A Randomized Control Trial Study: Evaluating Pedagogical Practices in Science Classrooms

References

1. Author. (1994).
2. Author. (2009).
3. Author. (2013).
4. Author. (2015a).
5. Author. (2015b)
6. Author. (2016).
7. Author. (2018a).
8. Author. (2018b).
9. Author. (2018c).
10. Author. (2019a).
11. Author. (2019b).
12. Author. (2020).
13. Author. (2021a).
14. Author. (2021b).
15. Author. (2021c).
16. Author. (2022a).
17. Author. (2022b).
18. Bang, E. (2013). Hybrid-mentoring programs for beginning elementary science teachers. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, 1(1), 1-15. https://ijemst.net/index.php/ijemst/article/view/31
19. Bang, E., & Luft, J. A. (2014). Exploring the written dialogues of two first-year secondary science teachers in an online mentoring program. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25, 25-51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9362-z
20. Binmohsen, S. A., & Abrahams, I. (2022). Science teachers continuing professional development: Online vs. face-to-face. Research in Science & Technological Education, 40(3), 291-319. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2020.1785857
21. Bragg, L. A., Walsh, C., & Heyeres, M. (2021). Successful design and delivery of online professional development for teachers: A systematic review of the literature. Computers & Education, 166, 104158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104158
22. Brophy, J. E., & Good, T. L. (1974). Teacher-student relationships: Causes and consequences. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
23. Buyers, A., Koba, S., Sherman, G., Scheppke, J., & Bolus, R. (2011). Developing a web-based mechanism for assessing teacher science knowledge. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22, 273-289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-011-9227-2
24. Bybee, R., & Landes, N. M. (1990). Science for life and living: An elementary school science program from Biological Sciences Improvement Study (BSCS). The American Biology Teacher, 52(2), 92-98. https://doi.org/10.2307/4449042
25. Cady, J. A., Aydeniz, M., & Rearden, K. T. (2011). E-learning environments for math and science teachers. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 5(1), 17-33. https://doi.org/10.3776/joci.2011.v5n1p17-33
26. Calderón, M., Slavin, R., & Sánchez, M. (2011). Effective instruction for English learners. The Future of Children, 21(1), 103-127. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1353/foc.2011.0007
27. Cardichon, J., Darling-Hammond, L., Yang, M., Scott, C., Shields, P. M., & Burns, D. (2020). Inequitable opportunity to learn: Student access to certified and experienced teachers. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/media/392/download?inline&file=CRDC_Teacher_Access_REPORT.pdf
28. Carson, C. D., Callard, C., Gillespie, R., Choppin, J., & Amador, J. M. (2019). Bridging the distance: One-on-one coaching supports rural teachers. The Learning Professional, 40(6), 66-70. https://learningforward.org/journal/coaching/30872-2/
29. Carson, C., & Choppin, J. (2021). Coaching from a distance: Exploring video-based online coaching. Online Learning, 25(4), 104-124. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v25i4.2881
30. Cavanaugh, C., & Dawson, K. (2010). Design of online professional development in science content and pedagogy. A pilot study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 438-446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9210-2
31. Coley, J. D., & Hoffman, D. M. (1990). Overcoming learned helplessness in at risk readers. Journal of Reading, 33, 497-502. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40032010
32. Community for Advancing Discovery Research in Education (CADRE). (2017). Emerging design principles for online and blended teacher professional development in K-12 STEM Education. Education Development Center, Inc. http://cadrek12.org/resources/emerging-design-principles-online-and-blended- teacher-professional-development-k-12-stem
33. Cummins, J. (1986). Empowering minority students: A framework for intervention. Harvard Educational Review, 56, 18-36. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.17763/haer.56.1.b327234461607787
34. Darling-Hammond, L., Hyler, M. E., & Gardner, M. (2017). Effective teacher professional development. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/sites/default/files/product-files/Effective_Teacher_Professional_Development_REPORT.pdf
35. Dede, C., Eisenkraft, A., Frumin, K., & Hartley, A. (2016). Teacher learning in the digital age: Online professional development in STEM education. Harvard Education Press.
36. Dede, C., Ketelhut, D. J., Whitehouse, P., Breit, L., & McCloskey, E. M. (2009). A research agenda for online teacher professional development. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 8-19. https://doi.org/10.11772F0022487108327554
37. Diaz, S., Moll, L. C., & Mehan, H. (1970). Sociocultural resources in instruction: A context-specific approach. In Beyond language: Social and cultural factors in schooling language minority students (pp.187-230). Bilingual Education Office, California State Department of Education.
38. Fairman, J. C., Mills, T., & Lech, P. L. (2019). Challenges with teacher retention and staffing and shortages in Maine school districts. https://digitalcommons.usm.maine.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1041&context=cepare_improvement#:~:text=Maine%20schools%20experiencing%20the%20greatest,significantly%20lower%20than%20in%20other
39. Fischer, C., Fishman, B., Dede, C., Eisenkraft, A., Frumin, K., Foster, B., Lawrenz, F., Jurist Levy, A., & McCoy, A. (2018). Investigating relationships between school context, teacher professional development, teaching practices, and student achievement in response to a nationwide science reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 72, 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.02.011
40. Fishman, B., Konstantopoulos, S., Kubitskey, B. W., Vath, R., Park, G., Johnson, H., & Edelson, D. C. (2013). Comparing the impact of online and face-to-face professional development in the context of curriculum implementation. Journal of Teacher Education, 64(5), 426-438. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113494413
41. Fishman, B., Marx, R., Best, S., & Tal, R. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 643-658. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00059-3
42. Friedrichsen, P., Chval, K. B., & Teuscher, D. (2007). Strategies and sources of support for beginning teachers of science and mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 107(5), 169-181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2007.tb17781.x
43. Gamez, R., & Parker, C. A. (2018). Becoming science learners: A study of newcomers’ identity work in elementary school science. Science Education, 102(2), 377-413. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21323
44. Gaudin, C., & Chaliès, S. (2015). Video viewing in teacher education and professional development: A literature review. Educational Research Review, 16, 41-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.06.001
45. Germuth, A. A. (2018). Professional development that changes teaching and improves learning. Journal of Interdisciplinary Teacher Leadership, 2(1), 77-90. https://doi.org/10.46767/kfp.2016-0025
46. Gosselin, D. C., Thomas, J., Redmond, A., Larson-Miller, C., Yendra, S., Bonnstetter, R. J., & Slater, T. (2010). Laboratory Earth: A model of online K-12 teacher coursework. Journal of Geoscience Education, 58(4), 203-213. https://doi.org/10.5408/1.3534859
47. Gupta, A., & Lee, G. (2020). The effects of a site-based teacher professional development program on student learning. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(5), 417-428. 10.26822/iejee.2020562132
48. Gwet, K. L. (2008). Computing inter‐rater reliability and its variance in the presence of high agreement. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61(1), 29-48. https://doi.org/10.1348/000711006x126600
49. Hathaway, D., & Norton, P. (2012). An exploratory study comparing two modes of preparation for online teaching. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 28(4), 146-152. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2012.10784695
50. Jaber, L. Z., Dini, V., Hammer, D., & Danahy, E. (2018). Targeting disciplinary practices in an online learning environment. Science Education, 102(4), 668–692. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21340
51. Jackson, J. K., Huerta, M., Garza, T., & Narvaez, R. (2019). Examining the effects of a professional development initiative on English learning and economically disadvantaged adolescents’ scores on a high-stakes science test. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 30(2), 122-143. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2018.1538299
52. Joyce, B., & Calhoun, E. (2010). Models of professional development: A celebration of educators. Corwin Press.
53. Kim, S., Raza, M., & Seidman, E. (2019). Improving 21st-century teaching skills: The key to effective 21st-century learners. Research in Comparative and International Education, 14(1), 99-117. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745499919829214
54. Krashen, S. (1981). Second language acquisition and second language learning. Pergamon Press.
55. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 159-174. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
56. Learning Forward. (2011). Standards for professional learning: Quick reference guide. Journal of Staff Development, 32(4), 41-44.
57. Lee, O., Maerten-Rivera, J., Penfield, R. D., LeRoy, K., & Secada, W. G. (2008). Science achievement of English language learners in urban elementary schools: Results of a first-year professional development intervention. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 31-52. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20209
58. Lee, O., Grapin, S., & Haas, A. (2023). Teacher professional development programs integrating science and language with multilingual learners: A conceptual framework. Science Education, 107, 1302–1323. https://doi-org.srv-proxy2.library.tamu.edu/10.1002/sce.21807
59. Lee, S. C., Nugent, G., Kunz, G. M., Houston, J., & DeChenne-Peters, S. (2018). Case study: Value-Added benefit of distance-based instructional coaching on science teachers’ inquiry instruction in rural schools. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 29(3), 179–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560x.2018.1432226
60. Llosa, L., Lee, O., Jiang, F., Haas, A., O’Connor, C., Van Booven, C. D., & Kieffer, M. J. (2016). Impact of a large-scale science intervention focused on English language learners. American Educational Research Journal, 53(2), 395-424. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216637348
61. Luz, M. R. M. P., Rolando, L. G. R., Salvador, D. F., & Souza, A. H. S. (2018). Characterization of the reasons why Brazilian science teachers drop out of online professional development courses. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 19(5), 145-164. https://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/3642
62. McChesney, K., & Aldridge, J. M. (2021). What gets in the way? A new conceptual model for the trajectory from teacher professional development to impact. Professional Development in Education, 47(5), 834-852. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2019.1667412
63. Melton, J., Miller, M., & Brobst, J. (2019). Mentoring the mentors: Hybridizing professional development to support cooperating teachers’ mentoring practice in science. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 19(1), 23-44. https://citejournal.org/volume-19/issue-1-19/science/mentoring-the-mentors-hybridizing-professional-development-to-support-cooperating-teachers-mentoring-practice-in-science/
64. Meskill, C., & Oliveira, A. W. (2019). Meeting the challenges of English learners by pairing science and language educators. Research in Science Education, 49, 1025-1040. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9837-9
65. Monk, D. H. (2007). Recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers in rural areas. The Future of Children, 155-174. http://doi.org/10.1353/foc.2007.0009
66. Moon, J., Passmore, C., Reiser, B. J., & Michaels, S. (2014). Beyond comparisons of online versus face-to-face PD: Commentary in response to Fishman et al., “Comparing the impact of online and face-to-face professional development in the context of curriculum implementation.” Journal of Teacher Education, 65(2), 172-176. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487113511497
67. National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. https://doi.org/10.17226/12882
68. Nugent, G., Kunz, G., Houston, J., Kalutskaya, I., Wu, C., Pedersen, J., Lee, S., DeChenne, S., Luo, L., & Berry, B. (2016). The effectiveness of technology-delivered science instructional coaching in middle and high school. Working paper. National Center for Research on Rural Education. https://r2ed.unl.edu/workingpapers/2016/R2Ed-WorkingPaper-2016-1.pdf
69. O’Leary, M., Cui, V., Kiem, M. T., Dang, D. T., Nguyen, G. T. H., & Hoang, K. H. T. (2023). The role of classroom observation in the development and assessment of schoolteachers in Vietnam: A review of national policy and research. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 51(4), 395-407. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2023.2191307
70. Ossola, A. (2014). Why kids won’t quit technology. The Atlantic. http://www.ikzadvisors.com/wp-content/uploads/Why-Kids-Wont-Quit-Tech_-Atlantic.pdf
71. Padrón, Y. N., & Waxman, H. C. (1993). Teaching and learning risks associated with limited cognitive mastery in science and mathematics for limited-English proficient students. In Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Language Affairs (Eds.), Proceedings of the Third National Research Symposium on Limited English Proficient Students. Focus on middle and high school issues (Vol. 2, pp. 511-547). National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education.
72. Quinn, F., Charteris, J., Adlington, R., Rizk, N., Fletcher, P., & Parkes, M. (2022). The potential of online technologies in meeting PLD needs of rural teachers. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 50(1), 69-83. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2020.1849538
73. Rodgers, W. J., Kennedy, M. J., VanUitert, V. J., & Myers, A. M. (2019). Delivering performance feedback to teachers using technology-based observation and coaching tools. Intervention in School and Clinic, 55(2), 103–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451219837640
74. Sancar, R., Atal, D., & Deryakulu, D. (2021). A new framework for teachers’ professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 101, 103305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103305
75. Schaefer, J. M., & Ottley, J. R. (2018). Evaluating immediate feedback via bug-in-ear as an evidence-based practice for professional development. Journal of Special Education Technology, 33(4), 247–258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643418766870
76. Sexton, D. M. (2018). Becoming a math teacher: Recruitment, preparation, and practice. (ERIC No. ED587885) [Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz]. ERIC.
77. Simonsen, L., Luebeck, J., & Bice, L. (2009). The effectiveness of online paired mentoring for beginning science and mathematics teachers. Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 51-68. http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/592/893
78. Sims, S., & Fletcher-Wood, H. (2021). Identifying the characteristics of effective teacher professional development: a critical review. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 32(1), 47-63. https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2020.1772841
79. Sutcher, L., Darling-Hammond, L., & Carver-Thomas, D. (2016). A coming crisis in teaching? Teacher supply, demand, and shortages in the US. Learning Policy Institute. https://learningpolicyinstitute.org/media/179/download?inline&file=A_Coming_Crisis_in_Teaching_REPORT.pdf
80. Sweigart, C., Collins, L., Evanovich, L., & Cook, S. (2016). An evaluation of the evidence base for performance feedback to improve teacher praise using CEC’s quality indicators. Education and Treatment of Children, 39, 419-444. https://doi.org/10.1080/1046560X.2020.1727622
81. Tang, A., Li, W., & Liu, D. (2022). The impact of teachers’ professional development in science pedagogy on students’ achievement: Evidence from TIMSS 2019. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 21(2), 258-274.
82. Tudge, J. (1992). Vygotski, the zone of proximal development, and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom practice. In L.C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotski and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp.155-172). Cambridge University Press.
83. Unver, A. O., Okulu, H. Z., Muslu, N., Yilmaz, Y. O., Senler, B., Arabacioglu, S., & Bektaş, O. (2023). The readiness of stakeholders in the scientific inquiry-supported mentoring project. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 11(1), 37-55. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.2651
84. Valiandes, S., & Neophytou, L. (2018). Teachers’ professional development for differentiated instruction in mixed-ability classrooms: investigating the impact of a development program on teachers’ professional learning and on students’ achievement. Teacher Development, 22(1), 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/13664530.2017.1338196
85. Vera, E. M., Heineke, A., Israel, M., Hill, M., Goldberger, N., Hook, K., & Anderson, B. (2022). Learning about English learners: teachers’ and leaders’ perceptions of effective professional development. International Multilingual Research Journal, 16(2), 93-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2021.1971474
86. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.

Keywords

United States, classroom observation, evaluation, randomized control trial, science, pedagogical practices, virtual professional development, virtual mentoring and coaching

Affiliations