Stage-based views of teacher development hold that novice teachers are unable to attend to students' thinking until they have begun to identify themselves as teachers and mastered classroom routines, and so the first emphases in learning to teach should be on forming routines and identity. The authors challenge those views, as others have done, with evidence of novices attending to students' thinking early in their teaching and offer framing as an alternative perspective on whether and how teachers attend to student thinking. By this account, most teachers work in professional contexts that focus their attention on curriculum, classroom routines, and their own behavior, rather than on student thinking. An account of framing suggests an early, strong emphasis on attention to student thinking in teacher education.
Abell, S., Bryan, L., & Anderson, M. (1998). Investigating preservice elementary science teacher reflective thinking using integrated media case-based instruction in elementary science teacher preparation. Science Education, 82, 491-509.
2.
Adams, P.E., & Krockover, G.H. (1997). Beginning science teacher cognition and its origins in the preservice secondary science teacher program . Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 633-653.
3.
Atkin, J., & Coffey, J. E. (Eds.). (2003). Everyday assessment in the science classroom. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
4.
Ball, D.L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93, 373-397.
5.
Berliner, D.C. (1988). Implications of studies on expertise in pedagogy for teacher education and evaluation. In New directions for teacher assessment (proceedings of the 1988 ETS invitational conference) (pp. 39-68). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service .
6.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80, 139-148.
7.
Bullough, R.V.J.R. (1991). Exploring personal teaching metaphors in preservice teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 42, 43-51.
8.
Coburn, C.E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77, 211-244.
9.
Cohen, D. (1990). A revolution in one classroom. The case of Mrs. Oublier. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 327-345.
10.
Cowie, B., & Bell, B. (1999). A model of formative assessment in science education. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice , 6, 101-116.
11.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Snyder, J. (2000). Authentic assessment of teaching in context. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16, 523-545.
12.
Davis, E.A. (2006). Characterizing productive reflection among preservice elementary teachers: Seeing what matters. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 281-301.
13.
Dori, Y.J., & Herscovitz, O. (2005). Case-based long-term professional development of science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1413-1446.
14.
Feldman, D. (1994). Beyond universals in cognitive development. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
15.
Fischer, K. (1980). A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies and skills. Psychological Review, 87, 477-531.
16.
Freese, A.R. (2006). Reframing one's teaching: Discovering our teacher selves through reflection and inquiry. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 100-119.
17.
Fuller, F.F. (1969). Concerns of teachers: A developmental conceptualization . American Educational Research Journal, 6, 207-226.
18.
Fuller, F.F., & Bown, O. (1975). Becoming a teacher. In K. Ryan (Ed.), Teacher education (74th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Pt. II) (pp. 25-52). Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
19.
Grossman, P.L. (1992). Why models matter: An alternate view on professional growth in teaching. Review of Educational Research, 62, 171-179.
20.
Grossman, P.L., & Richert, A. (1988). Unacknowledged knowledge growth: A re-examination of the effects of teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 53-62.
21.
Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 485-529.
22.
Hammer, D. (2000). Teacher inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. H. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 184-215). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
23.
Hammer, D., Elby, A., Scherr, R.E., & Redish, E.F. (2005). Resources, framing, and transfer. In J. Maestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning from a modern multidisciplinary perspective (pp. 89-120). Greenwich, CT : Information Age Publishing.
24.
Hammer, D., & Van Zee, E.H. (2006). Seeing the science in children's thinking: Case studies of student inquiry in physical science. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
25.
Herbst, P.G. (2003). Using novel tasks in teaching mathematics: Three tensions affecting the work. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 197-238.
26.
Jenkins, E. (2000). The impact of the national curriculum on secondary school science teaching in England and Wales. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 325-336.
27.
Kagan, D.M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62, 129-169.
28.
Lau, M. (in press). Understanding the dynamics of teacher attention: Case studies of how high school physics teachers attend to student ideas in their classrooms . Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland at College Park.
29.
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values . Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
30.
Levin, D.M. (2008). What secondary science teachers pay attention to in the classroom: Situating teaching in institutional and social systems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland at College Park.
31.
Lising, L., & Elby, A. (2005). The impact of epistemology on learning: A case study from introductory physics. American Journal of Physics , 73, 372-382.
32.
Loughran, J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. London: Routledge.
33.
MacLachlan, G., & Reid, I. (1994). Framing and interpretation. Carlton, Canada: Melbourne University Press.
34.
McLaughlin, M.W., & Talbert, J.E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
35.
Mehan, H. (1978). Structuring school structure. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 32-64.
36.
Mellado, V. (1998). The classroom practice of preservice teachers and their conceptions of teaching and learning science. Science Education, 82, 197-214.
37.
Metz, K.E. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children's science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65, 93-127.
38.
NRC. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: Committee on the National Science Education Standards.
39.
NRC. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning . Washington, DC: Committee on the Development of an Addendum to the National Science Education Standards on Scientific Inquiry .
40.
NRC. (2001). Classroom assessment and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: Committee on Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards.
41.
NRC. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten Through Eighth Grade.
42.
Pierson, J. (2008). The relationship between patterns of classroom discourse and mathematics learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.
43.
Redish, E. (2004). A theoretical framework for physics education research: Modeling student thinking. In E. Redish & M. Vicentini (Eds.), Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School, Course CLVI (pp. 1-50). Bologna: Italian Physical Society.
44.
Rop, C. (2002). The meaning of student inquiry questions: A teacher's beliefs and responses. International Journal of Science Education , 24, 717-736.
45.
Rosenberg, S., Hammer, D., & Phelan, J. (2006). Multiple epistemological coherences in an eighth-grade discussion of the rock cycle. Journal of the Learning Sciences , 15, 261-292.
46.
Sadler, D.R. (1998). Formative assessment: Revisiting the territory. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice , 5, 77-84.
47.
Samaras, A.P., & Freese, A.R. (2006). Self-study of teaching practices. New York: Peter Lang.
48.
Scherr, R.E., & Hammer, D. (in press). Student behavior in epistemological framing: Examples from collaborative active-learning activities in physics. Cognition and Instruction.
49.
Settlage, J., & Meadows, L. (2002). Standards-based reform and its unintended consequences: Implications for science education within America's urban schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 114-127.
50.
Shapiro, B.L. (1991). A collaborative approach to help novice science teachers reflect on changes in their construction of the role of science teacher . Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 37, 119-132.
51.
Sherin, M.G., & Han, S.Y. (2004). Teacher learning in the context of a video club . Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 163-183.
52.
Shulman, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
53.
Siegler, R.S. (1996). Emerging minds: The process of change in children's thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
54.
Simons, D., & Chabris, C. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: Sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28, 1059-1074.
55.
Siskin, L. (1990). Different worlds: The department as context for high school teachers. Stanford, CA: Center for Research on the Context of Secondary School Teaching, Stanford University.
56.
Tannen, D. (1993). Framing in discourse. New York : Oxford University Press.
57.
Van Zee, E.H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questioning to guide student thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 227-269.
58.
Warren, B., & Rosebery, A.S. (1995). "This question is just too, too easy!" Perspectives from the classroom on accountability in science . Santa Cruz, CA: National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
59.
Wilson, S., & Wineburg, S. (1988). Peering at history with different lenses: The role of disciplinary perspectives in teaching history. Teachers College Record, 89, 525-539.
