Penick and Yager show how research and practice can be blended to produce a powerful preservice science teacher education program. The University of Iowa program includes intensive field ex periences at a variety of levels, small group seminars, and a series of oppor tunities for teacher self-evaluation. Orig inally developed with funding for a ten- year period from the National Science Foundation, this program is now fully self-supporting, visible within the uni versity, and successful in terms of stu dent performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bennett, W.J. (1986). First lessons: A report on elementary education in America. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
2.
Berliner, D.C. (1984). Making the right changes in preservice teacher education. Phi Delta Kappan, 66 (2), 94-97.
3.
Clark, D.L. (1984). Better teachers for the year 2000: A proposal for the structural reform of teacher education. Phi Delta Kappan, 66 (2), 116-120.
4.
Heath, D.H. (1986). Developing teachers, not just techniques. In K. K. Zumwalt (Ed.), Improving Teaching (pp. 1-14). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
5.
Howe, T.G. (April, 1987). Summary report of teacher supply and demand, 1971-86. Ames, IA: Iowa State University .
6.
Hueftle, S.J., Rakow, S.J., & Welch, W.W. (1983). Images of science: A summary of the results from the 1981-82 national assessment in science. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota, Science Assessment and Research Project.
7.
Krajcik, J.S. (1986). An evaluation of the University of Iowa's science teacher education program, 1977-1984. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City.
Lunetta, V.N., & Tamir, P. (1979). Matching lab activities with teaching goals. The Science Teacher, 46 (5), 22-24.
10.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. ( 1978). Science: Third assessment (1976-1977). (Report No. 08-S-04) . Denver: National Assessment of Educational Progress.
11.
National Science Board Commission on Precollege Education in Mathematics, Science, and Technology. (1983). Educating Americans for the 21 st century: A report to the American people and the national science board. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
12.
National Science Teachers Association. (1986 ). Position statement: Science education for middle and junior high students. Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
Penick, J.E., & Lunetta, V N. (1980). Iowa-UPSTEP: A dynamic model in science teacher education now. The Teacher Educator, 16 (1), 14-18.
15.
Penick, J.E., & Lunetta, V.N. (1981). Improving practices in middle school science. In V D. Ochs (Ed.), AETS Yearbook (pps. 197-206). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education .
16.
Phillips, D.G., & Phillips, D.R. (1987). The structures of thinking (6th ed.). Iowa City, IA: Science Education Center.
17.
Tamir, R., Lunetta, V.N., & Yager, R.E. (1978). Science teacher education : An assessment inventory . Science Education, 62, 85-94.
18.
Walter, L.J. (1984). A synthesis of research findings on teacher planning and decision making. In R. L. Egbert & M. M. Kloender (Eds.), Using research to improve teacher education (pp. 54-63). Washington, DC : ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education.
