Professional development encompasses formal and informal learning experiences in order to provide the connections between school science and real-life science (NRC, 1996, Fullan, 1995; Exeter Academy, 1980; Holmes Group, 1986; Exxon, 1984). When teache rs participate in experiences in which both practitioners and theoreticians are involved, the interconnectedness of disciplines and technology evolves (NRC, 1996). Extensive collaboration among schools, universities, local industry, and science-oriented c enters are highly recommended by the National Research Council as stated in Standard D (NRC, 1996). Qualified community professionals such as engineers, chemists, and meteorologists involved in professional development programs for teachers of science lin k the best sources of expertise with the current needs of teachers (NRC, 1996; AAAS, 1989; Guskey, 1995). Optimal collaboratives provide teachers with opportunities to learn about new scientific developments help teachers acquire useful collaborative skil ls, and form scientific networks (NRC, 1996; Exeter Academy, 1980; William, Konrad, & Larson, 1992). The involvement of community professionals in professional development programs:

Teachers should continue to learn and to deepen their understanding of science as emphasized in Professional Development Standard C (NRC, 1996). Teachers should keep current in science content and advancements to be prepared for their students of today and tomorrow (NRC, 1996). By forming relationships with working scientists, teachers decrease their isolation from the scientific community and link school science with contemporary real-world experiences (NRC, 1996; Exeter Academy, 1980; William, Konrad , & Larson, 1992; Exxon, 1984).

Professional Development Standard A recommends that teachers of science learn science content through the perspectives and methods of inquiry (NRC, 1996). Programs built around methods of inquiry are designed to help teachers learn pedagogical techniqu es that prepare teachers to:

Elementary teachers of science need opportunities in professional development programs to develop a broad knowledge of science content as well as some in-depth learning in at least one science subject (NRC, 1996). Using an inquiry-based program activel y engages teachers in learning; teacher learning is "analogous to student learning" (NRC, 1996; Lawson, et.al. 1989; Barman & Shedd, 1992). The use of inquiry encourages teachers to teach science as:

Programs focused on professional development should prepare teachers to use new instructional materials (NRC, 1996). Strategies for teaching require a variety of sources including research, new materials and tools, and descriptions of best practices as described in Professional Development Standard C (NRC, 1996; AAAS, 1989; Exxon, 1984). Instruction in computing, networking, and using the Interment and World Wide Web assists teachers in using these tools effectively in the classroom and in taking respo nsibility for their own professional development (NRC, 1996). Teachers need to be familiar with accessing new knowledge and strategies generated from research (NRC, 1996). Teachers of science need to be more adept at conducting research on science instruc tion in their own classrooms and sharing the results with the science education community (NRC, 1996).

Project Selection

This project was designed to provide a variety of hands-on, inquiry-based, technology-rich, school-based and university-connected activities in formal and informal settings. Environmental science conservation, a national issu e, was selected as the targeted content with local and state resources. The professional development program evaluated the attainments of teacher-participants using the assessment tools recommended by Standard C to determine the usefulness of the professi onal development experiences (NRC, 1996; AAAS, 1989; NCISE, 1989; Anderson, 1984). The assessment tools used to evaluate the teacher-participants’ acquisition of knowledge and performance represented two of the tools, self-reflection and questionnaires, r ecommended by Standard C (NRC, 1996).

The program "Habitats and Their Conservation" exemplified a professional development collaborative that involved state agencies, local industry, an outdoor learning center, a university, and teams of teachers from rural public and private schools. The University of Mobile and the Harrigan Forest Learning Center provided the link between the collaborative partners. The Scott Paper Company of Alabama, the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, and the Game and Fish Division were active partner s in the field experiences of the professional development program.

Selection of Participants

Teams of participants were selected according to the following criteria: (a) teacher of elementary science in either a public or private, rural school (b) interest in learning about environmental science (c) personal commitment to participate in follow-up meetings, and (d) principal's commitment to allow the team of teachers to present at one inservice meeting. Twenty participants from eight public and private, rural schools were selected. Their teaching experience ranged from one to twenty-five years. Tw o schools were represented by one teacher each, and the other schools were represented by teams of two or more teachers.

Design of Program

The professional development program focused on environmental science content and afforded elementary teachers from rural schools with day-long workshops in formal and informal settings. The program introduced the teams of teachers to a variety of resourc e speakers from Scott Paper Company, the Alabama Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, and the Alabama Game and Fish Division, provided opportunities to develop inquiry-based instruction, and familiarized the teacher-participants with the teac hing/learning cycle recommended by the National Center for Improving Science Education (Bybee, 1989). The field experiences provided the teachers with opportunities to perceive the interconnections between school science and real-life science.

Teaching/Learning Cycle

Incorporated with the sequence of content activities was an emphasis on the learning cycle (Lawson, et al. 1989). The three-stage learning cycle: exploration, explanation/concept invention, and concept application afforded the teacher-participants with op portunities to become familiar with the content of environmental science and the teaching strategies for inquiry-based science. During exploration, the teacher-participants learned through their own actions and reactions in new situations. The new experiences created questions and complexities. The explanation/concept invention phase provided the teacher-participants with opportunities to link the pattern discovered in the exploration phase with any special vocabulary. During the concept application phase teacher-participants learned to transfer key ideas to new contexts (Lawson, et al., 1989), extending the range of applicability of the concept. In group sessions, the teacher-participants organized and adapted their newly-acquired en vironmental science knowledge into practical applications with the field experiences as noted in Figure 1 (Lawson, et al., 1989).

Figure 1. Schedule of Events

Day 1 (Presidential Awardee, Presenter)

Morning

• Slide Presentation of Costa Rica Rainforest.
• Group Discussion of Rainforest Deforestation.
• Large Group Discussion of Animal Adaptation and Biomes.
• Creation and Presentation of Hand-Puppet Dramas.
• Self-Reflection in Journals.

• Animal Adaptation and Biodiversity Hands-On Activities.
• Biome Simulation Game.
• Non-Fiction and Fiction Book Reviews on Rainforests.
• Lesson Plans with Assessment Component.
• Self-Reflection in Journals.

Day 2 (Scott Paper Company Personnel, Presenters)

Morning

• Statistical Data on Forest Economics, Management, Protection, and Forest Stewardship.
• Simulations with Forest Habitats and Ecology.
• Outdoor Games Using Simulations.
• A Tree Trip (Economic Impact).
• The Paper Trail (Societal Issue).

• Guided Nature Tour of Diverse Forest Habitats.
• Observe Physical Characteristics of Various Parts of Trees.
• Identify Physical Factors in the Forest Environment.
• Recognize Major Characteristics Used in Tree Identification.
• Identify Trees Which Are Used Commercially to Produce Paper and Other Forest Generated Products.
• Name and Describe Forest Careers.
• To Use or Not to Use, That is the Question (Societal Issues).
• Forest Management and Protection.
• Group Lesson Plans.
• Self-Reflection in Journals.

Day 3 (Harrigan Forest Learning Center’s Resource Teachers)

Morning

• Introduction to Bioassessment Techniques.
• Bioassessment Field Activities: Chickasabogue Creek and Cypress Pond.
• Preserve and Identify Collected Specimens.
• Lab Aid Chemical Analysis of Water from Creek and Pond.
• Self-Reflection in Journals.

• Nature Trail Hike: Plant Identification and Collection, Soil Collected from Three Habitats: Sandy Hill, Cypress Pond and Chickasabogue Creek Bank.
• Soil Analysis.
• Plant Pressing Procedures.
• Nature Art Activities.
• Brain Storming and Extensions.
• Evaluation.

Days 4/5 (Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Teacher, Alabama Game and Fish Division Personnel; Scott Paper Company Personnel)

Morning

• Travel to the Scott Paper Hunting Camp.
• Point and Nonpoint Pollution: Wetlands in a Pan
• Energy Transfer: Food Chains, Food Webs, and Energy Pyramids.
• Nature Art Activities: Fashion a Fish.
• Project WILD Activities Outdoors: Whale of a Tail.

• Field Experiences within the Alabama River Delta.
• Boat Ride into the Delta: Identify Wildlife.
• Conservation Discussions.
• Evening Discussions with Personnel.
• Self-Reflection in Journals.

• A Walk Through WILD.
• Depart for Live Oak Landing for a Boat Ride into the Alabama River Delta to View Helicopter Logging and Indian Shell Mounds.
• Lunch
• Collegial Reflection.

• Small Group Presentations.
• Closure and Evaluations.

Day 6 (Teacher from the Mobile County Public Schools)

Morning

• Investigate the Abiotic Features of Habitats.
• Use Soil Thermometer To Read Substrate Temperature of Soil.
• Determine Incident Light by Using a Box Light Meter.
• Experiment with Soil pH Using Cabbage Juice and Soil Samples Collected.

• Determine Topsoil Depth Using Soil Core Sampling Tubes.
• Investigate Soil Porosity Using an Open-Ended Tin Can Plus a Stopwatch to Determine Soil Structure and Absorption Capabilities.
• Explore Wind Velocity and Direction Using Wind Gauges and Compasses.
• Practice Field Bearing Rules Using Silva Compasses.
• Evaluation.

Days 7/8 (Principal Investigator and Graduate Student, Presenters)

Morning

• World Wide Web Training.
• Small Group Discussions and Informal Interviews.
• Self-Reflection in Journals.

• Software and CD ROM Training.
• Small Group Discussions and Informal Interviews.
• Self-Reflection in Journals.

1: Rainforests: Amazon and Costa Rica

The first day of the project "Habitats and Their Conservation" introduced the teacher-participants to the Amazon and Costa Rica Rainforests. The Presidential Awardee who had firsthand experience in the Costa Rica Rainforest presented hands-on activities t hat engaged the teacher-participants to help them develop understandings of new concepts including biodiversity, animal adaptation, biome, and Rainforest deforestation. The construction of forest puppets and participation in the group puppet dramas helped the teacher-participants construct personal meaning for the Rainforest habitats. The participants received "Rainforest Rendezvous" notebooks that included lesson plans and outdoor activities.

2: Local Forest: Project Learning Tree

The second day focused on the local forestry habitat with a presentation of Project Learning Tree by staff members of the Scott Paper Company at the Harrigan Forest Learning Center. The teacher-participants hiked through the forest with educational guides and collected data on the trees, three types of soil, plants, animals, and the three habitats, the Chickasabogue Creek, a cypress pond, and a sandy hill. The teachers participated in interdisciplinary activities and developed group lesson plans. Each tea cher-participant received a Project Learning Tree instructional guide that included lesson plans, a resource list of materials, and simulations for habitats.

3: Local Forest: Bioassessment

Activities for the third day focused on Bioassessment techniques in the Chickasabogue Creek and Cypress Pond. The teacher-participants applied techniques of collecting, identifying, and classifying aquatic macroinvertebrates to assess water quality. The t eacher-participants used Save Our Stream materials to analyze the data. Each team prepared a representative sample of aquatic macroinvertebrates and performed multiple tests on the chemical parameters of water samples. Hand lenses and microscopes w ere used to study the soil samples and differences in habitats were emphasized. Each team received complimentary water testing equipment and field guides for implementing the activities within their science classes.

4/5: The Alabama River Delta: Project WILD

The fourth and fifth days featured the national project, Project WILD, in the field setting of the Alabama River Delta. Scott Paper Company provided overnight accommodations at the company's hunting lodge for the teacher-participants and instructors. The Department of Conservation and Natural Resources and Scott Paper Company provided workshops using awareness activities to increase the teacher-participants’ knowledge and skills needed for informed decision-making and responsible citizen behavior concerni ng wildlife and the environment. The topics of the activities included point and nonpoint pollution, renewable Vs non-renewable resources, energy transfer in food chains, field experiences within the delta, and conservation discussions. The boat rides int o the delta provided by the Alabama Game and Fish Division enabled the teacher-participants to view firsthand the partnership between industry and environmental conservation interests, particularly the viewing of the helicopter logging process. Each teach er-participant had opportunities to work in small groups on content activities included in the Project WILD Aquatic Education Activity Guide.

6: Local Forest: Abiotic

The sixth day of the summer session involved the teachers in cooperative groups collecting and interpreting abiotic data from the local forest next to the Harrigan Forest Learning Center. Instruction focused on the participants’ use of scientific instrume nts to collect data. Activities included using a wind meter and compass to determine wind speed and direction, thermometers to determine soil and air temperature, and a sampling tube to collect soil. The cooperative groups of teacher-participants categori zed the collected data and discussed the interrelationships between biotic and abiotic features of habitats. Each team received a complimentary field backpack with all the instruments to investigate abiotic features of habitats with their science classes in their individual schools.

7 & 8: Macintosh Computer Laboratory: Computer Software Training

The follow-up meetings during the fall semester focused on the practical use of the World Wide Web and science software/CD-ROM programs. Eight interactive programs familiarized the teacher-participants on topics such as wildlife habitats, endangered anima ls, conservation of the Rainforests, population growth, succession, and ecology. The programs selected were Zurk's Rainforest Lab, The Secret Codes of Cypher, My Backyard, Eco-Adventures in the Ocean, Eco-Adventures in the R ainforest, Odell Down Under, Learning All About Our Environment, World of Nature, and Undersea Adventure.

Data Collection

Data collected for the study included teacher-participants' responses to a questio nnaire designed by the author. The questionnaire included fifteen items, organized into three categories.

The first section (See Table 1) included four semantic differential items concerning the participants' attitudes toward teaching more ecology duri ng the present school year than in past years, the impact of others including the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, the Forestry Commission of Alabama, and the Environmental Protection Agency, on their environmental science teaching, and t heir commitment to exhibit confidence in their teaching the environmental science activities. Five response choices ranged on a scale from extensive to never.

The second section (See Table 2) included six items that examined the participants' intentions toward using the content and activities acquired in the program and the extent to which their knowledge and teaching strategies had increased due to their pa rticipation in the professional development program.

The third section consisted of short-answer, open-ended questions (See Figure 2) pertaining to their participation in the "Habitats and Their Conservation" program and the effects of the teaching strategies, specifically, their impressions of the program, belief in the long-term effects of the program, and usefulness of the team approach in aiding professional development.

Figure 2. Open-Ended Questions

1. In what ways were the firsthand experiences valuable to you?

2. How helpful were the presenters from industry and the state agencies?

3. What do you think about the likelihood of knowledge affecting practice since you attended this professional development program?

4. In what ways did the field experiences enhance concept construction?

5. What benefits were accrued from working with a team of teachers from your school in this project?

6. What are your best impressions of this project?

A follow-up assessment including the items on Table 1 and 2 was administered after a year of implementation of teaching environmental science activities included in the professional development program "Habitats and Their Conservation". The findings of the data from the follow-up questionnaire (See Tables 3 and 4) are described in the section "Results".

Section 1: Intentions and Attitudes

Results from the first section of the questionnaire (See Table 1) revealed that the teachers’ intentions are positively oriented toward teaching more environmental science in the present school year compared with previous years. The data showed that the t eacher-participants think that teaching environmental science in their respective classrooms will be easier. The responses to the item concerning "others, meaning state and national agencies, think I should teach more environmental science" revealed that influence is only somewhat important.

Section 2: Best Impressions

Responses to the questions in the second section revealed that the participants’ direct quotations supported their belief that an increase in content knowledge was due to their participation in the project. The participants responded that they had increas ed their repertoire of hands-on strategies that would motivate them to involve the students in more firsthand field experiences. The participants did not anticipate any change in their principals’ interest in their teaching environmental science. From dis cussions with the participants they emphasized that their principals previously had not shown an interest. This belief continues from the recent survey as noted in Table 4. The participants' responses to the first survey are presented in Table 2.

Analy sis of the questionnaire data from the third section (See Figure 2) yielded a set of assertions from the teacher-participants’ direct quotations to the open-ended questions.

The assertions focused on science learning as student-centered, practical field experiences, environmental science content and team participation. Discussion with participants at the follow-up computer training session provided additional data for the assertions.

Assertions and Direct Quotations

Assertion 1: Science learning is a constructive process that requires active participation on the part of both the learner and the teacher. The participants expressed that actually doing the outdoor acti vities provided them with the incentive and confidence to use them in their classes.

* The microscope studies, chemical analysis, and nature walks were all activities that can be used in my classroom and were learning experiences for me as well.

* The construction of knowledge of various habitats in the area and the importance of wise management of these resources has sparked an increased interest in the environment and how I can affect it directly and indirectly through teaching methods t hat will involve my students.

Assertion 2: Educating the public about the importance of conservation and preservation of the environment requires interaction between learners and instructors. The program emphasized the need for an effe ctive partnership between industry and education in practicing conservation and preservation measures, reflecting the greater national emphasis on conservation issues. The teacher-participants appreciated the willingness of the industry representatives an d the conservation staff members to inform them about environmental issues.

* The program utilized these sources in the presentation and gave us information needed to contact these sources ourselves.

Assertion 3: Engaging in concrete activ ities with the phenomenon promotes enthusiasm. The teachers openly expressed the importance of the concrete activities that they experienced in the project. The manipulation of the materials provided an impetus for following through with the activitie s in their classrooms. The teachers responded that the ripple effect started by involvement in the project would extend outward from the classroom into the rest of the school and local community.

* I have already talked with the team about how we w ill use the materials and activities at our school.

* The information is practical and already in a format to be used in the classroom. My two co-workers and I are already planning to develop a week long Rainforest study that will involve the wh ole school.

Assertion 4: Engaging in hands-on, practical field experiences encourages teachers to think like scientists and improve their environmental science knowledge as well as instruction. A majority of participants expressed tha t practical field experience gives them valuable knowledge to use in developing their science curriculum and lesson plans. One teacher responded that she enjoyed using the microscopes, testing with the analysis kit, and traveling to the delta for two days .

* We are trying to develop our science curriculum which goes way beyond the text; our resources are extremely limited.

Teachers found the program’s format "very applicable," because "activities were designed for easy integra tion into subjects and skills areas especially science, social studies, language arts, and math." The participants agreed that they were taking many innovative ideas and interdisciplinary activities back with them. They found the resource mater ials and the curriculum guides very applicable and plan to share workshop ideas with other teachers at their schools.

Assertion 5: Participation as a team facilitates inservice presentations. A number of teachers in their comments about t he program recognized the positive effects of the teachers’ collaboration on inservice presentations.

* Attending the project with another member of the school will allow the knowledge and education to go further.

* Working together as a t eam will spread out the responsibility and draw on all our strengths.

Another teacher replied that group participation "helps to motivate and inspire more school-wide activities across grade levels." The majority of participants felt that teachers, from different grade levels, offered interesting insights. Participants expressed that they would share materials with students, fellow teachers, and faculty alike. One participant expressed that she benefited from the ideas gathered from e ducators from other school systems and plans to continue to share ideas with her fellow participants.

* I feel excited that I can share activities that other teachers will actually use, and they will not feel terrified about trying them.Results and Analysis

The data collected from the questionnaire for the project "Habitats and Their Conservation" indicated that the teacher-participants perceived the usefulness of the teaching strategies, content, and field experiences.

The first and second sections of the questionnaire (See Tables 1 - 5) were administered for pre and post responses. The first set of semantic-differential items identified the teacher-participants’ perceptions toward teaching environmental science. Eighteen of the twenty par ticipants completed the questionnaire immediately following the professional development program. Fifteen of the eighteen respondents completed the questionnaire after one year of implementation (See Tables 3 and 5).

The teacher-participants may have been exceptionally motivated about teaching environmental science immediately following the professional development program. There were no significant differences with item two "My plan to teach more environmental sci ence is valuable" and "My plan to teach more environmental science is still valuable" or item three " I can teach environmental science more easily" and "Teaching environmental science has been easier" (See Table 4).

Item 4, "People who are important to me think I should teach more environmental science" (noted on Table 1) and "Others including the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, the Forestry Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency think I should teach more environmental science" (noted on Table 3) showed a significant difference with the pre and post responses. The significant difference was noted as p = < 0.005 on Table 4. Possibly, the teacher-participants developed more of an aware ness during the year that they implemented the environmental science activities. The state and national agencies may have contributed more educational materials for classroom use and more media coverage may have been provided for the environmentally focus ed agencies in the local communities. Furthermore, the National Science Education Standards (1996) have addressed environmental science content as a part of the curriculum.

Analysis of pre and post responses of the second section of the questionnaire sh owed several percentage differences between the responses. The pre response rating "extensive" to item one on Table 2 "increased knowledge from the project" was represented by 94 % as compared to the post response rating "extensive" which was represented by 60% (See Table 5).

The pre/post response "extensive" to item 2 (increased hands-on strategies) was represented by 83% and 86%, respectively (See Tables 2 and 5). Their intentions to involve parents in future activities appeared optimistic immediately following the profes sional development. Eighty-three percent responded that they would extensively and/or moderately involve their parents in activities as noted on Table 2 and 20% exhibited those intentions after a year of implementation (See Table 5). The intention to exte nsively involve students in outdoor activities showed 61% and 33%, respectively to pre/post questionnaires (See Tables 2 and 5). A significant difference was noticeable with the "principal’ level of interest". Seventy-seven percent of the teacher-particip ants perceived that their principals would be extensively and/or moderately interested prior to implementation of the environmental activities (See Table 2). Twenty-seven percent of their principals were perceived as interested in their activities after a year of teaching environmental science (See Table 5).

The important features of the "Habitats and Their Conservation" program focused on the vital elements identified in the reform effort on professional development (NSF, 1996; NRC, 1996). It was led by teams that included facilitators with scientific exp ertise who incorporated activities that modeled effective science teaching and learning that is expected to occur in classrooms (Corcoran, 1995). For example, the resource teachers from the Harrigan Forest Learning Center, the presidential awardee of seco ndary science teaching, and the resource teacher from the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources presented the best of classroom practices from their programs (Loucks-Horsley et al., 1989). These facilitators understood that the teacher-particip ants should participate in the activities in the same way that their students should experience them. Melanie Barron, science coordinator and leader of the NSF-funded teacher enhancement project (NSF, 1996) stated:

... we do with them (the teachers) what we want them to do in the classroom. If you want your teachers to have children learn from the environment, you have to take them to a pond for a sampling expedition.

Figure 1. Schedule of Events portrays the environmental science activities that provided the teacher-participants opportunities to experience firsthand the effective science teaching and learning that should occur in classrooms.

This professional development program encouraged collegiality and collaboration that are identified by the National Science Education Standards (1996) as characteristics of good professional development programs (See Assertion 5). The teachers collabor ated with other teachers from rural public and private schools, shared their ideas, and revised their own beliefs about teaching and learning (NRC, 1996). Professional Development Standard B states that teachers who experience opportunities to revise thei r ideas on science instruction develop an appreciation and understanding of the nature of exemplary teaching (NRC, 1996).

Professional development for teachers of science should include activities that provide opportunities for teachers to learn techniques for self-reflection (See Figure 1). Effective programs should engage teachers in an ongoing process of reflective lea rning (Regional Laboratory for Education Improvement of the Northeast and Islands, 1995). Portfolios and journals, two tools for reflection, help teachers reflect on their teaching and the learning that should occur in the classroom. The practice of self- reflection should build understanding and skill in science teaching (NRC, 1996).

Professional development programs should encompass a range of teacher experience, and , for all teachers, extend over a sufficient period of time (Harvey, 1995; NRC, 1996). The "Habitats and Their Conservation" program included twenty teacher - partici pants from eight public and private, rural schools with their teaching experience ranging from one to twenty-five years. Two follow-up days during the fall semester provided opportunities for the teachers to improve their technological skills. The experie nces familiarized the teachers with World Wide Web sites and computer software/CD-ROM environmental science programs (See Figure 1). Professional Development Standard A states that teachers need to be introduced to technological resources that provide opp ortunities for teachers to expand their knowledge and ability to access further knowledge (NRC, 1996).

Inquiry-based teaching requires a deeper understanding of content than the more traditional approaches to teaching (NRC, 1996). The "Habitats and Their Conservation" program provided teachers with opportunities to increase their depth of knowledge with environmental science topics including abiotic, biotic, biodiversity, biome, deforestation, point and nonpoint pollution, macroinvertebrates, and energy transfer (See Assertions 1 - 4). Most importantly, the hands-on, participatory design of the program provided participants with opportunities to develop the confidence needed to apply the new concepts learned in their classroom settings.

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: Author.

Anderson, R.C. (1984). Some reflections on the acquisition of knowledge. Educational Researcher, 13, 5-10.

Bybee, R . W., Buchwald, C. E., Crissman, S., Heil, D., Kuerbis, P. J., Matsumoto, C., & McInerney, J. D. (1989). Science and technology for the elementary years: Framework for curriculum and instruction. Andover, MA: The Network.

Barman, C. R. , & Shedd, J. D. (1992). An inservice program designed to introduce K-6 teachers to the learning cycle teaching approach. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 3 (2), 589.

Commission on Biology Teachers Inservice Programs. (1996). The role of scientists in the professional development of science teachers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Corcoran, T. (1995). Helping teachers teach well: Transforming professional

development, Consortium for Policy Research in Education (CPRE) Policy Brief RB-16.

Exeter Academy. (1980). The Exeter conference on secondary school science education. Exeter, NH: The Exeter Foundation.

Exxon Education Foundation. (1984). Science education in the United States: Ess ential steps for achieving fundamental improvement. New York: The Foundation.

Fullan, M. G, (1995). The limits and the potential of professional development. In T.R. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.). Professional development in education: N ew paradigms and practices. New York: Teachers College Press.

Guskey, T. R., & Huberman, M. (Eds.). (1995). Professional development in education: New paradigms and practices. New York: Teachers College Press.

Harvey, G. (1995). Editorial. The Regional Lab Reports on Professional Development, October:3.

Holmes Group (1986). Tomorrow’s teachers. East Lansing, MI: Author.

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. ( 1988). Student achievement through staff development. New Yor k: Longman.

Kyle, W. (1995). Professional development : The growth and learning of teachers as professionals over time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32 (7) 679-681.

Lawson, A. E., Abraham, M. R., & Renner, J. W. (1989). A th eory of instruction: Using the learning cycle to teach science concepts and thinking skills. The National Association for Research in Science Teaching Monograph, 1, 1-57.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Carolson, M., Brink, L., Horwitz, P., Marsh, D., Pr att, H., Roy, K., and Worth, K. (1989). Developing and supporting teachers for elementary school science education. Washington, DC: The National Center for Improving Science Education.

National Center for Improving Science Education (NCISE). (198 9). The reform of science education in elementary schools. Washington, DC: Author.

National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards (NSES). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Science Foundation. (1996 ). Foundations: The challenge and promise of K - 8 science education. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

Novak, J., & Gown, D. B. (1984). Learning How to Learn. London: Cambridge University Press.

Regional Laboratory for Edu cational Improvement of the Northeast and Islands. (1995). How to make sure your professional development investment pays off. The Regional Lab Reports on Professional Development, October: 1 - 3.

Stoddart, T. (1993). The professional development school: Building bridges between cultures. Educational Policy, 7, 5-23.

Stohr-Hunt, P. M. (1996). An analysis of frequency of hands-on experience and science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33 (1) 101-109.

William , L. A., Konrad, J., & Larson, H. K. (1992). A guide for planning a volunteer program for science, mathematics, and technology education. College Park, MD: Triangle Coalition for Science and Technology Education.

About the authors. . .

M. Faye Neathery is an Assistant Professor and Master Teacher-In-Residence for an NSF/Oklahoma Teacher Education Collaborative at Southwestern Oklahoma State University.

Justine Glynn is a former graduate student at University of Mobile and presently Technology Manager for the Gulf of Maine Aquarium.

Katherine Long is the Assistant Director of Development Office, University of Mobile.

To get back to the current issue of the EJSE, click here.

To get back to the EJSE's Archive page, click here.