This article was downloaded by: [University of Delaware]On: 04 October 2014, At: 16:03Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Action in Teacher EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uate20

Science Notebooks: Teachers’Developing Beliefs, Practices, andStudent OutcomesLori A. Fulton aa University of Nevada , Las Vegas , USAPublished online: 11 May 2012.

To cite this article: Lori A. Fulton (2012) Science Notebooks: Teachers’ Developing Beliefs,Practices, and Student Outcomes, Action in Teacher Education, 34:2, 121-132, DOI:10.1080/01626620.2012.677736

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01626620.2012.677736

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Action in Teacher Education, 34:121–132, 2012Copyright © Association of Teacher EducatorsISSN: 0162-6620 print/2158-6098 onlineDOI: 10.1080/01626620.2012.677736

Science Notebooks: Teachers’ Developing Beliefs,Practices, and Student Outcomes

Lori A. FultonUniversity of Nevada, Las Vegas

This article compares the experiences of two elementary teachers, each of whom attended a traditionalworkshop on the development of conclusions within science notebooks. One teacher continued toexpand her learning on this topic by participating in a lesson study group; the other did not. Througha qualitative case study, I explored the impact on teachers’ beliefs and practices and student outcomesas a result of participating in lesson study. Data from teacher interviews, video of classroom lessons,and student work were collected and analyzed. This study suggested that participation in lesson studymay positively affect a teacher’s beliefs and practices related to using science notebooks and, in turn,student outcomes.

Science notebooks have become popular as a means to improve student understanding of sciencecontent and processes through the integration of purposeful writing in science (Aschbacher &Alonzo, 2006; Baxter, Bass, & Glaser, 2001). Notebooks have been defined by Ruiz-Primo andLi (2004) “as a compilation of entries (or items in a log) that provide a record, at least partially,of the instructional experiences a student had in her or his classroom for a certain period oftime” (p. 62). Writing within the notebook differs but ranges from such things as observations,drawings, notes, and plans, to reflections, explanations, and conclusions. In addition to writing,students may also use their notebooks as a resource or tool as they engage in debating scienceconcepts. Both practices are important elements of the National Science Education Standards(National Research Council [NRC], 1996), which stated that students should be engaged in oraland written discourse in order to deepen their “understandings of scientific concepts” (p. 32) and“collaborate in the pursuit of ideas” (p. 33).

Learning to teach science in this way is complex. Although teachers may have receivedinstruction on inquiry-based teaching and the use of science notebooks, they struggle to putthose ideas into practice and often focus more on management issues than on implementationof reform-based practices (Davis, Petish, & Smithey, 2006). Teachers may also struggle withintegrating writing within science, especially supporting those students who may be strugglingwith language issues, such as English language learners (ELLs) or early literacy learners. Forthose who do integrate writing through science notebooks, they tend to structure them in sucha prescriptive manner or so open ended that they are of little benefit to the students or teachers(Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006).

Correspondence should be addressed to Lori A. Fulton, Department of Teaching and Learning, University of Nevada,Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154. E-mail: lfulton3@cox.net

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

122 LORI A. FULTON

Using science notebooks appropriately and effectively to support students’ development ofscience concepts and language requires professional development focused on these concepts.Researchers have suggested that such professional development should provide in-depth directaccess to authentic inquiry-based instruction (Haney, Wang, Keil, & Zoffel, 2007) and engageteachers in self-reflection (Hoban, 2000). Peers, Diezmann, and Watters (2003) found one-on-onecollegial support or small group settings were beneficial.

Lesson study, a main component of Japanese professional development (Alvine, Judson,Schein, & Yoshida, 2007), consists of teachers working collaboratively “to plan, execute, andanalyze classroom lessons” (Alvine et al., p. 109). Stigler and Hiebert (1999) highlighted lessonstudy in The Teaching Gap and emphasized the impact it could have on the culture of teachingand student learning. This format allows teachers to learn what science notebooks can look like inthe classroom and how students can use them to develop scientific concepts and language throughcollegial dialogue and self-reflection.

Based on these ideas, I implemented a lesson study on science notebooks at an elementaryschool in which 74.3% of the students were labeled as Limited English Proficient (LEP). Thepurpose was to help teachers to understand how to use science notebooks as tools that help stu-dents develop scientific content, processes, and language by incorporating conclusions containingclaims, evidence, and explanations within the notebook. Two questions guided the study: (1) Howare a teacher’s beliefs and practices, as they relate to the use of science notebooks, affected byparticipation in lesson study? and (2) How are students’ use of science notebooks affected whentheir teacher participates in lesson study?

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

A sociocultural perspective suggests an individual’s views or beliefs are tied to a complex webof practices related to the community with which they are associated (Lemke, 2001). Lemke(2001) stated that working within a sociocultural perspective in science education meant viewingit “as human social activities conducted within institutional and cultural frameworks” (p. 296).As children grow and learn within the classroom, they are part of that social organization thatprovides them with tools for sense making. In this study, the way in which the teacher structuredwriting within science provided tools that helped students understand why writing is an importantcomponent of science and how the notebook should be used to convey ideas.

Vygotsky (1934/1986) noted written language is more demanding than the spoken word dueto its symbolic and abstract nature. As children struggle to internalize language, the discourseof science adds another dimension, because it involves a specialized vocabulary that is oftenunfamiliar to students (Lemke, 1990), making it even more difficult for them to talk and writeabout it. The context and culture of lesson study may provide teachers with the skills needed toscaffold instruction that is different from that of a traditional workshop setting.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Beliefs are often deeply rooted in an individual and stem from that individual’s own personalexperiences. An individual’s beliefs could affect the way in which reform-based science is

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

SCIENCE NOTEBOOKS 123

implemented, which ultimately affects student learning. Keys (2005) demonstrated that teachersoften had two sets of beliefs, those they exhibited in the classroom and those they stated butnever followed through with in the classroom. Many teachers needed ongoing support as theyattempted to implement a new practice that was not aligned with their beliefs. Stoffels (2005)and Pekmez, Johnson, and Gott (2005) pointed out that new programs were often overwhelm-ing to teachers, resulting in written implementation that could be detrimental to reform-basedefforts. However, when teachers were ready for change and had some form of ongoing support,they could move reform-based efforts forward (Akerson, Cullen, & Hanson, 2009; Peers et al.,2003; Pekmez et al., 2005). Research is needed to explore the different supports teachers need asthey change their beliefs and implement new ideas related to reform-based efforts like the use ofscience notebooks.

Science Notebooks

Although researchers confirmed that notebooks were being used within science classrooms, thecontent was focused on procedures and observations (Baxter et al., 2001), implemented in amechanical and prescriptive way (Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006; Baxter et al., 2001; Ruiz-Primo,Li, Ayala, & Shavelson, 2004), and influenced by the teacher (Ruiz-Primo, Li, Tsai, & Schneider,2010). Teachers needed a better sense of how to structure writing within notebooks to pro-mote the learning of scientific concepts rather than as a means to capture what was done inscience (Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006; Ruiz-Primo et al., 2010). To accomplish this, teachersneeded opportunities to learn and discuss strategies that would help students accomplish thisgoal. Aschbacher and Alonzo’s (2006) study was the only one that included any type of pro-fessional development on science notebooks; however, this study inferred what was happeningin classrooms based on notebook entries rather than classroom observations. Research needsto examine what notebooks look like when teachers have access to professional developmentspecific to science notebooks.

Lesson Study

Research on lesson study has documented an influence on teachers’ knowledge and beliefs per-taining to subject-matter knowledge, pedagogy, and student thinking in mathematics (Fernandez,2005; Parks, 2008) and science (Oshima et al., 2006). For lesson study to have the desiredimpact, lesson study sessions needed to be structured and have a specific focus (Fernandez, 2005).Oshima et al. (2006) examined lesson study in the area of science, focusing on one expert teacherwho was not in the classroom during the study, a practice that is not representative of the typ-ical teacher. More research needs to be done with lesson study in the area of science to fullyunderstand its impact.

Because learning is a social practice (Carlsen, 2007), a lesson study community may enableteachers and students to feel supported as they develop their conceptual understandings aboutscience notebooks. If teachers are to truly understand the scaffolds, frames, and other writingtools that can support writing within the science notebook, they need an opportunity to analyzeand discuss these practices with others, use them in the classroom with children, and discussoutcomes. If teachers have this type of support, one might expect to see a difference not only intheir beliefs and practices but also in their students’ use of notebooks.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

124 LORI A. FULTON

METHOD

To study how teacher’s beliefs and practices and student use of a science notebook were affectedby participation in lesson study, I conducted a pilot study with two second-grade teachers in adiverse, urban context. The two teachers qualified as constituting a bounded system (Creswell,2007), making case study an appropriate methodology. Creswell (2007) defined a case as abounded system, which may be bounded by time, space, or components and has a defined startingand finish point. For this study, the bounded system was the teachers, including their classroomsand their students’ work in the given time frame. Creswell defined a case study as “the study ofan issue explored through one or more cases within a bounded system” (p. 73), which may bebounded by time, space, or components. The components of this system would be the teachersand their classrooms.

Participants and Context

I asked for volunteers from among second-grade teachers and selected two participants for thisstudy, both of whom had participated in a professional development session on science notebooksand one continued to study science notebooks through lesson study. These two teachers wereselected because both had experience using a science notebook and had expressed a desire toimprove their practice. Ann, in her 5th year of teaching, had taught first and second grade. Shehad also obtained a master’s degree in literacy. At the time of the study, she had looped with herstudents from first to second grade. Riley, in her 8th year of teaching, had taught kindergarten,second grade, fourth grade, and middle school science. She had also obtained a master’s degreein technology. Both attended a workshop on science notebooks in September 2009, but only Annparticipated in the lesson study on science notebooks from October 2009 through February 2010.

Both teachers worked at a year-round, inquiry-based science school, in an urban district in theSouthwest United States. The school encouraged the use of science notebooks to develop scienceconcepts and language. It was an inner-city school, located in a low socioeconomic area, with100% of the students receiving free lunch. The majority of the students were Hispanic (90.9%)followed by African Americans (5.0%) and Whites (3.4%). Language development is a concernwith 74.3% of the students being classified as LEP. Ongoing professional development on sciencenotebooks was available to all teachers and utilized a lesson study format.

This site was selected for two reasons. First, I had access to the site, support of the principal,and rapport with the teachers. Second, as a mentor within the building, my responsibility was toprovide professional development for the teachers, and lesson study on science notebooks wasan ongoing component. Therefore, I was part of the lesson study group, acting as a “teacher ofteachers” (Fernandez, 2005, p. 284).

Data

Data were collected from April to July 2010 and included one teacher interview, conducted atthe beginning of the study; video of classroom lessons for the Solids unit from the Full OptionScience System (FOSS) module “Solids and Liquids” (Lawrence Hall of Science, 2005) andscience notebook entries from 41 students generated during those lessons. A semistructured inter-view conducted with each teacher provided insight into the teachers’ beliefs and practices related

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

SCIENCE NOTEBOOKS 125

to science notebooks and the types of resources they employed to learn about science notebooksand instruct their students in how to use them. In addition, Ann was asked questions related to thelesson study in which she participated. Teachers placed a video camera in the back of the roomand recorded all lessons pertaining to the science unit on solids. This resulted in seven lessonsfor Ann, at an average of 32 minutes per lesson (200+ minutes total), and three lessons for Riley,at an average of 54 minutes per lesson (150+ minutes total). The videos allowed for insight intothe teachers’ practices to determine whether espoused beliefs were actually implemented withinthe classroom. The video also provided insight into the types of resources each teacher utilized.Students’ notebooks, 21 from Ann’s class and 20 from Riley’s class, were collected and entriesspecific to the videotaped lessons were copied to determine the types of entries students madeand the focus of their learning.

Analysis

Analysis followed Creswell’s (2007) description for case study analysis and representation forthe interviews and classroom videos. All interview and video data were transcribed. Inductiveanalysis (Marshall & Rossman, 2006) was used as I read through the transcripts and watched thevideos looking for themes or patterns based on the literature. The themes that emerged included(1) the purpose of the notebook as a recording or learning tool; (2) elements of a notebook, includ-ing such things as date, illustrations, and conclusions; and (3) supports the teacher provided tohelp students develop the notebook. These themes were used as categories. Following Creswell, ashort list of categories was developed, which was then counted to give an idea of how frequentlythe categories occurred. Interview transcripts were reviewed, initial reactions were recorded, andidea units related to knowledge and beliefs were marked. Video transcripts were analyzed inthe same manner to see if there was a correlation between espoused beliefs and actual practice.Individual cases were composed, and then a cross-case synthesis (Yin, 2009) was conducted tolook for similarities and differences between the two teachers.

Content analysis was used to identify characteristics of the notebook entries. Following Berg(2001), a “criteria of selection” (p. 240) was established based on the literature (Campbell &Fulton, 2003; Ruiz-Primo et al., 2004), which described notebooks as including such things aswords, pictures, and graphic organizers to represent observations, predictions, reflections, andmore. This information was used along with an inductive approach to establish themes andpatterns in the student work. Each entry was analyzed and various elements, such as the date,drawings, claims, and evidence were coded. Additionally, I met with teachers to go over the stu-dents’ notebook entries to validate that student work was interpreted correctly. Teachers weregiven a written description based on the findings from their interviews, videos, and student workand were asked to provide feedback on the accuracy of the description.

Strengths and Limitations

My personal involvement with the lesson study may be viewed as a benefit in that I had anestablished rapport with the teachers and had insider knowledge of the context. It may also beviewed as a limiting factor in that it may have made it difficult for me to study this in an unbiasedmanner due to my high level of involvement. Furthermore, the limited number of cases presentedin this study demonstrated the impact for those two teachers and their students, but the effects

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

126 LORI A. FULTON

cannot be generalized to others. Finally, the limited time frame of this study made it difficultto determine the broader impact that participation in lesson study may have had on beliefs andpractices and student outcomes over time.

FINDINGS

In this section, I build the cases for each teacher, focusing on how she defined a science notebook,how the teachers believed students learned to use a science notebook, and speculated about howthey implemented notebooks within their classrooms. In Ann’s case, I also share her views oflesson study. Finally, I examine the impact these beliefs and practices had on their students’ useof science notebooks.

Ann

Ann participated in the school-based workshop on writing conclusions and then went on to studythis concept further as part of a lesson study focused on science notebooks. During the workshop,she had the opportunity to use a science notebook herself and said that she found this valuable,because it helped her know how to use a notebook, which she thought was important if she wasgoing to teach it to her students. After the workshop, she worked with other teachers to implementthe lesson study and found it to be “a great way to learn from each other.”

In the lesson study, a group of eight to 10 teachers, first through fifth grade, voluntarilymet after school to continue the discussion about conclusions. At these meetings, they sharedstrategies and student work and planned lessons to help students develop conclusions. Theyplanned, implemented, revised, and again implemented two lessons. The first lesson was todevelop an understanding of conclusions at the primary grades, and the second lesson was toteach intermediate students how to write a strong conclusion.

Although she did not always agree with the ideas shared during the lesson study meetings, Annfound the collaboration with others to be of great value. Ann also believed that she learned fromobserving others and discussing the different strategies they used in their classrooms. She statedthat perhaps the most valuable thing she learned from her participation in the lesson study wasthat “Notebooks are important . . . they’ve helped my students not only become better thinkersin science, but it’s transferred into other content areas as well.” In addition, she talked abouthow valuable she found having the time to see notebook implementation firsthand because shebelieved those experiences helped her develop her ideas of how to teach her students how to usescience notebooks.

Because the lesson study was a K–5 group, Ann’s participation also gave her a sense of “what[her] students [were] expected to do in third grade,” which helped her establish goals for herstudents. One goal was to have her students create conclusions independently “so that whenthey move into the higher grade levels they can do that without me, that’s my ultimate goal.”To help meet this goal, Ann implemented various strategies discussed during the lesson studymeetings. One strategy was to model writing conclusions for the students, which she felt was oneof the best strategies. Another was to help students identify the parts of a conclusion within theirwork and the work of their peers. She started by having students share their notebooks, callingattention to the parts of a conclusion; then, to push this idea further, she borrowed notebooks from

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

SCIENCE NOTEBOOKS 127

another class and copied entries. Students went through those entries and underlined claims,evidence, and explanations in different colors and were surprised to find that in many of theentries, “The students only had claims and they didn’t back their claims up with evidence.” Annbelieved that this activity raised her students’ awareness about their own entries and pushedtheir thinking further. As Ann described, “They were kind of right at the turning point wherethey were starting . . . to add more evidence into their writing” rather than just making a claim.Such strategies supported Ann’s students as they worked toward her goal of writing their ownconclusions independently.

In the interview, Ann defined science notebooks as tools that “help students develop theirhigher level thinking . . . [and] language skills.” She believed that students did not develop theseskills simply by using a notebook; rather, the teacher must model how to use the science note-book. Ann felt this was “one of the best ways to teach students how to use a notebook.” Annstated in the interview that through modeling, she was able to help students learn how to organizeand structure their work, turning the notebook into “an organized piece of work that can be usedas a reference tool.” She emphasized that it was important for students to learn from one anotherand that students should share their notebooks with one another to show and teach each otherrecording and organizing strategies.

Ann’s lessons modeled specific aspects of the notebook within a class notebook she kept onthe Smartboard. She went over page setup, such as including a date and a title; demonstratedhow to organize the properties of solids using a tree map; and modeled writing a full conclusion.Ann’s videos showed that she gave explicit directions of what to do in the notebook, for example,she stated, (1) “In the notebook, draw and tell how you sorted the objects/solids. You need to bevery detailed and tell how you sorted your objects,” (2) “Tell what properties are useful forthe base of the tower,” and (3) “You are going to write another conclusion about the propertiesof the solids.” Although students used their notebooks throughout the lessons, in three of theseven lessons, Ann’s students put the materials away and dedicated time solely to writing in theirnotebooks.

Beyond modeling how to record in the notebook, Ann also emphasized using the notebook asa tool. She asked students to look back at a previous entry to determine the types of properties ofa specific solid and how they used that solid in building their towers. She modeled this techniqueof looking back within the class notebook as well, pulling up previous entries to reread somethingthey had written and to revisit the properties of solids and what might make them good for thebase of a tower. Furthermore, she had students use the document camera to share their sciencenotebooks in four of the seven lessons.

Riley

Riley participated in the school-based workshop on writing conclusions. This was a full-dayworkshop in which teachers participated in a structured activity to write a conclusion containinga claim, evidence, and an explanation based on an investigation they had completed. They thenwent into a classroom, where they watched students participate in a similarly structured activityto create a conclusion. Finally, they had time to work with grade-level peers to create a lessonthey could utilize in their classrooms to introduce conclusions to their students. The goal was tohave students utilize conclusions within their notebooks. As researchers (Ruiz-Primo et al., 2010)have found this to be an essential component to ensure the notebook serves as a learning tool.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

128 LORI A. FULTON

Although she found the workshop to be “one of the more helpful staff developments,” she didnot choose to participate in the lesson study that followed it.

In the interview, Riley defined science notebooks as “a place for students to record their think-ing and their observations.” She emphasized that students needed to see examples of notebooks;“Whether it be a student example or my example, they really need that because otherwise they’venever seen it before.” Riley stated that students “are really good at writing down what they notice,but . . . [she wanted] them to think about why it happens that way,” which she believed could hap-pen through modeling. She also acknowledged that it was important for students to go back anduse information within their science notebooks to write claims and evidence on a topic.

These beliefs were not always evident in Riley’s lessons. Although Riley believed that note-books should capture thinking and explain why something happened, she focused on modelingthe procedural elements and observations. Specifically, within her class notebook, she modeledhow to set up (1) a table of contents; (2) the title page, including a date and title; (3) a circle mapof properties of solids; and (4) drawings as a means of recording. Her directions were general innature and focused on observations rather than the “why” she stated was important. Examples ofthese statements included (1) “It’s your notebook, so whatever is going to help you. Just makesure we are writing down our observations,” (2) “Make sure you have observations in your note-book,” and (3) “As you are building, remember to write some observations in your notebook.Some things you notice as you are building.” In one lesson, she provided dedicated time to thestudents after the materials were cleaned up to write within their notebooks, but even then, shefocused them on recording their observations, saying, “Clean up now so you’ll have time to write,lots of time to put your observations in your notebook.” Although she stated that it was importantfor students to use the notebook to find information, she did not ask students to use it in thismanner nor did she model using it in this way. Although she stated that student examples wereimportant, only one student shared her notebook during the three lessons.

Students’ Work

Of Ann’s seven lessons, 21 students created 78 notebook entries, and out of Riley’s three lessons,20 students created 55 entries. All entries were examined using content analysis, and results arepresented as percentages in Table 1. Examples of student entries are exact quotes, includingspelling and punctuation as they were used in the original document.

Ruiz-Primo et al. (2010) found that student achievement was positively affected when studentswere engaged in the construction of conclusions. The videos documented that Ann focused onconclusions, and this same focus was apparent in the notebook entries. A claim or an answerto the question being investigated was evident in 77% of the entries. Seventeen percent of theentries provided some evidence to support the claim, and 35% supported the claim with somesort of explanation. Examples of conclusions from Ann’s students included

I Claim: the base fo my tower need to be flat Because if it was shap like a circel it well tip over y andbreak. my evidence: when a circel has a tower on it it rolse and break and ther no tower. (Student 1)

I claim a cup is a perfect bace of a tower because when I built my tower it balenced with a lot ofsolids on top. This happened because the cups are big on the bottom and it makes it balance. Andalso because it is strong, flat, and wide. (Student 2)

Within these entries, both students utilized the word because in an attempt to connect a reason totheir thinking.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

SCIENCE NOTEBOOKS 129

TABLE 1Percentage of Student Notebooks Containing

Various Elements

Notebook elements Ann’s students Riley’s students

Basic ElementsDate 92 47Title 76 69Focus question 17 0Drawings/diagrams 46 53Labels 24 36Writing 94 93Graphic organizer 17 31

Content of EntriesAddresses science content 85 65Describes science activity 15 16Describes feelings 4 0Contains a claim 77 25Contains evidence 17 0Contains an explanation 35 4Uses because 44 9

In her interview, Riley expressed the importance of using information in the notebook to writeclaims and evidence; however, these aspects were not strongly represented within the students’work. This was not surprising based on the focus of recording observations within the lessons.Twenty-five percent of the lessons contained some sort of claim, for example, “The tip of thetriengle can get stuck in the tube” and “I notice that when I fold the sold paper and pat it in mytower it was biggir.” None of the entries contained any type of evidence, and only 4% containedsome sort of explanation that supported their claim, such as, “When I stacked my to cup’s togetherthey fell because they weren’t flat but round.”

If science notebooks were meant to improve students’ understanding of science content andprocesses through the integration of purposeful writing in science, then evidence of scientificcontent should be present and was present in both classrooms to varying degrees. Beyond simplecontent though, there should be evidence of students making sense of the content through theuse of conclusions, with claims, evidence, and explanations. These aspects were more evidentin the science notebooks from Ann’s room than were those from Riley’s room. Although it wasdifficult to attribute this higher rate of occurrence to lesson study alone, it appeared as thoughAnn’s participation may have influenced her practice, which in turn may have influenced herstudents’ entries, including, a stronger focus on science content and a greater use of claims,evidence, explanations, and because.

CONCLUSION

Previous research (Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006; Baxter et al., 2001; Ruiz-Primo et al., 2004;Ruiz-Primo et al., 2010) demonstrated that notebooks have been used in a mechanical manner torecord lower-level thinking. Although Riley expressed that notebooks should be used for higher-level thinking, she did not promote this concept within her class notebook or in her directions to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

130 LORI A. FULTON

students. Instead she focused on what notebooks should look like and the low-level skill requiredto record what was observed. Although Riley talked about the importance of using informationin the notebook to write claims and evidence, this higher-level task was not evident in any of herlessons.

In contrast, Ann went beyond the mechanical nature of notebooks and pushed students toarticulate their thoughts in writing, even requiring them to revisit conclusions with which theystruggled to make sense during a previous lesson. Ann had a sense that notebooks were formore than simply recording observations and that she needed to model this and provide explicitdirections if students were to meet this goal. Although Ann’s practices cannot be attributedsolely to her participation in the lesson study group, there were specific practices Ann used thatwere not apparent in Riley’s lessons. Those behaviors, which are supported by the literature(Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006; Baxter et al., 2001; Ruiz-Primo et al., 2004; Ruiz-Primo et al.,2010), included

• defining science notebooks in terms of what they do for students rather than how theyare used,

• modeling practices that focus on recording of thinking rather than observations,• focusing student recording through explicit directions, and• providing opportunities for students to go back and use their science notebooks.

Borko (2004) stated that teachers should be engaged in collaboration around student work tohelp bring about change to their practice. This study suggests that lesson study provided thattype of collaboration and enhanced a teacher’s development of beliefs and practices related toscience notebooks. The ongoing support Ann received as a member of the lesson study group mayhave contributed to her successful implementation of the writing of conclusions within sciencenotebooks (Akerson et al., 2009; Peers et al., 2003; Pekmez et al., 2005). This affirmed the ideathat structured collaboration may help teachers meet the call to move students’ notebook entriesaway from activity to content-focused entries (Aschbacher & Alonzo, 2006; Baxter et al., 2001).

The above findings suggested that there may be a positive connection between a teacher’sbeliefs and practices and her participation in a lesson study group, but it is still unclear how herparticipation ultimately affected student outcomes. In this study, Riley’s students tended to focuson their observations, stating what they noticed in the form of a claim and did not attempt toexplain their thinking further by including some sort of evidence or explanation.

Ann’s students, however, had a greater percentage of entries that contained claims and werealso supported through the use of evidence and explanations. In addition, many of her studentsincorporated the word because within their entries, demonstrating an attempt to explain theirthinking. Perhaps more important, Ann’s students seemed to gain insight into the importance ofproviding evidence or an explanation to support their thinking based on their review of others’entries, a strategy Ann implemented based on ideas she learned within the lesson study group.These findings provided insight into the potential of what notebooks could become if teachersreceived support through science-based lesson study; however, more research is needed to con-nect these findings to Ann’s participation in the lesson study group. In addition, further data, suchas pre- and posttests, are needed to consider the impact classroom practices and students’ sciencenotebook entries have on student achievement.

Based on this research, teacher educators might consider emphasizing structured collaborationor lesson study as a meaningful form of professional development. More specifically, science

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

SCIENCE NOTEBOOKS 131

educators could focus on providing pre- and in-service teachers with opportunities to collabo-rate on how to develop scientific concepts within the science notebook (Aschbacher & Alonzo,2006; Ruiz-Primo et al., 2010). However, to fully understand the impact participation in a lessonstudy group may have, further research is needed to understand all of the influences acting uponteachers to help bring about such change. Suggestions for further research include (1) expand-ing the study to include other people who do and do not participate in lesson study to betterunderstand their beliefs and how their participation may impact their practices and hence studentoutcomes, (2) studying the lesson study process itself to better understand what and how teach-ers learn through this process, and (3) exploring student outcomes further, including students’science notebook entries and how these correlate to achievement on academic tests in science.

REFERENCES

Akerson, V. L., Cullen, T. A., & Hanson, D. L. (2009). Fostering a community of practice through a professional develop-ment program to improve elementary teachers’ views of nature of science and teaching practice. Journal of Researchin Science Teaching, 46(10), 1090–1113.

Alvine, A., Judson, T. W., Schein, M., & Yoshida, T. (2007). What graduate students (and the rest of us) can learn fromlesson study. College Teaching, 55(3), 109–113.

Aschbacher, P., & Alonzo, A. (2006). Examining the utility of elementary science notebooks for formative assessmentpurposes. Educational Assessment, 11(3/4), 179–203.

Baxter, G. P., Bass, K. M., & Glaser, R. (2001). Notebook writing in three fifth-grade science classrooms. ElementarySchool Journal, 102(2), 123–140.

Berg, B. L. (2001). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: Mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8),

3–15.Campbell, B., & Fulton, L. (2003). Science notebooks: Writing about inquiry. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Carlsen, W. S. (2007). Language and science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research

on science education (pp. 57–74). New York, NY: Routledge.Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage.Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research,

76(4), 607–651.Fernandez, C. (2005). Lesson study: A means for elementary teachers to develop the knowledge of mathematics needed

for reform-minded teaching? Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7(4), 265–289.Haney, J. J., Wang, J., Keil, C., & Zoffel, J. (2007). Enhancing teachers’ beliefs and practices through problem-based

learning focused on pertinent issues of environmental health science. Journal of Environmental Education, 38(4),25–33.

Hoban, G. (2000). Making practice problematic: Listening to student interviews as a catalyst for teacher reflection. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 28(2), 133–147.

Keys, P. M. (2005). Are teachers walking the walk or just talking the talk in science education? Teachers and Teaching:Theory and Practice, 11(5), 499–516.

Lawrence Hall of Science. (2005). Full option science system (FOSS) teacher guide: Solids and liquids. Berkeley, CA:Regents of the University of California.

Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Lemke, J. L. (2001). Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education. Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 38(3), 296–316.Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2006). Designing qualitative research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Oshima, J., Horino, R., Oshima, R., Yamamoto, T., Inagaki, S., Takenaka, M., . . . Nakayama, H. (2006). Changing teach-

ers’ epistemological perspectives: A case study of teacher-researcher collaborative lesson studies in Japan. TeachingEducation, 17(1), 43–57.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4

132 LORI A. FULTON

Parks, A. N. (2008). Messy learning: Preservice teachers’ lesson-study conversations about mathematics and students.Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(5), 1200–1216.

Peers, C. E., Diezmann, C. M., & Watters, J. J. (2003). Supports and concerns for teacher professional growth during theimplementation of a science curriculum innovation. Research in Science Education, 33(1), 89–110.

Pekmez, E. S., Johnson, P., & Gott, R. (2005). Teachers’ understanding of the nature and purpose of practical work.Research in Science and Technological Education, 23(1), 3–23.

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Li, M. (2004). On the use of students’ science notebooks as an assessment tool. Studies inEducational Evaluation, 30(1), 61–85. doi:10.1016/j.stueduc.2004.03.004

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Li, M., Ayala, C., & Shavelson, R. J. (2004). Evaluating students’ science notebooks as an assessmenttool. International Journal of Science Education, 26(12), 1477–1506.

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Li, M., Tsai, S. P., & Schneider, J. (2010). Testing one premise of scientific inquiry in science class-rooms: Examining students’ scientific explanations and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,47(5), 583–608. doi:10.1002/tea.20356

Stigler, J. W., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world’s teachers for improving education inthe classroom. New York, NY: Free Press.

Stoffels, N. T. (2005). “Sir on what page is the answer?” Exploring teacher decision-making during complex curricu-lum change, with specific reference to the use of learner support material. International Journal of EducationalDevelopment, 25(5), 531–546.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (Original workpublished 1934)

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lori A. Fulton is Doctoral Candidate in Teacher Education in the Department of Teaching andLearning at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f D

elaw

are]

at 1

6:03

04

Oct

ober

201

4