHqvHRWq1dkOm_P3wDCfaGgQ</recordid><startdate>20150102</startdate><enddate>20150102</enddate><creator>Wheeler, Lindsay B.</creator><creator>Bell, Randy L.</creator><creator>Whitworth, Brooke A.</creator><creator>Maeng, Jennifer L.</creator><general>Routledge</general><general>Taylor & Francis Ltd</general><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20150102</creationdate><title>The Science ELF: Assessing the enquiry levels framework as a heuristic for professional development</title><author>Wheeler, Lindsay B. ; Bell, Randy L. ; Whitworth, Brooke A. ; Maeng, Jennifer L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c427t-8fdb9ec1de95287a45238d0705267ddfcd1a50ba9cf66d709c2eb2ff8ca46d4c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Academic Standards</topic><topic>Best Practices</topic><topic>Classroom Techniques</topic><topic>Comparative Analysis</topic><topic>Constructivism (Learning)</topic><topic>Control Groups</topic><topic>Experimental Groups</topic><topic>Faculty Development</topic><topic>Grounded Theory</topic><topic>Inquiry</topic><topic>Inquiry-based teaching</topic><topic>Interaction</topic><topic>Interviews</topic><topic>Methods Courses</topic><topic>Mixed methods</topic><topic>Mixed Methods Research</topic><topic>Observation</topic><topic>Pretests Posttests</topic><topic>Professional development</topic><topic>Science Curriculum</topic><topic>Science education</topic><topic>Science Instruction</topic><topic>Secondary school</topic><topic>Secondary School Science</topic><topic>Secondary School Teachers</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Teacher Improvement</topic><topic>Teacher Student Relationship</topic><topic>Teaching Methods</topic><topic>United States (Mid Atlantic States)</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Lindsay B.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bell, Randy L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitworth, Brooke A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maeng, Jennifer L.</creatorcontrib><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>International journal of science education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wheeler, Lindsay B.</au><au>Bell, Randy L.</au><au>Whitworth, Brooke A.</au><au>Maeng, Jennifer L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ1046278</ericid><atitle>The Science ELF: Assessing the enquiry levels framework as a heuristic for professional development</atitle><jtitle>International journal of science education</jtitle><date>2015-01-02</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>55</spage><epage>81</epage><pages>55-81</pages><issn>0950-0693</issn><eissn>1464-5289</eissn><coden>ISEDEB</coden><abstract>This study utilized an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach to explore randomly assigned treatment and control participants' frequency of inquiry instruction in secondary science classrooms. Eleven treatment participants received professional development (PD) that emphasized a structured approach to inquiry instruction, while 10 control participants received no PD. Two representative treatment participants were interviewed and observed to provide an in-depth understanding of inquiry instruction and factors affecting implementation. Paired t-tests were used to analyze quantitative data from observation forms, and a constant comparative approach was used to analyze qualitative data from surveys, interviews, purposeful observations and artifacts. Results indicated that treatment participants implemented inquiry significantly more frequently than control participants (p < .01). Two treatment participants' instruction revealed that both used a similar structure of inquiry but employed different types of interactions and emphasized different scientific practices. These differences may be explained by the participants' understandings of and beliefs about inquiry and structuring inquiry. The present study has the potential to inform how methods of structuring inquiry instruction and teaching scientific practices are addressed in teacher preparation.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Routledge</pub><doi>10.1080/09500693.2014.961182</doi><tpages>27</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0950-0693 |
| ispartof | International journal of science education, 2015-01, Vol.37 (1), p.55-81 |
| issn | 0950-0693 1464-5289 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1640561765 |
| source | International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); ERIC; Taylor and Francis Social Sciences and Humanities Collection |
| subjects | Academic Standards Best Practices Classroom Techniques Comparative Analysis Constructivism (Learning) Control Groups Experimental Groups Faculty Development Grounded Theory Inquiry Inquiry-based teaching Interaction Interviews Methods Courses Mixed methods Mixed Methods Research Observation Pretests Posttests Professional development Science Curriculum Science education Science Instruction Secondary school Secondary School Science Secondary School Teachers Surveys Teacher Improvement Teacher Student Relationship Teaching Methods United States (Mid Atlantic States) |
| title | The Science ELF: Assessing the enquiry levels framework as a heuristic for professional development |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T21%3A02%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_infor&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Science%20ELF:%20Assessing%20the%20enquiry%20levels%20framework%20as%20a%20heuristic%20for%20professional%20development&rft.jtitle=International%20journal%20of%20science%20education&rft.au=Wheeler,%20Lindsay%20B.&rft.date=2015-01-02&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=55&rft.epage=81&rft.pages=55-81&rft.issn=0950-0693&rft.eissn=1464-5289&rft.coden=ISEDEB&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/09500693.2014.961182&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_infor%3E3537425721%3C/proquest_infor%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c427t-8fdb9ec1de95287a45238d0705267ddfcd1a50ba9cf66d709c2eb2ff8ca46d4c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1640561765&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ1046278&rfr_iscdi=true |