Teacher professional development is essential to efforts to improve our schools. This article maps the terrain of research on this important topic. It first provides an overview of what we have learned as a field, about effective professional development programs and their impact on teacher learning. It then suggests some important directions and strategies for extending our knowledge into new territory of questions not yet explored.

Professional Development and Teacher Learning: Mapping the Terrain

The education and research communities are abuzz with new (or at least re-discovered) ideas about the nature of cognition and learning. Terms like \"situated cognition,\" \"distributed cognition,\" and \"communities of practice\" fill the air. Recent dialogue in Educational Researcher (Anderson, Reder, & Simon, 1996,1997; Greeno, 1997) typifies this discussion. Some have argued that the shifts in world view that these discussions represent are even more fundamental than the now-historical shift from behaviorist to cognitive views of learning (Shuell, 1986). These new ideas about the nature of knowledge, thinking, and learning—which are becoming known as the \"situative perspective\" (Greeno, 1997; Greeno, Collins, & Resnick, 1996)—are interacting with, and sometimes fueling, current reform movements in education. Most discussions of these ideas and their implications for educational practice have been cast primarily in terms of students. Scholars and policymakers have considered, for example, how to help students develop deep understandings of subject matter, situate students' learning in meaningful contexts, and create learning communities in which teachers and students engage in rich discourse about important ideas (e.g., National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1989; National Education Goals Panel, 1991; National Research Council, 1993).

What Do New Views of Knowledge and Thinking Have to Say About Research on Teacher Learning

Note on Translation Introduction by Michael Holquist Response to a Question from the Novy Mir Editorial Staff The Bildungsroman and Its Significance in the History of Realism (Toward a Historical Typology of the Novel) The Problem of Speech Genres The Problem of the Text in Linguistics, Philology, and the Human Sciences: An Experiment in Philosophical Analysis From Notes Made in 1970-71 Toward a Methodology for the Human Sciences Index

Speech Genres and Other Late Essays

Two lines of thinking are becoming increasingly important in higher educational practice. The first derives from constructivist learning theory, and the second from the instructional design literature. Constructivism comprises a family of theories but all have in common the centrality of the learner's activities in creating meaning. These and related ideas have important implications for teaching and assessment. Instructional designers for their part have emphasised alignment between the objectives of a course or unit and the targets for assessing student performance. “Constructive alignment” represents a marriage of the two thrusts, constructivism being used as a framework to guide decision-making at all stages in instructional design: in deriving curriculum objectives in terms of performances that represent a suitably high cognitive level, in deciding teaching/learning activities judged to elicit those performances, and to assess and summatively report student performance. The “performances of understanding” nominated in the objectives are thus used to systematically align the teaching methods and the assessment. The process is illustrated with reference to a professional development unit in educational psychology for teachers, but the model may be generalized to most units or programs in higher education.

/pdf/enhancing-teaching-through-constructive-alignment-4j3girmwo2.pdf

Enhancing Teaching through Constructive Alignment.

Basing its arguments in current perspectives on the nature of the scientific enterprise, which see argument and argumentative practice as a core activity of scientists, this article develops the case for the inclusion and central role of argument in science education. Beginning with a review of the nature of argument, it discusses the function and purpose of dialogic argument in the social construction of scientific knowledge and the interpretation of empirical data. The case is then advanced that any education about science, rather than education in science, must give the role of argument a high priority if it is to give a fair account of the social practice of science, and develop a knowledge and understanding of the evaluative criteria used to establish scientific theories. Such knowledge is essential to enhance the public understanding of science and improve scientific literacy. The existing literature, and work that has attempted to use argument within science education, is reviewed to show that classroom practice does provide the opportunity to develop young people's ability to construct argument. Furthermore, the case is advanced that the lack of opportunities for the practice of argument within science classrooms, and lack of teacher's pedagogical skills in organizing argumentative discourse within the classroom are significant impediments to progress in the field. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Sci Ed84:287–312, 2000.

Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms

The view that knowledge cannot be transmitted but must be constructed by the mental activity of learners underpins contemporary perspectives on science education. This article, which presents a theoretical perspective on teaching and learning science in the social setting of classrooms, is informed by a view of scientific knowledge as socially constructed and by a perspective on the learning of science as knowledge construction involving both individual and social processes. First, we present an overview of the nature of scientific knowledge. We then describe two major traditions in explaining the process of learning science: personal and social constructivism. Finally, we illustrate how both personal and social perspectives on learning, as well as perspectives on the nature of the scientific knowledge to be learned, are necessary in interpreting science learning in formal settings.

Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom

This article describes views about the nature of science held by a small sample of science students in their final year at the university. In a longitudinal interview study, 11 students were asked questions about the nature of science during the time they were involved in project work. Statements about the nature of science were characterized and coded using a framework drawing on aspects of the epistemology and sociology of science. The framework in this study has three distinct areas: the relationship between data and knowledge claims, the nature of lines of scientific enquiry, and science as a social activity. The students in our sample tended to see knowledge claims as resting solely on empirical grounds, although some students mentioned social factors as also being important. Many of the students showed significant development in their understanding of how lines of scientific enquiry are influenced by theoretical developments within a discipline, over the 5–8 month period of their project work. Issues relating to scientists working as a community were underrepresented in the students' discussions about science. Individual students drew upon a range of views about the nature of science, depending on the scientific context being discussed. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 36: 201–219, 1999

Undergraduate science students' images of science

In this paper we consider how theories of learning can inform the practice of scienceteaching in formal settings. We describe two broad strands of learning theory that havebeen drawn upon in science education, namely individual and sociocultural views. Weshow how aspects of both views can usefully inform our understanding of teaching andlearning science in formal settings. A perspective on science learning in formal settingsis presented which draws on and develops features of both individual and socioculturalviews, and the implications of this perspective on science learning for research and practice are discussed. The paper concludes with reflections on some of the recent critiques of so-called `constructivist views of learning' in the light of the perspective developed.

Individual and Sociocultural Views of Learning in Science Education

(2002) Designing and Evaluating Science Teaching Sequences: An Approach Drawing upon the Concept of Learning Demand and a Social Constructivist Perspective on Learning Studies in Science Education: Vol 38, No 1, pp 115-142

Designing and Evaluating Science Teaching Sequences: An Approach Drawing upon the Concept of Learning Demand and a Social Constructivist Perspective on Learning

This paper considers the relationship between science knowledge and the ability to engage in reasoned discussion of the social consequences of science. Through a study of over 200 school students aged 14–16 we show that the ability to engage in reasoned discussion of applications of gene technology is strongly influenced by the ability to recognize key issues, and that ability to recognize key issues requires some understanding of the relevant science. It is also influenced by the specificity of the context under discussion and personal experience. The requisite scientific knowledge base is relatively modest and can be effectively taught through brief teaching interventions that are well designed and contextualized. The implications for classroom practice are considered

John Leach

Papers

Constructing Scientific Knowledge in the Classroom

Undergraduate science students' images of science

Individual and Sociocultural Views of Learning in Science Education

Designing and Evaluating Science Teaching Sequences: An Approach Drawing upon the Concept of Learning Demand and a Social Constructivist Perspective on Learning

Discussion of Socio‐scientific Issues: The role of science knowledge