An Efficacy Trial of Research-Based Curriculum Materials With Curriculum-Based Professional Development

This study examined the efficacy of a curriculum-based intervention for high school science students. Specifically, the intervention was two years of research-based, multidisciplinary curriculum materials for science supported by comprehensive professional development for teachers that focused on those materials. A modest positive effect was detected when comparing outcomes from this intervention to those of business-as-usual materials and professional development. However, this effect was typical for interventions at this grade span that are tested using a state achievement test. Tests of mediation suggest a large treatment effect on teachers and in turn a strong effect of teacher practice on student achievement—reinforcing the hypothesized key role of teacher practice. Tests of moderation indicate no significant treatment by demographic interactions.

[1]  Alejandro Mauricio Dávila Rubio.  Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005) Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development ASCD , 2017 .

[2]  Laura Hoch,et al.  Implementing Change Patterns Principles And Potholes , 2016 .

[3]  Jonas Schmitt,et al.  Understanding By Design , 2016 .

[4]  Sally Brown.  Authentic assessment: using assessment to help students learn. , 2015 .

[5]  D. Francis,et al.  Helping ELLs Meet the Common Core State Standards for Literacy in Science: The Impact of an Instructional Intervention Focused on Academic Language , 2014 .

[6]  William F. McComas,et al.  The Atlas of Science Literacy , 2014 .

[7]  Philip M. Sadler,et al.  The Influence of Teachers’ Knowledge on Student Learning in Middle School Physical Science Classrooms , 2013 .

[8]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Do Learners Really Know Best? Urban Legends in Education , 2013 .

[9]  Ngss Lead States.  Next generation science standards : for states, by states , 2013 .

[10]  J. Earle,et al.  Common Guidelines for Education Research and Development , 2013 .

[11]  David A. Gillam,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2012 .

[12]  Sharon J. Lynch,et al.  A retrospective view of a study of middle school science curriculum materials: Implementation, scale‐up, and sustainability in a changing policy environment , 2012 .

[13]  Elizabeth A. Davis,et al.  Learning to critique and adapt science curriculum materials: Examining the development of preservice elementary teachers' pedagogical content knowledge , 2012 .

[14]  Savitha Moorthy,et al.  Preparing Teachers to Design Sequences of Instruction in Earth Systems Science , 2011 .

[15]  Cory T. Forbes,et al.  Curriculum design for inquiry: Preservice elementary teachers' mobilization and adaptation of science curriculum materials , 2010 .

[16]  P. Black,et al.  Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards through Classroom Assessment , 2010 .

[17]  F. Manganello.  Constructivist Instruction: Success or Failure? , 2010 .

[18]  David Klahr.  Coming Up for Air: But Is It Oxygen or Phlogiston? A Response to Taber's Review of Constructivist Instruction: Success Or Failure? , 2010 .

[19]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Investigating Teacher Learning Supports in High School Biology Curricular Programs to Inform the Design of Educative Curriculum Materials , 2009 .

[20]  Daniel L. Murphy,et al.  Three-Level Models for Indirect Effects in School- and Class-Randomized Experiments in Education , 2009 .

[21]  Scott D. Gest,et al.  Fostering High-Quality Teaching With an Enriched Curriculum and Professional Development Support:The Head Start REDI Program , 2009, American educational research journal.

[22]  David H. Jonassen.  Reconciling a Human Cognitive Architecture , 2009 .

[23]  R. G. Duncan,et al.  Beyond the fringe: Building and evaluating scientific knowledge systems , 2009 .

[24]  Katherine L. McNeill.  Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena , 2009 .

[25]  Mark W. Lipsey,et al.  Empirical Benchmarks for Interpreting Effect Sizes in Research , 2008 .

[26]  S. Raudenbush,et al.  Empirical Issues in the Design of Group-Randomized Studies to Measure the Effects of Interventions for Children , 2008 .

[27]  Julie Sarama,et al.  Experimental Evaluation of the Effects of a Research-Based Preschool Mathematics Curriculum , 2008 .

[28]  D. Mackinnon.  Introduction to Statistical Mediation Analysis , 2008 .

[29]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  Perspectives on Evidence-Based Research in Education—What Works? Issues in Synthesizing Educational Program Evaluations , 2008 .

[30]  Matthew S. Fritz,et al.  Mediation analysis. , 2019, Annual review of psychology.

[31]  C. Hmelo‐Silver,et al.  Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) , 2007 .

[32]  H. Schweingruber,et al.  TAKING SCIENCE TO SCHOOL: LEARNING AND TEACHING SCIENCE IN GRADES K-8 , 2007 .

[33]  Andrew T. Stull,et al.  Three Experimental Comparisons of Learner-generated versus Author-provided Graphic Organizers , 2007 .

[34]  Barry Fishman,et al.  Exploring the relationship between teachers' curriculum enactment experience and their understanding of underlying unit structures , 2006 .

[35]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching , 2006 .

[36]  J. Remillard.  Examining Key Concepts in Research on Teachers’ Use of Mathematics Curricula , 2005 .

[37]  J. Krajcik,et al.  Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning , 2005 .

[38]  W. Schmidt,et al.  Curriculum coherence: an examination of US mathematics and science content standards from an international perspective , 2005 .

[39]  G Wiggins,et al.  Understanding by design (expanded 2nd ed. , 2005 .

[40]  M. Cole,et al.  Mind in Society , 2005 .

[41]  L. Hedges,et al.  How Large Are Teacher Effects? , 2004 .

[42]  R. Mayer.  Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. , 2004, The American psychologist.

[43]  Irene Bloom,et al.  Measuring Reform Practices in Science and Mathematics Classrooms: The Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol , 2002 .

[44]  J. Krajcik,et al.  Supporting Science Teacher Learning: The Role of Educative Curriculum Materials , 2002 .

[45]  Jo Ellen Roseman,et al.  How well do middle school science programs measure up? Findings from Project 2061's curriculum review , 2002 .

[46]  Ronald D. Anderson,et al.  Changing teachers' practice: curriculum materials and science education reform in the USA , 2002 .

[47]  William H. Schmidt,et al.  A Coherent Curriculum: The Case of Mathematics. , 2002 .

[48]  R. Glaser,et al.  Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment , 2001 .

[49]  William H. Schmidt,et al.  Why Schools Matter: A Cross-National Comparison of Curriculum and Learning , 2001 .

[50]  Sharon J. Lynch.  “Science for all” is not equal to “one size fits all”: Linguistic and cultural diversity and science education reform , 2001 .

[51]  M. Fullan.  Leading in a Culture of Change , 2001 .

[52]  W. Shadish,et al.  Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Generalized Causal Inference , 2001 .

[53]  Douglas A. Roberts,et al.  Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices , 2000 .

[54]  STANDARDS, ASSESSMENTS—AND WHAT ELSE? THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF STANDARDS-BASED SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT1 , 2000 .

[55]  California. Legislature.  REPORT TO THE , 1998 .

[56]  S. Loucks-Horsley.  Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics , 1997 .

[57]  L. Darling-Hammond,et al.  Doing what matters most : investing in quality teaching , 1997 .

[58]  S. Raudenbush.  Statistical analysis and optimal design for cluster randomized trials , 1997 .

[59]  William H. Schmidt,et al.  A splintered vision : an investigation of U.S. science and mathematics education , 1997 .

[60]  D. Ball,et al.  Reform by the Book: What Is—or Might Be—the Role of Curriculum Materials in Teacher Learning and Instructional Reform? , 1996 .

[61]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  A Middle Grade Science Teacher's Emerging Understanding of Project-Based Instruction , 1994, The Elementary School Journal.

[62]  D. Laplane.  Thought and language. , 1992, Behavioural neurology.

[63]  Rodger W. Bybee,et al.  Science for Life & Living: An Elementary School Science Program from Biological Sciences Curriculum Study , 1990 .

[64]  Joseph D. Novak,et al.  Learning Science and the Science of Learning , 1988 .

[65]  E. Yalow.  Educational psychology: A cognitive view. 2nd ed. , 1978 .

[66]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.