materials and teaching guides were written, and training for teachers and .... decided to initiate a task suitable to 10th grade students and eventually to also ...
Methodology of Change Assimilation in Technology Education - case study Nissim Sabag, Yaron Doppelt Abstract: This article describes a four-year program to advance electrical and electronics studies and their implementation in eight northern Israeli high schools. Four schools participated at the beginning of the program, increasing to eight schools towards the end. The paper presents the teaching and learning processes of teachers and students during the program. Learning materials and teaching guides were written, and training for teachers and guidance in schools, as well as meetings with teachers and headmasters, were conducted within the program's framework to track the field performance in order to promote it. Finally, more than 200 12th grade students from eight high schools passed their matriculation exam on large scale projects successfully. About 150 of them had studied Electronics while the other 50 were from the Electrical department. Prior to this program, only about 40 final projects in these fields were undertaken in the State of Israel. Today, 10 years after the program some 2,000 final projects are submitted each year to matriculation exams. Index Terms—Project based learning (PBL), change assimilation, intervention program.
I.
INTRODUCTION
THE case presented in this article stems from a great concern voiced by high schools which teach courses in electrical and electronic departments. The teachers’ and principals’ statements revealed that the fields of electrical and electronic teaching are in crisis. Good students, who previously competed for the right to learn in these attractive disciplines, no longer require a special effort to be accepted to study in these departments. On the contrary, the departments' staff finds themselves forced to court the good students to come and study. Student achievements are no longer high as in the past, and their motivation to learn is questionable. Students prefer studying mathematics and physics, which contribute more than electricity and electronics to the chances for acceptance to the university, and require less study hours. In addition, teachers said, "studies are not challenging and bore the students". This certainly convinced the education authority that an intervention program to improve the situation was required. To help schools improve this situation, an economic support frame as well as a pedagogical staff to lead the program was identified. The staff included teacher-leaders from the appropriate discipline, researchers, and administration personnel. A
1
three-year program to enhance the change assimilation in schools, with an extension option of one year was started. The staff leaders’ activities were characterized by a high presence in the field. What was expressed in observations of students' and teachers' activity, and many interviews with principals, teachers and their students, was a high sensitivity to success or lack of success of the new processes, and a high willingness to change when required. The program started with four schools in the Galilee expanding to eight schools within two years.
II.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
How to assimilate a sustainable educational change? According to Roger's model [1], teachers adopt new teaching methods if the pre-conditions, types of knowledge and persuasion variables help them reach a decision that supports the adoption of the new method. According to Resnick [2], one of the reasons that educational change is not assimilated and sustained in the field is that teachers tend to adopt only small parts of the new method, such as subjects that do not deviate much from what they are used to. Teacher training that supports new learning methods may contribute to increasing the chances that teachers will adopt it over time. In learning with computers (including technology project-based learning) it is extremely important to change the teacher's role from that of a lecturer to that of a mentor. Fisher [3] claims that teachers are the main decision-makers regarding learning materials, and they guide their students towards known answers. Moreover, even in a case of open curricula, when part of the subjects will be determined by the students, classroom management will still be the teacher's role. Nevertheless, one cannot ignore the fact that many teachers find it difficult to realize the concept that certain content areas require a fixed structure to ensure effective learning. "Effective learning" (sometimes identified with "including all the subjects") can prevent the development of creative thinking which is so essential in project-based learning. Chagas and Abegg [4] argue that teachers are willing to contribute to the success of an advanced technology-based curriculum, even though teachers in many cases oppose this way of learning. Consequently, introducing computer-based learning is problematic. The same dilemmas are relevant for introducing project-based learning, which requires a great deal of teachers' good will. Rafalovich [5] examined the implementation of the "Science and
Technology" educational program in junior high school and discovered that the curriculum is not well understood by most science and technology teachers. That is one of the reasons for the total rejection of the program. His findings indicate that teachers prefer to continue doing what they already know. Teachers felt their professional status was lower than that of their colleagues, and therefore avoided participating in training. On the other hand, when the early implementation of educational change has been supported by on-the-job teacher-training, many teachers have adopted new programs, implemented new materials and changed their roles from lecturer to facilitator, fostering higher-order thinking skills [6]; [7]. In the intervention program described in this article, inservice teacher training was conducted. Schools were asked to distribute the project’s guiding activities to the teachers who actively participated in building projects in the teachers' training course, and this usually worked. Some researchers [8] believe that the teacher's personal characteristics (beliefs, experience, knowledge, etc.) affect the teacher's way of managing operations. For example, the teacher's content and pedagogical knowledge will determine the leading questions chosen to promote the student's learning, or the teacher will leave it to the students to choose the questions by themselves. Barak and Pearlman-Avnion describe research [9] where science and technology teachers were required to cooperate in science-technology teaching, and where it was found that the teachers cooperated when there was a common sciencetechnology curricular interest, particularly when the teaching included practical experience. They recommend project-based learning as a way to achieve effective collaboration between teachers. In the intervention program described in this article there were certainly cases of cooperation between teachers, and cases in which teachers asked for professional help from their colleagues. First steps – introducing the field The first operative step of the pedagogical leading team was to meet the schools teachers' representatives followed by a brainstorming forum comprising 30 teachers, including the schools’ teachers, the leading team and other electrical and electronics teachers. The brainstorming revolved around these questions: What is the purpose of the intervention plan? What are the ways to achieve the goal? What are the subjects to teach in a teachers’ training course in order to reach this goal? What are the preferable teaching methods? What is the learning environment needed to achieve the goal? The meeting lasted four intensive hours during which dozens of ideas arose. For example: enhancing the students' pride, introducing interesting subjects, equipping the laboratories with computers and simulation software as
2
well as modern measurement equipment. Among the ideas proposed was that of project-based learning followed by an exhibition of the projects built by the students. The most frequent ideas, offered by the brainstorming participants, to be included in the teachers training course were: enhancing the teachers’ knowledge of computers (using OFFICE for electronics implementations, integrating simulations such as EWB Electronics Work Bench - into the curriculum, using the Internet), project-based learning, and some specific subjects from the field of electricity and electronics. III.
INTERVENTION PROGRAM
Teachers Training A week after the brainstorming session, an annual 4 hours a week teacher-training course began. The focal idea to keep in mind was: What will the student do? Each topic studied in the teacher training course was implemented in classrooms during the subsequent weeks, and teachers reported the results in the teacher training course. The first subjects taught were computer applications, not much enthusiasm was noted by teachers during the first weeks of the course. The leading team, which was attentive to the mood, urgently convened and changed the course program. The projectbased learning module was brought forward in the schedule. A perceptible change in the atmosphere was noticed at the first meeting on project-based learning. In a small number of training sessions it became apparent that the issue caught the teachers' imagination. It was decided to initiate a task suitable to 10th grade students and eventually to also consolidate activities for higher grades. An appropriate pedagogical approach to projectbased learning was formulated. Each one of the participants in this teachers’ training was asked to choose a small project among a proposed list and to implement it; teachers were encouraged to offer projects of their own. The content realm was switching and digital systems focused on combinational logic but also including some sequential elements such as Flip Flops and counters. Some examples are: a Code Converter, 4 bits Adder/Substractor, Control System for Traffic Lights, Electronic Combinational Locker, LEDs' Display for Electronic Dice, etc. Teachers experienced projects production, malfunctions debugging, and writing a brochure that summarizes the activities and their feelings about what they learned during the experience. The joy of accomplishment was felt in the air during training sessions. Two weeks after the start of project-based learning in the teacher training course, the teachers attempted the same approaches with their students in schools. Positive reports multiplied. Statements such as: "Students do not want to take a break" became commonplace. Teachers, encouraged by the change in their students’ behavior, volunteered to
continue the activities even during their Passover holiday. In classes application Tenth grade students in four schools had about 30 hours of electronics project-based learning. For this purpose, a project-based learning process was determined and 10 issues for projects developed from the content of "digital systems," as a basis for activities, some of them are mentioned above. A booklet was written for each project to guide the student in the work. It included clues (guiding questions) for solving problems that were also included on subjects that the student had not yet learned. This unfamiliar subject was only a small part of the issues involved in the project. For example, the project "control system for traffic light" required the student to recognize the working of a "Flip-Flop" and a "Counter." These topics were scheduled for later in the curriculum of switching and digital systems, but the students studied independently, drawing information from different sources (teachers, parents, family, friends, internet, or literature.) Each project demanded a system level optimization. All students built a project which was a solution to an open problem presented to them. Some students asked for an extra project and their wish was fulfilled. A suitable project was developed for the electricity students, who had lower academic achievement levels than those of the electronics students. They were asked to assemble and perform measurements on an electronic alarm circuit, without designing. All the students were required to go through the following steps during their project: 1. Choosing a topic for the project and characterizing the system. The student could choose among an existing list or offer a self-initiated topic. 2. Dividing tasks among team members. 3. Collecting information on the Internet (given guidance on recommended sites.) 4. Sketching the system's block diagram (a system perspective approach). 5. Formulation of logical equations to a given problem and realization with logic gates, while taking system optimization into consideration. 6. Testing the circuit which was chosen as the solution to the project’s problem on simulation software, and troubleshooting. 7. Preparation of manufacturing documents (list of components, assembly and drafting wiring list) before assembling the system. 8. Assembling the system (with real components) and methodically troubleshooting. 9. Final testing according to specifications written by the student. 10. The process was accompanied by documentation of students' feelings and thoughts at every stage of the
3
implementation; at the end, the students were required to submit their project booklet. The intervention program included projects development for grades 10 and 11. One of the products of the program was a project-based learning handbook [10] which included: student workbooks, a teacher's guide booklet, and an alternative assessment guide. The success of the first two years of the program encouraged the program leaders to push the schools towards large final projects on which the students had their matriculation examination at the end of 12th Grade. IV.
RESEARCH METHOD
During the three years in which the program operated, both quantitative and qualitative data collection tools were employed. Quantitative tools comprised the analysis of matriculation exams grades. Qualitative tools included classroom observations, conversations with teachers, questionnaires, and content analysis of interviews with students. The authors of this article led the in-service teacher training and attended all the training sessions, the instruction meetings in school, and observed the end projects exhibition. V.
FINDINGS
Interviews with six students from school # 3 In-depth interviews were conducted with six students. The interviews were recorded and later transcribed. The purpose of the interviews was to learn from the students about the activities in the field and of their attitudes towards this activity. The students were chosen by the head of the electronics department from the same school. Some were outstanding students and others less successful. A content analysis was conducted with the transcript of the interviews, and categories were produced. The prominent ones appear in Table 1. Table 1: prominent categories from content analysis of interviews with students Category Prevalence General satisfaction with the department 6 Satisfaction with the choice to study 6 electronics Division of labor in advance 5 A teamwork description 6 Testing the solution with simulation. 6 Satisfaction with the projects activities 5 Support of the practical work with 4 theoretical studies In the interviews, satisfaction was expressed with the project’s activities, and from the students’ comments it is also possible to identify the attention they paid to the stages involved in carrying out the projects in
accordance with the activities that had been identified earlier. Student opinions As a preparation towards constructing an attitudes questionnaire, each 11th grade student from schools 1, 2, 3, was asked to write two positive statements and two negative statements that expressed their opinions on the Electricity or Electronics departments. (These students did not participate in the project-based learning program, but were similar to the examined population). 239 statements were collected and a content analysis performed. Based on the students’ statements, a questionnaire was composed in order to assess their attitudes towards their studies. The questionnaire that included 22 statements was filled out by 10th grade students who carried out projects and by 11th grade students who did not carry out projects. The average attitudes scores of four categories (about 5 statements for each category) are presented in Table 2. Table 2: Results of attitudes questionnaire on a scale of 100 Sense of General Learning Dep. Grade N burden satisfaction Environment image studies 10th 44 83.50 77.75 56.25 71.25 11th 42 78.50 67.50 63 65 It can be seen from table 2 that the 10th grade students who carried out projects were satisfied with their studies and learning environment, felt less stress, and the department image was higher in comparison to the 11th grade students who did not carry out projects. These results are not sufficient to determine that the project activity led to improvement in the atmosphere of the 10th grades. Yet, it can justify the continuation of the projects activities. Teachers and coordinators' statements relating to the projects' impact on the students in their departments Meetings were held with teachers and departmental coordinators in which they described the impact of the project on students' activities: A. Students acquired new leaning behaviors Schools #1 and #2: "We see new learning features; students are interested in advanced topics not yet learned in the classroom. The labs are open to allow the students to search for online materials". Teacher #2 in school #4: "Students offer their own suggestions to solve the projects that they chose to perform. The teachers relate to their students, encouraging them to implement their ideas. New characteristics were discovered in the students learning; they dare to deal with issues that they have not yet
4
learned in class. Students solve their own problems. The teachers let their students find the solutions to their selfchosen problems independently." B. The projects activity is more interesting School #3: "The students are excited about the projects activity; they ask questions concerning the learning materials. Even students that were bored previously show interest today, asking and searching for materials on the Internet. All the students like using computers. Students cope with questions of professional content even though it has not been studied yet. Students solve their own problems." School #4: The department coordinator who used to enter the electricity class (low achiever students) at least twice a week to discipline the students hasn’t had to do so since the start of projects activity. "It is the first time in the history of the electricity lab that computers have been used. Students learn to use simulation software (EWB) and to simulate electronic circuits just as their friends in the electronics department do." Change in teachers' behavior as noted during the program Teacher #5 at school #4, who had been deterred from using a computer in the past, is now using computers without fear. The departmental coordinator of School #4: "The students are very pleased with the activities and asked to work in the Passover holiday (in their vacation time), at school, in order to finish the project on time. Their request was granted and teacher #6 came to school during her holiday to help students to move forward." Teachers #3, #4, #5, #6 from school #4, initiated three topics for projects for 10th grade students concerning digital systems. This is an encouraging change, compared with the teachers’ usual passivity. Other teachers showed enthusiasm during the project construction that they chose to implement in the teacher training course. Utilizing a success - Second year of the intervention program Towards the end of the first year of the intervention program, three other schools joined the program, and at the end of second year another school joined, making eight schools in total. At the end of the first year, another teachers training course was conducted for the school teachers who joined the program. The course took place during the summer and allowed the smooth integration of the new schools to the program. A joint forum of department coordinators of the schools and the leading team was established to govern the program. This forum was convened once a month. Each meeting opened with the schools’ report about the activities carried out, and discussed further developments in order to improve the electrical and electronic studies. The
Student achievements in matriculation exams Students from the Electricity and Electronics departments of eight schools took matriculation exams on projects. A total of 171 projects were carried out by 208 students of whom 207 successfully completed the matriculation exam, as describe in table 3. The average grade of all students was 83.4. Distribution of the
5
average final project grades by schools is described in Figure 1. Table 3: Distribution of projects categories Project's category Electronic Electric Dep. Dep. Three units projects for a single 74 53 student Three units projects for a 23 couple of student Five units projects for a single 6 1 student Five units projects for a couple 14 of student Figure 1: Average matriculation grades by schools 90 88
88
87
87
7
8
86
Average grades
main effort was to convince the schools to submit their students to the matriculation examination on large projects. Opinions were divided between supporters and opponents, all of whom had important arguments. Supporters said that inserting large projects for the matriculation exams into the curriculum would significantly upgrade the departments. In contrast, the opponents said: "Today, the students are required to have a lab examination that has a history of high scores. The project is more demanding; there is a concern that matriculation scores will drop. What shall we tell the students and their parents?" Indeed an argument that cannot be ignored. There was also concern expressed by the teachers who had never implemented projects for matriculation. "It's scary", they said. As part of the efforts to persuade the schools, it was promised that experienced facilitators would be recruited to assist schools teachers in solving difficult problems. Assistance was also promised in formulating the issues and setting up projects, and in the purchase of components and equipment required to implement the projects. A mandatory demand of the leading team was that all the projects be different, requiring the creation of hundreds different topics for projects. In addition, the schools were promised a one week projects camp during the summer vacation between 11th and 12th grades. This camp would be for students and their teachers, in summer camp conditions, in which the schools would start their activities towards the realization of large projects for matriculation. Determination paid off. All eight schools agreed to meet the challenge and guide their students to matriculation exams on projects. Towards the beginning of the summer camp, about 200 project proposals had been initiated and sent to the Ministry of Education for approval. The procedure dictated by the ministry of education for submitting students to projects' matriculation examination include three stages: first, the student should formally offer a project issue including short description, specifications and a block diagram of suggested project. Only after a formal approval the student is allowed to start the second stage that is: realizing the project. At the end, the matriculation exam take place; every individual student should present his project in front of two inspectors and answer their professional questions. Many suggestions were offered by school teachers and other suggestions by the leading team and some professional guides who joined the team.
84
83 82
82
81
80
79
79
78 76 74
1
2
3
4
5
6
School number It is interesting to examine the correlation between school grades and the governmental matriculation exam scores: a comparison between these sets of average scores is listed in Table 4. Table 4: Correlations between average school scores to matriculation scores School no.
1
Correlation 0.7
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
0.7 0.85 0.81 0.8 0.98 0.9 0.5
The table shoes that the correlations are typically high, except for school #8. This can be considered as "reliability between judges'," even though it is not the same test assessment but assessment of the same activity with various tools. Main findings from the projects camp The projects activity in the camp was videoed. Film analysis shows that project-based learning promotes the interaction between teacher and student and enables: 1. Coaching - conversation at "eye level" (one-on-one guidance)
2. During the activity the students and teachers do not sit in one place, they move around. The teacher serves as a guide and creates a relaxed atmosphere in the classroom, which contributes to a better relationship between students and teachers; this relationship has significant impact on the success of students later. 3. There are cases where a student determines the issue to study and the teacher examines what the student knows and completes the missing pieces for the student. 4. The teaching method is a method in which the student uses his knowledge nucleus and produces new knowledge over the existing knowledge: this is knowledge construction. For example: Student #7 asks the teacher: "What counter shall I choose"? The teacher returns the decision to the student. After the student has struggled with his doubts, he finally decides to choose an asynchronous BCD counter (BCD-Binary Coded Decimal). The teacher asks, "What is the difference between a synchronous and an asynchronous counter"? The student does not know, so the teacher explains. Then, a discussion on the BCD term is held. 5. There are times when the student is the one who navigates the conversation according to his needs, regarding the project progress. 6. The student is not ashamed to admit ignorance. Here is an example: Student: "I'll tell you why I did not write it." Teacher: “Why?” Student: "Because I do not understand it yet." 7. The students sit and work on their assignments for hours without disciplinary problems or degradation in their motivation. It can be seen on the video after about 3 consecutive hours of studying; the students still sit in an orderly manner and work on their projects. (Traditionally, the students' patience ends in 15 minutes). For example: At the 36th minute in tape #1: A Senior advisor entered the classroom. The teacher says hello. The senior advisor says with satisfaction: "Everyone is working." The teacher replies with a smile: "Working? Oh, that's surprising." It seems that even the teachers and advisors are surprised at how seriously the students attend to the project activity. 8. The teacher is not ashamed to admit (even in front of her students) that she was not sure about a piece of information associated with the investigation that she was conducting. 9. Dialogue takes place between teacher and student in front of the EWB screen (Time 1:35 tape #1). The student is exploring why the "falling light" on the photo-transistor drives it into saturation. The discussion is around the student's understanding. The student points at the waveform on the screen
6
indicating the conductive and cut off sections of the transistor, in his opinion. In project-based learning one can identify discussions between a teacher and a student who work together to solve a real problem. In these projects, real life problems occur because the circuit and malfunctions are real. The discussion, as well as the topics, was initiated by the student. Interesting points raised by the teachers' daily meetings (in the projects' camp): Daily meetings involving the school teachers, the extra advisors, and the program's leading team, were held in order to monitor the activity’s progress as well as the participants' feelings. 1. In the first day’s meeting, three schools reported on the difficulties and sought the help of extra advisors. (This finding can be related to a sense of frustration that accompanied the project’s activity in the early stages). 2. On the second day, one school reported that students were having difficulties in understanding the connection between the block diagram and the real circuit. 3. On the third day, the teachers and students of school #5 asked for permission to continue the project activities after official hours. The students received permission to continue working until 22:00. 4. Four of the schools’ teachers reported that their students complained about having too many hours devoted to fun activities and trips. They would prefer to devote the hours to advancing their projects. 5. The Electronics Department Coordinator of School #7 said: "At the beginning of activity the students were shocked, but now towards the end of simulation (the students were required to check the operation of their project through simulation) it is just fun."
VI.
DISCUSSION
This study revealed that implementing a change in schools is a sensitive process that sometimes involves many factors working in opposite directions, as mentioned by Resnick [2] and by Rafalovich [5]. There is no doubt that the keyword in the success of change processes is the sensitivity of the change leaders. The leaders must listen to voices coming from the participants in the change process, and be flexible enough to modify the change processes when needed while insisting on their demands when necessary, providing that the desired goal is achieved. Another condition is the collaboration with teachers and principals, making them partners in the process. For achieving this condition, it is important that teachers feel they gain from the relationship created between
them and the change leaders. A teacher is willing to participate in a teachers’ training course when he knows that he will get the tools and materials that will help him in classroom activities with students, this findings are supported by [5];[6];[7] claims for carrying out the teachers training. Common difficulties in project-based learning are the student's difficulty in selecting the project topic and writing the project proposal to be submitted to the Ministry of Education for approval. In addition, students have difficulties writing a literature review and the research they conducted. It is much easier for them to record the routine activities and constructive steps that they carried out directly with electronic components than to document problem solving processes and ways of overcoming difficulties. The important obstacle mentioned by Fisher [3] that teachers are the main decision-makers was solved as shown in the results of the project camp. VII. REFERENCES [1] E. M. Rogers, Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.), New York: Free Press, 2003. [2] L. B. Resnick, "Teaching teachers: Professional development to improve student achievement", AERA Research Points, vol.3, no.1, pp. 1-4, 2005. [3] Y. Fisher, "Teacher's role in computerized teaching", Computers in Education, vol.3, pp. 4– 12, (In Hebrew), 1996. [4] M. I. Chagas and G. L. Abegg, "Teachers as Innovators: A Case Study of Implementing the Interactive Videodisc in a Middle School Science Program", J. of Comp. in Math. and Science Teaching, vol.15, no.1/2, pp. 103–118, 1996. [5] D. Rafalovich, "Formative assessment of the science and technology course assimilation process in intermediate school Teachers", M.S. thesis, Dep. of Edu. in Tech. and Science, Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel, (in Hebrew, abstract in English), 1999. [6] Y. Doppelt, "Implementation and assessment of project-based learning in a flexible environment", Int. J. of Technology and Design Education, vol.13, pp. 255-272, 2003. [7] Y. Doppelt, "Assessing creative thinking in design based learning", Int. J. of Technology and Design Education, vol.19, no.1, pp. 55-65, 2009. [8] J. S. Krajcik and P. C. Blumenfeld and R. W. Marx and E. Soloway, "A Collaborative Model for Helping Middle Grade Science Teachers Learn Project – based Instruction", The Elementary School J., vol.94, no.5, pp. 483–497, 1994. [9] M. Barak and S. Pearlman-Avnion, "Who will teach an integrated program for science and
7
technology in Israeli junior high schools? A case study". J. of Research in Science Teaching, vol.36, no.2, pp. 239-253, 1999. [10] N. Sabag and Y. Doppelt and Z. Azia, Project based learning in electric and electronics, ORT Israel publishing. (In Hebrew), 2001. Nissim Sabag is a senior lecturer, Department of EEE. Chair, collegial committee of academic affairs, Ort Braude College, Israel. Head of project, involving, eight high schools for improving learning and teaching of electronics (1998-2002). Received seven prizes for outstanding member of the academic staff (2004 – 2010). His academic activity revolves around EEE as well as Technology Education; particularly, Project Based Learning. Recent publications: Sabag & Trotskovsky Engineering Thinking: Characterization by Experts and its Appearance in Graduate Design Projects. International Conference on Engineering Education ICEE – 2010. Poland. Trotskovsky & Sabag. Internship in Engineering Design at Hi-Tech Industries: Theory and Practice. Transforming Engineering Education conference. Ireland. 2010. His academic education: B.Sc.E.E (1982) Second B.Sc. (1995) & M.Sc. (1998) & PhD (2002) in Technology and Science Education at Technion – Israel Institute of Technology.
Yaron Doppelt is a senior lecturer at Sakhnin Academic College. Since September 2010 he is the national superintendent of mechanical engineering education in the Israeli Ministry of Education. Recently, he received the Chase-Rashi-Recanati Entrepreneur Teacher Award for his longitudinal field research on design-based learning. In this research he dealt with characterizing effective professional development for teachers as well as implementing a system design approach for curriculum design, teachers' training and pupils' hands-on learning. On this aspect of his research he published several referreed papers. His latest publication is: Doppelt, Y., Schunn, C. D., Silk, E. M., Mehalik, M. M., Reynolds, B. & Ward E. (2009). Evaluating the impact of a facilitated learning community approach to professional development on teacher practice and student achievement. Research in Science and Technological Education, 27(3), 339-354. (Rated in the top ten downloadable papers in this journal for 2009 ).
