Albion, P. R. (2008). Web 2.0 in teacher education: Two imperatives for action. Computers in the Schools, 25(3-4), 181-198. doi: 10.1080/07380560802368173.
Al-Fudail , M., & Mellar, H. (2008). Investigating teacher stress when using technology. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1103-1110. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2007.11.004.
Bayer Corporation. (2010). Planting the Seeds for a Diverse U.S. STEM Pipeline: A Compendium of Best Practice K–12 STEM Education Programs. Pittsburgh, PA: Author.
Bleicher, R. E. (2006). Nurturing confidence in preservice elementary science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 165–187
Brandon, P.R., Taum, A.K., Young, D.B., Pottenger, F.P., Speitel, T., & Gray, M. (2007). Development, validation, and trial of a method for judging the quality of using questioning strategies in a middle school inquiry science program. Chicago, IL: American Educational Research Association Annual Conference.
Brandon, P. R., Taum, A. K. H., Young, D. B., & Pottenger, F. M. (2008a). The development and validation of The Inquiry Science Observation Coding Sheet. Evaluation and Program Planning. 31:247-258.
Brandon, P. R., Taum, A. K. H., Young, D. B., Pottenger, F. M., & Speitel, T. W. (2008b). The complexity of measuring the quality of program implementation with observations: The case of middle-school inquiry-based science. American Journal of Evaluation. 29, 235–250.
Brandon, P. R., Young, D. B., Taum, A. K. H., & Pottenger, F. M. (2009). The inquiry science implementation scale: development and applications. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. 7:6:1135-1147.
Carey, S. (1985). Conceptual Change in Childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cohen, D. K., & Hill, H. C. (2000). Instructional policy and classroom performance: The mathematics reform in California. Teachers College Record, 102, 294–343.
Corcoran, T., Mosher, F.A., & Rogat, A. (2009). Learning Progressions in Science: An Evidence-based Approach to Reform. New York, NY: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
Curriculum Research & Development Group. (1999). Developmental Approaches in Science, Health and Technology (DASH) Submission to the Expert Panel on Mathematics and Science Education. Honolulu, HI: Author.
Curriculum Research & Development Group. (2011). Designing Professional Development for Educators. Honolulu, HI: Author.
Desimone, M. L., Porter, A. C., Garet, M., Yoon, S. K., & Birman, B. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24, 81–112.
Desimone, L. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38, 181–199. Digital Promises. (2011). “Digital Promises” Factsheet. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/2011/09/15/fact-sheet-digital-promise-initiative
Digital Promises. (2011). “Digital Promises” Factsheet. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/
2011/09/15/fact-sheet-digital-promise-initiativeDunn, K. E. & Rakes, G. C. (2010). Learner-centeredness and teacher efficacy: Predicting teachers’ consequence concerns regarding the use of technology in the classroom. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 18, 57–81.
Ertmer, P .A. & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.
Expert Panel on Mathematics and Science Education. (2001)
Fixsen, D. L., Naoom, S. F., Blase, K. A., Friedman, R.M., & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation research: A synthesis of the literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, National Implementation Research Network.
Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
Gelman, S., and Kalish, C. (2005). Conceptual development. In R.S. Siegler and D. Kuhn (Eds.) Handbook of Child Psychology, Set, 6th Edition (vol. 2, pp. 687-733). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Guskey, T. R. (2000). Evaluating professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Guskey, T. R. (2003). Analyzing lists of the characteristics of effective professional development to promote visionary leadership. NASSP Bulletin, 87(637), 38–54.
Glazer, E. M., Hannafin, M. J., Polly, D., & Rich, P. (2009). Factors and interactions influencing technology integration during situated professional development in an elementary school. Computers in the Schools, 26(1), 21-39. doi: 10.1080/07380560802688257.
Harlen, W., & Holroyd, C. (1997). Primary teachers’ understanding of concepts of science: Impact on confidence and teaching. International Journal of Science Teaching, 19, 93–105.
Holden, H. & Rada, R. (2011). Understanding the influence of perceived usability and technology selfefficacy on teachers’ technology acceptance. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(4) 343–367.
Inagaki, K., and Hatano, G. (2002). Young Children’s Naïve Thinking About the Biological World. New York: Psychology Press.
Inagaki, K., and Hatano, G. (2006). Young children’s conception of the biological world. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(4), 177.
Interactive Educational Systems Design, Inc. (IESD) (2011). National Survey on STEM Education 2011. New York, NY: Author.
Killion, J. (2002). What Works in Elementary: Results-based Staff Development. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.
King, A.R., & Brownell, J.A. (1966). The curriculum and the disciplines of knowledge. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Learning Forward. (2011). Standards for professional learning. Dallas: Author Dallas: Author. Retrieved from http://www.learningforward.org/standards/index.cfm.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., & Stiles, K. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., Mundry, S. & Stiles, K.E. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N. B., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S. E., & Hewson, P. W. (2010). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Metz, K. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children’s science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65, 93–127.
Miranda, H. & Russell, M. (2011). Predictors of teacher-directed student use of technology in elementary classrooms: A multilevel SEM approach using data from the USEIT study.
National Assessment Governing Board. (2008). Science Framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Retrieved from the National Assessment Governing Board website: http://www.nagb.org/publications/frameworks/scinece-09.pdf .
National Center for Education Statistics. (2005). Characteristics of public school teacher’s professional development activities: 1999-2000, NCES 2005-030. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Educational Sciences.
National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. National Committee for Science Education Standards and Assessment. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (1999). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning. J. D. Bransford, A. L. Brown, and R. R. Cocking (Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (1996). Standards for Professional Development for Teachers of Science, National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten Through Eighth Grade. R.A. Duschl, H.A. Schweingruber, and A.W. Shouse, Eds. Board on Science Education, Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments. P. Bell, B. Lewenstein, A.W. Shouse, and M.A. Feder, Eds. Board on Science Education, Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Research Council. (2011). A Framework for K–12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
National Staff Development Council. (2001). Standards for staff development. Retrieved January 10, 2010 from http://www.nsdc.org/standards/index.cfm.
Oliveira, A. (2009). Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 422-453.
Pottenger, F and Young, D. (1992). The Local Environment: FAST 1 Foundational Approaches in Science Teaching. University of Hawaii Manoa: Curriculum Research and Development Group.
Pottenger, F. M., Brennan, C. A., Pottenger, L., Buchholz, D. L., Shimabukuro, S. K., Yamamoto, K., & Young, D. B. (2000a). Developmental Approaches in Science, Health and Technology (DASH) Program Grade K Teacher Guide. Honolulu, HI: Curriculum Research & Development Group.
Pottenger, F.M., Brennan, C.A., Buchholz, D.L., Pottenger, L., Shimabukuro, S.K., Yamamoto, K., & Young, D.B. (2000b). Developmental Approaches in Science, Health and Technology (DASH) Program Grade 1 Teacher Guide. Honolulu, HI: Curriculum Research & Development Group.
Pottenger, F.M., Brennan, C.A., Buchholz, D.L., Pottenger, L., Shimabukuro, S.K., Yamamoto, K., & Young, D.B. (2000c). Developmental Approaches in Science, Health and Technology (DASH) Program Grade 2 Teacher Guide. Honolulu, HI: Curriculum Research & Development Group.
Seraphin, K. (2011). The Accessible Professional Development for Teaching Aquatic Science Inquiry project: Annual performance report to the U. S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences. Honolulu, HI: Curriculum Research & Development Group.
Settlage, J., Southerland, S. A., Smith, L. K. & Ceglie, R. (2009). Constructing a doubt-free teaching self: selfefficacy, teacher identity, and science instruction within diverse settings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46 (1), 102–125.
Shavelson, R. J., Yin, Y., Furtak, E. M., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Ayala, C. C., Young, D. B., Tomita, M. K., Brandon, P. R., & Pottenger, F. (2008). On the role and impact of formative assessment on science inquiry teaching and learning (p. 21–36). In J. E. Coffey, R. Douglas, & C. Stearns (Eds.), Assessing Science Learning: Perspectives from Research and Practice. Washington, DC: NSTA Press.
Shavelson, R. J. et al. (2008). Applied Measurement in Education. 21:4.
Shavelson, R. J. & Kurplus, A. (2011). Reflections on learning progressions. In Alonzo, A. C. & Gotwals, A. W. (Eds.) Learning Progressions in Science. Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense.
Sparks, D. (2002). Designing powerful professional development for teachers and principals. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.
Trautmann, N. M., and MaKinster, J. G. (2010). Flexibly adaptive professional development in support of teaching science with geospatial technology. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(3), 351–370.
Tucker, M. S. (2011). Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: An American Agenda for Education Reform. Washington, DC: National Center on Education and the Economy.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement (1994a). Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education Programs that Work. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Research and Improvement. (1994b). Promising Practices in Mathematics and Science Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
U.S. Department of Education. (1999). Federal Education Legislation Enacted in 1994: An Evaluation of Implementation and Impact. Washington, DC: Author.
van Es, E. A. (2009). Participants’ roles in the context of a video club. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 100-137.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to manage knowledge. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.
Young, D. B. (2007a). Scaling up: recommendations for dissemination and implementation. Moscow, Russia. National Training Foundation (invited presentation).
Young, D. B. (2007b). Preparing students for their future. Successful schools: from research to action plans. Honolulu, HI: Pacific Circle Consortium Annual Conference.
Young, D. B. (2008a). Research and practice: lessons learned in national dissemination and implementation of science and mathematics programs. Moscow, Russia: National Training Foundation (invited presentation).
Young, D. B. (2008b). Science teacher professional development using DLE: lessons learned from research and experience. N. Novgorod, Russia. Russian Electronic Academic and Research Association Conference.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row row_type=”row” use_row_as_full_screen_section=”no” type=”full_width” angled_section=”no” text_align=”left” background_image_as_pattern=”without_pattern” css_animation=””][vc_column][vc_separator type=”transparent” up=”20″ down=”20″][/vc_column][/vc_row]