ARTICLE IN PRESS

Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477

www.elsevier.com/locate/tate

Teaching communication skills in science:

Tracing teacher change
Ornit Spektor-Levy, Bat-Sheva Eylon, Zahava Scherz!
The Department of Science Teaching, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rechovot, Israel
Received 6 March 2006; received in revised form 7 October 2006; accepted 23 October 2006

Abstract

This paper describes a general model for skills instruction and its implementation through the program ‘‘Scientific
Communication’’ for acquiring learning skills. The model is characterized by modularity, explicit instruction, spiral
integration into contents, practice in various contexts, and implementation in performance tasks. It requires flexible
planning and implementation by the teachers. The study investigated how science teachers implemented this model for a
two-year period. Results show that they coped with this task by customizing the program; they underwent a positive
change in perceptions about skills instruction, instructional models, using instructional materials, influence and
involvement in school and beyond.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Professional development; Learning skills; Scientific communication; Teacher change

1. Introduction teachers (Campbell, Kaunda, Allie, Buffler, &

In the third millennium, science teachers face the
challenge of bridging the gap between what they
studied, what is written in school textbooks, and
what is actually known today about a certain issue.
A meaningful understanding of science concepts
and familiarity with the experimental procedures of
science are necessary elements of learning science.
The ability to communicate this knowledge success-
fully is an essential part of science education
(Germann & Aram, 1996; Sheeran & Barnes,
1991) and thus, it is a legitimate concern of science
!Corresponding author. Tel.: +972 8 9342035;
fax: +972 8 9344115.
E-mail addresses: ornit.spektor-levy@weizmann.ac.il
(O. Spektor-Levy), b.eylon@weizmann.ac.il (B.-S. Eylon),
zahava.scherz@weizmann.ac.il (Z. Scherz).
Lubben, 2000). Science educators have begun to
see their role as preparing all students for a life in a
world of rapid scientific and technological change,
rather than preparing a small group of students for
highly specialized careers. The shift is toward the
goal of helping students integrate what they have
learned in the science classroom into their daily lives
(AAAS, 1993; PISA, 2003). In this way, the
curriculum content is placed in more ecologically
valid contexts, by making it more enquiry-based
(Bybee, 1997, 2000; Hofstein & Lunetta, 2004; Linn,
Songer, & Eylon, 1996) and by adopting measures
to assess students’ outcomes that tap the students’
ability to engage in guided discovery activities
rather than memory of content per se (Bol &
Strage, 1996; Schneider, Krajcik, Marx, & Soloway,
2002).

0742-051X/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.10.009
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
It is becoming increasingly apparent that if
students are to pursue autonomous learning effec-
tively, they need the skills to search for information
that will expand their knowledge beyond what was
specifically learned in the classroom (Borgman,
Hirsh, & Walter, 1995; Scherz, Spektor-Levy, &
Eylon, 2005); hence, they need the ability to
communicate effectively (Campbell et al., 2000;
Scherz, Michman, & Tamir, 1986; Spektor-Levy &
Scherz, 2001). Therefore, in many countries, re-
forms in science education have taken place and
new standards were formulated (AAAS, 1993;
Atkin & Black, 2003; National Curriculum, The
standard site, 2003; National Research Council,
1996; Science Syllabus Primary-Singapore, 2004;
Twenty First Century Science, 2002). These reforms
and standards reflect the understanding that one of
the most important teacher’s tasks is to equip
students with high-order skills that will support
independent learning: inquiry and problem-solving
skills, thinking skills, and learning skills (Bereiter &
Scardamalia, 1989; Bybee & Ben-Zvi, 1998; Camp-
bell et al., 2000; Costa, 1985; Eylon & Linn, 1988;
Kirkwood, 2000; Zohar & Dori, 2003).
It is widely accepted that if teachers are to move
successfully toward these new visions, many tea-
chers—experts and novices alike—must make major
changes in their teaching practices, and in their
knowledge and beliefs about teaching, learning, and
the subject matter (Hofstein, Carmi & Ben-Zvi,
2003; Pintó, 2005; Pintó, Couso, & Gutierrez, 2005;
Tobin & McRobbie, 1996; van Driel, Beijaard, &
Verloop, 2001).
However, even a real willingness to undergo such a
change does not guarantee its implementation. There-
fore, given the increasing commitment to professional
development on the part of the educational commu-
nity and governments, it is important to identify those
features of professional development that are success-
ful in fostering teachers’ change.
This study is based on research and theory
concerning the professional development of science
teachers and instruction of skills. More specifically,
we present a flexible model for skills instruction that
integrates the instruction of skills into the scheme of
content instruction. This model challenges the
teachers by requiring flexible thinking, decision-
making, and development of spiral instruction.
Therefore, it has the potential to influence teaching
habits and views.
We describe here a longitudinal research study
that traced science teachers’ change throughout two
463
years. We consider how the instruction of ‘‘Scientific
Communication’’ (SC) skills based on the new
model for skills instruction influences teachers’
beliefs, attitudes, intentions, and practices.
Understanding the change in teachers’ beliefs and
practices as they gain experience in teaching SC
skills is critical if we are to improve students’
scientific literacy, competencies, and achievements.
2. The ‘‘Scientific Communication’’ program
In 1993 a new reform took place in the Israeli
middle school: a new subject was introduced—
‘‘Science and Technology’’—followed by a new
curriculum that emphasized learning skills, in addi-
tion to content learning (Israeli Ministry of Educa-
tion, 1996). As a result, new instructional materials
were developed. One of them was the program ‘‘SC’’,
designed for developing scientific literacy and learn-
ing skills in science studies (Spektor-Levy & Scherz,
1999, 2001).1 The program focuses mainly on the
following skills: information retrieval, scientific read-
ing, listening and observing, scientific writing,
information representation, and knowledge presenta-
tion. Each of these skills can be further subdivided
into sub-skills. For example, scientific writing in-
cludes knowledge of how to write an extended
scientific report, how to write an essay on a scientific
topic, and how to construct an abstract (Table 1).
This program is modular and flexible as will be
elaborated in the next section. More specifically, it
employs an instructional approach unfamiliar to the
teachers, requiring them to design their own
sequences of instruction by integrating content and
skills attainment. This new approach raises some
questions with regard to the feasibility of implement-
ing the program, as will be described next.
2.1. The instructional model of SC
The model of skills instruction is based on three
assumptions:
1. Most students do not develop learning skills
spontaneously. Therefore, they should be taught
explicitly in a well-planned manner.
1
In 2005, this program was further developed and adapted to
the UK KS4 science curriculum, funded by the Gatsby Science
Enhancement Programme (SEP). It is entitled ‘‘Learning Skills
for Science’’ and is published by the Nuffield Curriculum Centre
(Scherz & Spektor-Levy, 2005).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
464 O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
Table 1
The ‘‘Scientific Communication’’ program: skills and sub-skills
‘‘Scientific Sub-skills (examples)
Communication’’ skills
Information retrieval Information retrieval in computerized
databases; ‘‘navigation’’ in the
library: using catalogs, the Dewey
classification; searching in scientific
journals; interviewing experts
Scientific reading Reading a scientific article, becoming
familiar with the structure of
reference books, scientific reports/
news.
Listening and observing Lectures, videos, debates,
demonstrations
Scientific writing Articles, reports, abstracts, a scientific
essay
Information Schemes, graphs, tables, drawings/
representation illustrations
Knowledge presentation Oral presentations, multimedia,
models, a panel of experts, scientific
posters
2. The teaching of skills should be integrated and
infused with content learning in science and
technology, and it should not be taught as a
separate content-free subject.
3. The learned skills should be applied repeatedly in
a variety of domains and contexts throughout the
curriculum and should not be taught as a ‘‘one-
shot’’ experience.
Eilam (2002) elaborated that skill acquisition
might be better achieved if the emphasis would shift
from demonstrating the applications of skills
towards explicitly exposing the skills’ components
and the necessary cognitive operations. It is also
important to promote the students’ ability to
construct the mental representations of each opera-
tion and its related conditional knowledge. This
requires allocating the necessary time and promot-
ing classroom experiences in which students can be
active.
The above assumptions and the literature guided
us in designing the general model for skills instruc-
tion that furnishes the science teacher with pedago-
gical and instructional strategies and can be
implemented in the science classroom. The follow-
ing characteristics describe this general skills in-
struction model:
! Explicit instruction: The instruction of skills and
sub-skills is very evident and emphasized. Stu-
dents are aware of the process of skills acquisi-
tion.
! Active learning: The process of skills acquisition
requires the learner to be active and to actually
use the learned skill. The learner is not only
aware of the skill but immediately asks to
perform it.
! Framework: The instructional materials consist
of a framework of many general activities that
can be used in conjunction with specific contents.
These activities are designed so students can
practice the different skills as well as the sub-
skills, in any given content in science.
! Integration: The teachers are supposed to tailor
the general activities to specific content areas.
The model facilitates the integration of learning
skills instruction with the science contents,
according to the level and needs of the students
in class.
! Spiral instruction: Throughout the years the
students practice the generic skill of gathering
and analyzing information, representing infor-
mation, and presenting knowledge. Each year
students are introduced to different sub-skills in
depth and continue to practice them several times
in the course of their studies.
! Flexibility and modularity: The instructional
materials are flexible and modular in a way that
enables teachers to choose the specific skills and
activities that will be implemented every year. In
this way, the teachers can plan their own
sequence of instruction according to their agenda
and adjust the activities to the level and needs of
the students.
2.2. The instructional materials of SC
Based on the above general model, we developed
the program SC. It is a didactic learning package
that includes an activities booklet for the student, an
extended guide for the teacher, several interfaces to
the main topics of the curriculum, and assessment
tasks.
The following are examples of activities from the
program:
(1) In the skill area of Information Retrieval:
advertise a scientific journal.
This activity helps students become familiar with
scientific journals suitable to their level. Working in
teams, students are given samples of a scientific
journal. They have to explore the journals following
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
specific instructions, introduce the journal to the
class, and prepare an attractive advertisement to
encourage others to use this journal in the future. In
doing so, they present the structure of the journal,
its goals, the different sections and give a critique
about the level of the journal and its target
audience. In preparing the advertisement, the
students utilize their creativity and compose jingles,
draw posters, and write slogans.
(2) In the skill area of Scientific Reading: the ‘‘first
glance’’ into a scientific article.
In this activity, students acquire the skills of
browsing and sorting scientific articles in order to
find out which are suitable, relevant, and desirable
for a specific assignment.
By ‘‘first glance’’ we mean skimming through an
article, but nevertheless drawing information from
it and becoming acquainted with it. The aim of the
‘‘first glance’’ is to decide whether an article is
relevant for the reader’s aims and thus worth
reading in greater depth. Generally, after a ‘‘first
glance’’ the initial selection of articles can be
reduced by around 80%. After the ‘‘first glance’’
the reader should know whether he is interested in
the article in terms of its suitability for the assign-
ment on hand and its scientific level.
In-service workshops and courses were provided
for science teachers in order to improve their
mastery of learning skills and to equip them with
the necessary methodology and tools for meaningful
implementation of the SC program.
3. Professional development of teachers
During the 1970s, professional development of
teachers was based on the notion that there is a
deficit in teachers’ skills and knowledge. Therefore,
most professional development programs consisted
of ‘‘one shot’’ workshops aimed at teachers’ mastery
of prescribed skills and knowledge (Guskey, 1986).
This deficit model has been criticized throughout
the literature (Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Fullan
& Stiegelbauer, 1991). The 1980s saw professional
development of teachers reflecting a movement
towards organizational development, school im-
provement, and systemic change (Guskey, 1986).
Today, as Clarke and Hollingsworth (2002) elabo-
rated, a significant outcome of the above criticism
and research is a shift in focus from teachers’ earlier
conceptions of change (when the teachers are
passive participants), to change as a complex
process that involves learning and reflection. Wood
465
and Bennett (2000) proposed a three-stage model
for change: (1) reflective consideration (the process
of reflection-on-action), (2) problematizing practice
(identifying constraints and dilemmas), (3) changing
theories and practice (restructuring theories, or
practice, or both). Thus, teachers’ change and the
implementation of a new curriculum, a new
standard, a new strategy, or any new approach
cannot be achieved by mere dissemination of novel
ideas. The change should be considered as a process
and should be followed by scaffolding, support, and
the necessary conditions to facilitate the change
(Clarke & Hollingsworth, 2002; Eraut, 1975; Wood
& Bennett, 2000).
Thus, a major aim of teacher education today is
the development of ‘‘reflective practitioners’’.
Schon (1983) claimed that the ‘‘reflective practi-
tioner’’ needs to reflect critically on the meaning of
his/her thoughts and actions as a route to the
enhancement of professional practice. The process
of reflection is defined as reviewing, reconstructing,
re-enacting, and critically analyzing one’s own
performance as well as that of the class, and
establishing explanations based on evidence
(Shulman, 1987).
These reflection processes are especially impor-
tant when teachers need to teach materials that are
unfamiliar or new to them, and this is the focus of
this article: the instruction of learning skills and SC
skills in science classes. As mentioned before, in
order to teach it, teachers must master these skills
themselves and therefore should be formally trained
in the skills that they are expected to teach (Rubin &
Norman, 1992). This study follows those teachers
through their reflection processes during the im-
plementation in class. The context of this study is
unique since the course of the professional devel-
opment of the teachers was a combination of two
aspects: (1) a structured and well-planned training
course that taught the teachers the rationale and the
ways to conduct a variety of activities of the SC
program as well as actually practicing the skills, (2)
a follow-up procedure that consisted of visits to the
teachers’ classrooms and interviews during which
the teachers were asked to reflect upon their
instruction. However, in order to explore the
feasibility of the instructional model and program,
and its contribution to the development of science
teachers, we did not discuss with the teachers their
reflections and attitudes. No further scaffolding and
support was given to these teachers throughout the
2 years of the study.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
466 O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
4. Methods
4.1. Research rationale and questions
The SC program is modular and flexible. Its
components do not require one preferable order as
most instructional programs do. However, it
requires the teachers to plan their own sequence of
instruction, and to integrate it into the science
contents. It also requires the teachers to adapt or
customize the program according to the needs of
learners, in different situations.
This study aimed at determining whether science
teachers can carry out the task of implementing
such a flexible and very demanding model of
instruction. We also wanted to explore and under-
stand the change in and development of the beliefs
and actions of science teachers while teaching the
special activities and the unique strategies of the
program.
In particular, answers to the following were
sought:
1. How did the implementation of the SC program
evolve in the course of 2 years of implementa-
tion?
2. How did the instruction of the SC program
influence the attitudes, practices, and intentions
of science teachers?
4.2. Participants
Forty-nine science teachers were found eligible to
participate in the study and were invited to join it.
Eleven of the forty-nine original teachers agreed to
be involved and actually participated in this long-
itudinal study. This sample of eleven teachers, in the
initial stage of the research, was heterogeneous in all
aspects and we will substantiate this claim in the
study.
The participants were science teachers from
different regions of the country. All had previously
participated in a comprehensive course on the SC
program (minimum of 16 h) and had taught the
program that was integrated into the ‘‘Science and
Technology’’ curriculum in middle school. During
the 2 years of the study, there was no further
guidance or support for the teachers concerning the
instruction of the program.
All participants were females (as are the great
majority of the teachers in the country).
The teachers had diverse backgrounds in terms of
their ages (a range of 25–52 years) and in terms of
their experience as teachers (a range of 5–24 years).
Because of their varied educational and profes-
sional experiences, these teachers had a variety of
beliefs, opinions, and practices—a point that will be
elaborated later in this article.
4.3. Method
Qualitative research methods were employed in
order to answer both research questions.
Several data collection techniques were employed
to gauge and represent the findings in this study.
Interviews were the main technique. Other techni-
ques were observations in classrooms, collecting
artifacts (e.g., students’ work, teachers’ worksheets)
that were collected in order to corroborate reported
practices, changes, and beliefs.
All teachers participated in face-to-face inter-
views. Two major interviews were conducted: one at
the beginning of the study, and one at the end of the
study after two school years. These semi-structured
interviews lasted 1.5–2 h. The interviews were
designed to explore teachers’ conceptions about
the instruction and acquisition of learning skills, the
usage of the instructional materials, the ways of
implementing the SC program, and the difficulties
they meet.
Each interview was conducted by one of the
authors, at the participant’s school. Shorter and
open interviews were conducted while we visited the
participating teachers at school to observe the
classrooms. These intermediate interviews took
place 2–4 times throughout the 2 years of the study.
All interviews were audio-taped and transcribed.
As mentioned, during the two years of the study,
we visited the ‘‘Science and Technology’’ classes of
the participating teachers, observed the implemen-
tation of SC activities, and heard from the teachers
about their impressions from the activities that had
taken place in class.
When observations in the classroom took place,
field notes were taken.
4.4. Data analysis
Initial data analysis consisted of coding the
interview transcripts, field notes, and artifacts for
issues related to the learning, teaching, and assess-
ment of SC skills. Teachers’ views from the inter-
views were identified through re-examining, re-
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
defining, and re-classifying until there was a strong
consensus between the first author and the second
analyst, who is a knowledgeable practitioner with
knowledge of both science education and teacher
education. We used analytic induction and reason-
ing to develop thematic categories. After several
attempts, we proposed categories contrasting and
distinguishing different characteristics in teachers’
conceptions. Categories included instructional
goals, instructional activities, organization of in-
struction, assessment goals, assessment tasks, tea-
cher dilemmas, use of the instructional materials,
and teamwork among teachers in school.
In the next phase of analysis we compiled the data
that addressed the topics that emerged and orga-
nized these data according to the change that
occurred, and the nature of the change processes.
Next, we looked for commonalities and differences
across teachers. Based on that analysis, we identified
four main aspects that describe the teachers’ change.
By deciding to focus on four aspects, we were able
to analyze in detail a subset of the large dataset and
trace patterns in the change process. We are aware
that by focusing on the four chosen aspects, this
analysis does not portray the full scope of all
changes in ideas and practices.
Nevertheless, the four aspects became the orga-
nizational structure for our presentation of results.
Furthermore, it enabled us to define levels of
proficiency for each of these aspects.
A scoring system was established for further
analysis of the change in the different aspects of SC
teaching over time. Following discussions and
consultations with experts in science education, an
ordinal numeric scale of one–five was used to
represent the extent of teachers’ development of
perceptions, views, and professional actions
(Table 2). We chose to use a five-level scale since
in most rubrics of alternative assessment one can
find three main levels of performance (low, medium,
and high) and two more optional intermediate
levels. Then we defined each level of proficiency
and attitudes. The scale is ordinal in the sense that
each level is higher than the previous one. In most
cases the levels are cumulative, namely, a higher
level requires the specified behaviors in the lower
level (Table 2: ‘Instructional model’, levels one–f-
ive). In other cases, levels were judged by experts as
consecutive but not necessarily cumulative-repre-
senting lower or higher performance (see for
example in Table 2: ‘Influence and involvement in
school and beyond’, level five was judged to be
467
higher than level four, which is higher than level
three, etc.). Moreover, the difference between
consecutive levels is not necessarily the same.
Sometimes the transition between levels requires
relatively small changes and in other cases the
difference between consecutive levels is substantial.
The ‘‘level of proficiency’’ scale is based on the
analysis of data and our rich field experience while
conducting workshops on SC and supporting
teachers in implementation. It enables an in-depth
analysis that allows comparing between the partici-
pants.
A coding scheme was needed to represent the
development of the teachers in the four aspects and
their ‘‘level of proficiency’’. The coding scheme will
be presented with our findings.
Two science education researchers revised and
validated the ‘‘levels of proficiency’’ and the data
analysis to ensure the integrity of these analyses and
findings.
In the next sections we discuss our findings about
teachers’ practices, attitudes, and beliefs about skills
instruction, organized around the four aspects
chosen.
4.5. Two science teachers
From the eleven interviewees, two teachers were
specifically selected for the focus of this article.
Because of space limitations, we selected represen-
tative teachers to provide sufficient depth of
perspectives and experiences. The two teachers’
beliefs and actions and the degree to which those
beliefs changed or did not change represented much
of what we learned from the other teachers during
the study.
5. Findings and interpretations
The findings are presented for each aspect of the
SC instruction: (a) perceptions about skills instruc-
tion; (b) instructional models; (c) using instructional
materials; and (d) influence and involvement in
school and beyond. Comparison between the
different aspects and changes over time is reported.
In this section, we describe in detail, the develop-
ment profile of the two science teachers: Ela and
Oran, based on their interviews.
Both teachers, like the other science teachers in
the sample, participated in a comprehensive SC
workshop before the research, and both implemen-
ted the program in their ‘‘Science and Technology’’
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
468 O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477

Table 2
Four aspects of ‘‘Scientific Communication’’ instruction and the ‘‘levels of proficiency’’

Level of Perceptions about the Instructional model Teaching and using the Influence and
proficiency acquisition of skills instructional materials involvement in school
and beyond

Low 1 Instruction of skills is not
considered
2 Realizing the importance
of skills instruction
without implementing it
3 Realizing the importance
of skills instruction and
being ready to introduce
opportunities for skills
acquisition occasionally
4 Believing that the
systematic planning of
multiple opportunities for
the acquisition and
practice of skills is
essential
High 5 Realizing the necessity of
skills’ assessment in
addition to planned
acquisition and practice
of skills
Instruction of skills over
a limited period of time
Instruction and activities
are scattered with
minimal planning and
integration into content
Intensive instruction of
skills only with complex
tasks and not throughout
the year
Well-planned integration
of skills and content
throughout the year
Multi-year planning of
spiral instruction and
integration of skills and
scientific contents
Using instructional
materials of only a
specific skill/chapter/
activity
Using instructional
materials of some skills/
chapters/activities
occasionally
Intensive use of the
instructional materials
Intensive and flexible use
of the instructional
materials. Adjustment of
sequences and activities
according to students’
needs
Intensive and flexible use
of the instructional
materials. Adjustment of
activities when needed.
Development of
innovative activities for
instruction and practice
of skills
The teacher works alone
The teacher collaborates
with teachers of the same
discipline within the
school
The teacher collaborates
with other teachers from
different disciplines
within the school
The teacher initiates and
is involved in cooperating
with the school
management to improve
skills instruction
The teacher influences
and is involved in
professional development
and improvement of skills
instruction in school and
beyond the school

classes. Ela entered our study with 17 years of
experience as a science teacher. She has continu-
ously participated in various in-service courses to
update her professional knowledge. She was the
coordinator of the science studies in her school.
Oran has been a science teacher for 7 years. She also
participated in different in-service courses through-
out the years but to a much lesser extent. Using the
knowledge gained from these courses, she tried to
initiate new instructional methods in her school but
without much success.
The initial profiles of these two teachers are very
different. Therefore, we chose them to illustrate our
methodology.
Based on the level of proficiency and scaling
presented in Table 2, we analyzed the professional
development of the two teachers during the 2 years
of study (Table 3a–d).
They exemplify two different stages of experience
in class and different stages of confidence in
teaching—yet in both cases, as with all other
teachers in the study, a change could be
detected.
5.1. Perceptions about the acquisition of skills
Teachers have a variety of beliefs and perceptions
about how instruction should take place and what
should be taught. During this research their
perceptions about the acquisition of skills were
changed (Table 3a).
5.2. Instructional model
As mentioned before, the SC program was
developed according to the following characteris-
tics: explicit instruction of skills, integration of SC
instruction with scientific contents, modularity and
flexibility, and spiral instruction. The rationale of
the program is that acquisition of skills cannot be a
‘‘one-shot’’ experience, and it must be distributed in
a spiral manner throughout the years. Therefore,
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
Table 3
Interviewee Description
(a) Perceptions about the acquisition of skills: Ela and Oran—at the beginning of the study and after 2 years
Ela—beginning of Ela is an experienced teacher in skills
study instruction. When the study began,
she had already fully implemented
the program ‘‘scientific
communication’’ and felt committed
to skills instruction. She was aware of
the need not only to teach the skills
but also to create learning
opportunities for the students to
practice and implement the skills they
had learned
Ela—after 2 years After two years she continued to hold
the same view and she made no
progress toward including skills
assessment in her instruction. She
emphasized the importance of
learning skills instruction, yet she did
not mention skills assessment
Oran—beginning of Oran, understands the importance of
study learning skills instruction. She tends
to grant acquisition of skills a high
affective value. However, she
admitted that she herself had to
acquire learning skills before starting
to teach it
Oran—after 2 years After two years, Oran still utilizes the
acquisition of skills but also put them
into action. She implemented more
and more activities of ‘‘scientific
communication’’ and shifted the
main goal of her instruction from
mainly content to the integration of
skills and content. She understood
that the instruction of skills must
include application of assessment
methods that assess students’abilities
and skills
469
Quote Level
‘‘...What is important to me is not the content Level 4: Believing
itself but how to learn the content. If the that the systematic
student acquires the skills for independent planning of multiple
learning, he will manage with every subject. opportunities for the
The essence of instruction is the teaching of acquisition and
learning skills. The content supplies the context practice of skills is
for skills instruction’’ essential
‘‘yFor example, in the chemistry lesson, I sent
the students to gather information in the
library... They came back from the library and
started to tell what they had found, and all of a
sudden a discourse started ... So they practiced
the skill of gathering information and I gained
a wonderful start for the lessony’’
‘‘I believe that skills acquisition is very Level 4: Believing
important. It is an integral part of instruction, that the systematic
and if it is not implemented as a continuous planning of multiple
process it has no meaning!...You can call it opportunities for the
‘learning skills’, I also call it ‘working tools’y acquisition and
I told the class: ‘I am coming with a toolbox practice of skills is
full of skills and from time to time we will take essential
out one and will learn it’’’
‘‘... The acquisition of learning skills exposes Level 2: Realizing
the learner to the intrinsic value of learning: the the importance of
effort to accomplish a learning task, the skills instruction
opportunity to demonstrate one’s own abilities, without
to receive help. These things increase one’s implementing it
involvement in studies and encourage
motivation and independent learning’’
‘‘...The program exposed me to aspects that I
did not think about before, such as information
representation, reading a scientific text, and
various teaching methods. For example, I admit
that I did not know about the Dewey
classification and all the indexes in the library.
We, as teachers, have to first absorb the
learning skills we acquired and then implement
skills instruction’’
‘‘...I teach learning skills so that the students Level 5: Realizing
will better understand the content. I teach the necessity of skills
learning skills because my goal is to enable assessment in
them to learn independently’’ addition to planned
acquisition and
practice of skills
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
470 O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
Table 3 (continued )
Interviewee Description
(b) The instructional model of Ela and Oran—at the beginning of the study and after 2 years
Ela—beginning of Ela described how she and her
study colleagues conducted ’Project-Based
Learning’ and what happened when
they tried to teach several learning
skills in a short time in order to
support the project
Ela—after 2 years After 2 years she looked back and
could see the change. She even
realizes the meaning of spiral
instruction
Oran—beginning of Oran thought that once a skill is
study taught, the students could easily
transfer its implementation to other
learning situations as well as without
further practice
Oran—after 2 years Oran learned from her own
experience and realized that learning
skills acquisition is a long and
continuous process and therefore
must be well-planned and integrated
with the content
(c) Description of the usage of SC instructional materials by Ela and Oran—at the beginning of the study and after
Ela—beginning of Ela feels confident enough to plan
study different sequences of the program’s
activities to match her students’
needs. She takes into consideration
the heterogeneity of the class and
makes sure that each student will
have the opportunity to acquire the
learned skills
Quote Level
‘‘I told the students that to learn how to learn is
the most important goal. And I would prefer to
teach mainly that’’
"After I started to implement the program, I
also started to think how to evaluate students’
implementation of skills that were learned. I am
not sure whether the assessment tasks I use can
diagnose the different levels of skills
performance. But it shows that there was
progress. Previously, none of the teachers in my
team thought to assess skills performance’’
‘‘We felt that what we tried to do in the last Level 3: Intensive
month and a half was too intensive. This instruction of skills
intensive method of instruction that we applied only toward
is not meaningful learning. We missed the complex tasks and
point! We must distribute the skills instruction not throughout the
throughout the year’’ year
‘‘Each learning skill can be subdivided into Level 5: Multi-year
many sub-skills. We distribute the skills planning of spiral
instruction throughout the three years of JHS. instruction and
In the past we concentrated it all in the 8th integration of skills
grade. Nowadays we understand that it must be and scientific
taught throughout the three years in an contents
attractive manner...Two years ago I did not
understand it. The practical experience with the
students leads to the understanding that
learning skills instruction must be a continuous
and spiral process throughout JHS. If we
taught the skills of gathering information from
a variety of sources in the 7th grade, then we
must practice that skill in other learning
situations in the next years in different
contexts’’
‘‘Actually we do not integrate the skills Level 2: Instruction
instruction into the subject matter we teach. and activities are
The goal is to teach the skills and not scattered with
necessarily in the context of the subject learned minimal planning
in class, so that the students will be able to and integration into
transfer it to any subject matter’’ content
‘‘Today I understand that if we do not practice Level 4: Well-
the skills in different learning situations, they planned integration
will fade away. We must integrate and practice of skills and content
the learning skills in various topics and contexts throughout the year
and in different stages of the learning process’’
2 years
‘‘It is important that each student in class will Level 4: Intensive
experience the process of skills acquisition. We and flexible use of
make sure that if a student was absent or does the instructional
not understand something, he receives support materials.
and guidanceyUsually, there are students in Adjustment of
class who learn the skills and the content sequences and
rapidly, and they receive enrichment activities. activities according
Those students who have difficulties are to students’ needs
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
Table 3 (continued )
Interviewee Description
Ela—after 2 years Ela developed new and innovative
activities for teaching learning skills
that create opportunities for the
students to implement and perform
the skills they have acquired
Oran Beginning of Oran was working sporadically with
study the instructional materials of
‘‘scientific communication’’
Oran after 2 years After two years of gaining more
experience with the learning package,
she felt that she still had to improve
her instructional plan and work on
integrating the ‘‘Scientific
Communication’’ program into the
curriculum
(d) Influence and involvement in school and beyond: Ela and Oran—at the beginning of the study and after 2 years
Ela—beginning of Ela honestly wants to share her
study knowledge and experience with other
teachers at school. She wants to make watched my excitement and the activities that
sure that she can do it right, so she went on in my classes. I asked the principal to
demands more instructional hours
from the principal of the school
Ela—after 2 years After 2 years, Ela, as the coordinator
of the science teachers in her school,
succeeded in motivating her
colleagues and in having them
committed to the process of
‘‘Scientific Communication’’
instruction. This teamwork and the
products that resulted from the
learning process changed the learning
atmosphere in school. Teachers from
other disciplines could see that
change. It encouraged Ela to
approach science teachers in other
schools as well
471
Quote Level
referred to the teacher. The demands are
different according to the heterogeneity of the
class’’
‘‘With the help of the librarians, I developed a Level 5: Intensive
game in the library. Through the game they and flexible use of
learn about the different sections of the library the instructional
and the ways to locate textbooks, journals, etc. materials.
They have to work as a team, to locate certain Adjustment of
information resources, to find in the textbook activities when
or article the answer to a question and other needed.
tasks. If they accomplish all the tasks, they Development of
receive full credit. If they need help, the innovative activities
librarians and the science teachers act as for instruction and
supervisors, but it reduces the number of points practice of skills
they get’’
‘‘I usually work with the students’ activities Level 1: Using
book and the teachers’ guide. I do not want to instructional
rely only on textbooks. I want to enrich my materials of only a
instruction so I implement some activities of specific skill/
‘Scientific Communication’’’. chapter/activity
‘‘I pick as many activities as I can and adhere Level 2: Using
to the book. I guess that for the next year we instructional
will have some conclusions and we will plan our materials of some
instructional sequence and improve our learning skills/chapters/
skills instruction’’ activities
occasionally
‘‘For two years I implemented ’Scientific Level 4: The teacher
Communication’ and the other science teachers initiates and is
involved in
cooperating with the
add two weekly hours for science studies. Then school management
it was legitimate to ask the other teachers to to improve skills
join me. After they saw the learning products instruction
they wanted to join me’’
‘‘yWe have been working as a team of science
teachers for several years, we have good
working relations and we are very creative.
Still, we are not satisfied. We are working on it
nowadays’’
‘‘The implementation of ’Scientific Level 5: The teacher
Communication’ in the science lessons changed influences and is
the whole learning atmosphere in school. We involved in
taught our students how to gather information, professional
organize, and present it. We implemented development and
activities to practice those skills. Then, teachers improvement of
from other disciplines reported that it became skills instruction in
easier with the students when they asked them school and beyond
to accomplish learning tasks that required the school
implementation of skills that were learned in
science lessons. The students needed less
support and worked better independentlyyIn
addition to the support of science teachers in
my school, I also conduct in-service courses and
train science teachers from other schools in my
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
472 O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
Table 3 (continued )
Interviewee Description
Oran—beginning of At the beginning of the study Oran
study collaborated with other science
teachers in her school working as a
team, planning the instruction
together. In her response she
described her efforts and those of her
colleagues
Oran—after 2 years Toward the end of the study, Oran
tried to cooperate with teachers from
other disciplines in order to share and
conduct learning skills instruction in
other subjects as well
teachers were asked to describe their methods of SC
instruction (Table 3b) and observations in class
were made in order to corroborate the reported
data.
5.3. Using the instructional materials
As was described before, the SC program is
modular and flexible. It consists of a framework of
general activities that can be integrated in conjunc-
tion with any scientific content. These character-
istics enable the teacher to choose his/her own
sequence of instruction and activities according to
the needs of the class. During the study, we noticed
different levels of relying on the instructional
materials of the program (Table 3c).
5.4. Influence and involvement in school and beyond
In this study, we wanted to determine whether
teachers change their attitudes and intentions when
instructing the SC program. We found that this
change does occur, but we also found that this
change can benefit other teachers: Ela indicated
(Table 3d) that teachers from other disciplines
reported that the students are also more skilled
and need less support in their lessons. Realizing
Quote Level
district. As part of these courses I scaffold the
teachers in implementing the ’Scientific
Communication’ program’’
‘‘We tried to implement the ’Scientific Level 2: The teacher
Communication’ program as much as we can, collaborates with the
but I feel that we need more support and teachers of the same
resources in school. However, I cannot change discipline in the
or demand things’’ same school, they
plan the instruction
together and
support each other
‘‘My colleagues (science teachers) and I are in Level 3: The teacher
the middle of the process of integrating skills cooperates with his/
instruction. We are at a stage in which we have her colleagues and
to plan together how we are going to integrate with other teachers
the program in the best way that fits our from different
resources, since we do not have extra hours for disciplines within the
that. However, I already began cooperating school
with the Language teacher regarding visual
representations of scientific text’’
these outcomes encouraged Ela to train other
teachers.
The qualitative data presented here illustrates the
complexity of skills instruction. The two teachers,
Ela and Oran, realized throughout the two years of
the study that there are no shortcuts. Learning SC
skills requires a continuous effort. The instruction
of the skills should accompany students all the years
of their studies. Towards the end of the study Ela
said:
yI can say that I noticed our own professional
development when I realized that at the begin-
ning we implemented many ‘Scientific Commu-
nication’ activities in a relatively short period of
time-and it was a mess for the students. And then
this whole big ‘salad’ turned to be well planned
and scattered throughout the 3 years of JHS.
Even science teachers from the high school
wanted to continue this process. It is all because
of our planned, organized, and spiral sequence of
instruction.
These two teachers started from very different
levels in all four aspects. Ela was more experienced
in ‘‘Science and Technology’’ instruction and in SC
instruction in particular. In her interview she
presented a high level of proficiency regarding the
use of the instructional materials and the relations
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
with the school management, and showed further
progress after 2 years. Regarding her perceptions,
no change was detected while analyzing the inter-
views. Oran, at the beginning of the study, demon-
strated very low levels in all aspects. After 2 years,
she is still acquiring the professional skills of
teaching SC. However, she presented the highest
level of perceptions (see Fig. 1). We will discuss
these issues in the next section.
5.5. Schematic representation of qualitative data
As was described before, the scoring system was
established to help in analyzing the data and to
detect the change in the different aspects related to
SC teaching over time. The numeric values of 1–5
were used to represent the extent of teachers’
development of perceptions and actions (Table 2).
Equipped with this scoring system, we re-analyzed
the interviews with the other nine participants. In
order to represent the teachers’ change over the 2
years, we designed a scheme of proficiency and
located all interviewees on that scheme according
the scoring analysis (Fig. 1). This scheme demon-
strates that each of the teachers had a different
profile at the beginning of the study. However, they
all showed progress after 2 years of SC instruction.
Out of the 44 incidents measured (four aspects of
eleven teachers), only in five incidents was there no
change in one of the aspects (teachers A, C, D–F).
Out of these five, in three cases no development was
detected in the aspect of ‘‘perceptions about the
acquisition of skills’’ (teachers A, C, and E). In the
other two cases, there was no development in the
aspect of ‘‘Influence and involvement in school and
beyond’’. It is not surprising that development in
these two aspects was less pronounced, since the aim
of the comprehensive training course that all
participants experienced was mainly to instruct
science teachers how to teach and use the SC
instructional materials and to become familiar with
the rationale and characteristics of the instructional
model. Perceptions develop through experience and
practice, and cannot be taught directly. Most
teachers changed their perception to a higher level
according to our analysis. Some teachers showed at
the beginning of the study a high level in that aspect.
Teachers A, C, and E expressed a high level of
perceptions about the acquisition of skills already at
the beginning of the study (level four) and did not
make further progress in that aspect maybe because
of a ceiling effect: perceptions develop with experi-
473
ence and practice, and those teachers were already
convinced and sure about the value of SC instruc-
tion. Therefore, to make further progress it may
take more time and the gradual realization that
there is room to improve. In contrast, in the case of
Oran and teacher H., who at the beginning of the
study expressed an initial level of perceptions
regarding skills acquisition, we could detect a great
change in perceptions over the 2 years. This may
imply that some teachers can ‘‘see’’ the goals of
instruction and develop advanced perception re-
garding that aspect in a relatively short time and
others need more time and experience to reach the
same views.
Influence and involvement in school and beyond is
also an aspect that cannot be taught during
teachers’ training. It requires personal characteris-
tics such as leadership and motivation to initiate
changes by coordinating with the management of
the school or to take the role as teachers’ trainer.
Yet only two teachers showed no change in that
aspect (Teachers D and F, Fig. 1).
A prominent change appeared in the aspect
Instructional model. This may imply that teachers
who implement the SC program change their model
of instruction as they become more experienced.
They are more convinced that instruction of skills
should be well planned throughout the years in a
spiral manner, integrating both skills and contents.
Fig. 1 also shows the change within the aspect of
Teaching and using the instructional materials: at the
beginning of the study all teachers (accept Ela) used
the instructional materials with no further change or
modification. Some were using a very specific
activity, some were using various activities occasion-
ally, and others were using the instructional materials
intensively. However, after 2 more years of SC
instruction the majority of the teachers became
familiar with the generic characteristics of the
materials and realized that these materials can be
modified according to the needs of the teacher and
class. They took advantage of the flexibility and
modularity of the program and adjusted the se-
quences and activities according to students’ needs.
Some teachers even started to develop innovative
activities for instruction and practice of skills.
We concluded that (a) teachers improved their
level of proficiency in all four aspects that were
examined and especially improved their model of
instruction of skills, (b) teachers who participated in
the study hold considerably advanced perceptions
concerning skills instruction and developed con-
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
474 O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477

Pre Post

a b
ELA ORAN
Package Package
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 6
2
Perceptions 1 Model Perceptions 1 Model

System
System

c d e
Package Package Package
5 5 5
4 4 4
3 3 3
2 2 2
Perceptions 1 Model Perceptions 1 Model Perceptions 1 Model

System System
System

f g h
Package Package Package
5 5 5
4 4 4
3 3 3
2 2 2
Perceptions 1 Model Perceptions 1 Model Perceptions 1 Model

System System System

i j k
Package Package Package
5 5 5
4 4 4
3 3 3
2 2 2
Perceptions 1 Model Perceptions 1 Model Perceptions 1 Model

System System System

Fig. 1. Professional development profile of 11 teachers (at the beginning of the research-pre, and after two years of implementing the
‘‘Scientific Communication’’ program-post) in four aspects defined by the scoring system in Table 2. Package ¼ teaching and using the
instructional materials; System ¼ influence and involvement in school and beyond; Perceptions ¼ perceptions about the acquisition of
skills; Model ¼ instructional model.

siderably during 2 years of SC instruction, (c) most practicing skills and therefore started to modify
teachers gained confidence and became better the instructional materials according to their own
convinced about the necessity of teaching and instructional plan and needs.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
6. Discussion
Skills instruction is considered a demanding task
because it requires the teachers to master the skills
themselves. It requires not only to plan the content
instruction but also to constantly integrate skills
instruction and practice. It requires changing the
assessment methods. Previous research showed that
teachers need support during this process (Pintó,
2005; Pintó et al., 2005).
It is important to emphasize that most of today’s
teachers did not experience instruction of skills
during their pre-service studies.
The program ‘‘SC’’ presents an approach for
learning skills instruction that is unfamiliar and
challenging for most teachers. The aim of the study
presented here was to determine whether they can
cope with such an approach and how they change
while carrying out that flexible instructional pro-
gram. This was to be achieved by examining the
instructional methods and strategies that a group of
science teachers used for implementing and teaching
learning skills through the SC program. Our
findings indicate that they understood the rationale
of the instructional model. Most of them custo-
mized the instructional materials according to their
needs and improved their practices. Baumgrartner
and His (2002) contend that customizing instruc-
tional materials requires a deep understanding of
the nature of the original innovation and the
contextual factors that shaped its design.
Interviews that were conducted with eleven
science teachers showed that each teacher had a
different profile of proficiency at the beginning of
the study. However, after 2 years of SC instruction,
all of them progressed. These results show that the
instruction of SC changed their attitudes, practices,
and intentions.
This qualitative study demonstrated the potential
of the program ‘‘SC’’ to serve as a supportive
environment for teacher change and professional
development. As evident in this study, all teachers
that were interviewed showed improvement in four
aspects that were examined concerning SC skills
instruction: perceptions about skills acquisition, the
instructional model, teaching and using the instruc-
tional materials, and influence and involvement in
school and beyond. We can further describe the
teachers’ change in this study, according to Clarke
and Hollingsworth (1994). They identified a number
of alternative perspectives for the term ‘‘teacher
change’’. They argue that the notion of ‘‘teacher
475
change’’ is open to multiple interpretations, and
each interpretation could be associated with a
particular perspective of teachers’ professional
development. They describe six perspectives regard-
ing teachers’ changes:
! Change as training—change is something that is
done to teachers; that is, teachers are ‘‘changed’’.
! Change as adaptation—teachers ‘‘change’’ in
response to something; they adapt their practice
to changed conditions.
! Change as personal development—teachers
‘‘seek to change’’ in an attempt to improve their
performance or develop additional skills or
strategies.
! Change as local reform—teachers ‘‘change some-
thing’’ for reasons of personal growth.
! Change as systemic restructuring—teachers enact
the ‘‘change policies’’ of the system.
! Change as growth of learning-teachers ‘‘change
inevitably through professional activity’’; tea-
chers are themselves learners who work in a
learning community.
The study presented here showed that the
instruction of SC and the emphasis on skills
acquisition during science studies facilitated tea-
chers’ change in several alternative perspectives:
Change as adaptation—teachers changed their
instruction according to the demands of the SC
program; change as personal development—tea-
chers in the study improved their instructional
performance and developed their teaching strate-
gies; change as local reform—teachers showed
willingness to make efforts for personal growth;
change as systemic restructuring—teachers enact
the ‘‘change policies’’ of the system and influenced
their colleagues in school or outside school; change
as growth of learning—the teachers that partici-
pated in the study were themselves learners who
work in a learning community and constantly
improve their instruction.
Beyond the scope of this research, the resulting
teachers’ profile of development may serve as a tool
for evaluating what aspects of skills instruction are
difficult for teachers. Furthermore, evaluating
teachers’ profiles over time provides a measure of
teachers’ professional development. The scoring
system that we developed and the schematic profile
may serve as tools to evaluate individual teachers so
that more accurate scaffolding can be tailored to the
needs of individual teachers.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
476 O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
The quotations of the teachers and the represen-
tation of the data of all eleven teachers that were
interviewed emphasize the potential of the SC
program, not only to enhance learning skills
acquisition, but also to promote the professional
development of the teachers. The program en-
courages teamwork, influences the learning atmo-
sphere at school, and may encourage teachers to
share their proficiency with teachers within school
and beyond.
A ‘‘universal’’ phenomenon is accepted that
teachers shift an innovation back toward what is
(locally) customary. What exactly these transforma-
tions do, and what in training needs to be done to
confront them, shows strong local variation.
Changes take time, since teachers are already
‘‘primed’’ to do what they are accustomed to do
(Pintó, 2005). Our results show that science teachers
may adopt new innovations and new teaching
strategies. Whether this change will last and further
developed, or will fade away, needs to be studied in
future research. Future studies should also take into
account the concern that little research exists about
the accuracy of teacher self-reported data and most
of the existing information is contradictory (Boyle,
Lamprianou, & Boyle, 2005). Teachers’ change and
professional development need to be traced more
reliably through actual observations and collection
of evidence in class.
To summarize, the results of the study described
here show that science teachers can cope with a
modular and flexible program for skills acquisition
integrated into scientific contents, such as the SC
program. As implementation of the program
evolved, the teachers could customize and conduct
different instructional sequences of skills, according
to the needs of the class. Moreover, the instruction
of learning skills through the program enhanced the
professional development of the teachers. However,
further research regarding teachers’ change and
skills instruction need to be conducted not only at
the declarative level but also by thorough investiga-
tion of what is actually done in science classes and
how it advances students’ achievements.
Moreover, not only is there an urgent need to
supply science teachers with instructional materials
and strategies to achieve the goal of scientific
literacy among students; there is also a need to
construct knowledge about teachers’ needs, the kind
of scaffolding and support they might take advan-
tage of, and the kinds of incentives that will make it
feasible.
References
AAAS. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Atkin, J. M., & Black, P. (2003). Inside science education reform:
A history of curricular and policy change. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Baumgrartner, E., & His, S. (2002). CILT2000: Synergy,
technology, and teacher professional development. Journal of
Science Education and Technology, 11(3), 311–315.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1989). Intentional learning as a
goal of instruction. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and
instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 361–392).
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bol, L., & Strage, A. (1996). The contradiction between teacher’s
instructional goals and their assessment practices in high school
biology courses. Science Education, 80(2), 145–163.
Borgman, C. L., Hirsh, S. G., & Walter, V. A. (1995). Children’s
searching behavior on browsing and keyword online catalog: The
science library catalog project. Journal of the American Society
for Information Science, 46(9), 663–684.
Boyle, B., Lamprianou, I., & Boyle, B. (2005). A longitudinal
study of teacher change: What makes professional development
effective? Report of the second year of the study. School
Effectiveness and School Improvement, 16(1), 1–27.
Bybee, R. W. (1997). Meeting the challenge of achieving scientific
literacy. In Paper prepared for the international conference on
science education, Seoul, Korea.
Bybee, R. W. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry. In J. Minstrell,
& E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and
teaching in science (pp. 20–46). Washington, DC: American
Association for the Advancement of Science.
Bybee, R. W., & Ben-Zvi, N. (1998). Science curriculum:
Transforming goals to practices. In B. J. Fraser, & K. G. Tobin
(Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 487–498).
Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Campbell, B., Kaunda, L., Allie, S., Buffler, A., & Lubben, F.
(2000). The communication of laboratory investigations by
university entrants. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
37(8), 839–853.
Clarke, D. J., & Hollingsworth, H. (1994). Reconceptualising
teacher change. In G. Bell, B. Wright, N. Leeson, & J. Geake
(Eds.), Challenges in mathematics education: Constraints on
construction, Vol. 1. Proceedings of the 17th annual conference
of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia (pp.
153–164). Lismore, NSW: Southern Cross University.
Clarke, D. J., & Hollingsworth, H. (2002). Elaborating a model
of teacher professional growth. Teaching and Teacher Education,
18, 947–967.
Costa, A. L. (Ed.). (1985). Developing minds: A resource book for
teaching thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development.
Eilam, B. (2002). Phases of learning: Ninth graders’ skill
acquisition. Research in Science & Technological Education,
20(1), 5–24.
Eraut, M. (1975). Promoting innovation in teaching and learning:
Problems, processes and institutional mechanisms. Higher
Education, 4(1), 13–26.
Eylon, B., & Linn, M. C. (1988). Learning and instruction: An
examination of four research perspectives in science education.
Review of Educational Research, 58(3), 251–301.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
O. Spektor-Levy et al. / Teaching and Teacher Education 24 (2008) 462–477
Fullan, M., & Stiegelbauer, S. (1991). The new meaning of
educational change (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Germann, P. J., & Aram, R. J. (1996). Students’ performances on
the science processes of recording data, analysing data, drawing
conclusions and providing evidence. Journal of Research in
Science Teaching, 33, 773–797.
Guskey, T. R. (1986). Staff development and the process of
teacher change. Educational Researcher, 15(5), 5–12.
Hofstein, A., Carmi, M., & Ben-Zvi, R. (2003). The development
of leadership among chemistry teachers in Israel. International
Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 1, 39–65.
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science
education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science
Education, 88(1), 28–54.
Israeli Ministry of Education. (1996). Science and technology
curriculum for junior high school. Jerusalem, Israel: Israeli
Ministry of Education.
Kirkwood, M. (2000). Infusing higher-order thinking and
learning to learn into content instruction: A case study of
secondary computing studies in Scotland. Journal of Curriculum
Studies, 32, 509–535.
Linn, M. C., Songer, N. B., & Eylon, B. S. (1996). Shifts and
convergences in science learning and instruction. In R. Calfee, &
D. Berliner (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology. New
York: Macmillan.
National Curriculum, The standard site. (2003). Available at:
/http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/schemes2/secondar-
y_science/teaching?view=getS
National Research Council. (1996). National science education
standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Pintó, R. (2005). Introducing curriculum innovations in science:
Identifying teachers’ transformations and the design of related
teacher education. Science Education, 89, 1–12.
Pintó, R., Couso, D., & Gutierrez, R. (2005). Using research on
teachers’ transformations of innovations to inform teacher
education. The case of energy degradation. Science Education,
89, 38–55.
PISA. (2003). Available at: /http://www.pisa.oecd.org/science/
struct.htmS
Rubin, R. L., & Norman, J. T. (1992). Systematic modeling
versus the learning cycle: Comparative effects on integrated
science process skill achievement. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 29(7), 715–727.
Scherz, Z., Michman, M., & Tamir, P. (1986). Attitudes of
university candidates towards learning activities aimed at
477
preparation for science studies. Research in Science & Technolo-
gical Education, 4(2), 183–194.
Scherz, Z., & Spektor-Levy, O. (2005). Learning skills for science.
London: Institute of Education, Nuffield foundation, Gatsby
Foundation: Science Enhancement Programme.
Scherz, Z., Spektor-Levy, O., & Eylon, B. (2005). ‘‘Scientific
communication’’: An instructional program for high-order
learning skills and its impact on students’ performance’’. In K.
Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. de-Jong, & H. Eijkelhof (Eds.),
Research and the quality of science education (pp. 231–243).
Netherlands: Springer.
Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E.
(2002). Performance of students in project-based science class-
rooms on a national measure of science achievement. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 39(5), 410–422.
Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals
think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Science Syllabus Primary. (2004). Curriculum planning & devel-
opment division. Singapore: Ministry of Education.
Sheeran, Y., & Barnes, D. (1991). School writing: Discovering the
ground rules. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowing and teaching: Foundations of
the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–32.
Spektor-levy, O., & Scherz, Z. (1999). Scientific communication
(p. 108). Rehovot, Israel: The Weizmann Institute for Science and
The Ministry of Education (in Hebrew).
Spektor-levy, O., & Scherz, Z. (2001). ‘Scientific communica-
tion’—teachers guide (p. 189). Rehovot, Israel: The Weizmann
Institute for Science and The Ministry of Education (in Hebrew).
Tobin, K., & McRobbie, C. J. (1996). Cultural myths as
constraints to the enacted science curriculum. Science Education,
80, 223–241.
Twenty First Century Science. (2002). Available at: /http://
www.21stcenturyscience.org/S
Van Driel, J. H., Beijaard, D., & Verloop, N. (2001). Professional
development and reform in science education: The role of
teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 38(2), 137–158.
Wood, E., & Bennett, N. (2000). Changing theories, changing
practice: Exploring early childhood teachers’ professional learn-
ing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(5–6),
635–647.
Zohar, A., & Dori, Y. J. (2003). Higher order thinking skills and
low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive? The Journal
of the Learning Sciences, 12, 145–181.