0.6 Gresham, g. (october 2011). a university/school partnership  (Page 10/10)

Conclusions

The planning model and coaching strategies were instrumental in focusing instruction on science at the elementary level and in implementing proven instructional strategies that led to academic success and science knowledge gain. At the end of the year’s implementation, the campus achieved the rating of Recognized, the state of Texas’s second level in the accountability rating system. This was a feat that previously eluded the campus due to their TAKS science scores. Even more exciting was the change in attitude toward science that students exhibited. The teacher reported that students were eager to walk into the room. “You could see it in their eyes when they graced the door,” exclaimed the teacher. In addition, responses by the teacher revealed that the planning model was easy to implement because it provided a more consistent structure of daily activities, and it simplified the teacher’s planning. Students and the teacher knew what was expected and focused learning on identified state curriculum standards. Included in the planning model were proven instructional strategies that emphasized students constructing science knowledge through an inquiry approach.

References

• Anderson, L. W. (Ed.), Krathwohl, D. R. (Ed.), Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Myer, R. E., Pinrich, P. R., Raths, J.,&Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Complete edition). New York: Longman.
• Bloom, B. S. (Ed.), Englehart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H.,&Krathwhol, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain . New York: David McKay.
• Baer, G. T.,&Nourie, B. L. (1993). Strategies for teaching reading in the content areas. Clearing House, 67 (2), 121-122.
• Baker, W. P., Barstack, R., Clark, D., Hull, E.,&Goodman, B., Kook, J., Kraft, K., Ramakrishna, P., Roberts, E., Shaw, J. Weaver, D.,&Lang. M. (2008). Writing-to-learn in the inquiry-science classroom: Effective strategies from middle school science and writing teachers. Clearing House, 81 (3), 105-108.
• Berube, C. (2008). Atoms, strings, apples, and gravity: What the average American science teacher does not teach. Clearing House, 81 (5), 223-226.
• Best, R. M., Rowe, M., Ozuru, Y.,&McNamara, D. S. (2005). Deep-level comprehension of science texts. Top Lang Disorders, 25 (1), 65-83.
• Borman, G. D., Hewes, G. M., Overman, L. T.,&Brown, S. (2003). Comprehensive school reform and achievement: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 73 (2), 125-230.
• Carbo, M. (1997). What every principal should know about teaching reading. New York: National Reading Institute.
• Coe, M. A. (2001). The 5 E learning cycle model . Retrieved from http://faculty.mwsu.edu/west/maryann.coe/coe/inquire/inquiry.htm.
• Dewey, J. (1991). How we think. Amherst, New York: Prometheus Books.
• Diehl, H. L. (2008). Journey to independence. Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/portal/site/ascd/menuitem.d6eaddbe742e2120db44aa33e3108a0c/template.ascdexpressarticle?articleMgmtId=631ec7cfea309010VgnVCM1000003d01a8c0RCRD
• ED.gov. (2008). Differentiated accountability: A more nuanced system to better target resources. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/accountability/differentiated/factsheet.html
• Ediger, M. (2002). Factors which make reading expository text difficult. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29 (4), 312-317.
• Gersten, R., Baker, S. T.,&Marks, S. U. (1998). Teaching English-language learners with learning difficulties: Guiding principles and examples from research-based practice . ERIC Clearninghouse: ERIC Doc. Rep. No. 427488.
• Gill, J., Kostiw, N.,&Stone, S. (2010). Coaching teachers in effective instruction: A Victorian perspective. Literacy Learning: Middle Years, 18 (2), 49-53 .
• Good, T. L.,&Brophy, J. E. (2008). Looking in classrooms tenth edition . Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn Bacon.
• Gunning, T. G. (1996). Creating reading instruction for all children. Chapter 6, 192-236.
• Hyerle, D. (1996). Visual tools for constructing knowledge . Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Hunter, M. (1976). Improved instruction . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
• Keys, C. (1994). The development of scientific reasoning skills in conjunction with collaborative writing assignments: An interpretive study of six ninth-grade students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31 (9), 1003-1022.
• Khattri, N., Reeve, A. L.,&Kane, M. B. (1998). Principles and practices of performance assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
• Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J.,&Pollock, J. E. (2006). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
• Mercer, C. S.,&Mercer, A. R. (2001). Teaching students with learning problems ( 6 ^th ed.). New York: MacMillan.
• National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards . Washington, D. C.: National Academy Press.
• Pallant, J. (2007). SPSS survival manual ( 3 ^rd ed.). Two Penn Plaza, New York: Open University Press.
• Pearson, P.,&Gallagher, M. (1983). The instruction of reading comprehension.  Contemporary Educational Psychology, 8 (3), 317–344.
• Ryan, P.,&Walking-Woman, I. (2000). Linking writing to the process of scientific inquiry: Strategies from writing teachers in the disciplines . Washington, D. C.: U. S. Department of Education. ERIC Doc. Rep. No. ED458655.
• Samara, J., Curry, J., Gresham, J.,&Porter, R. (2004). The Curry/Samara Model ® &The model classrooms project background and research foundations . Retrieved from http://www.curriculumproject.com/CSM-MCP.htm
• Shidler, L. (2009). The impact of time spent coaching for teacher efficacy on student achievement. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36 (5), 453-460.
• Sousa, D. (2006). How the brain learns (2 ^nd ed.). Thousands Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
• Texas Education Agency. (2006-2007). Texas student assessment program technical digest 2006-2007. Retrieved from http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/student.assessment/resources/techdig07/Chapters/Table_Contents_Introduction.pdf
• Thinking Maps ^® . (2009) Thinking Maps, Incorporated . Retrieved from http://www.thinkingmaps.com/index.htm
• Wallace, C. S., Hand, B. ,&Prain, V. (2004). Writing and learning in the science classroom. Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer.
• Weiss, D. J. (2006). Analysis of variance and functional measurement: A practical guide . New York: Oxford University Press.
• Young, E. (2005). The language of science, the language of students: Bridging the gap with engaged learning vocabulary strategies. Science Activities, 42 (2), 12-17.