Capps 2012

Journal of Science Teacher Education
The official journal of the Association for Science Teacher Education
ISSN: 1046-560X (Print) 1573-1847 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uste20
A Review of Empirical Literature on Inquiry

Professional Development: Alignment with Best
Practices and a Critique of the Findings
Daniel K. Capps, Barbara A. Crawford & Mark A. Constas
To cite this article: Daniel K. Capps, Barbara A. Crawford & Mark A. Constas (2012) A Review
of Empirical Literature on Inquiry Professional Development: Alignment with Best Practices and
a Critique of the Findings, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23:3, 291-318, DOI: 10.1007/
s10972-012-9275-2
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9275-2
Published online: 23 Feb 2017.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 645
View related articles
Citing articles: 40 View citing articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=uste20
J Sci Teacher Educ (2012) 23:291–318
DOI 10.1007/s10972-012-9275-2
A Review of Empirical Literature on Inquiry

Professional Development: Alignment with Best
Practices and a Critique of the Findings
Daniel K. Capps • Barbara A. Crawford •
Mark A. Constas
Published online: 16 March 2012

The Association for Science Teacher Education, USA 2012
Abstract This review brings together the literature on inquiry-based teaching and
learning and science teacher professional development (PD). We present a targeted
critical review of research focused specifically on the nature of PD programs pur-
ported to emphasize inquiry. Our review analyzes the features of each program and
critiques the reported outcomes of each study. Findings from this review suggest a
general alignment with recommended features of effective PD as outlined in the
literature with a few notable exceptions, including: supporting teachers in devel-
oping inquiry-based lesson plans, providing authentic inquiry experiences, and
focusing on science content for teachers. More importantly, our review reveals that
no reported study has connected participation in inquiry-based PD with all the
desired outcomes of teacher PD: enhanced teacher knowledge, change in beliefs and
practice, and enhanced student achievement. Implications for future research on
inquiry-based PD programs are discussed.
Keywords Review Inquiry-based Professional development
Introduction
Over a decade ago, science education reform documents in the United States
advocated changing science teaching in precollege science classrooms from having
D. K. Capps (&)
University of Maine, 160 Shibles Hall, Orono, ME 04469, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
B. A. Crawford
University of Georgia, 212 Aderhold Hall, Athens, GA 30602, USA
M. A. Constas
Cornell University, 423 Warren Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
123
292 D. K. Capps et al.
less emphasis on using direct instruction to a greater emphasis on inquiry-based

instruction (American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS] 1989,
1993; National Research Council [NRC] 1996, 2000; National Science Teachers’
Association Position-Statement 1998). Although science education reform efforts
highlight the importance of inquiry-based instruction, it appears that little has
changed regarding how science is taught in the majority of US classrooms. Most
teachers do not routinely use inquiry-based instruction in their teaching due to a
number of issues including: perceived time constraints due to high-stakes testing;
unfamiliarity with how science is practiced (Deboer 2004); inadequate preparation
in science (Krajcik et al. 2000a, b), or they simply do not understand what inquiry
is. This problem is more apparent at the elementary and middle school levels, where
teachers often have little or no formal science training and lack familiarity with the
fundamentals of scientific inquiry and inquiry-based instruction (Kennedy 1998;
Loucks-Horsley et al. 1998, 2003). Inquiry-based teaching is a complex and
sophisticated way of teaching that demands significant professional development
(PD) (Crawford 2000, 2007). It appears that the key to change is in providing
innovative science teacher education for both preservice and inservice teachers.
Unless teachers are supported in developing an understanding of science subject
matter, the nature of scientific inquiry, and how to create an inquiry-based learning
environment in the classroom, it is unlikely there will be significant shifts in teacher
practice. Thus, a major challenge in the field of science teacher education is to assist
teachers in understanding how to enact inquiry-based instruction in their
classrooms.
Teacher PD is a well-recognized way to support practicing teachers in carrying
out inquiry-based instruction in science classrooms (Loucks-Horsley et al. 1998,
2003; NRC 1996). PD is regarded as a cornerstone for the implementation of
standards-based reform (Committee on Science and Mathematics Teacher Prepa-
ration 2001). Recently, many PD programs have emerged to support classroom
teachers in changing their instructional approach to be more consistent with inquiry-
based instruction. Millions of dollars have been spent on these programs; however,
there is a paucity of empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of teacher PD
in this area (Borko 2004; Smylie 1996; Wilson and Berne 1999). An exhaustive
search of the literature revealed that for the most part, only general reviews have
been published on science teacher PD (e.g. Hewson 2007; Kennedy 1998).
Additionally, there has been no targeted review of PD programs focused specifically
on scientific inquiry.
The purpose of this paper is to critically review and evaluate those empirical
studies pertaining to scientific inquiry PD interventions. Specifically, we are
interested in the nature of inquiry-focused PD programs, if and how these programs
support teachers in enhancing their knowledge, changing their beliefs and practices,
and if these changes can be linked to enhanced student achievement. Our research
questions are the following:
1. To what extent are the programs aligned with critical features of effective PD as
outlined in this review?
2. How robust are the findings of each of these studies?
123
A Review of Empirical Literature 293
3. What do these findings tell us about PD aimed at promoting inquiry-based

instruction in science classrooms?
We begin the review with a background section where we define the terms
scientific inquiry, inquiry-based learning and teaching, and discuss where the
confusion regarding inquiry arises. Then, we discuss the theoretical underpinnings
for teaching science as inquiry and illustrate why inquiry-based instruction is
considered an important part of school science. Next, we define teacher PD and
discuss the overall goals and best practices for PD as defined by experts in the field,
empirical studies, and the National Science Education Standards (NSES [NRC
1996]). In the methods section, we present the criteria for our literature review and
describe the process of searching for, selecting, and grouping articles, and our
analysis scheme. We then present our critical review of the literature, followed by a
discussion of findings and implications for promoting effective PD for scientific
inquiry.
Background: Scientific Inquiry and Professional Development (PD)
Scientific Inquiry: Definitions and Theoretical Underpinnings
There is much confusion among science teachers over the meaning of the term
inquiry. Inquiry has been referred to as an elastic term that can be ‘‘stretched and
twisted to fit people’s differing world views’’ (Wheeler 2000, p. 14). The confusion
over the meaning of inquiry may arise because nearly every academic discipline has
its own definition of the process of inquiry. Throughout their careers most teachers
have encountered the word inquiry in a variety of contexts, including college
classes, textbooks, and PD. However, if they have not had personal experience
engaging in scientific inquiry, they may conflate it with other meanings of the word.
Limited experience with scientific inquiry has caused many to equate inquiry with
similar teaching techniques, such as hands-on learning, learning by doing, problem-
based learning or a variety of other methods that do not necessarily guarantee
meaningful inquiry is occurring (AAAS 1993; NRC 1996).
Some of the confusion may also exist because science education literature and
reform documents address inquiry in several different contexts, including scientific
inquiry, inquiry-based learning, and inquiry-based teaching. Each of these terms has
a particular meaning that when not specified may lead to misunderstandings. Here,
we define each term and its relationship to science education. Scientific inquiry has
been defined as, ‘‘…the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and
propose explanations based on evidence derived from their work’’ (NRC 1996,
p. 23), ‘‘the process by which scientific knowledge is developed’’ (Lederman 2004,
p. 308), or more simply as the research carried out by actual scientists (Chinn and
Malhotra 2002). It has been argued that classroom inquiry will never reach the level
of sophistication involved in authentic scientific inquiry, and by presenting
classroom inquiry as equal to scientific inquiry, one skews the image of the
authentic practice (Lave and Wenger 1991). Although authentic scientific inquiry
123
differs from classroom inquiry, classroom inquiry can be modeled after the
authentic practice of science to enhance student interest and motivation (Crawford
2000).
The NSES consider classroom inquiry to have three different meanings; two of
which are educational outcomes while the third is a teaching strategy. The
educational outcomes of inquiry are composed of one’s ability to do scientific
inquiry, which includes asking and identifying questions, planning and designing
experiments, using data, and connecting it with explanations; and inquiry as a
content area of study or the knowledge of how scientists do their work, for example
realizing that scientists ask questions, perform different types of investigations, and
produce explanations based on observations (NRC 1996, p. 121). The third meaning
of classroom inquiry is a kind of pedagogy; inquiry-based teaching concerns the
pedagogy of inquiry or one’s ability to employ inquiry instruction in the classroom
(NRC 2000). Though it is not the only way to effectively teach science, inquiry-
based instruction is thought to have a powerful influence on students’ science
learning, because it exposes them to a type of learning that parallels the work of
practicing scientists (NRC 1996, 2000).
It is important to note that there are different views of what constitutes inquiry-
based instruction. Abrams et al. (2008) argue that classroom inquiry is multifaceted
and difficult to define, and that outcomes are difficult to compare since there are
different versions. Many textbooks, unfortunately, promote an incorrect view of
scientific inquiry, as proceeding in a prescribed, step-by-step fashion (Bybee 2004).
Thus, science teachers dependent on textbooks may adopt this similar view in their
teaching practice. Laboratory investigations that are tightly structured may resemble
confirmatory exercises, rather than inquiry. Historically, Schwab (1966) identified
two aspects of the nature of scientific inquiry, one in which problems are addressed
using scientific principles (‘‘stable enquiry’’) and another in which principles are
questioned (‘‘fluid enquiry’’). This translates to students doing science, as well as
learning about the ways in which scientific inquiry is carried out. In this view,
teachers create opportunities for their students to learn inquiry skills and to reflect
on inquiry. This view of inquiry is echoed in the NSES. The standards add that
teaching science as inquiry also targets students learning scientific ideas and the
nature of scientific work (NRC 1996). There are voices critical of the NSES view on
inquiry. For example, some suggest reform documents take too narrow of a view of
inquiry and scientific literacy, leaving school science unchanged (e.g. Eisenhart
et al. 1996). Others have questioned the effectiveness of instructional approaches
like inquiry, based on the way humans learn and by citing evidence from empirical
studies (Kirschner et al. 2006). Given this discussion of the varied ideas of inquiry-
based teaching, it is not the purpose of this review of inquiry-based PD studies to
present a detailed history of inquiry-based teaching or arrive at a conclusion as to
the effectiveness of inquiry as an instructional approach. For further clarification of
historical and contextual perspectives of inquiry and the effectiveness of inquiry, the
authors refer the reader to Deboer (2004), Anderson (2002) and Kirschner et al.
(2006). For the purpose of this paper, we use the NSES five essential features of
classroom inquiry (NRC 2000) as a framework for discussing inquiry-based
instruction (see Table 1).
123
Table 1 Five essential features

NSES, 5 essential features of classroom inquiry
of inquiry (NRC 2000)
Learner is involved in a scientifically oriented question
Learner gives priority to evidence in responding to the question
Learner uses evidence to develop an explanation
Learner connects explanation to scientific knowledge
Learner communicates and justifies the explanation
Theoretical Underpinnings and the Importance of Inquiry Instruction
Constructivism in science education centers on the idea that learners should be

engaged in answering authentic scientific questions relevant to their lives (Brown
et al. 1989; Dewey 1938; Schwab 1976). Reform-based teaching approaches—
including inquiry—draw on constructivist views of learning (e.g. Driver et al.
1994). Inquiry-based science teaching focuses on active student knowledge
construction in place of merely drill and practice and the memorization of facts.
Teaching science as inquiry has the potential to be more relevant to students than
other forms of science instruction, like lecture or cookbook labs, because it engages
students in negotiating their own understandings with science and approximates
how science is practiced (Dewey 1938). Dewey’s perspective on science education
focused on solving real world problems based in children’s experiences. He argued
for an inquiry-based, student-centered education where the role of the teacher was to
guide and support students in an active quest for knowledge (Dewey 1938).
Yet, most teachers do not use inquiry-based instruction in their science
classrooms (Stake and Easley 1978; Wee et al. 2007; Wells 1995; Windschitl
2002). Preservice teachers are apprentices during their K-16 years of classroom
experiences (Britzman 1991; Lortie 1975). Thus, many teachers use primarily direct
instruction, because it reflects how they were taught. Direct instruction is teacher-
centered and focuses on memorizing content and may have little relevance to the
learner (AAAS 1993). Inquiry-based instruction has potential to improve both
student understanding of science and engagement in science (AAAS 1989, 1993;
NRC 1996). Further, inquiry-based science teaching has possibilities of engaging
all students, including those from underrepresented populations in science, in
understanding and becoming motivated to learn science.
Definitions and Characteristics of Effective Professional Development (PD)
Professional Development (PD) in teaching has been defined as the ‘‘sum total of
formal and informal learning experiences throughout one’s career from preservice
teacher education to retirement’’ (Fullan and Steigelbauer 1991, p. 326). Charac-
teristics of effective PD have been described by well-recognized experts in the field
of general education (e.g. Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin 1995; Desimone
2009) and more specifically in science education (e.g. Loucks-Horsley et al. 1998,
2003). Samples of these characteristics are listed in Table 2. Common features of
each include engaging participants in inquiry-based learning and modeling teaching
strategies, connecting PD to classroom work, and continuity.
123
Table 2 Characteristics of effective professional development described by Darling-Hammond and

McLaughlin (1995) and Loucks-Horsley et al. (1998)
Darling-Hammond and McLaughlin (1995) Loucks-Horsley et al. (1998)
Engages teachers in concrete tasks of teaching, Emphasizes inquiry-based learning,

assessment, observation, and reflection investigations, and problem solving
Engages participants in inquiry, reflection, Helps build pedagogical skills and content
and experimentation knowledge
Promotes a collaboration between participants Models the strategies teachers will use with
and professional developers their students
Connects to or is coherent with classroom work Builds learning communities where continued
learning is valued
Sustains and continues support Supports teachers in leadership roles
Connects to other aspects of school change Links to the educational system (district
initiatives, state curriculum, etc.)
Changes to insure positive impact
Large-scale surveys have also aimed to determine factors that contribute toward
making science PD effective (Garet et al. 2001; Penuel et al. 2007). Garet et al.
(2001) conducted a national probability study of 1,027 teachers and reported six
characteristics of effective mathematics and science PD programs on teacher
learning, including structural features and core features of the programs. Penuel
et al. (2007) surveyed 454 teachers to determine characteristics of PD that affect
teacher knowledge and curriculum implementation (see Table 3 for a list of
characteristics of effective PD). Several of the features determined in these studies
confirm characteristics of effective PD described in the general education literature,
particularly, engaging participants in inquiry-based learning and modeling teaching
strategies, connecting PD to classroom work, supporting continued PD, collective
participation, and allowing adequate time for PD activities. Additionally, these
studies suggest other important characteristics of PD for science teachers, such as
focusing on science content knowledge and the importance of discussing how to
integrate activities in the classroom.
Reform documents such as the NSES also provide guidelines for PD. The NSES
suggest that PD programs in science, ‘‘explicitly attend to inquiry—both as a
learning outcome for teachers and as a way for teachers to learn science subject
matter’’ (NRC 2000, p. 112). Furthermore, the standards call for PD programs to
help teachers learn how to teach through inquiry. Our operational definition of
inquiry-based science (IBS) PD is the following: IBS teacher PD is one that consists
of activities that support teachers in creating classroom environments in which
students learn science concepts and principles through inquiry, as well as learn
about what science is, and how scientists work. In particular, in this type of PD, a
teacher would learn how to support students in designing and carrying out scientific
investigations, finding solutions to real world problems through asking and revising
questions, gathering and analyzing data, using data as evidence in creating
explanations, drawing conclusions, and reporting and justifying findings (i.e.
Krajcik et al. 2000a, b; NRC 2000).
123
Table 3 Characteristics of effective professional development reported by Garet et al. (2001) and Penuel
et al. (2007)
Garet et al. (2001) Penuel et al. (2007)
Focuses on content knowledge Discusses alignment with local, state, and national
standards
Provides opportunities for active learning Engages teachers in aligning activities with standards
Connects to or is coherent with other Emphasizes content of particular curriculum during PD
activities
Engages teachers in reform-based PD Provides ongoing, coherent PD
Promotes collective participation of teachers Connects to reform-based practices
Provides an adequate amount of time
Methods
Selection of Studies for Review
As stated in the introduction, the purpose of this article is to evaluate empirical

studies pertaining to scientific inquiry PD interventions. The review was guided by
the literature on inquiry and professional development. In selecting the articles, a
keyword search using the terms ‘‘science inquiry’’ and ‘‘professional development’’
was conducted in the Educational Resources Information Center (68 results) and
Wiley InterScience (289 results) databases. A subsequent search was performed in
databases of four science education journals reporting empirical studies of science
teacher PD, the Journal of Research in Science Teaching (131 results), Science
Education (99 results), the International Journal of Science Education (72 results),
and the Journal of Science Teacher Education (176), to ensure appropriate studies
were included. These searches located 835 articles. Many of these articles were
discarded, because they were not empirical studies pertaining to inquiry PD for
science teachers. To further narrow the scope of the review, we selected only
empirical studies published subsequent to the NSES and prior to the completion of
this study (1997–2008). Although we located articles published prior to the NSES
standards, many of these studies came out of the ‘new science curricula’ of the
1960s and early 1970s. These studies focused on developing curricula and studying
how curricula affected student achievement, rather than how teacher learning
through PD affected student achievement. Because of this, we made the decision not
to include these studies in this review. Several other studies were located in
bibliography searches using a snowball sampling technique (Krathwohl 1998). All
articles selected for review came from singular non-aggregate studies where
outcome data were reported on teacher knowledge, changes in teacher beliefs or
practice, or student achievement. Finally, we acknowledge that there have been
many reports submitted to funding agencies (e.g., National Science Foundation
reports) as well as conference papers presented on a similar topic; however, we
excluded reports and conference papers in favor of empirical studies published in
highly rated peer-reviewed journals of science teacher education. At the end of this
process, we selected 22 articles. However, several of the articles came from PD
123
programs that published more than one study. This occurred in five programs. Thus,
we combined these articles, leaving a total of 17 programs for review. The contexts
of the 17 programs varied from large-scale PD programs, with multiple aims,
carried out in urban settings, to smaller-scale PD, primarily focused on engaging
teachers in research, conducted in laboratory or field settings. The common
denominator was that each of the programs emphasized supporting teachers in
learning about inquiry (see Table 4 in ‘‘Appendix 1’’ for a list of the programs
reviewed or see abstracts of each article in ‘‘Appendix 1’’).
Analyses of Studies
In attempting to remain as objective as possible, we relied on expert opinion,

education research literature, and reform documents previously mentioned to
develop our categories for analysis. We created a list of nine common features of
effective inquiry PD by comparing information from Tables 2 and 3, with reform
documents, looking for overlapping characteristics and synthesizing these charac-
teristics into a list of common features of effective inquiry PD. The list includes
structural features like total time, extended support, and providing teachers with
authentic experiences; and core features including coherency with standards,
development of lessons, modeling inquiry, reflection, transference, and content
knowledge (see Table 4 in ‘‘Appendix 1’’). Total time refers to the amount of time
allotted for the PD. It was reported in hours or weeks (weeks if the program
completed a full, 40-h work week). Extended support indicates programs that
persisted over an extended period of time providing sustained support for teachers.
Some programs did this by having periodic workshops or classroom visitations
throughout the year, while other programs supported teachers remotely. Each of
these formats has the potential to create learning communities outside of the initial
PD, promoting collective participation between PD participants. Authentic Expe-
rience refers to PD programs where teachers conducted an inquiry study that was
not predefined, that is, teachers were instrumental in defining and carrying out the
research as if they were scientists. Coherency refers to PD programs that aligned
with local, state, or national standards. Developed Lessons denotes programs where
teachers learned about inquiry as a teaching strategy by designing inquiry-based
lessons for use in their classrooms. Teachers were often asked to bring current
lessons and adapt them into inquiry lessons or design an inquiry-based lesson based
on content from the PD for classroom use. Modeled Inquiry means the program
modeled inquiry-based instruction for the teachers during the PD. In most cases,
teachers engaged in the same inquiry lessons they would later teach their students.
These programs offered teachers the opportunity to engage in classroom inquiry,
think about how scientists might work, and experience what inquiry-based
instruction might look like. Reflection refers to programs where teachers were
given the explicit opportunity to reflect on their experiences through journaling,
discussion groups, or other activities that promoted reflective thought. Transference
pertains to programs where there was explicit discussion about enacting the
curriculum in the classroom. Finally, Content Knowledge indicates the PD program
focused on science subject matter and content learning for teachers.
123
Once the studies were selected, we reviewed these articles to answer the
aforementioned questions. To determine alignment with the critical features of
effective PD, the first author carefully read each article looking for evidence that the
PD supported teachers with each of the targeted features identified in the literature.
Programs were judged on the presence, absence, or quantity of each feature. The
second author reviewed the categorization and together we discussed any
differences and came to consensus. Finally, we asked a group of four science
educators to repeat our analysis using several articles reviewed for this study to
ensure reliability. Their analysis was consistent with our own. To assess the
robustness of the four categories of research findings, we examined the methods
used in the studies to make claims of enhanced teacher knowledge, enhanced
teacher practice, change in teacher beliefs, and enhanced student achievement (see
Table 4 in ‘‘Appendix 1’’). Robust studies were those that went beyond teacher self-
report and used multiple data sources to establish a connection between the PD and
the particular finding.
Results and Discussion
Alignment with Critical Features of Effective Professional Development
Total Time
One feature reported to have impact on the outcome of PD is the total amount of
time of a program (Garet et al. 2001). The inquiry PD studies critiqued in this
review typically ranged in length from a week to 6 weeks; though one program was
considerably shorter (see Table 4). Although there is no specified amount of time
required for effective PD, programs should provide teachers enough time to fully
process and address the doubts and misconceptions they have regarding inquiry.
Programs that run for a week or more may be an adequate length of time to help
teachers understand aspects of inquiry, if inquiry is the primary focus of the
program. However, many PD programs serve multiple purposes. For example, two
of the programs spent a great deal of time on literacy development for English
language learners and other important topics (Lee et al. 2004, 2005, 2008a, b, c)
resulting in very little time focused on inquiry (e.g., 2-days of an 8-day program).
Partitioning an already brief program may limit the opportunity to fully address
doubts and misconceptions teachers may have regarding inquiry.
Extended Support
Thirteen of the 17 programs critiqued provided extended support for teachers after
the initial PD session (see Table 4). Extended support is important because it offers
teachers a chance to ask questions and interact with professional developers and
their colleagues outside of the workshop, and gives teachers the opportunity to
receive feedback on new teaching strategies after using them in their classrooms
(Garet et al. 2001). There are a variety of ways to support teachers after an initial
123
workshop including, classroom visits, reunions, where teachers and developers

physically come back together, and various types of remote support, like chat
groups and threaded discussions. Each of these options can provide extended
support. Furthermore, remote support may be helpful in creating professional
learning communities promoting collective teacher participation. This might be
especially important for teachers in smaller districts where there may be just one
science teacher or for PD programs drawing on teachers from a variety of
geographic areas, because it can create a professional community that would be
impossible without the aid of technology. Unfortunately, the shortest program in
total time did not appear to provide continued support for teachers (see Table 4). It
seems that programs with a limited amount of hours could make up for lack of time
with increased follow-up support for teachers after they return to their schools. An
alternative way to provide continued support would be to break up a stretch of PD
sessions into a series of workshops given throughout the year (e.g., Lee et al.
programs). It would be important to provide teachers adequate time to discuss
questions and concerns they might have, as well as their experiences in the
classroom.
Authentic Experience
Only five of the studies critiqued engaged teachers in authentic inquiry—these

experiences paralleled the actual work of scientists (see Table 4). In one of these
programs, a summer research experience for teachers (Westerlund et al. 2002), the
authentic experience varied from teacher to teacher. Only some of the teachers
conducted their own investigations; other teachers learned techniques and assisted
scientists in answering pre-existing questions. Another program, not included in the
five that engaged teachers in authentic inquiry, was nearly added to this list of
programs using authentic inquiry; however, in this particular PD program, teachers
worked in labs helping scientists with small pieces of ongoing investigations
instead of teachers conducting their own investigations (Lotter et al. 2006, 2007).
The fact that only five studies engaged teachers in authentic inquiry is problematic.
Only in these programs were teachers challenged to help design and carry out
research. Engagement in authentic experiences, like research, might be difficult
for large-scale programs with many teachers. However, if teachers are expected
to enact inquiry-based instruction, engagement in authentic inquiry experiences
may be a necessary intervention in assisting them in supporting their students in
designing and carrying out investigations in school. As stated in the NSES,
‘‘inquiry is in part a state of mind, that of inquisitiveness’’ (NRC 2000, p. xii), thus
teachers need to experience the various aspects of scientific inquiry. Constructivist
views of learning and situated cognition advocate learning in specific contexts and
allowing adequate time to reflect and draw on past experiences (Brown et al. 1989;
Lave and Wenger 1991). It is predicted that teachers who experience authentic
inquiry, similar to that which they will later enact in their classroom, will be better
able to translate their experiences and relate concepts to their students (Dubner
et al. 2001).
123
Coherency
All 17 programs critiqued aligned their workshops with either state or national
standards. This finding is noteworthy, because it suggests that professional
developers are making efforts to connect their PD activities and goals to those
recommended by science education literature and reform documents. Clearly,
teachers will be more likely to enact a curriculum or changes in their teaching, if
they see it as relevant to their everyday work.
Developed Lessons
Less than half of the programs reviewed (7 of 17) required teachers to develop
inquiry-based lessons related to the program objectives (see Table 4). One program
expected teachers to bring in problematic lessons and adapt them to be more
consistent with inquiry (Lotter et al. 2006, 2007). This explicit approach helped
teachers learn how to develop their own inquiry lessons and allowed them to
collaborate with colleagues and with professional developers. Additionally, the fact
that these lessons were already part of the teachers’ curriculum made this process
relevant.
Although many teachers can teach inquiry-based lessons that have been created
by professional developers, it is more difficult to develop one’s own inquiry-based
lesson. Teachers will likely benefit from PD experiences grounded in the same
pedagogical principles they will later enact in their own classrooms (Loucks-
Horsley et al. 1998; NRC 1996). Holliday (2004) suggested the need to be explicit
about inquiry. Explicitly supporting teachers in learning how to develop inquiry-
based lessons may help sustain inquiry-based teaching beyond the enactment of a
specific program’s curriculum.
Modeled Inquiry
Sixteen of the seventeen programs reviewed modeled inquiry-based instruction in

their PD (see Table 4). The extent to which these programs modeled inquiry varied.
The longer duration programs specifically emphasizing inquiry gave teachers
multiple opportunities to engage in inquiry from the perspective of learners, learn
about the work of scientists, and discuss aspects of inquiry-based instruction
through lessons and or extended inquiry experiences, similar to those they would
use in their classrooms. Shorter duration programs that focused on several topics
naturally spent less time modeling inquiry. These shorter programs provided
practice tasks, often just one or two lessons from a curriculum. As noted earlier, the
essential nature of scientific inquiry and inquiry teaching is often misunderstood by
teachers (Deboer 2004). Because of this confusion, modeling inquiry with teachers
during PD is important to help them truly understand the essential features of
classroom inquiry. Clearly, if teachers are expected to teach using inquiry, they will
need to work through content matter in this way (McDermott and DeWater 2000).
Programs that offer more opportunity for teachers to experience inquiry, through
modeling the lessons they will later teach in their classes and discussing aspects
123
of inquiry-based instruction, will most likely result in teachers enhancing their

knowledge of how to engage their students in inquiry-based instruction.
Reflection
Fifteen out of seventeen of the programs critiqued promoted teacher reflection in

their PD through discussions or journaling. Literature on teacher’s professional
knowledge points out the value of reflection to bringing about teacher change
(Tobin et al. 1990; Tobin and LaMaster 1995). Experience alone is not always
sufficient for enhancing teacher knowledge and promoting teacher change
(Loughran 2002). Programs that provide explicit time for reflection may
encourage teachers to be more metacognitive about what they know, how they
know it, and what they do. Inquiry PD programs should provide a structure for
teachers to reflect on their experiences. Without including explicit reflection as
part of PD experiences, it is unlikely that substantial teacher learning or change
will occur.
Transference
Fifteen out of seventeen programs reviewed actively supported teachers in

discussing how they might transfer PD materials or experiences into their
classrooms. Explicit discussion about how one will enact workshop materials or
transfer experiences in the classroom is an essential feature of inquiry PD.
Contextual factors are important, and the reality is that there is no classroom
environment or teacher that is identical. Allowing workshop time for teachers to
discuss these differences with colleagues and professional developers will more
likely ensure that teachers will feel comfortable enacting the reformed-based
curriculum in their classrooms. Additionally, discussions on transference allow
teachers to consider how enactment may look in their classroom.
Content Knowledge
Eleven of the seventeen programs reviewed in this study focused on specific content
knowledge, including teachers’ understanding of NOS, inquiry, or science concepts
like chemistry and physics. Supporting teachers in increasing their own content
knowledge and the content to be learned by students is an important feature of PD
(Garet et al. 2001; Desimone 2009). Content knowledge is considered important,
because obviously, you cannot teach what you do not know, and many teachers lack
specific content knowledge teaching skills. If teachers do not develop adequate
content knowledge, they will likely be uncomfortable with the material they teach
and have difficulties when they attempt to teach the material.
Robustness of the Findings
Inquiry PD programs reported a range of findings, including enhanced teacher

knowledge, enhanced teacher practice, change in teacher beliefs, and enhanced
123
student knowledge as a result of the PD intervention (see Table 4). Each of the
programs critiqued reported on one or more of these outcome categories.
Interestingly, none of the programs we reviewed reported outcomes on all four of
these categories. This finding is a concern, because it indicates that none of these
studies demonstrated a link between enhanced teacher knowledge to change in
beliefs, change in practice, and enhanced student knowledge.
The remainder of this section critiques findings from the studies based on the
categories of the findings reported by the authors. These categories include enhanced
teacher knowledge, change in teacher beliefs, change in teacher knowledge, and
enhanced student knowledge.
Enhanced Teacher Knowledge
Enhanced teacher knowledge including subject matter knowledge, knowledge of

NOS, and inquiry was measured in a variety of ways. Data included instruments
resembling tests, interviews, questionnaires, and classroom observations. Eight of
the studies reported enhanced teacher knowledge as a result of the PD (see
Table 4). Four of these studies used a pre- and post-instrument similar to a written
test to demonstrate an improvement in teacher content knowledge (Basista and
Mathews 2002; Jeanpierre et al. 2005; Westerlund et al. 2002) or in science
process skills (Radford 1998). Two studies employed open-response question-
naires and interviews to document enhanced teacher conceptions of nature of
science and inquiry (Akerson and Hanuscin 2007; Akerson et al. 2007). Another
study used pre–post-surveys and a mid-program interview to demonstrate
enhanced teacher knowledge of inquiry (Shepardson and Harbor 2004). A final
study used interviews to assess teachers’ conceptions of inquiry before and after
the institute (Lotter et al. 2006, 2007). The methods discussed in each of these
studies appeared appropriate and thorough. Two programs reported on teachers’
knowledge during their first year of participation in a PD (Lee et al. 2005, 2008b).
However, since they did not have baseline data on teacher knowledge prior to the
intervention, the authors made no attempt to make a claim that the intervention
was associated with enhanced teacher knowledge. These studies used Likert-style
questionnaires to ascertain teachers’ perceptions of their own knowledge at the
beginning and end of the school year. Additionally, the authors observed each
teacher twice during the school year, but there was no baseline data since
observations were conducted only after teachers entered the program. Although
the findings appear positive, it is difficult to gauge what one’s perception of
‘‘more knowledgeable’’ truly means. Teacher self-report has been referred to as a
suspect methodology that provides ‘‘unconvincing evidence of real gains’’
(Frechtling et al. 1995, p. 33). Although the Lee et al. (2005) and (2008b)
studies indeed offer positive results, the findings could have been bolstered by
adding a pre- and post-instrument and/or a semi-structured interview to better
assess teachers’ knowledge of science content before the intervention. In general,
studies that actively assessed teacher understanding before and after the PD
intervention or used multiple methods to verify findings appeared more robust.
123
Change in Teacher Beliefs
Change in teacher beliefs concerning the importance of inquiry in teaching science

and a level of confidence in implementing inquiry were measured using interviews,
questionnaires, and classroom observations. Four studies reported on changes in
teacher beliefs as a result of the PD. Lee et al. (2004) used a Likert-style
questionnaire to show a statistically significant change in response to the importance
of inquiry following the PD. However, classroom observations indicated that the
change in belief did not affect classroom practice. Conversely, another study that
used a questionnaire to report that teachers felt better prepared verified this finding
with informal classroom observations and reviewing teacher portfolios (Basista and
Mathews 2002). Johnson (2007) conducted two interviews to document change in
teacher beliefs as a result of the program. A final study examined teacher
pedagogical philosophies using pre–post-interviews (Luft 2001). This study
indicated that changes in beliefs were more common in new teachers than veteran
teachers. Further, the Luft study found that veteran teachers were more likely to
change their teaching practice than newer teachers. These results highlight two
things. First, it appears that very few studies systematically assessed teacher beliefs.
Second, assessing teacher beliefs is a difficult endeavor. Further, determining
change in a teacher’s beliefs is not necessarily indicative of a change in this
teacher’s practice. Finally, additional research should focus on alternative ways to
assess teacher beliefs beyond primarily using teacher self-reports.
Change in Teacher Practice
Measurements of enhanced teacher practice of inquiry in the classroom or ability to

teach using inquiry included both teacher self-report data and classroom observa-
tions. Fourteen of the studies reported on the influence on teacher practice (see
Table 4). Eleven studies used classroom observation to assess enhanced teacher
practice of inquiry-based teaching. Three studies employed teacher self-report data
as evidence of enhanced practice of inquiry (Jeanpierre et al. 2005; Lee et al. 2004;
Young and Lee 2005). In addition to teacher self-report, both Jeanpierre et al.
(2005) and Lee et al. (2004) used classroom observations to confirm teacher self-
report data. Findings from Lee et al. (2004) conflicted with teacher self-report data
indicating a lack of actual change in classroom practice as a result of the
intervention, while observations by Jeanpierre et al. (2005) confirmed teacher self-
report data. Equivocal results from teacher self-report confirm the concern that
Fretchling et al. (1995) identified; teacher self-report data alone may not actually
reflect what is happening in the classroom. In order to assess changes in classroom
practice, it would be useful to conduct pre- and post-observations of teacher
classroom practice. We realize that it is not feasible to always collect a large number
of pre-observations, in particular, and a limited number of pre- and post-classroom
observations may not accurately represent the day-to-day nature of a teacher’s
practice; however, these observations can help to serve as a reference point, in
addition to lesson plans, interviews, and other data sources, when attempting to
characterize a teacher’s practice.
123
Enhanced Student Knowledge
The extent of enhanced student knowledge including science subject matter

knowledge, knowledge of NOS, and inquiry was measured several different ways,
including instruments resembling tests, interviews, and teacher perception of
student knowledge. Nine of the fifteen studies reported on enhanced student
knowledge (see Table 4). Seven of these studies used instruments similar to tests to
report gains in student science content knowledge or inquiry skills (Johnson et al.
2007; Lee et al. 2004, 2008a, c; Marx et al. 2004; McNeill and Krajcik 2008;
Radford 1998; Young and Lee 2005). Two of these studies had design issues that
resulted in methodological problems. One group of studies had no control or
comparison group (Lee et al. 2004, 2008a). This made it difficult to ascertain if
enhanced student knowledge indeed was the result of the PD program or the result
of another factor, such as maturation. A second study only used a post-test (Johnson
et al. 2007). Because of this, it was not possible to determine if the teachers’
involvement in the PD affected their students’ achievement. The remainder of the
studies mentioned above appeared to be thorough in measuring growth in student
knowledge as a result of the PD. Akerson and Hanuscin (2007) used pre- and post-
interviews to document enhanced student knowledge of NOS. A final study utilized
teacher perception to determine enhanced student abilities to develop researchable
questions, design and conduct investigations, and share investigation results (Luft
2001). Findings from this study would have been more robust if researchers had
combined teacher self-report with classroom observation.
What Do These Findings Tell Us About Professional Development (PD)

Aimed at Promoting Inquiry-Based Instruction?
Experts in science education and authors of science reform documents have

advocated a focus on inquiry, both as a preferred science teaching approach and as a
learning outcome for students. To change the norm in most science classrooms
experts have suggested that PD is needed to support teachers’ learning about inquiry
and teaching science through inquiry. In conducting this review, we were interested
in how recent inquiry professional-development programs aligned with features of
effective PD and supported teachers in enhancing their content knowledge,
changing their beliefs and practices, and the extent to which these changes could be
linked to enhanced student knowledge.
Surprisingly, we found very few empirical studies (17) related specifically to
science-inquiry professional-development programs actually published in major peer-
reviewed journals in science education. However, in those published articles, it was
promising that the majority of the programs aligned with features of effective PD
identified in the literature. Those features infrequently addressed included, (a) teachers
developing lessons (7/17), (b) authentic experiences (5/17), and (c) focus on content
knowledge (11/17). The literature on teacher PD suggests that each of these features is
important in supporting teachers in enacting reform-based practices in their
classrooms. Supporting teachers in developing their own inquiry-based lessons and
engaging them in authentic research experiences, the two most infrequently addressed
123
features, may likely be the missing link in helping teachers enact inquiry-based
instruction in their own classrooms. Additionally, a focus on science content
knowledge will no doubt help teachers feel more comfortable in teaching new topics.
None of the articles reviewed linked enhanced teacher knowledge to changes in
teacher beliefs, actual classroom practice, and finally, to enhanced student knowledge.
Moreover, the majority of the articles focused on only one or two of these outcomes.
An important challenge in education research is to establish a direct relationship
between teacher learning and student learning (Blank et al. 2008). Desimone (2009)
proposed a conceptual framework for studying and testing the effects of PD on
teachers and students. As of yet, no study has made this connection. When made, this
connection can be used to either confirm or reject expert opinion regarding inquiry
teaching as a preferred instructional practice. Without considering each of these four
variables, studies connecting enhanced teacher knowledge to enhanced student
knowledge have very little explanatory power (Zeichner 2005). In exploring the
relationships between these variables, researchers must take into account the
complexities of classroom teaching. Further, it is important to consider teachers’
predispositions to an inquiry-oriented teaching approach, since many teachers enter
PD programs with years of experience in teaching (Kagen 1992). It may also be
important to consider the filtering effects of teachers’ prior beliefs (Yarrick et al. 1997)
and the idea that changes in teacher beliefs may lag behind changes in their knowledge
and practice (Guskey 2002). In order to connect growth in teacher knowledge with
enhanced student learning researchers need to move beyond, ‘‘automatic biases’’
regarding methods, and employ the most robust and appropriate research methods to
answer a particular question (Desimone 2009). For instance, certain studies may
require surveys or interviews while observations or a combination of methods may be
appropriate for other studies. For example, in attempting to access teacher beliefs, a
researcher might use a Likert-style questionnaire in order to understand a phenomenon
from the teacher’s perspective. Teacher self-report can then be followed-up with
classroom observations and teacher interviews, in order to confirm teacher self-report.
Conclusions and Implications
From our targeted review, it is apparent that there is a need for more published
empirical research on the effectiveness of PD models related to teachers facilitating
their students in understanding and using scientific inquiry. Designers of teacher PD
programs need to know to what extent teachers’ experiences change and enhance
teacher practice, and most importantly, enhance student achievement. We found
evidence that many studies focused on inquiry PD have been presented at annual
science education conferences, yet few have reached the publication stage in prominent
science educational research journals, as of this writing. The existing studies, reviewed
in this article, report a range of outcomes, including enhanced teacher knowledge,
changes in teacher beliefs and practice, and growth in student knowledge; however, to
the best of our knowledge, there is no existing study that reports on all of these.
We recommend that future studies be designed to investigate the connections
between the design of inquiry-focused PD, teacher knowledge, changes in teacher
123
beliefs and practice, and student knowledge. Although it is acknowledged that there is
no one formula for science teacher PD (Loucks-Horsley et al. 1998, 2003), we did find
that the programs reviewed in this study aligned with many of the features of effective
PD. However, no single study we reviewed incorporated all the features of effective
IBS PD, as advocated in the literature. Future research studies should attempt to
explore which of the nine features of effective PD identified in this paper are most
crucial for teacher growth. Experimental or quasi-experimental design might help to
elucidate the most important features of effective PD (Wayne et al. 2008).
A limitation of this targeted critical review is that we did not consider the extent
of the interactions between various features of effective PD defined in the literature.
For instance, is there a relationship between the duration of a program and how
scientific inquiry was modeled? This kind of analysis was beyond the scope of our
study. We suggest that a future critical literature review might look at the
interactions between variables to determine recommendations for the most effective
combinations of features in PD programs.
Effective inquiry PD should support teachers in enhancing their knowledge and
changing their practice. Teachers who lack science content knowledge or pedagogical
knowledge will likely have difficulty teaching science as inquiry. If teachers are
expected to change their teaching practice from using mainly a traditional approach to
a more inquiry-based approach, they will need to possess a depth of science content
knowledge, understand what inquiry is, have experience in both conducting scientific
inquiry and teaching using inquiry-based approaches, and, finally, have adequate
practice adapting lessons to be congruent with inquiry-based instruction. With this in
mind, it would be important to develop an empirically based Inquiry Teacher
Professional Development Framework for science teaching, in like manner as
suggested by Loucks-Horsley et al. (2003). Although researchers have suggested
models for supporting teachers in implementing reform-based teaching (e.g. Marx
et al. 1997, 1998; Fishman et al. 2003), these models do not include an authentic
inquiry experience as a necessary component. Other models (e.g., Shepardson and
Harbor 2004) have included authentic inquiry experiences, but do not include
opportunity for teachers to develop their own inquiry-based lessons. We argue that a
framework for effective inquiry PD would provide a structure for challenging teachers
to examine their knowledge and beliefs and reflect on their teaching practice, allow
teachers the opportunity to experience authentic scientific inquiry in meaningful
contexts similar to how they will teach in their classrooms, support teachers in
developing their own inquiry-based lessons, and focus on both content knowledge and
pedagogical knowledge. Finally, we end with an endorsement of Hilda Borko’s
AERA presidential address and article (2004) on effective teacher PD, making the
point that we have much work to do and many questions to answer about high-quality
PD for all teachers, particulary, in the case we pose, related to inquiry-specific PD.
Appendix 1
See Table 4.
123
Table 4 Alignment with the critical features of professional development and the reported findings of each of the studies reviewed
308
Study Goal Level Structural features Core features Research findings
Total Extend Authentic Coherence Dev Modeled Reflect Transfer Content (?) D D (?)
123
Time support exp lesson inquiry know Teacher Belief Practice Student
know know
1. Lee et al. TB, Tpr, E 8 days y n y n y y y y n y y y

(2004), JRST SA
and Lee et al.
(2005), JRST
and Lee
(2008a, b, c)
JRST
2. Lee (2008a, b, SA, TK, E 14 days y n y n y y y y n n n y
c), JRST and Tpr
Lee
(2008a, b, c)
SE
3. Marx et al. SA M 1 week? y n y n y y y n n n y y
(2004)
4. McNeill and Tpr, SA M 1 week? y n y n y n y n n n y y
Krajcik (2008)
5. Young and SA, Tprep E 12 h? n n y n y n n n n n y y
Lee (2005)
6. Taitelbaum Tpr S 61 h? y n y n y y y y n n y n
et al. (2008)
7. Luft (2001) TB, Tpr M/S 11 days? y n y y y y n y n y y y
8. Lotter et al. TB, Tpr, S 2 weeks? y n y y y y y y y n y n
(2007) JRST TK
and Lotter
et al. (2006)
JSTE
D. K. Capps et al.
Table 4 continued
Study Goal Level Structural features Core features Research findings
Total Extend Authentic Coherence Dev Modeled Reflect Transfer Content (?) D D (?)
Time support exp lesson inquiry know Teacher Belief Practice Student
know know
9. Akerson et al. TK, TB, E 84 h y n y y y y y y y n y y

(2007) JRST Tpr
10. Akerson TK E 2 weeks n n y y y y y y y n n n
et al. (2007)
A Review of Empirical Literature
JSTE
11. Johnson SA, Tpr, M 198 h y n y y y y y n n y y y
(2007), JRST TB
and Johnson
(2007) JSTE
12. Basista and TK, TB M/S 72 h y n y y y y y y y y n n
Mathews
(2002)
13. Jeanpierre TK, Tpr S 100 h y y y n y y y y y n y n
et al. (2005)
14. Shepardson TK, Tpr E/S 4 weeks y y y n y y y y y n y n
and Harbor
(2004)
15. Radford TK, Tat, E/S 3 weeks? y y y n y y y y y n y y
(1998) SK, Sat
16. Blanchard TK, Tpr S 6 weeks? n y y y y y y n n n y n
et al. (2009)
17. Westerlund TK, Tpr S 8 weeks n y/n y n n y y n y n y n
et al. (2002)
TB teacher beliefs, Tpr teacher practice, SA student attitude, Tprep teacher preperation, TK teacher knowledge, Tat teacher attitude, SK student knowledge, E elementary, M middle,
S secondary
309
123
Abstracts of Programs Included in This Review
1. Lee et al. (2004) Journal of Research in Science Teaching (JRST)—This study

reported on the first year of a 3-year investigation aimed at enhancing elementary
teacher beliefs and practices related to IBS. Specifically, the authors described the
reported views and practices of 53, 3rd and 4th grade teachers in a large urban area
(with high ELL population) before and after the intervention. The intervention
consisted of four full-day teacher workshops and the design of instructional units.
The workshops took place during the school year and focused on IBS instruction
and incorporating English language and literacy, as well as students’ home
languages, into science instruction. Two, long-term (2–3 months of class time),
instructional units were designed at each grade level. The authors used a mixed
methods approach including pre–post interviews and questionnaires, as well as
classroom observations to describe teacher beliefs and practices related to inquiry.
Lee et al. (2005) JRST—This study investigated the impact of an instructional
intervention on 1,523 third- and fourth-grade students whose teachers participated in
a PD program (see above for details on the PD). Specifically, the paper reported on
science and literacy achievement as a result of the intervention. The authors used a
pre–post instrument to assess students understanding of science concepts and
scientific inquiry.
Lee et al. (2008a) JRST—This study examined the impact of a multiple-year
intervention on third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade students’ science achievement. The
paper reported on 2 years of science achievement data at each grade level. Teachers
participated in 2 years of PD (see above for details on year 1). The second year of
PD consisted of four full-day teacher workshops. The workshops took place during
the school year and had a similar focus as the first year; however, there was an
emphasis on sharing experiences from enacting the curriculum. Again, a large focus
of the PD was on literacy and supporting English language learners. The authors
used a pre–post instrument to assess students understanding of science concepts and
scientific inquiry.
2. Lee et al. (2008c) JRST—This study reported on the first year of a 5-year
investigation aimed at supporting 3rd–5th grade students in science and literacy
achievement. Specifically, the authors examined students’ science achievement at
15 elementary schools in a large urban area (with high ELL population) after their
teachers participated in a PD intervention. The intervention included 5 days of
workshops during the school year, focusing on the topics teachers would later enact
in their classrooms. Additionally, a series of curriculum units and teachers guides
were developed for classroom use. The authors used a 10-question pre–post
instrument to assess student gains in science content and science inquiry in
comparison to a control or comparison group.
Lee et al. (2008b) Science Education (SE)—This study examined the reported
knowledge and practice of 38, third-grade teachers as they participated in the first
year of a 5-year PD program (see above for details on the PD). The authors used a
teacher self-report questionnaire to obtain information on teacher knowledge of
science content, practice in scientific understanding, and practice in scientific
inquiry; this was administered to teachers during the final workshop. Classroom
123
observations were conducted twice during the teaching of curricular units (using a
scaled instrument), once at the beginning of the year and once at the end of the year
to measure teacher knowledge of science content, practice in scientific understand-
ing, and practice in scientific inquiry. Post-observations interviews were employed
to gain further information about conceptions of science and inquiry.
3. Marx et al. (2004) JRST—This study investigated student learning of science
content and process after their teachers participated in a PD program. The program
included a summer PD workshop, monthly work sessions, teacher discussion
groups, and classroom support. Additionally, a series of curriculum materials were
developed to engage students in inquiry-based learning activities. The authors used
a pre–post instrument to assess gains in student science content and process as a
result of the intervention.
4. McNeill and Krajcik (2008) JRST—This study examined middle school
teachers’ instructional practice and student learning after a PD program. The
program included a 1-week summer PD and curriculum materials. The summer PD
provided teachers with generalizable knowledge for teaching curriculum materials.
Teachers attended two-day workshops prior to teaching specific units. Curriculum
materials were developed to engage students in long-term (up to 8 weeks) inquiry-
based learning activities. The authors used observation to evaluate teacher practice
and a pre–post instrument to measure student learning.
5. Young and Lee (2005) Journal of Science Education and Technology—This
study compared the performance of 5th grade students whose teachers had PD
related to a kit-based inquiry science curriculum to students whose teachers did not.
It also reported on teaching practice related to inquiry. The program included 6 h of
basic training followed by another 6 h of follow-up training a year or 2 after the
initial training. Curriculum materials were provided for teachers as part of kits. The
authors used a pre–post instrument to assess gains in student science content
including nature of science. Additionally, the authors used questionnaires to
describe classroom teaching practice.
6. Taitelbaum et al. (2008) International Journal of Science Education (ISJE)—
This study looked at the change in high school chemistry teachers’ classroom
practice as a result of a PD experience. The PD was designed to increase teachers’
knowledge and pedagogy, so they could support their students in acquiring inquiry
skills. The PD consisted of three parts: the development of a teacher’s guide to
support teachers in teaching through inquiry, a summer induction course that
supported teachers in using an inquiry approach, and a series of school year
workshop where inexperienced teachers shared their inquiry teaching experiences
with their peers. The authors used classroom observations, interviews, teacher
portfolios, and documentation of the workshop to report on changes in teaching
practice as a result of the PD.
7. Luft (2001) IJSE—This study examined the impact of an in-service PD
program on 14 secondary science teacher beliefs and practices related to inquiry.
The PD was designed to support teachers in enacting extended inquiry cycles. The
PD consisted of a day workshop during the school year as well as 5 days over the
summer where teachers participated in and developed extended inquiry lessons.
Follow-up activities including five, 1-day school-year meetings were held to discuss
123
concerns and share what teachers were doing in their classrooms. The author used
classroom observations to report on teaching practice and a series of standardized
pre–post interviews to report on teacher beliefs.
8. Lotter et al. (2007) JRST—This study described how secondary teachers’
conceptions of inquiry and beliefs on teaching changed throughout a PD experience
and discussed how changing conceptions related to inquiry teaching practice. The
PD program included a 2-week summer institute consisting of morning workshops
where teachers learned about inquiry-based teaching and afternoon research
experience in university laboratories. The summer institute was followed by three
additional, 3-h workshops during the academic year where teachers reflected on the
implementation of the lessons they designed. The authors used qualitative methods
to develop three cases of teacher change. Data included pre–post summer institute
interviews, as well as interviews after each academic year workshop to describe
teachers’ conceptions of inquiry and classroom observations to describe inquiry-
based teaching practice for each of the cases.
Lotter et al. (2006) Journal of Science Teacher Education (JSTE)—This study
investigated the conceptions of inquiry developed by teachers during the program
(see above for details on the PD). Teachers’ conceptions of inquiry before and after
the institute were assessed using pre–post interview data and through the analysis of
teacher designed lessons created during the PD.
9. Akerson et al. (2007) JRST—This study examined the impact of a 3-year PD
program on elementary teachers conceptions of NOS and inquiry, their classroom
practice, and their student conceptions of NOS and inquiry. The PD program
included a series of monthly half-day workshops at the participating elementary
school, where teachers engaged in scientific inquiry with explicit NOS instruction
and adapted and revised their current curriculum to be more inquiry-based and teach
about NOS. Teachers also received on site support that was specific to each teacher.
The authors used pre–post questionnaires and interviews along with field notes from
the workshops to construct three cases of teachers’ conceptions of NOS and inquiry.
Additionally, classroom observations were conducted as a further source of
teachers’ understandings and teaching practice for each of the cases. Pre–post
questionnaires and interviews with students were conducted to determine students’
conceptions of NOS and inquiry.
10. Akerson et al. (2007) JSTE—This study examined the impact of a PD
program on 17 elementary teachers’ conceptions of NOS. The PD program
consisted of a 2-week summer workshop where teachers learned about science
content through inquiry and received support on teaching about content matter like
physics and NOS using an inquiry-based instructional approach. The authors used
pre–post surveys to assess participants views on NOS and inquiry. Additionally, a
subset of teachers was interviewed before and after the summer institute to validate
the authors’ interpretations.
11. Johnson et al. (2007) JRST—The first study investigated the relationship
between middle school teachers’ participation in whole school PD and student
achievement in science. Eleven teachers participated in a 2-week summer institute
at a local university followed by monthly half-day workshops for 3 years following
the initial summer institute. The summer institute consisted of immersion in
123
standards-based instruction and developing or modifying the school’s current

curriculum. Monthly workshops focused on modifying curriculum and providing
support for one another. The authors used a pre–post instrument to compare student
achievement of students whose teachers attended the workshops to students of
control teachers.
Johnson (2007) JSTE—The second study explored the teachers’ implementation
of standards-based instruction in the classroom throughout a 2-year period (see
above for details on the PD). The author used a combination of interviews and
classroom observations to develop six cases of instructional change and change in
teacher beliefs.
12. Basista and Mathews (2002) School Science and Mathematics—This study
investigated the impact of a science and math PD on upper elementary and
secondary teachers’ content understanding and pedagogical knowledge in order to
promote standards-based teaching in the classroom. Twenty-two teachers partici-
pated in a 4-week summer institute meeting 8 h a day, for 3 days a week. The
institute focused on both content and pedagogy and engaged teachers in inquiry-
based learning environments. Teachers also received support during the academic
year. The authors used a pre–post instrument to assess gains in teacher content
knowledge and a Likert-style survey to determine classroom implementation.
Informal classroom observations were used and materials collected to check for
consistency with the survey results.
13. Jeanpierre et al. (2005) JRST—This study examined the impact of a PD
program on teachers’ content knowledge and teaching practice. Forty-four teachers
participated in a PD program consisting of a two-part resident institute including a
week in the summer and a week in the fall. Teachers participated in inquiry
activities, learned science content, and conducted short, inquiry-based research
projects. Additionally, teachers participated in an ongoing scientific study and
brought this investigation to their schools. The authors used a pre–post instrument to
determine gains in content knowledge. Changes in classroom teaching practice were
determined using a pre–post survey to assess the current use of inquiry, classroom
observations after the two-part institute, teacher interviews, and member checking.
14. Shepardson and Harbor (2004) Environmental Education Research—This
study examined the impact of a PD program on teachers’ knowledge of inquiry and
classroom practice. The PD program was divided into two groups. The first group of
30 elementary and secondary teachers participated in a 4-week summer institute
designed to enhance teachers’ inquiry-based teaching, content knowledge, and
inquiry abilities. Teachers participated in investigations and later designed their own
research project that they later presented to the group. All along teachers discussed
how their work related to inquiry described by the NSES. These teachers later
provided PD for the second group of 31 teachers at their individual schools. The
authors used observations of classroom practice, pre–post lesson profiles, a pre–post
open response survey, and interviews to make claims about knowledge of inquiry
and changes in classroom practice as a result of the PD.
15. Radford (1998) JRST—This study examined the impact of a PD program on
upper elementary through high school teachers’ science content knowledge, process
skills, and attitudes toward teaching science, as well as on their students’ process
123
skills and attitudes toward science. The PD program ran for 3 years; each year 30
teachers participated. It included a 3-week summer course at a university, consisting
of lab and field work, where teachers participated in inquiry and talked about
inquiry-based teaching; a 4-week independent science investigation; and follow-up
workshops during the academic year. The author used pre–post instruments to
assess teachers’ gains in science content and process skills and a Likert-style survey
to measure teachers’ attitudes toward science. Teachers were also asked to keep
portfolios during their teaching of the lessons. A pre–post instrument was given to
students and comparison students to report on gains in process skills. A similar
Likert-style survey was also given to students to measure their attitudes toward
science.
16. Blanchard et al. (2009) SE—This study examined the link between a research
experience for teachers PD program, and secondary teachers’ conceptions of inquiry
and use of inquiry in the classroom. The PD consisted of a 6-week resident institute
at a biological field station designed to support teachers in learning about inquiry as
a method for scientific research and a teaching strategy. Twenty-four teachers
participated in the program. The program challenged teachers to develop a scientific
question, a method to research the question, and conduct the study. Additionally,
teachers developed a lesson using the inquiry model the learned during the program.
The author used a pre–post questionnaire and interview to measure teachers’
conceptions of inquiry. Inquiry enactment was assessed through pre–post classroom
observations and interviews. Through these, the author developed four cases of
teacher change.
17. Westerlund et al. (2002) JSTE—This study was carried out in the second year
of a 5-year grant. The particular study examined the effects of a PD experience on
teachers’ content knowledge and classroom practice. Twenty-three secondary
science teachers were placed in an 8-week summer research experience with
laboratory scientists at a university. Participants’ experiences varied due to their
placement, but most reports suggested that teachers engaged in authentic research.
Additionally, teachers kept journal reflections of their work and related it to
classroom teaching. The authors used pre–post content knowledge assessments,
developed by cooperating scientists to assess gains in knowledge and conducted
classroom observations and interviews with four teachers to look for evidence of
teachers applying what they learned in their classrooms.
References
Abrams, E., Southerland, S. A., & Evans, C. A. (2008). Inquiry in the classroom: Identifying necessary
components of a useful definition. In E. A. Abrams, S. A. Southerland, & P. Silva (Eds.), Integrating
inquiry in the classroom: realities and opportunities. Hartford, CT: Age of Information Press.
Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: Results of a 3-year
professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 653–680.
Akerson, V. L., Hanson, D. L., & Cullen, T. A. (2007). The influence of guided inquiry and explicit
instruction on K-6 teachers’ views of nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18,
751–772.
123
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New
York: Oxford University Press.
American Association for the Advancement of Sciences. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans.
New York: Oxford University Press.
Anderson, R. D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of
Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1–12.
Basista, B., & Mathews, S. (2002). Integrated science and mathematics professional development
programs. School Science and Mathematics, 102(7), 359–370.
Blanchard, M. R., Southerland, S. A., & Granger, E. M. (2009). No silver bullet for inquiry: Making sense
of teacher change following an inquiry-based research experience for teachers. Journal of Research
in Science Teaching, 93(2), 322–360.
Blank, R. K., de las Alas, N., & Smth, C. (2008). Does teacher professional development have effects on
teaching and learning? Analysis of evaluation finding from programs for mathematics and science
teachers in 14 states. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State.
Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational
Researcher, 33, 3–15.
Britzman, D. (1991). Practice makes practice: A critical study of learning to teach. Albany: State
University of New York press.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational
Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
Bybee, R. W. (2004). Scientific inquiry and science teaching. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.),
Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education.
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical
framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175–218.
Committee on Science and Mathematics Teacher Preparation. (2001). Educating teachers of science,
mathematics, and technology: New practices for the new millennium. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916–937.
Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642.
Darling-Hammond, L., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1995). Policies that support professional development in
an era of reform. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(8), 597–604.
Deboer, G. E. (2004). Historical perspectives on inquiry teaching in schools. In L. B. Flick &
N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning,
and teacher education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Desimone, L. M. (2009). Improving impact studies of teachers’ professional development: Toward better
conceptualizations and measures. Educational Researcher, 38(3), 181–199.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in
the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.
Dubner, J., Silverstein, S. C., Carey, N., Frechtling, J., Busch-Johnsen, T., & Han, J. (2001). Evaluating
science research experience for teachers programs and their effects on student interest and academic
performance: A preliminary report on an ongoing collaborative study by eight programs. In Paper
presented at the materials research society symposium proceedings.
Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. F. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy:
A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33(2), 261–295.
Fishman, B. J., Marx, R. W., Best, S., & Tal, R. T. (2003). Linking teacher and student learning to
improve professional development in systemic reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6),
643–658.
Frechtling, J. A., Sharp, L., Carey, N., & Vanden-Kieman Westat, N. (1995). Teacher enhancement
programs: A perspective on the last four decades. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
Fullan, M., & Steigelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). New York:
Teachers College Press.
Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional
development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research
Journal, 38(4), 915–945.
123
Guskey, T. T. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and
practice, 8(3/4), 381–391.
Hewson, P. W. (2007). Teacher professional development in science. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman
(Eds.), Handbook of research on science education. Mahwah: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Holliday, W. G. (2004). A balanced approach to science inquiry teaching. In L. B. Flick &
N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning,
and teacher education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Jeanpierre, B., Oberhauser, K., & Freeman, C. (2005). Characteristics of professional development that
effect change in secondary science teachers’ classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 42(6), 668–690.
Johnson, C. C. (2007). Whole-school collaborative sustained professional development and science
teacher change: Sings of progress. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 629–661.
Johnson, C. C., Kahle, J. B., & Fargo, J. D. (2007). A study of the effect of sustained, whole-school
professional development on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 44(6), 775–786.
Kagen, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of
Educational Research, 62, 129–169.
Kennedy, M. (1998). Form and substance in in-service teacher education. Arlington, VA: National
Science Foundation.
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not
work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and
inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2000a). Instructional, curricular, and
technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.),
Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 283–315). Washington, DC: American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
Krajcik, J. S., Mamlok, R., & Hug, B. (2000b). Modern content and the enterprise of science: Science
education in the twentieth century. In L. Como (Ed.), Education across a century: The centennial
volume—One-hundredth yearbook of the national society for the study of education. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Krathwohl, D. R. (1998). Methods of educational and social science research: An integrated approach.
Reading, MA: Addison Wesley Longman.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Lederman, N. G. (2004). In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science:
Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Lee, O., Hart, J. E., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2004). Professional development in inquiry-based science
for elementary teachers of diverse student groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10),
1021–1043.
Lee, O., Deaktor, R. A., Hart, J. E., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2005). An instructional intervention’s
impact on the science and literacy achievement of culturally and linguistically diverse elementary
students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(8), 857–887.
Lee, O., Deaktor, R., Enders, C., & Lambert, J. (2008a). Impact of a multiyear professional development
intervention on science achievement of culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students.
Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(6), 726–747.
Lee, O., Lewis, S., Adamson, K., Maerten-Rivera, J., & Secada, W. G. (2008b). Urban elementary school
teachers’ knowledge and practices in teaching science to English language learners. Science
Education, 92(4), 733–758.
Lee, O., Maerten-Rivera, J., Penfield, R. D., LeRoy, K., & Secada, W. G. (2008c). Science achievement
of English language learners in urban elementary schools: Results of a first-year professional
development intervention. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 31–52.
Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lotter, C., Harwood, W. S., & Bonner, J. J. (2006). Overcoming a learning bottleneck: Inquiry
professional development for secondary science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17,
185–216.
Lotter, C., Harwood, W. S., & Bonner, J. J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on
teachers’ use of inquiry teaching practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9),
1318–1347.
123
Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing professional
development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional
development for teachers of science and mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Loughran, J. J. (2002). Effective reflective practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 33–43.
Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: The impact of an inquiry-based professional
development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International
Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 517–534.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science:
Challenges for practice and policy. The Elementary School Journal, 97(4), 341–358.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1998). New technologies for teacher
professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 33–52.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., Geier, R., et al. (2004). Inquiry-
based science in the middle grades: Assessment of learning in urban systemic reform. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 1063–1080.
McDermott, L. C., & DeWater, L. S. (2000). The need for special science courses for teachers: Two
perspectives. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in
science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of
teachers’ instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
45(1), 53–78.
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
National Science Teachers Association. (1998). The national science education standards: A vision for
the improvement of science teaching and learning. Arlington, VA: NSTA.
Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes professional
development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational
Research Journal, 44(4), 921–958.
Radford, D. L. (1998). Transferring theory into practice: A model for professional development for
science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35(1), 73–88.
Schwab, J. J. (1966). The teaching of science as enquiry. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Schwab, J. J. (1976). Education and the state: Learning community. In R. M. Hutchins (Ed.), The great
ideas today. Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
Shepardson, D. P., & Harbor, J. (2004). ENVISION: The effectiveness of a dual-level professional
development model for changing teacher practice. Environmental Education Research, 10(4),
471–492.
Smylie, M. A. (1996). From bureaucratic control to building human capital: The importance of teacher
learning in education reform. Educational Researcher, 25(9), 9–11.
Stake, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Case studies in science education. Urbana, IL: The University of Illinois.
Taitelbaum, D., Mamlok-Naaman, R., Carmeli, M., & Hofstein, A. (2008). Evidence for teachers’ change
while participating in a continuous professional development programme and implementing the
inquiry approach in the chemistry laboratory. International Journal of Science Education, 30(5),
593–617.
Tobin, K., & LaMaster, S. U. (1995). Relationships between metaphors, beliefs, and actions in a context
of science curriculum change. Science Education, 32(3), 225–242.
Tobin, K., Briscoe, C., & Holman, J. R. (1990). Overcoming constraints to effective elementary science
teaching. Science Education, 74(4), 409–420.
Wayne, A. J., Yoon, K. S., Zhu, P., Cronen, S., & Garet, M. S. (2008). Experimenting with teacher
professional development: Motives and methods. Educational Researcher, 37(8), 469–479.
Wee, B., Shepardson, D. P., Fast, J., & Harbor, J. (2007). Teaching and learning about inquiry: Insights
and challenges in professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(1), 63–89.
Wells, G. (1995). Language and the inquiry-oriented curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 25(3), 233–269.
Westerlund, J. F., Garcia, D. M., Koke, J. R., Taylor, T. A., & Mason, D. S. (2002). Summer scientific
research for teachers: The experience and its effect. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1),
63–83.
123
Wheeler, G. F. (2000). The three faces of inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into
inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Wilson, S. M., & Berne, J. (1999). Teacher learning and the acquisition of professional knowledge: An
examination of research on contemporary professional development. Review of Research in
Education, 24, 173–209.
Windschitl, M. (2002). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: What can investigative experiences
reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87(1), 112–143.
Yarrick, R., Parke, H., & Nugent, J. (1997). Struggling to report deeply rooted change: The ‘‘filtering
effects’’ on teachers’ beliefs on understanding transformation views of teaching science. Science
Education, 81(2), 137–159.
Young, B., & Lee, S. (2005). The effects of a kit-based science curriculum and intensive science
professional development on elementary student science achievement. Journal of Science Education
and Technology, 14(5), 471–481.
Zeichner, K. M. (2005). A research agenda for teacher education. In M. Cochran-Smith & K. M. Zeichner
(Eds.), Studying teacher education: The report of the AERA panel on research and teacher
education. Washington, DC: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
123

Capps 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Capps 2012

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Capps 2012

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Science Teacher Education

The official journal of the Association for Science Teacher Education

ISSN: 1046-560X (Print) 1573-1847 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uste20

A Review of Empirical Literature on Inquiry

Daniel K. Capps, Barbara A. Crawford & Mark A. Constas

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9275-2

Published online: 23 Feb 2017.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 645

View related articles

Citing articles: 40 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

A Review of Empirical Literature on Inquiry

Daniel K. Capps • Barbara A. Crawford •

Published online: 16 March 2012

Keywords Review Inquiry-based Professional development

less emphasis on using direct instruction to a greater emphasis on inquiry-based

3. What do these findings tell us about PD aimed at promoting inquiry-based

Background: Scientific Inquiry and Professional Development (PD)

Scientific Inquiry: Definitions and Theoretical Underpinnings

Table 1 Five essential features

Theoretical Underpinnings and the Importance of Inquiry Instruction

Constructivism in science education centers on the idea that learners should be

Definitions and Characteristics of Effective Professional Development (PD)

Table 2 Characteristics of effective professional development described by Darling-Hammond and

Engages teachers in concrete tasks of teaching, Emphasizes inquiry-based learning,

Selection of Studies for Review

As stated in the introduction, the purpose of this article is to evaluate empirical

In attempting to remain as objective as possible, we relied on expert opinion,

Results and Discussion

Alignment with Critical Features of Effective Professional Development

workshop including, classroom visits, reunions, where teachers and developers

Only five of the studies critiqued engaged teachers in authentic inquiry—these

Sixteen of the seventeen programs reviewed modeled inquiry-based instruction in

of inquiry-based instruction, will most likely result in teachers enhancing their

Fifteen out of seventeen of the programs critiqued promoted teacher reflection in

Fifteen out of seventeen programs reviewed actively supported teachers in

Robustness of the Findings

Inquiry PD programs reported a range of findings, including enhanced teacher

Enhanced Teacher Knowledge

Enhanced teacher knowledge including subject matter knowledge, knowledge of

Change in Teacher Beliefs

Change in teacher beliefs concerning the importance of inquiry in teaching science

Change in Teacher Practice

Measurements of enhanced teacher practice of inquiry in the classroom or ability to

Enhanced Student Knowledge

The extent of enhanced student knowledge including science subject matter

What Do These Findings Tell Us About Professional Development (PD)

Experts in science education and authors of science reform documents have

Conclusions and Implications

Study Goal Level Structural features Core features Research findings

1. Lee et al. TB, Tpr, E 8 days y n y n y y y y n y y y

Study Goal Level Structural features Core features Research findings

9. Akerson et al. TK, TB, E 84 h y n y y y y y y y n y y

Abstracts of Programs Included in This Review

1. Lee et al. (2004) Journal of Research in Science Teaching (JRST)—This study

standards-based instruction and developing or modifying the school’s current

You might also like