Empirical; Contextual Research Strand; Title: Elementary Science Specialists and Classroom Generalists: Are There Differences in Science Instruction, Student Achievement, and Cost?

摘要智力价值这一建议侧重于初级科学教学，目前对科学教学有效模式的研究很少。这项研究的目的是确定通才、专家或混合型课堂教学模式在科学教学的数量和质量上存在多大程度的有意义的差异；教学差异是否与学生的结果相关；从财力和人力资源的角度来看，哪种模式是最具成本效益的。这项研究将针对波士顿公立学区42所学校的80名四年级和五年级学生的教师。马萨诸塞州科学与技术工程课程框架中详细阐述的指导原则将作为高质量科学教学的操作定义和指导课堂观察的理论框架。本研究将指导这项研究的四个研究问题包括：1.有没有聘请科学专家的学校有什么特点？科学专家和课堂通才的特点是什么？2.科学专家、课堂通才和专家/通才的组合提供的科学教学质量有何不同？科学专家、课堂通才和专家/通才的组合提供的科学教学的数量有何不同？3.如果教学模式之间存在差异，它们在多大程度上和以什么方式与学生的学习相关？4.每种模式相关的财政和人力资源成本是多少？将使用混合方法通过调查、三次面对面访谈和三次课堂观察来收集数据。数据将在两年半的时间里从校长和教师那里收集。调查工具和协议由Horizon Research，Inc.开发，并将进行修改，以满足本研究的特定需求。来自马萨诸塞州综合评估系统的四年级和五年级学生的测试分数，以及基于套件的测试将被用来确定不同模型对学生成绩的影响。这项研究包括一种深思熟虑的方法，用于使用一系列定量和定性方法(例如，一般描述统计、分层线性建模、Logistic回归模型、单向Manova估计、编码和编码方案以及atlas.it)来分析数据。更广泛的影响这项研究的更大影响在于结果对地区政策制定者的意义和重要性。虽然在美国，只有不到30%的小学生除了接受常规课堂教师的科学指导外，还接受专家或科学专家的科学指导，但很少有研究描述这种方法对科学教学和学生成绩的影响。通过这项研究可能解决的根本问题包括三种模式(通才、专家或混合模式)中哪一种更适合科学教学和学习，以及成本是多少。这些信息将帮助政策制定者就初级科学教育做出更好的决策。将通过与政策制定者有关的多种渠道和途径，向主要教育利益攸关方传播经验教训。因此，该项目增加了这一领域有限的研究，提高了关于科学教学的知识，突出了对学生成绩的影响，揭示了成本效益，并提供了一个衡量初级科学教学的工具。

AbstractIntellectual MeritThis proposal focuses on science instruction at the elementary level where few research studies exist about effective models for teaching science. The goal of this study is to determine the degree to which there are meaningful differences in the quantity and quality of science instruction provided by a generalist, specialist, or blended model for classroom instruction; whether differences in instruction are associated with student outcomes; and which model is the most cost-effective based on financial and human resources. The study will target 80 teachers of fourth and fifth grade students in 42 schools in the Boston Public School District. The guiding principles detailed in the Massachusetts Science and Technology Engineering Curriculum Framework will serve as the operating definition of high-quality science instruction and the theoretical framework to guide classroom observations.The four research questions that will guide this study include:1. What are the characteristics of schools that do and do not employ science specialists? What are the characteristics of science specialists and classroom generalists? 2. How does the quality of science instruction provided by a science specialist, a classroom generalist, and a combination of specialist/generalist differ? How does the quantity of science instruction provided by a science specialist, a classroom generalist, and a combination of specialist/generalist differ?3. If differences in instruction exist between the models, to what extent and in what ways are they associated with student learning?4. What are the financial and human-resource costs associated with each model?A mixed methods approach will be used to collect data through surveys, three face-to face interviews and three classroom observations. Data will be collected from both principals and teachers over a 2.5 year period. The survey instruments and protocols were developed by Horizon Research, Inc., and will be modified to meet the specific needs of this study. Fourth and fifth grade student test scores from the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System, the state's assessment instrument, and kit-based tests will be used to determine the impact of the different models on student achievement. The study includes a well thought-out approach for analyzing data using an array of quantitative and qualitative methods (e.g. general descriptive statistics, hierarchical linear modeling, logistic regression models, one-way MANOVA estimations, coding and coding schemes, and atlas.it). Broader ImpactsThe boarder impacts of this study reside in the significance and importance of results to district policymakers. While less that 30% of elementary students in the United States receive science instruction from specialists or a science specialist in addition to their regular classroom teachers, few studies exist that describe the effect of this approach on science teaching and student achievement. The fundamental issue that might be resolved through this study include which of three models (generalist, specialist, or blended) is the better one for teaching and learning science and at what cost. This information will help policymakers make better decisions about science instruction at the elementary level. Ways to disseminate lessons-learned to key education stakeholders will be distributed through multiple channels and pathways relevant to policymakers. Thus, this project adds to the limited research in this area, advances knowledge about science instruction, highlights the impact on student achievement, sheds light on cost effectiveness, and provides a tool for measuring science instruction at the elementary level.