Abstract

Enacting Project-Based
Science Recommendationsfor reform in science educa-
tion place a premium on students' understand-
ing of scientificconceptsand theirabilityto iden-
tify problems, conduct inquiry, and use
informationflexibly. They call for an apprecia-
Ronald W. Marx tion for how ideas evolve and are validated. In
this article we discuss changes in ideas about
Phyllis C. Blumenfeld learningthat underpinthe reforms.We then de-
Joseph S. Krajcik scribe our experiences with project-basedsci-
ence, a pedagogy that addresses the reformrec-
Elliot Soloway ommendations.Project-basedscience focuses on
Universityof Michigan student-designedinquirythatis organizedby in-
vestigations to answer driving questions, in-
cludes collaborationamong learnersand others,
the use of new technology, and the creation of
authenticartifactsthat representstudent under-
standing. Finally, we illustrate the challenges
this type of innovationposes for teachers'class-
room practice, for professional development,
and for policy.

Recent recommendations for science edu-

cation reform (American Association for the
Advancement of Science, 1993; National Re-
search Council, 1996) reflect new concep-
tions of teaching and learning that assign
primary importance to the way students at-
tempt to make sense of what they are learn-
ing rather than to how teachers should de-
liver information. This current view
pictures students as actively constructing
their knowledge by working on authentic
tasks in which they must apply and repre-
sent ideas (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989;
Newman, Griffin, & Cole, 1989; Resnick,
1987). Programs based on this view raise
many questions for education. In this article
we describe the challenges the reforms pose
The ElementarySchoolJournal for education, focusing on a new pedagogy,
Volume 97, Number 4
? 1997 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
project-based science, that is consistent with
0013-5984/97/9704-0005$01.00 these reform recommendations. We follow

This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
342
this with a discussion of challenges project-
based science presents for teachersand de-
scribe attempts to help teachersmeet these
challenges via new approaches to profes-
sional development.
The Challenge for Education
In addition to facility at basic skills, science
education reformersargue that, in a post-
industrial, information economy, citizens
need to have a command of key scientific
ideas, be able to solve problems, and think
critically.Theseaims are informedby recent
ideas about learning that stress student ac-
tive constructionof ideas. The National Re-
search Council's (1996) standards for sci-
ence education emphasize understanding
concepts and developing inquiry abilities.
They suggest that a smaller number of sci-
ence concepts be studied and integrated
across disciplines. The standards propose
that subjectmatterbe learnedthroughlong-
term inquiryactivitiesthatinclude such ele-
ments as argumentationand explanation,
communicatingideas to others,and using a
wide range of manipulative,cognitive, and
proceduralskills.
The newer approaches to instruction
emphasize student activity but stand in
contrastto programs that relied on hands-
on activities to promote the discovery of
ideas (Karplus, 1977). In some instances,
students' achievement and attitudes im-
proved after students participatedin these
hands-on, activity-based programs (Bred-
derman, 1983).However, the effect of these
earlierscience reformeffortswas limited by
problems related to the design of activities,
student learning,and classroomimplemen-
tation.Activitieswere designed to show ab-
stractprinciples,generallyprocedureswere
specified, and results were already known.
The activities were not related to students'
lives and were discrete rather than con-
nected to a particularset of questions or or-
ganized around a phenomenon. Students
often did not discover the intended ideas
and relationships or accommodate their un-
derstandings in light of experimental re-
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL
sults. They did not relate the activities to
everyday experiences, so that, even when
students could explain experimentalresults
and answer test questions correctly in
school, their misconceptionsabout the phe-
nomenon persisted outside school. Teacher
implementation varied considerably. The
innovations involved considerable change
in classroommanagement,lesson structure,
and student assessment.Although students
were active and on task,much of theirfocus
was on carryingout proceduresratherthan
thinking deeply about important science
concepts. In fact, work on activities was
characterizedas hands-on, but not neces-
sarily minds-on (Tobin,Tippins,& Gallard,
1994).
In contrast to previous approaches to
activity-based science, recently developed
programsare premised on new researchon
learning that examines how knowledge is
organized and stored in memory and how
the social context influences these pro-
cesses. A large body of research (McGilly,
1995) has shown that, when informationis
acquiredthrough the memorizationof dis-
crete facts, it will be isolated and inert. As
a result, it is hard for students to access the
informationand apply it to new situations.
Alternatively, knowledge can be robust
when it is organized into large, conceptu-
ally linked networks. This kind of organi-
zation facilitatesflexible access and use of
knowledge so that the learner can ask and
answer questions, draw analogies to new
situations, and solve problems.
To achieve robust understanding, stu-
dents need to relate new information to
what they already know in order to build
connected networks of concepts. To do so
they need to use memory, elaboration,and
organizational strategies to elaborate, or-
ganize, and remember new information,
and they need to employ metacognitive
strategies to evaluate the effectiveness of
their strategy use and understanding. Con-
nections are strengthened as students use
and represent information in many differ-
ent ways, by writing, graphing, and mod-
MARCH 1997

eling. Knowledgealso grows as students re-
organize and restructureexisting ideas that
prove to be inadequateto explain new phe-
nomena. It is not the hierarchicalbuilding
up of bits of informationabout a phenom-
enon that is criticalbut how it is used and
how it is related to other informationthat
createsunderstanding.
Knowledgegrowth is influencedby sev-
eral factors. First, what students attend to
and how they storeinformationdepends on
existing knowledge and beliefs. Therefore,
teachers need to determine what students
alreadyknow and work with potentiallyer-
roneous conceptionsthey bring.
Second, learning is situated;knowledge
is contextualizedand cannot be easily sep-
arated from the situation in which it devel-
ops (Brownet al., 1989). Knowing and do-
ing are not separate;knowledge is not an
abstractionthat can be transferredreadily
from how it is learned in the classroom to
how it needs to be used out of school. More-
over, how students are asked to demon-
strate knowledge affects what they learn.
Therefore,authentic activities and assess-
ments need to be designed carefully.These
activities should mirror real-world situa-
tions; they should afford students oppor-
tunities to engage ideas in many different
ways so that they build representationsof
conceptsunder study and see how they can
be applied. Rather than rely on standard-
ized tests that tap fragmented and decon-
textualized knowledge, the use of alterna-
tive assessmentsis encouraged.Assessment
should focus on students' mastery of the
discipline and knowledge integration. For
example, Perkins (1992) calls for "under-
standing performances"in which students
engage in demonstrationsof thoughtfulness
that go beyond answering test questions or
writing brief reportsfor the teacher.
Third, environment and culture affect
knowledge. What students learn is influ-
enced by social interaction; students can
learn by talking and collaborating with oth-
ers and with more experienced adults.
Through collaboration, they encounter and
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
SCIENCE
PROJECT-BASED 343
explore ideas in a subject, uses for these
ideas, and ways that ideas are validated;
that is, students learn what constitutes le-
gitimate knowledge in a field. Disciplines
that underlie the school subjects have vo-
cabularies, established bodies of knowl-
edge, and rules for gatheringevidence and
evaluating results. As students engage in
conversations,they can draw on others'ex-
pertise;explain, extend, and reflecton their
own ideas; and gain exposure to the ways
of thought exhibitedby disciplinaryexperts
(Bruer,1995).
Fourth, learning also is entwined with
the use of cognitive tools. With the explo-
sive growth and accessibilityof new tech-
nologies, the possibility now exists for sup-
porting robust learning.Such tools include
interactive videodisks, telecommunica-
tions, microcomputer-based laboratories,
and software applicationsfor modeling, vi-
sualizing, and simulating. These tools sup-
port learnersas they solve complex and am-
biguous problems by providing access to
data and information,and opportunitiesto
collaborate, investigate, and create repre-
sentations.
Overall, the new approaches view the
teacher as a coleamer and guide. Collins,
Brown, and Newman (1989) use the anal-
ogy of a cognitive apprenticeship for the
teaching-learningsituation. Like a master
craftsman, the teacher should scaffold in-
structionby breakingdown tasks,use mod-
eling and coaching to teach strategies for
thinking, provide feedback, and gradually
release responsibility to the learner. Simi-
larly, Driver, Asoko, Leach,Mortimer,and
Scott (1994) use the metaphor of a tour
guide with the teacher mediating between
the child's everyday world and the world
of science. They suggest that the teacher's
role is to acquaintlearnerswith new ideas
or cultural tools and to support and guide
students as they make sense of these. As
class discourse unfolds, the teacher listens
and interprets the ways in which learners
understand instructional activities to guide
further action. In this manner, teachers help
344
students understand concepts and intro-
duce them to the discipline. The idea is to
foster critical perspectives on knowledge
and scientific culture including the pur-
poses of scientific knowledge, its limita-
tions, and the basis on which evidence is
gathered and claims are made.
These ideas lead to instructional pro-
grams that differ considerably from what
typically goes on in schools and from earlier
activity-based approaches to science edu-
cation. They include changes in student
roles, the nature of content and tasks, as-
sessments, learning tools, and social orga-
nization. Such approaches entail numerous
challenges. One involves creating new ped-
agogies that reflect the new ideas of teach-
ing and learning. A second is in creating
new approaches to teacher professional de-
velopment that help teachers understand
the innovations and meet the difficulties of
instantiating them in classrooms. We turn
now to a description of the challenges and
ways to meet them.
A New Pedagogy
A number of developers and researchers
have created approaches to science educa-
tion that are more consistent with the cur-
rent views of students as constructors of un-
derstanding. The programs differ in their
point of departure and in the inclusion of
the elements of the newer approaches re-
viewed above. Some are very specific in the
concepts and topics they address; for in-
stance, conceptual change models underlie
Linn's (1986) work on heat and temperature
and Anderson's (see Anderson, Sheldon, &
Dubay, 1990) work on photosynthesis and
states of matter. Others showcase technol-
ogy; for example, Pea and his colleagues
(Gordin, Polman, & Pea, 1994) have devel-
oped a tool to facilitate visualization
through collaboration in the study of
weather. Other programs provide a general
framework that can be applied to different
topics, such as the community of learners
described by Brown (1992). Many of these
programs use project-based or project-
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL
enhanced instruction. Projects serve as pri-
mary tasks through which students explore
topics, or they supplement instruction by
providing ways for students to demonstrate
understanding.
Our group has been working on a proj-
ect pedagogy. We have articulated features
of project-based science (PBS) in collabora-
tion with teachers as they have enacted the
innovation in their classrooms. We have re-
ported research on our efforts with teachers
(Blumenfeld, Krajcik, Marx, & Soloway,
1994; Krajcik, Blumenfeld, Marx, & Solo-
way, 1994; Ladewski, Krajcik, & Harvey,
1994; Marx et al., 1994), and teachers have
described their experiences enacting PBS (B.
Brown, 1994; D. P. Brown, 1994; Scott,
1994). We have reported studies of stu-
dents' attitudes toward science in PBS class-
rooms (Stratford & Finkel, 1996), students'
use of inquiry strategies (Krajcik et al.,
1996), the use of PBS as a basis for curricu-
lum change in a high school (Heubel-Drake,
Mouradian, Stem, & Finkel, 1995), and the
development of technologies for students as
they learn in PBS classrooms (Jackson, Strat-
ford, Krajcik,& Soloway, in press; Stratford,
Krajcik, & Soloway, 1996).
Features of Project-Based Science
We have identified five features of PBS
that help communicate the complexity of
the innovation in terms that are familiar to
teachers. The features of PBS (Krajciket al.,
1994) include a driving question, investi-
gations and artifacts, collaboration, and
technological tools.
Driving question. To overcome the per-
sistent problem that school learning is often
separated from out-of-school contexts and
focused on ideas whose connections are not
apparent (Perkins, 1992), we orchestrate in-
structional units-we call them projects-
around a driving question. There are three
essential characteristics of good driving
questions. First, they need to be worthwhile
in that they are consistent with existing cur-
riculum frameworks. In exploring the driv-
ing question students develop conceptual
MARCH 1997

understandings stipulated by district and
state curriculum frameworks. Second, driv-
ing questions need to encompass real-world
problems that students find meaningful,
thereby motivating them to take ownership
of the questions and to thoughtfully pursue
answers to them. Third, questions need to
be feasible; students need the prerequisite
knowledge and skills to design and conduct
investigations to find answers to their ques-
tions.
Projects designed to help students an-
swer the driving question last from 2 weeks
up to the entire school year, although our
experience is that most teachers prefer proj-
ects that last about 6-8 weeks. Teachers can
create projects by adapting topic-based
units and instructional materials, or they
can use published materials. Well-designed
projects enable students to ask their own
subquestions that personalize the driving
question. Questions like "What is air?" in-
volve important science content but are not
authentic. The same content can be learned
and more authenticity is afforded by a ques-
tion like, "Will breathing the air in my city
make me sick?" Similarly, the question,
"What are Newton's laws?" involves sub-
stantial science content, but the question
"How do I stay on my skateboard?" relates
this science content to the lives of students.
Investigations and artifacts. If students
are to understand complex ideas in science,
they need to engage in deep cognitive pro-
cessing of the content. Surface-level pro-
cessing like recall and recognition is not
likely to result in sophisticated understand-
ing. Students need to organize and elabo-
rate their thinking as they answer the driv-
ing question. Two PBS features-
investigations and artifacts-encourage
and support such thinking.
Investigations emulate the real work of
science; they engage students in planning,
designing, and conducting real-world re-
search to collect and analyze data and draw
inferences from those data. Investigations
are not mere activities. They need to be
open enough that the method and the an-
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
SCIENCE
PROJECT-BASED 345
swer are not known to students before be-
ginning. Following prescribed steps in a
laboratory task is insufficient as an investi-
gation because the task is not authentic.
Well-conceived and authentic investiga-
tions provide opportunities for students to
engage in scientifically important endeav-
ors like planning and designing experi-
ments, searching for information in libraries
and electronic sources like the World Wide
Web, observing natural phenomena, col-
lecting and analyzing data, developing ex-
planations, drawing inferences and conclu-
sions, and reporting findings to others. For
instance, in a project called "Is the water in
Traver Creek safe?" one of the major inves-
tigations was to map a section of the creek,
identify and measure pollutants, derive a
water quality index, and monitor popula-
tions of benthic macroinvertebrates.
Similarly, students need to create prod-
ucts that contribute to and reflect their
learning. We call these products artifacts.
Artifacts are tangible, real results of the pro-
cess of investigation that represent student
understanding. Artifacts can be computer
programs, multimedia documents, written
reports, posters, group presentations, or
any complex representation (or preferably,
multiple representations) of the students'
thinking (Perkins, 1992). For instance, stu-
dents have prepared a presentation to the
local water board about results of a study
of stream quality; others have designed an
exhibit for a local children's museum. Be-
cause they are tangible, artifacts can be
shared and critiqued by other members of
the learning community in a manner similar
to the way that scientists share their work
within research communities.
Collaboration. In PBS, we encourage
teachers to structure the classroom environ-
ment so that students work in groups. We
do this because group activities can foster
collaboration-literally laboring together to
accomplish a task. Collaboration is an es-
sential component of PBS. It provides op-
portunities for students to share ideas, ex-
tend their thinking, draw on the expertise
346
of others, and experience the value of think-
ing intelligently (Bruer, 1995). Teachers and
students collaborate with each other as they
work on investigations and artifacts; they
collaborate with members of the local com-
munity (experts like the forester who works
for the community's parks department or
an engineer in a local company); and they
collaborate with teachers, students, and
with experts through telecommunications
activities like participating in listserve
groups on the Internet and publishing the
findings of their investigations on the
World Wide Web.
It is important to distinguish between
collaboration and cooperative learning. The
latter is often highly structured and stu-
dents are assigned roles, tasks, and proce-
dures. The tasks are generally designed to
help students learn information already
presented or to solve problems provided by
the teacher. In contrast, collaboration is
more loosely structured with roles largely
negotiated among participants. Coopera-
tion focuses on small groups within the
classroom; collaboration envisions a wider
sphere of communities of learners. Coop-
erative learning highlights sharing answers
and explanations in order to learn teacher-
determined concepts and procedures; col-
laboration often is in the service of answer-
ing questions posed by students.
Technological tools. Technological tools
are emerging as an important component of
the PBS classroom: they enable more au-
thentic investigations as well as support
deep understanding and learning in ways
that are not possible with paper and pencil
(Gordin et al., 1994; Linn, in press; Wisnu-
del, Stratford, Krajcik,& Soloway, in press).
We identify technology as a separate fea-
ture of PBS in light of the emergence of dra-
matically more powerful new technologies.
In many respects, technology pervades all
of the other features, although PBS can be
conducted (and in many cases because of
limited resources must be conducted) with-
out new technologies. Thus, we consider
technology as a separate feature in order to
MARCH 1997
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL
highlight its unique and promising poten-
tial.
Using new computing and communica-
tions technologies in PBS makes the envi-
ronment more authentic to students. For
one, students use tools that enable them to
carry out serious inquiry, much like profes-
sional scientists. For example, these tech-
nologies facilitate real-time data collection,
visualization, and modeling; expand collab-
oration possibilities beyond the confines of
a classroom; and support the construction
of sophisticated artifacts. As well, the mul-
timodal, multirepresentational, and multi-
media capabilities of technology not only
enhance the physical accessibility of infor-
mation, they facilitate its intellectual acces-
sibility as well.
We have explored the pervasive use of
technological tools in our classroom work.
Using microcomputer-based laboratory
(MBL) probes, students can gain a personal
sense of otherwise abstract physics notions
such as motion and acceleration. The porta-
bility of new handheld computers, like Ap-
ple's Newton, makes collecting data and
conducting analyses at remote sites, like a
stream or lake, a reality. These technological
tools allow students to focus on analysis
and interpretation of data rather than on the
mechanics of data collection. Scientists rou-
tinely use visualization tools to uncover re-
lationships that are buried in mounds of
data; similarly, students are using our
ScienceWare Viz-It software tool to analyze
numeric, image, and text data to express dy-
namic relationships (e.g., as the cloud cover
at night, depicted as radar images, disap-
pears, students see that the temperature, a
numeric quantity, drops). Modeling, which
typically requires considerable mathemati-
cal sophistication, is not accessible to mid-
dle and high school students. However, us-
ing our ScienceWare Model-It software tool,
students are building models for complex,
dynamic systems such as a stream ecosys-
tem, a climate system, and a predator-prey
system (Jackson et al., in press; Stratford et
al., 1996). A tool like Model-It enables stu-
 SCIENCE
PROJECT-BASED 347

dents to use data they collected via MBL tally, PBS requires attention to a range of
tools and analyzed with visualization tools challenges for it to succeed. If an innovation
to construct and test their models. With represents a dramatic departure from estab-
such tools, students can experience first- lished practice, it will be more difficult to
hand the real activities involved in doing enact because it will require a more sub-
science. stantial change in the teacher's stable and
Learners have unique needs. Unlike
well-practiced repertoire. Furthermore, if
adult and professional users, students do the innovation is derived from theory that
not typically come to a task with a deep un- is divergent from that which underlies the
derstanding of either the content or process teacher's established practices, then the
underlying that activity; learners display a teacher's beliefs and assumptions about
greater range of knowledge and skill than learning might also need reexamination.
professionals. And, unlike professionals, Both of these potential challenges presage
the motivation of students cannot be as-
the need for careful and long-term support
sumed. Work is progressing on a Learner-
for teachers as they attempt change (Blu-
Centered Design Framework that seeks to
menfeld, Marx, Patrick, Krajcik,& Soloway,
develop guidelines for software developers in press; Putnam & Borko, in press).
that address the unique needs of learners
As well as confronting the teacher's
(Soloway, Guzdial, & Hay, 1994).
The explosion of Internet technology af- practices and beliefs, innovative instruction
fords educational opportunities that reso- might conflict with students' expectations
nate with PBS. Although traditional print and abilities. For example, students who
resources will continue to have their place, have been successful at memorization or the
the World Wide Web's access to primary routine application of learned strategies
sources, current information, and dynamic might be reluctant to embrace new ap-
and computational media provides unique proaches that require greater thoughtful-
learning opportunities. Using readily avail- ness and initiative. Or students who are un-
able information-manipulation tools, stu- familiar with working with peers in groups
dents build on resources from the network or who lack the skill to negotiate roles or
and construct their own relationships and engage in productive discussions as they
representations. Moreover, students can work on collaborative tasks might prefer to
use the Web to have others read and com- work by themselves (Blumenfeld et al.,
ment on their work, thus enhancing student 1991).
motivation and sense of community. For ex- Our experience (Blumenfeld et al., 1994;
ample, students published a set of articles Ladewski et al., 1994; Marx et al., 1994) has
on diseases that affect teenagers (see http: / /
been that most teachers face common prob-
chs-web.umdl.umich.edu/classes/founda- lems when enacting PBS. One challenge is
tions, and http://www.umich.edu/ time. Investigations and discussions often
-aaps). Of course, the real challenge is not take longer than anticipated. Also, in-depth
the technology per se but how it is used by
classroom teachers, curriculum designers, exploration of ideas takes longer than the
more familiar broad and superficial survey
school media specialists, and students; go-
of concepts. A related challenge is how to
ing beyond surface accomplishments takes meet district curriculum guidelines while
considerable effort, energy, planning, and
experience. incorporating new in-depth approaches.
Teachers need to select driving questions
The Challenge of Enacting Project- carefully in order to ensure that students'
Based Science investigations enable them to learn the sci-
Like other instructional innovations that at- ence content stipulated in curriculum
tempt to change school learning fundamen- frameworks.

This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
348
A third challenge is classroom manage-
ment. Teachers must balance the need to al-
low students the freedom to talk together
and explore the design and execution of in-
vestigations with the need to maintain or-
der so that students can work and converse
productively. Some teachers have difficulty
organizing and monitoring simultaneous
tasks and dealing with increased activity
and noise. Related to problems of curricu-
lum frameworks and classroom manage-
ment is the challenge of control. Teachers
often feel a need to control the flow of in-
formation because of concerns about learn-
ing. They assume that students need to
master lower-level material and facts, even
though they also think that students need
to build their own understanding. They
want to direct lessons to ensure that stu-
dents get the right information.
A fifth problem is support of student
learning. Teachers have difficulty scaffold-
ing experiences so that students can take re-
sponsibility for learning, and they fre-
quently give students too much
independence without adequately model-
ing thinking, structuring the situation, or
providing feedback. Often teachers' ability
to scaffold is related to their own mastery
of the subject matter.
A sixth is technology use. Teachers who
are not proficient users and have not used
technology as a cognitive tool have diffi-
culty incorporating technology into the
classroom. They might use it to enhance
their previous instructional practices, such
as using multimedia for demonstrations,
but it takes considerable time and skill be-
fore they can help students exploit technol-
ogy's benefits as a tool (Mergendoller, John-
ston, Rockman, & Willis, 1994; Sandholz &
Ringstaff, 1996).
A final problem is assessment. Teachers
have difficulty designing assessments that
measure student understanding. The arti-
facts they ask students to produce often in-
volve participating in a public performance
or sharing reports, but do not always re-
quire students to synthesize information or
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL
generate conceptual representations in the
production of some artifacts. Moreover,
evaluating artifact quality is difficult and
must take into account the design, organi-
zation, and presentation of information, as
well as what information is included and
how accurate the representation of the in-
formation is. As well, because of the ubiq-
uitous use of classroom tests, teachers
might continue to use exams designed to
assess the breadth of content coverage
based on their former use of lecture and rec-
itation teaching. Students who are heavily
involved in project-based investigations are
not all exposed to the same content in the
same way, thus rendering conventional
tests inadequate.
We have found that teachers tend first
to explore aspects of PBS related to their
professional needs, such as enhancing stu-
dent motivation or becoming proficient
with technology (Ladewski et al., 1994;
Marx et al., 1994). Correspondingly, their
change efforts often focus on one or two fea-
tures of PBS such as collaboration or inves-
tigation. Developing expertise with one fea-
ture provides a base of competence from
which teachers can venture to incorporate
other features that are initially less compat-
ible with their approaches and past experi-
ence. Moreover, teachers are inclined to
concentrate and perfect a few strategies to
meet challenges rather than to develop nu-
merous ones. Initial enactments are influ-
enced by teachers' incomplete understand-
ing of broad conceptual issues in PBS and
more specific issues regarding the feature
they attempt to implement. First efforts are
also restricted by a limited vision of what
the classroom might look like, how a project
unfolds over time, and a lack of exposure to
examples of instruction of this type. As a
result of this complex set of factors, teachers
modify their practices in idiosyncratic ways
based on their prior experiences and beliefs.
This mapping of new onto old is sometimes
problematic and unsuccessful. For instance,
teachers used to doing activities con-
strained investigations. They avoided plan-
MARCH 1997

ning, defined procedures rather than let stu-
dents determine how inquiry might best be
designed, and kept investigations discrete,
failing to help students see how investiga-
tions were related to each other and to the
driving question.
Moreover, initial attempts to change
from a didactic model of instruction cause
teachers to be novices once more. Trying
unfamiliar instruction for which their prac-
tical or event knowledge is limited results
in awkward orchestration of the classroom.
Teachers who are masters at managing
classrooms find that they run out of time,
leave activities unfinished, and fail to re-
spond to or return to student suggestions
or questions. Attempts to deal with one fea-
ture (e.g., engaging learners in investiga-
tions) inevitably entail problems with other
features (e.g., the teacher forgets to help stu-
dents link the investigation clearly to the
driving question). Teachers not only have
difficulty with individual features of PBS,
they have difficulty orchestrating among
them.
How teachers dealt with student collab-
oration illustrates these points. Teachers
who agreed to try PBS because they wanted
to enhance student motivation tended to
work first on issues of student collaboration
and of fostering ownership and autonomy.
Collaboration requires exchanging ideas
and negotiating meaning. However, teach-
ers often thought that simply having stu-
dents work together by completing pre-
scribed procedures for an experiment
constituted collaboration. Like many oth-
ers, they also presumed that any type of in-
volvement equaled thoughtfulness (Prawat,
1992). Moreover, they constrained oppor-
tunities for interaction and sharing of ideas
among students. Drawing on prior experi-
ence with cooperative learning, they often
overspecified tasks, required roles for stu-
dents, and assigned "canned" problems
with predetermined procedures and out-
comes. In contrast, a teacher with more ex-
perience using PBS was able to foster col-
laboration more readily by linking class
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
SCIENCE
PROJECT-BASED 349
work to the driving question and by scaf-
folding investigations through carefully
crafted tasks (Crawford, 1996).
Teachers also confront dilemmas as they
reconcile conflicting priorities about the
need for students to engage in conversation
and their beliefs about the importance of
students getting right answers. It takes con-
siderable time for teachers to allow students
the freedom to grapple with ideas and to
meet the challenges of guiding students as
they generate problems and engage in pro-
ductive conversations. The difficulties they
encounter sometimes reaffirm teachers'
feeling that students are not mature or ca-
pable enough, and thus some teachers pre-
maturely abandon their efforts.
At the end of a year of work in PBS,
teachers' practices represent a profile of en-
actment, with some features instantiated
more than others in a manner congruent
with the premises underlying the innova-
tion. Overall, teachers' progress is not lin-
ear; they move between new and old ideas
and practices. Generally, as Shulman (1987)
suggests, development is a "dialectic."
Teachers advance and retreat as they con-
front dilemmas and attempt to meet chal-
lenges posed by the new approaches to
teaching for understanding. In fact, we have
found that it takes almost 3 years for teach-
ers to grasp the ideas underlying PBS and
to become proficient enactors of the inno-
vation (Blumenfeld et al., 1994).
The Challenge of Fostering Change:
Teacher Professional Development
A key to promoting PBS and similar inno-
vations is to support teachers as they
change from information-transmission
models to those that stress students' trans-
formation of ideas. The literature on teacher
change is clear--change will not take root
and innovation will not be sustained if one
adopts traditional top-down models of dis-
semination that rely on single workshops,
distribution of curriculum materials to be
used exactly as prepared, and lists of pre-
scribed practices (Cohen & Ball, 1990; Hall
350
& Hord, 1987; Joyce & Showers, 1988; Kaes-
tie, 1993). In fact, critics of such dissemina-
tion models assert that they are frequently
naive about complexities of teaching, are
couched in abstract theoretical terms, are
not situated in the reality of schools, do not
provide follow-up help and support, and
maintain teachers' isolation (Guskey, 1985;
Richardson, 1990; Sarason, 1993). New ap-
proaches to professional development are
needed in order for PBS and other construc-
tivist innovations to be adopted success-
fully.
Fullan (1993) argues that staff develop-
ment must lead to improvement of school
organization, not merely the skills of indi-
vidual teachers. In order to accomplish
school change through staff development,
efforts should focus on teacher learning, not
merely training in specific skills; quality
leadership as a result of change, not only as
a necessary condition; attention to fostering
an organizational culture that supports ef-
forts to change; and engaging local and re-
gional agencies in the school's efforts. Ef-
fective teacher professional development
needs to be based on a clear model of
teacher growth and development that ac-
knowledges the complexities of classroom,
school, and community as settings and con-
texts for teachers' work. Also, professional
need to be
development programs
grounded in a substantial and verifiable
knowledge base and have to be receptive to
teachers' thinking, feeling, and attempts to
draw meaning from their experience (Put-
nam & Borko, in press; Sprinthall, Reiman,
& Theis-Sprinthall, 1996).
In this section we describe our work
with science teachers that incorporates ele-
ments emerging from the literature as nec-
essary for successful staff development. We
address teachers' beliefs, knowledge, and
experience; the need to collaborate and re-
flect on practices; and the importance of
contextualizing innovation and promoting
systemic change. Our work with teachers is
based on a dynamic interplay of four ele-
ments: collaborationwith others, enactmentof
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL
new practices in classrooms, extendedeffort
to instantiate change, and reflectionon prac-
tice. As a result of engaging in staff devel-
opment designed to address these elements,
teachers are able to gain visions of new in-
structional practices, understand the fea-
tures of PBS, and develop and enact prac-
tices congruent with the theory that
supports PBS. An acronym for these ele-
ments is CEER (Marx, Freeman, Krajcik, &
Blumenfeld, in press). It is important to note
that this type of approach is not unique to
PBS, but can be adapted to help teachers
deal with other constructivist innovations.
CEER
The development of teachers' under-
standing and practice is idiosyncratic. Their
enactments are likely to differ yet should be
consistent with the guiding premises of the
innovation in terms of understanding,
ideas, strategies, and enactments. In other
words, teachers apply the premises of PBS
to develop a range of suitable enactments
within the confines of personal factors and
contextual constraints-a process similar to
Richardson's (1990) "warranted practice."
Warranted practices emerge when teachers
form new conceptions as a result of blend-
ing theory with their own ideas and expe-
riences. According to Richardson (p. 16),
"opportunities should be created to allow
teachers to interact and have conversations
around standards, theory and classroom ac-
tivities. It also suggests that a necessary ele-
ment of the conversation are discussions of
alternative conceptions and activities that in
combination with some of the teachers' own
conceptions form a view of warranted prac-
tice."
We first describe the four essential ele-
ments of CEER, arguing that the result of
CEER is not the acquisition of a set of pre-
scribed behaviors but rather the develop-
ment of theoretically congruent practices.
We then describe the interpersonal and
technological support systems that we have
developed to engage teachers in CEER.
MARCH 1997

Collaboration. Collaboration involves
teachers and researchers working together
to inform, critique, and support each other
(Lieberman, 1992). CEER stresses collabo-
ration among teachers, consultants, and
university staff. Teachers play a key role by
providing knowledge of schools and class-
rooms. University researchers and consul-
tants provide information on scientific
knowledge, application of new technolo-
gies, and new approaches to teaching and
learning that often are unavailable to teach-
ers in their practice community. Through
presentations, demonstrations, and discus-
sions, researchers introduce premises and
features of innovative instruction and con-
tent for authentic tasks on which learners
work. Teachers are given opportunities to
try activities, practice new skills, and dis-
cuss ideas and instructional strategies.
Collaboration provides opportunities to
share and critique ideas, plans, and class-
room enactments. Teachers represent their
ideas in a way that makes sense to others,
and in the process they gain greater clarity.
Through stories, written case reports and
journal entries, plans, and videotapes of
classroom instruction, teachers describe
what they do, how students react, what
problems they encounter, and solutions to
their difficulties. Conversations include di-
lemmas teachers face in making choices as
they reconcile conflicting beliefs and chal-
lenges of enacting PBS in their situation.
Teachers also critique their own and others'
attempts to employ PBS and examine how
enactments relate to premises of PBS.
Through discussion, participants develop
richer definitions of PBS and its possibilities
for classroom practice, clarify their concep-
tions of the features, gain understanding of
practices that address challenges, and con-
front their beliefs.
Sharing and critiquing encourage peer
support. By listening to others and reveal-
ing one's own difficulties, motivation to
persist in the face of difficulties and to try
new practices increases. Peer support also
fosters risk taking; teachers attempt new ap-
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
SCIENCE
PROJECT-BASED 351
proaches and strategies because of the safe
environment provided by collaboration.
Enactmentin classrooms. Collaborative
conversations serve as an impetus for
change but are not enough to promote
teachers' learning. Experience and reflec-
tion are also essential. Teachers must try
complex innovations in their classrooms be-
fore they understand the innovations' full
implications. Enactment involves planning
for innovation and conducting new prac-
tices in classrooms. We use the term enact-
ment (instead of the more commonly used
term implementation)to emphasize that the
process is generative and constructive.
Rather than merely applying a set of pre-
scriptions, teachers attempt to establish
practices congruent with the premises of the
innovations (Snyder, Bolin, & Zumwalt,
1992).
Planning for enactment is essential as
teachers learn new practices. Planning is
not merely scheduling time, resources, and
activities; it is better characterized as prob-
lem solving and translating instructional
theory and teachers' craft knowledge into
designs for student learning. Planning en-
gages teachers in thoughtful consideration
of what their classroom might be like when
they try to enact PBS. As teachers think
through issues of content, instruction, and
management (Borko & Niles, 1987; Clark,
1988), they benefit from anticipating and
solving problems that might arise. More-
over, the plans serve as flexible blueprints,
rather than exact scripts for classroom en-
actments, that can be modified depending
on how students respond and on other con-
ditions and constraints. Because PBS in-
volves dramatic reconfigurations of the way
content is addressed, planning is often quite
different from conventional, objectives-
driven accounts (Ladewski, Marx, & Blu-
menfeld, 1995). Planning for PBS requires
consideration of how to represent content
in order to engage learners thoughtfully in
authentic activities. Moreover, new ap-
proaches to authentic assessment require
that evaluation tasks be integrated coher-
352 THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL

ently with instruction, rather than being throughout the year, in the beginning we
treated as end-of-unit tests (Paris & Ayers, encourage teachers to enact at least two or
1994). Thus, planning requires extensive three projects over a school year. These pro-
consideration about the nature of the arti- jects will only address part of the year's cur-
facts students will create. Finally, and per- riculum, and teachers often use conven-
haps most importantly, PBS requires tailor- tional approaches to teaching the remaining
ing instruction to local contexts. Thus, content. Thus, project-based instruction
enactments will look different in various runs the danger of becoming encapsulated
classrooms, and planning will have to ac- and isolated, without affecting the rest of
commodate these differences. the teachers' instruction. We address these
Enactment of plans provides the expe- problems by working with teachers over
rience necessary for teachers to determine several years.
what is possible in their situation and to Reflection. We share Schdn's (1983)
modify their ideas accordingly. Knowledge view that teachers must reflect on teaching
is transformed by action; teachers' under- to extract the knowledge that leads to im-
standing of PBS will not, indeed cannot, be proved student learning. Experience edu-
formed until the practice is enacted. In this cates via reflection. Reflection involves both
sense, knowledge about teaching is embed- private and public acts. In private, teachers
ded in the act of teaching. may use journals to capture the daily or
Extended effort. Educational change weekly experience of change and use the
takes a long time. Change requires much acts of writing and rereading as occasions
more than helping teachers understand in- for reflection. Teachers may also write case
novations and learn new approaches. Many reports (Shulman, 1992) of their efforts for
other issues are involved-the school cur- others to read, rendering public some of
riculum; governance and policy; local, re- their private reflections. These case reports
gional, and national politics; and changes in constitute narratives of the teachers' expe-
the broader social setting in which schools riences that can provide ideas for others as
are embedded. Virtually all serious writing well as opportunities for reflection by the
about how to help teachers improve their authors. Reviewing videotapes of class-
craft strongly urges that change efforts be room implementations also stimulates re-
sustained (Fullan, 1993). flection, as does the use of new multimedia
As described above, teachers begin to tools. The opportunity to discuss their work
understand PBS through what initially mo- with peers and researchers becomes a pub-
tivated their participation. Teachers inter- lic venue for reflection.
ested in helping students work together
focus on collaboration as they start enact- New Technology
ment; teachers in
interested learning how to Supporting cycles of collaboration, en-
use computers focus on technology. We actment, and reflection is time consuming,
capitalize on teachers' interests by helping labor intensive, and expensive. Promoting
them work on these features in their initial change requires efficient processes. Har-
enactments. As they gain expertise, they be- nessing the potential of new technologies is
come more fluid and comfortable in using one route to supporting change in educa-
PBS. But there is a cost to this single-mind- tion (Hunter, 1992; Roup, Gal, Drayton, &
edness-the teachers lose sight of some of Pfister, 1992; Woolsey & Bellamy, 1997, in
the other features and the complexity of or- this issue) if change is guided by current
chestrating all of them. Thus, it takes con- ideas about teacher learning. We have de-
siderable time for teachers to work on all veloped an interactive learning environ-
features of PBS. Although there is no reason ment, the Project Support Environment, to
that projects cannot be done consistently be used as an integral part of our interven-
MARCH 1997

This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
 SCIENCE
PROJECT-BASED 353

tion to help teachers make the transition to and to provide information and ideas of
PBS (Krajcik et al., in press). how to do PBS. As its name suggests, CaPPs
The Project-Support Environment is a compendium of cases documenting
serves as a teacher's workbench. The tech- teachers' experiences with PBS.
nology components of the Project-Support The intent of CaPPs is to promote un-
Environment include (1) PIViT (Project In- derstanding of project-based science by il-
tegration Visualization Tool) to assist teach- lustrating instructional possibilities, fea-
ers in designing, planning, and modifying tures, and strategies. The Casebook of
projects; (2) CaPPs (Casebook of Project Project Practices is structured around
Practices) to help teachers learn features of video-based teacher cases accompanied by
PBS and strategies for enactment through teacher and researcher written and oral
video-based teacher cases; and (3) PSNet commentary. Each case in CaPPs depicts
(Project-Support Network) to promote col- how a teacher faced challenges associated
laboration via telecommunications. In the with a particular PBS feature throughout
Project-Support Environment, documents the enactment of one project. Each chal-
and applications are linked to each other, lenge is structured around a series of ques-
providing the user with a dynamic, nonlin- tions depicting a variety of potential enact-
ear structure that allows them to move eas- ment difficulties. For instance, a case about
ily among the components. For instance, if the feature investigation is organized by
a teacher is planning a project in PIViT and questions of how the teacher met challenges
has a question about orchestrating an in- such as introducing students to the inves-
vestigation across several days, only a few tigation, helping students use investiga-
mouse clicks bring up video cases of how tions to answer the driving question, and
other teachers did this. helping students design and conduct inves-
PIViT (Project Integration Visualiza- tigations and interpret results. Because
tion Tool). The Project Integration Visuali- teachers need to see enactments in different
zation Tool is a scaffolded, computer-aided contexts, the cases represent diverse set-
design environment in which teachers can tings to illustrate how teachers address dif-
construct and modify project designs (La- ferent circumstances and constraints. To
dewski et al., 1995). Teachers design, plan, orient the teachers there are several levels
and modify projects in PIViT, returning to of written and oral commentary about the
their design documents to record reflections background of the overall case, the teacher,
on their classroom enactments. Teachers setting, and nature of the project; issues re-
can graphically display project descriptions lated to the challenges; highlights of the
(e.g., student investigations, assessment ac- particular video clips; and teacher reflec-
tivities), concept maps of content domains, tions. Video clips contain prompts that fo-
and curriculum objectives from state guide- cus a viewer's attention on important is-
lines. These entities are then linked to high- sues.
light their relationships. Teachers can write Project-Support Network (PSNet). The
detailed descriptions of the various com- Project-Support Network (PSNet) supports
ponents of projects. Finally, PIViT provides teachers and researchers in conversations.
a calendar teachers can use to linearize and Experience with teacher use of telecommu-
temporalize their plans. nications is mixed (Roup et al., 1992); often
CaPPs (Casebook of Project Practices). the "conversations" are not particularly
When teachers are introduced to PBS, they substantive. The challenge for researchers is
need to see what it looks like in practice and to help teachers engage productively-that
hear what challenges and successes other is, have conversations that support learning
teachers have had. We built CaPPs to pro- new approaches to teaching. We help teach-
vide images of doing PBS in the classroom ers engage in conversations that revolve

This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
354
around PIViT documents. The Project Inte-
gration Visualization Tool is the lingua
franca, the common language, underlying
electronic conversations in PSNet. The ele-
ments of a PIViT document correspond to
important conversational topics. For exam-
ple, concept maps help teachers focus on
subject-matter concepts and their interrela-
tionships, and conversations about investi-
gations help teachers talk about students'
cognitive engagement. Teachers can down-
load PIViT and send their PIViT project
plans to the PSNet where they will be in-
dexed and added to the database (accessible
through the World Wide Web: http://
www.umich.edu/-pbsgroup/psnet). Over
the years, this growing database of plans
serves as a form of community memory.
More experienced PBS teachers upload
their plans, annotated with suggestions for
how to implement the plans, and new par-
ticipants are able to benefit from the project
plans created by more experienced teachers.
The School
When teachers embark on dramatic
changes in the way they teach, they take a
big risk. Whether they are willing to sustain
their efforts and whether instructional
changes like PBS take root will be influ-
enced by the school context. One important
aspect of the school environment is norms
of risk taking and collegiality. As teachers
attempt PBS, questions and concerns are
likely to arise. As they move from a broad
but shallow coverage of subject matter to
more narrow but deeper examinations of
driving questions, they might doubt that
they will achieve the goals of local or state
curriculum frameworks. They will encoun-
ter students whose previous experience
makes them reluctant to engage in new
ways of learning and negotiating new types
of activities and tasks. They will also face
administrators who doubt the wisdom of
encouraging students to be self-directed in
their learning as they explore their own
ideas. Administrators also may be reluctant
to open the school to greater involvement
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL
with community problems as a source of
driving questions and to community mem-
bers as sources of expertise because this also
exposes the school to more scrutiny by out-
siders. It is likely also that parents will be
skeptical of change, wondering what the
new approaches mean, how they will affect
student test scores, and how to interpret al-
ternative assessments. Moreover, newly
adopted classroom practices will not be
fluid, errors will be made, and lessons
might not go as anticipated. Consequently,
teachers' images of themselves as compe-
tent professionals will be challenged.
Given these potential barriers, it is essen-
tial that norms of risk taking necessary for
innovation be supported in schools that at-
tempt new pedagogies like PBS. Individuals
are not likely to be able to meet and solve
these challenges alone. And they are not
likely to continue to try when the profes-
sional climate does not reward their efforts.
One way to support teachers is to provide
time for planning and interaction with oth-
ers. With the vast majority of school district
budgets earmarked for salaries, it seems
nearly impossible to find money to pay for
activities that do not place teachers directly
with students. As a consequence, teacher
planning time is often a most precious com-
modity. However, it is essential. To build
collegiality and to improve practice, teach-
ers need to collaborate with peers as they re-
flect on what they do in class, how successful
it has been, and how to change it.
Allocation of time and technical re-
sources also will affect whether these in-
novations are sustained. Class scheduling
may need to be revised. In PBS, investiga-
tions designed to find answers to driving
questions are likely to be more successful if
students have more than 30 or 40 minutes
to do their work and collaborate with oth-
ers. Block scheduling is one route that has
been gaining acceptance as a way to reor-
ganizing time. In addition, for teachers to
integrate technology into daily instruction
to exploit its potential as a tool for learning,
they will need adequate numbers of com-
MARCH 1997
 SCIENCE
PROJECT-BASED 355

puters and access to telecommunications in of ideas, and generation of artifacts. Arti-

their classrooms. Technology cannot be iso- facts that represent student understanding
lated in a laboratory that students visit oc- should require students to integrate ideas
casionally. Furthermore, teachers will need and display their knowledge of content and
adequate technical training and support; of the discipline. Such artifacts should also
they cannot be left to solve the software and be authentic in that they have value beyond
hardware glitches that will inevitably arise the classroom. Finally, learning is inher-
and that require expertise beyond that of ently a social enterprise. As students con-
most users. verse and collaborate with peers and adults
Efforts at school reform that involve in and out of the classroom, they share and
changes in pedagogy, scheduling, and re- justify ideas, draw on the expertise of others
source allocation are often difficult and for information and ways of thinking. Thus,
painful. Not all stakeholders are committed they extend their understanding. The role
to change, and often improvements in one of the teacher is to introduce students to sci-
area of the school threaten other established entific ideas, premises, and ways of gath-
programs. It is essential that change be ap- ering information and validating hypothe-
proached in a manner that includes all of ses. The teacher provides scaffolding to aid
the school's stakeholders as participants students by modeling expert thinking,
and at a pace that does not lead to a feeling coaching, diagnosing learning difficulties,
that the change compels some into compli- giving feedback, and orchestrating oppor-
ance when, in fact, they have little commit- tunities for learning.
ment. Like similar programs centered on in-
quiry into authentic problems, collabora-
Summary and Conclusions tion, technology, student-generated arti-
New approaches to science education like facts, and alternative assessments, PBS
PBS are based on the idea that understand- poses considerable challenges for pedagogy
ing is a result of active construction by the and teacher professional development that
learner. Learners must relate information to must be met if the approach is to be adopted
what they know and use information in a and maintained. To develop "warranted
variety of ways and situations so that it be- practice" that is theoretically and practi-
comes connected rather than remains iso- cally justifiable, teachers need to gain an un-
lated. Students need to decide whether new derstanding of the innovation as well as
information is compatible with or requires strategies to meet the problems of class-
accommodation of previous ideas. This re- room enactment. New ways to deal with
quires that students be intentional rather subject-matter content, activities, time,
than passive; they must use learning strat- classroom management and organization,
egies, elaborating and organizing new in- technology use, and assessment must be ex-
formation to make sense of it, and use meta- plored. This process takes time and entails
cognitive strategies to evaluate the success considerable risk as teachers alter well-
of their attempts. established practices. Older models of
Learning cannot be separated from the professional development that stressed top-
tasks and conditions in which it occurs. down delivery of information and imple-
Consequently students need to work on mentation of prescribed practices and cur-
tasks that afford opportunities for inquiry riculum models are not sufficient to help
and deal with problems that do not have teachers accomplish these changes. Profes-
ready solutions if they are to use what they sional development needs to reflect the fact
learn outside the classroom. Moreover, new that teachers, like students, construct un-
technologies can be employed to aid infor- derstanding; they need to collaborate with
mation access, exploration, representation others, try things out, reflect on the results,

This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
356 THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL

References
modify their attempts, and try again. Ob-
viously, this requires more support than
one or two workshops. Since the process is American Association for the Advancement of
time consuming and labor intensive, tech- Science. (1993). Benchmarksfor science literacy.
New York: Oxford University Press.
nology can help; multimedia systems illus-
trate the new approaches, planning soft- Anderson, C., Sheldon, T., & Dubay, J. (1990).
The effects of instruction on college nonma-
ware aids in instantiating and integrating jors' conceptions of respiration and photo-
new ideas and tailoring them for particular synthesis. Journalof Researchin Science Teach-
classrooms, and rather than relying on face ing, 27, 761-776.
to face meetings, telecommunication pack- Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Marx, R. W., &
Soloway, E. (1994). Lessons learned: A col-
ages for teachers allow immediate collabo- laborative model for helping teachers learn
ration with others. project-based instruction. Elementary School
Finally, new policies must be put into Journal,94, 539-551.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Patrick, H.,
place that are compatible with the premises
and features of innovative programs if they Krajcik,J. S., & Soloway, E. (in press). Teach-
ing for understanding. In B. J. Biddle, T. L.
are to prosper. At the school level, this in- Good, & I. F. Goodson (Eds.), The interna-
cludes block scheduling to allow for in- tional handbookof teachersand teaching. Dor-
quiry, emphasis on interdisciplinary work, drecht: Kluwer.
Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W.,
acquisition of and easy access to computers
and to technical assistance and training, as Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A.
(1991). Motivating project-based learning:
well as implementation of new forms of as- Sustaining the doing, supporting the learn-
sessment. New policies also entail setting ing. EducationalPsychologist, 26(3 & 4), 369-
aside time for teacher collaboration, so that 398.
teachers can discuss the innovation and its Borko, H., & Niles, J. (Eds.). (1987). Descriptions
of teacher planning: Ideas for teachers and re-
enactment, and creating a climate that sup- search. New York: Longman.
ports innovation and risk taking. Moreover, Bredderman, T. (1983). Effects of activity-based
formation of alliances with community and elementary science on student outcomes: A
industry groups can identify local authentic quantitative synthesis. Review of Educational
Research,53, 499-518.
problems for students to investigate, pro- Brown, A. (1992). Design experiments: Theoreti-
vide resources, and serve as a source of col- cal and methodological challenges in creat-
laborative expertise. ing complex interventions in classroom set-
Obviously, the challenges are compli- tings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2,
cated and resolving them will not be simple. 141-178.
Brown, B. (1994). Michigan teachers' reflections:
Achieving the necessary changes will take Barbara Brown case study. In C. Julyan & S.
considerable time. But such accomplish- Wiske (Eds.), Learning along electronic paths:
ments are essential if students are to acquire Journeys with NGS Kids Network (pp. 139-
the scientific knowledge and literacy 151). Cambridge, MA: Technical Education
Research Center.
needed for the coming century.
Brown, D. P. (1994). Michigan teachers' reflec-
tions: Deborah Peek Brown case study. In C.
Julyan & S. Wiske (Eds.), Learningalong elec-
tronic paths: Journeys with NGS Kids Network
(pp. 163-172). Cambridge, MA: Technical
Note Education Research Center.
Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Sit-
uated cognition and the culture of learning.
This work was partiallysupportedby grants EducationalResearcher,18(1), 32-42.
from the National Science Foundation (grants Bruer, J. (1995). Classroom problems, school cul-
TPE-9153759, RED-9554205, RED-9353481, and ture, and cognitive research. In K. McGilly
REC-9555719). Opinions expressed are ours. (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive
MARCH 1997

This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
 SCIENCE
PROJECT-BASED 357

theory and classroom practice (pp. 273-290).
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Clark, C. M. (1988). Asking the right questions
about teacher preparation: Contributions of
research on teacher thinking. EducationalRe-
searcher,17(3), 5-12.
Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (Eds.). (1990). Policy
and practice [Special issue]. EducationalEval- Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., &
uation and Policy Analysis, 12, 249-353.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. G. (1989).
Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft
of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Krajcik, J. S., Soloway, E., Blumenfeld, P. C.,
Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruc-
tion: Essays in honor of RobertGlaser (pp. 453-
494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Crawford, B. (1996). Examining the essential ele-
ments of a community of learners in a middle
schoolscienceclassroom.Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Ladewski, B. G., Krajcik, J. S., & Harvey, C. L.
Arbor.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., &
Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific
knowledge in the classroom. EducationalRe-
searcher,23(7), 5-12.
Fullan, M. (1993). Changeforces: Probing the depths
of educationalreform.London: Falmer.
Gordin, D. N., Polman, J. L., & Pea, R. D. (1994).
The climate visualizer: Sense-making
through scientific visualization. Journalof Sci-
ence Educationand Technology,3, 203-226.
Guskey, T. R. (1985). Staff development and
teacher change. EducationalLeadership,42(7),
57-60.
Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in
schools: Facilitating the process. Albany: State
University of New York Press.
Heubel-Drake, M., Mouradian, M., Stem, E., & Linn, M. C. (1986). Computeras lab partnerproject.
Finkel, E. (1995). Planning a course for suc-
cess. Science Teacher,62(7), 18-21.
Hunter, B. (1992). Linking for learning: Com-
puter-and-communications network support
for nationwide innovation in education. Jour-
nal of Science Education and Technology, 1,
23-34.
Jackson, S., Stratford, S., Krajcik,J. S., & Soloway,
E. (in press). Making system dynamics mod-
eling accessible to pre-college science stu-
dents. InteractiveLearningEnvironments.
Joyce, B. R., & Showers, B. (1988). Student achieve- Marx, R. W., Freeman, J. G., Krajcik, J. S., & Blu-
ment through staff development. New York:
Longman.
Kaestle, C. R. (1993). The awful reputation of ed-
ucational research. Educational Researcher,
22(1), 26-31.
Karplus, R. (1977). Science teaching and the de-
velopment of reasoning. Journalof Researchin
Science Teaching,14, 169-175.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W.,
Bass, K., Fredericks, J., & Soloway, E. (1996).
The development of middle school students'
inquiry strategies in project based science
classrooms. In D. C. Edelson & E. A. Dome-
shek (Eds.), Proceedings of the International
Conferenceof the Learning Sciences (pp. 450-
455). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the
Advancement of Computing in Education.
Soloway, E. (1994). A collaborative model for
helping teachers learn project-based instruc-
tion. ElementarySchoolJournal,94, 483-497.
Marx, R. W., Ladewski, B. L., Bos, N. D., &
Hayes, P. J. (in press). The Casebook of Proj-
ect Practices: An example of an interactive
multimedia system for professional devel-
opment. Journal of Computersin Mathematics
and Science Teaching.
(1994). A middle grade science teacher's
emerging understanding of project-based in-
struction. ElementarySchool Journal,94, 499-
515.
Ladewski, B., Marx, R. W., & Blumenfeld, P. C.
(1995, April). Project Integration Visualiza-
tion Tool: How graphic oriented tools help
teachers plan and enact projects. In J. Krajcik
(Chair), Technologicalsupport for the profes-
sional developmentof science teachers.Sympo-
sium presented at the annual meeting of the
National Association for Research in Science
Teaching, San Francisco.
Lieberman, A. (1992). Pushing up from below:
Changing schools and universities [Com-
mentary]. Teachers College Record, 93, 717-
724.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Linn, M. C. (in press). Learning and instruction
in science education: Taking advantage of
technology. In D. Tobin & B. J. Fraser (Eds.),
International handbook of science education.
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S.,
Blunk, M., Crawford, B., Kelly, B., & Meyer,
K. M. (1994). Enacting project-based science:
Experiences of four middle grade teachers.
ElementarySchoolJournal,94, 517-538.
menfeld, P. C. (in press). The professional
development of science teachers. In B. Fraser
& K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbookof
science education.Dordrecht: Kluwer.
McGilly, K. (Ed.). (1995). Classroomlessons: Inte-
grating cognitive theory and classroompractice
(pp. 273-290). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mergendoller, J. R., Johnston, J., Rockman, S., &
Willis, J. (1994). Exemplaryapproachesto train-
ing teachersto use technology(Vol. 1). Novato,

This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM

All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
358
CA: Beryl Buck Institute. (National Technical Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of
Information Service No. 95-170932.)
National Research Council. (1996). National sci-
ence education standards. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.
Newman, D., Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1989). The
constructionzone: Workingfor cognitive change
in school. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Paris, S. G., & Ayers, L. R. (1994). Becoming re-
flective students and teacherswith portfoliosand
authenticassessment.Washington, DC: Amer- Soloway, E., Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P., &
ican Psychological Association.
Perkins, D. (1992). Smart schools: From training
memoriesto educating minds. New York: Free
Press.
Prawat, R. S. (1992). Teachers' beliefs about
and A constructivist
teaching learning: per-
spective. American Journal of Education,
354-395.
100(3),
Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (in press). Teacher
of new of
learning: Implications views cog-
nition. In B. J. Biddle, T. L. Good, & I. F.
Goodson (Eds.), International handbook of
teachersand teaching. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Resnick, L. B. (1987). Learning in school and out.
EducationalResearcher,16(9), 13-20.
Richardson, V. (1990). Significant and worth-
while change in teaching practice. Educa-
tional Researcher,19(7), 10-18.
Roup, R., Gal, S., Drayton, B., & Pfister, M. (Eds.).
(1992). LabNet: Toward a communityof practice.
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Sandholz, J. H., & Ringstaff, C. (1996). Teacher
change in technology-rich classrooms. In C.
Fisher, D. C. Dwyer, & K. Yocam (Eds.), Ed- Tobin, K.,
ucation and technology:Reflections on comput-
ing in classrooms(pp. 281-299). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Sarason, S. B. (1993). The casefor change:Rethink-
ing the preparationof educators.San Francisco: Wisnudel, M., Stratford, S., Krajcik, J., & Solo-
Jossey-Bass.
Sch6n, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner.
New York: Basic.
Scott, C. (1994). Project-based science: Reflec-
tions of a middle school teacher. Elementary
SchoolJournal,95, 75-94.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching:
Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Ed-
ucationalReview, 57, 1-22.
This content downloaded from 141.218.001.105 on August 09, 2016 03:05:21 AM
All use subject to University of Chicago Press Terms and Conditions (http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c).
THE ELEMENTARYSCHOOLJOURNAL
cases. In J. H. Shulman (Ed.), Case methodsin
teacher education (pp. 1-30). New York:
Teachers College Press.
Snyder, J., Bolin, F., & Zumwalt, K. (Eds.). (1992).
Curriculum implementation.New York: Mac-
millan.
Soloway, E., Guzdial, M., & Hay, K. E. (1994).
Learner-centered design: The challenge for
HCI in the 21st century. Interactions, 1(2),
36-48.
Marx, R. (in press). The Project Support En-
vironment: Technological support for teach-
ers transitioning to Project-Based Science
practices. In T. Koschman (Ed.), CSCL:Theory
and practiceof an emergingparadigm.Hillsdale,
NJ: Erlbaum.
N. A., Reiman, A. J., & Theis-
Sprinthall,
Sprinthall, L. (1996). Teacher professional de-
velopment. In J. Sikula, T. J. Buttery, & E.
Guyton (Eds.), Handbookof researchon teacher
education (2d ed., pp. 666-703). New York:
Macmillan.
Stratford, S. J., & Finkel, E. A. (1996). Impact of
ScienceWare and Foundations on students'
attitudes. Journal of Science Education and
Technology,5, 59-67.
Stratford, S. J., Krajcik,J. S., & Soloway, E. (1996).
Cognitive strategies in dynamic modeling:
Case studies of opportunities taken and
missed. In D. C. Edelson & E. A. Domeshek
(Eds.), Proceedingsof the InternationalConfer-
ence of the Learning Sciences (pp. 514-519).
Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Ad-
vancement of Computing in Education.
Tippins, D. J., & Gallard, A. J. (1994).
Research on instructional strategies for
teaching science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Hand-
bookof researchon science teachingand learning
(pp. 45-93). New York: Macmillan.
way, E. (in press). Using technology to sup-
port students' artifact construction in sci-
ence. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.),
International handbook of science education.
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Woolsey, K., & Bellamy, R. (1997). Science edu-
cation and technology: Opportunities to en-
hance student learning. Elementary School
Journal,97, 385-399.
MARCH 1997