See Related: Science PD Models

Public Discussion

  • Small default profile

    Susan Butler

    Guest
    May 11, 2015 | 12:44 p.m.

    The video clearly conveyed the importance of inquiry in science teaching. I particularly appreciated the idea of professional development for teachers being facilitated by teacher leaders. Such peer to peer teamwork appears to be the most effective way to change and improve instructional practices.

  • Icon for: Brian Drayton

    Brian Drayton

    Co-Principal Investigator
    May 11, 2015 | 01:19 p.m.

    A nice presentation. The presentation and project seem well grounded in good science pedagogy — which still seems like “news” in too many places!
    I am particularly interested in how the teachers are helped to gain experience with science practices — especially to deal with the unexpected, which so often pops up in an inquiry-bsed classroom. How are the practices supported?

  • Icon for: Rose Pringle

    Rose Pringle

    Presenter
    May 11, 2015 | 07:38 p.m.

    A team of science professors and science educators collaboratively developed the formal science courses in our project with much emphasis on science specific pedagogy and engaging the teachers in the science practices as they learn the content knowledge. The middle school science curriculum being taught is grounded in the science practices and has a rich educative component. In addition, other project activities such as monthly cadre meetings and post classroom observation debriefings served to re enforce and support the teachers’ development of science practices.

  • Icon for: Emily Stoeth

    Emily Stoeth

    Conservation Educator & Bridging the Gap Interim Project Coordinator
    May 13, 2015 | 02:54 p.m.

    This seems like such a great program! I’m curious whether you have run into any resistance from teachers—either the ones you are directly training or those who are then trained in the teacher-led professional learning communities? Are any of the teachers hesitant to embrace the somewhat unexpected world of inquiry-based teaching and do you have any tips for how to handle push back?

  • Icon for: Rose Pringle

    Rose Pringle

    Presenter
    May 14, 2015 | 06:50 a.m.

    Surprisingly, no push back. However, our research indicates that the curriculum (IQWST) around which the project is wrapped has provided the ease or scaffolding for the teachers to effectively embrace the inquiry-based practices. Furthermore, we have tried to explicitly integrate the practices into all project activities including their formal science courses. So, inquiry-based teaching does not become something we tell them to do but is integral to what we all do as we seek to transform science teaching in the middle grades.

  • Icon for: Randy Kochevar

    Randy Kochevar

    Facilitator
    May 11, 2015 | 06:29 p.m.

    This sounds like a great program! I was wondering how you are measuring success at the student level?

  • Icon for: Rose Pringle

    Rose Pringle

    Presenter
    May 11, 2015 | 07:43 p.m.

    We have developed and have begun to administer a content assessment that is aligned to the middle school science curriculum. In addition, we plan to follow a group of students beyond the middle grades into high school.

  • Icon for: Ben Sayler

    Ben Sayler

    Facilitator
    May 12, 2015 | 07:22 a.m.

    This sounds like a powerful, multifaceted model. Do participating teachers (and districts?) use a common set of instructional materials in their classrooms?

    Also, do you have data about changes in classroom practice?

  • Icon for: Rose Pringle

    Rose Pringle

    Presenter
    May 12, 2015 | 07:28 p.m.

    Multifaceted indeed! All participating teachers are teaching the reform-based middle grades science curriculum called IQWST and are using the same materials and resources in most cases. Our findings from classroom observations show that our teachers are demonstrating the ability to use instructional practices for promoting student conceptual change.

  • Icon for: Ben Sayler

    Ben Sayler

    Facilitator
    May 12, 2015 | 10:16 p.m.

    Are you able to detect growth in teacher practice? Do you use a specific observation protocol, or are your observations less formal than that?

  • Icon for: Rose Pringle

    Rose Pringle

    Presenter
    May 13, 2015 | 05:19 a.m.

    Our classroom observations are very formal guided by AIMCOP. We have detected much growth in teachers’ practices – more in some areas such as engaging students with phenomenon and focusing on claims, evidence, and reasoning. Growth has been slower in areas such as pressing for students understanding but overall there is evidence of transform practices.

  • Icon for: Ben Sayler

    Ben Sayler

    Facilitator
    May 14, 2015 | 03:37 p.m.

    Fantastic. I’m not familiar with AIMCOP. I’d love to have a look. Is it publicly available?

  • Icon for: Rose Pringle

    Rose Pringle

    Presenter
    May 14, 2015 | 10:53 p.m.

    Access to the Annotated Classroom Observation Protocol was provided by Horizon Research Inc. (U-FUTuRES external evaluators). We adapted it for our project because it was consistent with the “elements of effective instruction” framework that guided our practices.

  • Icon for: Jackie DeLisi

    Jackie DeLisi

    Facilitator
    May 14, 2015 | 10:39 a.m.

    Sounds like a great program. I’d be curious to hear more about your classroom observations— what practices are you examining through observations? Also, have you collected any data on teachers’ self-efficacy?

  • Icon for: Rose Pringle

    Rose Pringle

    Presenter
    May 14, 2015 | 11:18 p.m.

    The modified Annotated Classroom Observation Protocol (ACOP, Horizon Research, Inc., 2012) was adapted for U-FUTuRES because of its alignment to the instructional practices important for promoting conceptual change and consistent with the learning theory embraced in our project. Our classroom observers were trained to complete the observation protocol and we spent some time strengthening the inter-rater agreement before launching our extensive observation that is still continuing. Ratings are provided for areas such as deepening science content, surfacing students’ prior knowledge, engaging with phenomenon, claims-evidence, and opportunities for sense-making.

  • Small default profile

    Eric Banilower

    Guest
    May 15, 2015 | 02:30 p.m.

    The classroom observation protocol was developed as part of our AIM: K-8 Science MSP RETA project (along with several other instruments). The protocol and user guide are available on the AIM website:

    http://www.horizon-research.com/aim/instruments...

  • Icon for: Ben Sayler

    Ben Sayler

    Facilitator
    May 15, 2015 | 09:55 p.m.

    Many thanks Eric! I’ll have a look.

  • Further posting is closed as the showcase has ended.

  1. Rose Pringle
  2. http://education.ufl.edu/faculty/pringle-rose/
  3. Associate Professor
  4. U-FUTuRES: University of Florida Unites Teachers to Reform Education in Science
  5. http://education.ufl.edu/u-futures/faqs/
  6. University of Florida, College of Education
  1. Lynda Hayes
  2. http://www.pkyonge.ufl.edu
  3. Director
  4. U-FUTuRES: University of Florida Unites Teachers to Reform Education in Science
  5. http://education.ufl.edu/u-futures/faqs/
  6. P.K. Yonge Developmental Research School, University of Florida

U-FUTuRES: University of Florida Unites Teachers to Reform Education in Science
NSF Award #: MSP-1050166

U-FUTuRES is transforming middle school science teachers’ practices in twelve partnering school districts by collaboratively implementing a learning-goals-driven, national standards-aligned, inquiry-oriented science curriculum. Through our project activities we have prepared science teachers to become highly-trained and qualified Science Teacher Leaders, who lead district-level middle school science professional learning communities devoted to the continuous study of science teaching practices and student learning. Through their implementation of a reform-based science curriculum, students are actively engaged with scientific phenomena, disciplinary core ideas, scientific and engineering practices, and cross-cutting concepts. Project activities include a fully-funded, job-embedded graduate degree program (Science Teacher Leadership Institute – STLI), district support and collaboration, monthly cadre meetings, teacher-led professional learning communities, and a teacher transformation series dedicated to increasing science content knowledge across partnering districts.

The STLI was co-facilitated by the university’s College of Education and STEM partners from the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. The 2-year institute included 9 hours of graduate-level science content courses, science-specific pedagogy, leadership courses, and complementary professional development activities that offered support to teachers in their formal courses and curriculum enactment. The institute courses were developed collaboratively by teams of experienced university instructors who all participated in project-sponsored training in effective science instruction as well as the design framework of the curriculum to ensure alignment and coherence in the content and practices within and across courses. To date, thirty-five science teacher leaders have graduated from the U-FUTuRES/STLI with a MAE in science and environmental education.