1. EXPLORING TEACHERS’ BELIEF ABOUT LEARNING AND
PEDAGOGY IN INQUIRY CLASSROOMS
Sally Howard1
, Christine Harrison1
, and Brian Matthews1
1
Kings College London
Abstract: The drive towards a greater emphasis on inquiry-based science education (IBSE)
has been well articulated through international reports such as Rocard (2007) and The
European Commission report Science Education for Responsible Citizenship (2015). These
reports stress the need for quality science education as crucial in promoting a culture of
scientific thinking, creativity and innovation. They also claim that taking an inquiry based
approach is key in inspiring more students to follow careers in science and is more likely to
enthuse and equip all students for an increasingly complex life and working environment
(Rocard, 2007; Wellcome, 2011). The four year EU FP7 project, Strategies for Assessment of
Inquiry Learning in Science (SAILS) aim was to support teachers in adopting more inquiry
based practice within their science curriculum, where assessment of inquiry skills is fully
integrated into the teaching approach. A teacher education programme (TEP) was developed
that included 6-8 half day sessions with activities designed to help teachers engage with
inquiry practices and workout how to assess their students. The teachers then trialled some of
the inquiry activities from the TEP in their own classrooms and reported back to the group
during the next TEP session. This paper explores teacher change and how the SAILS project
teachers, in England, adapted their practice when they were introduced to new ideas. It
explores how three teachers dealt with the dilemmas that this transformation in pedagogy
imposed on them and illustrates how they made use of the professional learning opportunities
offered within the project to develop a personal and unique solution to this professional
challenge.
Key words: inquiry, assessment, teacher change
INTRODUCTION
In a rapidly changing world it is considered important that students are helped to develop key
competencies and skills so that they are better able to understand scientific knowledge,
concepts and have a positive attitude towards science. In this way they can become
responsible citizens and for some pursue a career in science (European Commission 2015). It
is well documented (OECD, 2005; Osborn & Dillon, 2008; Rocard, 2007) that the number of
students choosing to study science, after compulsory schooling, has been decreasing. Girls in
particular appear to be less interested in science education and it is thought to be linked to the
way it is being taught (Jenkins & Pell, 2006; Rocard, 2007).
The SAILS project promotes the idea that Inquiry based Science Education (IBSE) has the
potential to increase student engagement and tackle what has been described as “…out-of-
date and irrelevant contexts and to enable teachers to develop their knowledge and
pedagogical skills.” (McLoughlin, Finlayson, & Brady, 2013, p. 4). Inquiry skills can be
thought of as the means in which the world is explored and understood and by developing
these skills, students are better equipped in terms of understanding and enjoying science.
It is argued that an inquiry based approaches provide rich opportunities to use scientific
concepts in challenging ways which focuses on the ‘how do we know’ and, in an indirect way
enhances, ‘what is known’, because it is set in engaging and authentic contexts and is student-
led, rather than teacher directed (Osborn & Dillon 2008; Rocard, 2007).
Teaching is a complex craft drawing on skills and knowledge and while it is generally
accepted (Capps, Crawford, & Constas, 2012) that teachers seek professional development

2. because they believe they can make a difference to a student’s achievement, what is less well
articulated is how changes in teacher’s practice comes about. Explored within this paper is the
view that underpinning the way that teachers work and behave is their innate belief about how
learners learn. This belief-set is often subconscious yet it will influence how they, as teachers,
engage with different aspects of the subject matter to be taught, their approach to assessment
and their behaviour towards the learners.
Through engaging in the SAILS teacher education program (TEP,) and interacting with other
science teachers on a similar mission, it is hoped that the necessary teacher change will result
in them becoming more confident in their understanding of inquiry and better able to teach
and assess inquiry-based lessons. It is well recognise how teacher pedagogical knowledge and
their belief system influences a teachers practice in terms of the way they teach and how
assessment is undertaken within their classroom practice (Kane, Sandretto, & Heath, 2002;
Thomas, 2012). Whitworth (2015) describes teacher change as the changes in teacher’s
beliefs, as well as their understandings and practice. Kagan (1992) suggests that it is this
complex relationship between belief and practice that lies at the heart of what teachers do and
how they mediate learning and assessment within their own setting.
Stipek et al (2001) draws specific attention to the relationship between teacher belief and
practice in relation to inquiry learning. She suggests that teachers, in general, take one of two
approaches to practice. Firstly, there are teachers who believe that learning is most effective
when students construct meaning through a process of problem solving and inquiry orientated
process. These teachers tend to minimize aspects of performance and instead promote effort
and develop risk taking classroom climates. They tend to actively use ‘wrong’ answers, as a
beneficial part of the learning cycle, to tease out misconceptions and misunderstanding. The
emphasis in practice is on process, creativity and effort rather than single correct solutions.
This approach is in contrast to teachers who hold a strong belief about ‘traditional’
approaches to learning i.e. receiving knowledge from the teacher in discrete units. For these
teachers, there is an emphasis on performance and efficiency i.e. the speed in which the
student is able to achieve the correct outcome. Correct answers and speed are valued while
mistakes are to be avoided and student performance is often measured in relation to others
(Stipek, Givvin, Salmon, & MacGyvers, 2001).
Individual belief systems are built up over time ‘through a process of enculturation and social
construction’ (Pajares, 1992, p. 316). They influence how things are perceived and effect the
way new information is processed. Multiple beliefs can be held at the same time and there can
be conflicting belief sets being held concurrently, with some beliefs overriding other beliefs,
and are resistant to change from logical reasoning. Nespor (1987) (cited in Pajares, 1992, p.6)
describes this messy arrangement as:
“Belief systems, unlike knowledge systems, do not require general or group consensus
regarding the validity and appropriateness of their beliefs. Individual beliefs do not even
require internal consistency within the belief system. This nonconsensuality implies that belief
systems are by their very nature disputable, more inflexible, and less dynamic than knowledge
systems…”
As teachers are the main agents for setting the culture and practice in their classrooms,
helping them to reflect on their beliefs and their practice can assist them in making valuable
changes in their assessment practice and teaching approach.
School assessment practice can be a strong influence on teacher’s belief and practice.
Assessment serves two basic purposes; the first is to enhance learning and the second is about
accountability through tracking pupil progress. In many secondary classrooms, assessment is
dominated by the latter, where judgments about student’s attainment and tracking their
progress is done through grades and levels. However, it is well documented that formative

3. assessment, while primarily supporting the learning process as it happens, guides next steps in
learning, can also contribute to the formation of an overall judgment as part of a summative
assessment process (Black & Wiliam 1998, Black & Harrison, 2004).
There is a wealth of literature that draws attention to the problems of over-using didactic
teaching methods as well as the adverse impact on students through certain summative
assessment practice, such as the giving of grades and marks (Alexander, 2004; Black &
Wiliam, 1998; Mansell & James, 2009). These didactic approaches are recognised as
mechanisms that promote a culture of competition between learners rather than developing a
‘growth mind-set’ (Dweck, 2007), where effort is recognised and assessment is part of the
teaching and learning process and key to individual progress. A teachers’ belief about the
importance of effort rather than an over-emphasis on attainment and ability has a key part to
play in supporting student’s belief about themselves and their capacity to succeed (OECD,
2005). These are problems commonly associated with traditional methods of science teaching
and summative assessment.
Both formative and summative assessments are challenging tasks and make demands on the
teacher’s time. In spite of this growing awareness of the benefits of assessment for learning
practice (Mansell & James, 2009; Swaffield, 2011) and the need to prepare students for life
beyond school (European Commission 2015; Rocard, 2007; OECD, 2005) there remains a
strong tension between formative and summative assessment practice. This tension is largely
as a result of teachers believing there is pressures being placed on them to ensure their
students cover the content of the national curriculum (DFE, 2014) in order to perform
effectively in high stakes examinations. The performativity culture that exists within many
schools heavily influences the way that teachers teach and assess. As Black and Wiliam
(1998) identified, long term issues arise when students are not helped to make meaning for
themselves or when teachers fail to build on student’s prior knowledge and understanding.
Taking a formative approach to assessment requires a good level of subject knowledge and
related pedagogy. Having limited content-pedagogical knowledge will hinder a teachers’
ability to use formative assessment practice effectively as there is a need for them to analyse
students learning and recognise misconceptions, then provide feedback to scaffold the new
learning as part of the teaching process (Herman et al., 2015). Good pedagogical content
knowledge and formative assessment go hand-in-hand and develop through practice.
However, it is often the case that traditional summative assessment process dominate a
teacher’s practice and leads to ‘teaching to the exam’ (Black et al., 2011).
The role of assessment for learning (AfL) and ‘learning how to learn’ (European Commission
2015, James et al., 2006) is increasingly being seen as a means to facilitate learning and
gather evidence of student learning as part of the teaching process. It is argued that through a
formative approach to assessment, the learners are able to take a more proactive role in the
learning process while developing valuable higher order thinking skills, self-direction skills
and other prized twenty-first century skills, which are thought to be necessary for a rapidly
changing world (European Commission, 2015; OECD, 2005; Rocard, 2007). This approach to
teaching and learning fits well with an inquiry based approach as promoted through the work
undertaken as part of the SAILS project (visit www.sails-project.eu) where the teacher’s role
is more about mediating the learning rather than directing them along a specific route.
Through timely feedback students understanding and performance can be developed and
important assessment evidence gathered as part of the teaching and learning process.
This paper explores how teacher’s beliefs have changed through their engagement with the
SAILS project and has captured some of the complexities and subtleties associated with
taking a more open approaches to inquiry-based science education and an integrated
approach to assessment as a factor in these changes.
Research question

4. Teachers attempting to introduce more open inquiry into their classrooms are likely to
question both their beliefs about how pupils learn and what the teacher’s role is in supporting
learning in the classroom through the TEP. This will be explored through the following
research question:
 What are the characteristics of IBSE lessons?
 How do teachers perceive IBSE lessons as different from other science lessons they
teach?
 What challenges did the teacher encounter when implementing IBSE and assessment
of inquiry skills?
METHOD
The development of teacher’s understanding of the key skills of inquiry was developed within
a community of practice within the teachers professional development programme. This study
takes an interpretative stance using a qualitative research approach (Cohen, Manion, &
Morrison, 2013) based on Constructivist paradigms (Vygotsky, 1978). It explores how three
secondary science teachers involved in the SAILS project changed their practice. Two of
teachers were from the first year and participated in six half-day project meetings in year one
and five half day sessions in the second and final year. The third teacher joined the project in
the second year and six-half day meetings in their first year and five-half days in the final
phase. These teachers took part in teacher meetings which were aimed at developing
confidence in, and understanding of, IBSE teaching and assessment. This was facilitated by
them sharing their practice with peers, experiencing IBSE activities for themselves and
trialling units of work with their students, which they adapted and then evaluated as part of
their teacher writing.
Initial data tranche was gathered through the analyses of teacher writing at the end of the first
year of the project meetings. Further data was collected during the final year of the project
and analysed using an interpretivist research methodology incorporating multiple methods
(Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2013). Initial themes were identified within the initial set of
teacher writing, validated and enriched by the collection of further data from teacher case
studies, observation of lessons and teacher interviews. These data sets were analysed by
searching for common threads using open-coding.
Semi- structured interviews were also conducted at the end of the project to further explore
their perceptions of IBSE and assessment. This approach was undertaken as a means of
understanding the perspectives of participants over a period of three years (Punch, 2014)
Validity and reliability aspects of the research were enhanced through triangulation using
these multiple data sets (Cohen, Manion, & Morrison, 2013).
RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The findings are from the analyses of the teacher writing, interviews and observing practice of
the three teachers and presented as a response to the three research questions.
1. What are the characteristics of IBSE lessons?
Taking an inquiry approach to science education is recognised as a multifaceted process
(Linn, Davis, & Bell, 2004) and involves raising questions and seeking answers through the
gathering of evidence. This question-driven approach generally involves the investigation of
a problem or a phenomena (Kawalker & Vijapurker, 2013). Thus inquiry approach is not
linear but a cyclical process and often further questions are raised and even ‘blind alleys’
occur, making the process more important than the outcome. However, while there is not a
unified definition of inquiry, there are agreed common features such as the active engagement
of students and less teacher direction resulting in more pupil autonomy. Linn, Davis and Bell

5. (2004) description of inquiry includes the intentional process of diagnosing problems,
critiquing experiments, considering alternatives, debating with peers and forming coherent
arguments. Bybee (2009) identifies five similar features of inquiry as ‘engagement’
‘exploration’ ‘explanation’ ‘elaboration’ and ‘evaluation. Minner, Levy, and Century (2010)
also places the emphasis on the learners and their active involvement in raising and exploring
scientifically oriented questions. The agreement is that learners are encouraged to take more
responsibility to formulate explanations from evidence and evaluate these in light of
alternative explanations, particularly those reflecting scientific understanding and how to
communicate findings
The project teachers were able to develop a more student-centred approach in their lessons
with greater emphasis is placed on developing specific inquiry skills. Changes to teacher
practice, included focussing on inquiry skills to investigate students’ questions, not just
following a teacher-directed protocol. There is evidence that, over time, the teachers became
more proficient in fading out their scaffolded support for the students within the inquiry
process and ‘standing back’ as they transferred the responsibility of learning over to the
students (Van de Pol, Volman, & Beisghizen, 2010). There was a general acceptance that it
took them time and determination to achieve this ‘standing-back’ to enable their students to
take greater responsibility, yet in doing so, they noticed their students often achieved more
highly, in academic terms, than previously expected by the teachers. Teachers also reported
that inquiry motivated their students to engage in science learning and also that authentic
contexts encourage students to remain focused for sustained periods of time.
Group work, with students engaging in dialogic exchanges, features highly in IBSE lessons.
Groups of threes and fours are common, and tend to comprise of ‘mixed attainment’ and
mixed genders. Usually, but not exclusively, these groups are decided by the teacher, not as a
behaviour management strategy, but a means of promoting dialogic opportunities and
enrichment. Within the groups, students have lot autonomy to decide the direction the inquiry
takes and resources they feel is necessary to gather relevant evidence. Students are more able
to explain their reasons for their thinking and actions.
In IBSE lessons, the focus is on the process rather than achieving correct or a single answer to
an inquiry question. Teacher questioning is used to elicit understanding and challenge the
student’s thinking in a manner that promotes them to articulate the reasoning and
understanding behind their actions. In this way assessment is more easily woven into the
teaching process, and draws on a range of assessment for learning strategies. Written work
undertaken during the lesson is usually a collaborative effort within each group and often
includes poster presentations and mind-maps to convey the ideas and routes taken in solving
the inquiry questions. Individual written work frequently forms part of a homework activity
with the teacher giving written feedback.
2. How do teachers perceive IBSE lessons as different from other science lessons they
teach?
The teachers reported that they had better understanding of student capabilities through
adopting a more inquiry approach to their teaching. By listening more to what students were
saying, as they grappled with various problems, gave teachers a better insight into the
students’ understanding and attainment.
“…even when you see them struggling, it was probably in your mind that ‘they can do it!’ you
probably hadn’t realised that there was a problem, so you really do learn as a teacher, ‘that’s
something I need to go through again’. I hadn’t realised they hadn’t understood that!”
(Kevin: Interview)
Teachers reported that they had felt constrained by the National Curriculum for science and
pressurised to cover a lot of content in a short time. They reported that there had been a

6. tendency to set up highly structured practical investigations with clear guidelines so the
students were more able to demonstrate their success in line with the criteria expressed within
the marking structure. One teacher described this as a practical investigation with ‘fixed
borders’. This meant their intention was to focus on just the aspects that the exam grades
depended. This same teacher was able to articulate how their well-intentioned practice used to
be more heavily influenced by performance and driven by summative assessment, which had,
in fact, inhibited the students’ potential to demonstrate their full understanding. They now
found that by taking an open approach to inquiry, even if the student didn’t reach a solution to
their questions there was a lot that the student did learn from engaging in the inquiry.
Students were able to demonstrate their knowledge and understanding because of the
authenticity within the inquiry process.
“…If they set out what they want to do, they really understand it! If they start to see it doesn’t
work they then improve it. They understand better and they will confidently learn for the next
occasion …. By changing an experiment from; ‘you do this, you do this, you do this’, into an
inquiry, brings out more issues. It immediately gets the students asking and thinking about
things like ‘how reliable’ and going back again and again…” (Kevin: Interview)
One teacher stated that having to analyse her practice was challenging but beneficial as it had
helped her move her practice from a ‘traditional’ approach of doing formulaic experiments
with her students, marking written work and assigning grades, to recognising the value of
teacher assessment through an inquiry approach. She states how, over time, she became
much more comfortable with letting the students learn through their mistakes and shaping the
direction of their investigation. As a result, she believed she now has a much deeper
understanding of her student’s capabilities and understanding as she ‘really knows them’.
“… moving from the assumption that summative assessment is everything, you become more
confident in knowing that what I think really matters and that formative assessment and
teacher assessment is absolutely valid …… I’m much happier with the kids making mistakes
…. My biggest challenge was in my own thinking, ‘how do I get this back to summative?’ …
(inquiry) develops a huge range of skills, they didn’t used to get to work in groups …I’m
much better at building it in, and so when you plan it right from the start it is much, much
easier because you can leave a couple of lessons here, and you can carry it (investigation)
on…. ”(Susan: Interview)
She also recognises how student engagement has improved and how an inquiry approach has
helped her students gain a better and more realistic understanding of how scientists work.
This includes recognising that sometimes things do not go to plan or unexpected outcomes
occur, where previously they thought science always worked! However, she found that the
older students found it harder to engage with the inquiry approach in the beginning. They kept
seeking reassurance about what they were doing and concerned that they would not be
reprimanded for getting things wrong. She found these students needed more structured
scaffolding than she had found necessary with the younger students. This was possibly
because they had experienced a greater time with ‘traditional’ teaching methods and ‘high
stakes’ examinations, compared to the younger students, who had only recently left primary
school where problem solving practice was fairly common.
Much the same change in belief and practice was articulated by the other teachers. Sam stated
that when he first started the project he was a little confused trying to understand what it was
they as teachers were trying to achieve. Three years into the project, he states his confidence
and competence had evolved to the point where he is able to give greater autonomy to the
students and gather assessment evidence within the flow of the lesson:
“I feel much more confident and feel the students get a huge amount from it. IBSE puts the
students in the driving seat and when you put them into groups and highlight it’s not their

7. final answer that you are getting at, and the group work, the resilience and the enthusiasm of
the students increases ...”(Sam: Interview)
He reflects back on his earlier beliefs and realises how, in the beginning, he had interpreted
inquiry and working scientifically through an adult’s perception and had inadvertently put
limitations on his students. This included factors such as what to study, how they would go
about performing the experiment, and what questions they would want to ask. However, now
he is much more comfortable with a range of different approaches being taken by groups of
students, at the same time, and has found this approach to be extremely beneficial in terms of
motivation and learning:
“… I’m much more confident in putting a range of equipment out for them to pick and choose
the question on the content they are looking at. Because they have control, in terms of
questions, they are engaging more and it’s a much more dynamic classroom.” (Sam:
Interview)
Sam, like Susan and Kevin, found his students were at first fearful of making errors, or failing
to find the right answers. They initially felt particularly daunted when presented with very
open inquiries where they could set the questions to investigate and the process. Sam found
that the biggest change to his practice was to let the students find out through discussion, by
keeping the lessons open and keeping an open mind. Sam stresses the importance of letting
the lesson take its own pathway where the teacher’s role is to ‘tweak’ and help the students
through struggles, rather than driving them towards a right answer.
3. What challenges did the teachers encounter when implementing IBSE and assessment
of inquiry skills?
Developing an understanding of authentic assessment within an inquiry approach was found
to be both challenging and rewarding for all the teachers. The SAILS project had enabled the
teachers to take time out of the classroom and work with others grappling with the similar
issues and together finding a way forward. Solving problems together, and working with
colleagues, allowed the project teachers to reflect on their practice and their beliefs. By
working with colleagues and given the space and time to think about what they do in their
classrooms, they were able to articulate their thoughts and start to recognise how their beliefs
about learning and assessment influenced how they behaved and taught. Through this
metacognitive approach, they honed and refined their practice within their local settings.
While they felt more confident and competent, they also recognise that they and their
students, are still on a journey.
A challenge for all the teachers was trying to maintain a ‘dispassionate’ side and not getting
overly involved in the student’s inquiry and directing it towards a particular line. Instead they
had to stand back so that assessment evidence could be noticed as the students grappled to
make sense of what was occurring and went about making their decisions. There was a strong
temptation for these teachers to quickly intervene and redirect the students to prevent them
from going down ‘blind alleys’. However all three of the teachers stated that by giving the
students the time to pursue their own ideas, find out for themselves that what they were doing
was not actually relevant or did not provide the evidence they had expected, was ultimately
recognised as a crucial aspect of the inquiry process. When the students were able to start
asking questions of themselves such as ‘why didn’t it work?’ and ‘what if we tried it this
way?’ their inquiry skills were being developed, including their capacity to work as part of a
team, along with their science subject knowledge.
The teachers mentioned that finding time to introduce IBSE was initially a big problem as it
was a change in practice for them, and their students. It required changes in classroom
organisation and time to develop student’s ability to work effectively within a team and time
to adapt assessment tools. Recrafting the descriptions of effective achievement of specific

8. inquiry skills, to meet local needs, took considerable time as the teachers had to visualise
progression within specific inquiry skill would ‘look like’, in terms that the students could
recognise as observable or tangible features.
While some teachers were still trying to reconcile the time required to complete the scheme of
work, others were finding that they were embedding a wider range of inquiry skills and
dialogic approaches within all their teaching. These teachers had become better able to plan
opportunities for more inquiry skills focus within the existing scheme of work. They were
also able to plan for a number of open inquiries, where the students could raise their own
questions to investigate and analyse the evidence they gathered for themselves. It was evident
from the interviews, teacher writing and observation of their lessons that all the teachers had
moved way from a ‘task-orientated’ mind-set, where their role was to rapidly move through
the curriculum, to a process of developing skills and thinking through the inquiry process.
The older students initially found it a challenge to adjust their expectations and behaviours
within an inquiry lesson compared to younger students. This was thought to be because the
younger students were more familiar with a problem solving approach having recently arrived
from primary school settings where this is a common approach to science. It was also
suggested that the older students were more acutely aware of their high stakes exams and
wanted to know the right answers. Initially these students struggled to appreciate the
relevance of these inquiry based lessons in terms of passing their exam, however they did
enjoy them and eventually understand their value.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
The findings from this study highlight the dilemmas that teacher face when they transform
pedagogy and assessment practices. Pedagogic change is difficult and particularly so when
the thorny issue of assessment is involved (Harrison, 2005). It is suggested, that by gaining an
insight into the personal perspectives of the teachers, it is possible to capture their
interpretation of frequently complex situations regarding teaching and students’ learning. It
indicates that personal theories about science education, learning and assessment may, on the
one hand, encourage teachers to relinquish power to learners to decide which questions to ask
and which route to take within an inquiry, while at the same time, a formative approach
directs them to monitor current understanding in order to guide next steps in learning. These
two approaches are difficult to implement concurrently as one opens up the learning and
allows student autonomy, while the other relies on the student receiving and utilising
feedback from their teacher and so encourages dependency. Rationalising how these two
approaches can blend to support progress in inquiry based learning requires the teacher to
substantially restructure their pedagogy. This process of change seems to be supported
through regular opportunities for these teachers to think aloud about their practice and their
beliefs with other teachers as part of the teacher education programme.
This paper has explored how these teachers dealt with the dilemmas this transformation in
pedagogy imposed on them and illustrates how they made use of professional learning
opportunities to develop a personal solution to this challenge. Through their teacher writing
and discussions they have articulated how their beliefs have changed and how this has
impacted on their classroom practice.
This study contributes to the understanding of how teachers make sense of their professional
learning and how IBSE is undertaken and understood. It has important implications for
teacher continuing professional development and pre-service teacher education as
understanding more about the process that effects changes in teacher’s belief will help to
inform the instructional activities that can act as vehicles for change in teachers practice.

9. REFERENCES
Alexander, R. (2006).Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk. York: Dialogos.
Abrahams, I., & Millar, R. (2008). Does practical work really work? A study of the
effectiveness of practical work as a teaching and learning method in school science.
International journal of science Education, 30(14), 1945-1969.
Black, P, & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards. GLAssessment.
Black, P. J., & Harrison, C. (2004). Science inside the black box: Assessment for learning in
the science classroom. Granada Learning.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Hodgen, J., Marshall, B., & Serret, N. (2011). Can teachers’
summative assessments produce dependable results and also enhance classroom learning?.
Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 451-469.
Bybee, R. W. (2009). The BSCS 5E instructional model and 21st century skills. Colorado
Springs, CO: BSCS.
Whitworth, B. A., & Chiu, J. L. (2015). Professional development and teacher change: The
missing leadership link. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(2), 121-137.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2013). Research Methods in Education. 7th
edition.
London: Routledge.
Capps, D. K., Crawford, A., Constas, & M. A. (2012). A Review of Empirical Literature on
Inquiry Professional Development: Alignment with Best Practices and a Critique of the
Findings Published online: 16 March 2012. The Association for Science Teacher Education,
USA 2012 (accessed 10/12/15)
DFE (2014). The national curriculum in England Key stages 3 and 4 framework document.
Department for Education 2014, p. 58.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/381754/SECO
NDARY_national_curriculum.pdf (accessed 20/08/15).
Dweck, C. (2007). The new psychology of success. Ballentine books
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. Routledge
Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henriksson, H., & Hemmo, V.
(2007). Science education now. A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. Brussels:
European Comission. http://ec.europa.eu/research/science-
society/document_library/pdf_06/report-rocard-on-science-education_en.pdf accessed
24/01/15
European Commission. (2015) Science education for responsible citizens. Report to the
European Commission of the expert group on science education.
http://ec.europa.eu/research/swafs/pdf/pub_science_education/KI-NA-26-893-EN-N.pdf
accessed 20/09/15

10. Harrison, C. (2005). Teachers developing assessment for learning: Mapping teacher
change. Teacher Development, 9(2), 255-263.
Harrison, C. (2014). Assessment of inquiry skills in the SAILS project. Science Education
International. 25(1), 2014, 112-122.
Herman, J., Osmundson, E., Dai, Y., Ringstaff, C., & Timms, M. (2015). Investigating the
dynamics of formative assessment: relationships between teacher knowledge, assessment
practice and learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, (ahead-of-
print), 1-24.
Hopfenbeck, T.N. (2015) Formative assessment, grading and teacher judgement in times of
change, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 22(3), 299-301.
James, M. Black, P., Carmichael, P., Conner, C., Dudley, P., Fox, A., Frost, D., Honour, L.,
MacBeth, J., Marshall, B., Pedder, D., Procter, R., Swaffield, S., &, Wiliam, D. (2006).
Teaching and Learning Research Programme. Routledge
Jenkins, E.W., & Pell, R.G. (2006) The Relevance of Science Education Project (ROSE) in
England: a summary of findings. Centre for Studies in Science and Mathematics Education,
University of Leeds, Leeds UK
Kane, R., Sandretto, S., Heath, C. (2002). Telling half the story: A critical review of research
on the teaching beliefs and practices of university academics. Review of Educational
Research, 27(2), 177-228.
Kagan, D. M. (1992). Implication of research on teacher belief. Educational
psychologist, 27(1), 65-90.
Kawalkar, A., & Vijapurkar, J. (2013). Scaffolding Science Talk: The role of teachers'
questions in the inquiry classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 35(12), 2004-
2027.
Linn, M. C., Davis, E.A, & Bell. P. (2004). Internet Environments for Science Education.
Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
Mansell, W., James, M and the Assessment Reform Group (2009) Assessment in schools. Fit
for purpose? A commentary by the Teaching and Learning Research Programme. London:
Economic and Social Research Council, Teaching and Learning Research Programme
McLoughlin, E., Finlayson, O. & Brady, S. (2013). International Conference on Engaging
Pedagogy (ICEP13) Institute of Technology Sligo, Ireland
Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry‐based science instruction—what is
it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of
research in science teaching, 47(4), 474-496.
OECD (2005) Education and Training Policy. Teachers matter. Attracting, developing and
retaining effective teachers. http://www.oecd.org/edu/teacherpolicy accessed 28/08/15
Osbourne, J. & Dillon, J. (2008). Science Education in Europe: Critical Reflections. 32.
London: King's College, London

11. Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers' Beliefs and Educational Research: Cleaning up a Messy
Construct Review of Educational Research, 62(3). 307-332.
Punch, K. F. (2013).Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches.
Sage.
Song, E., Koh, K, (2010). Assessment for learning: understanding Teachers’ beliefs and
practice. Paper presented at the 36th Annual Conference of the International Association of
Educational Assessment (IAEA) on “Assessment for the Future Generations”, Bangkok,
Thailand, 20 – 27 August 2010.
Stipek, D. J., Givvin, K. B., Salmon, J. M., & MacGyvers, V. L. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and
practices related to mathematics instruction. Teaching and teacher education, 17(2), 213-226.
Swaffield, S. (2011). Getting to the heart of authentic assessment for learning. Assessment in
Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 18(4), 433-449.
Thomas, M. (2012). Teachers’ beliefs about classroom assessment and their selection of
classroom assessment strategies. Journal of Research and Reflections in Education, 6(2), 103-
112.
Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student
interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271-296.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in Society. The Development of Higher Psychological
Processes. Harvard
Wellcome (2011) Perspectives on Education: inquiry-based learning. Wellcome Trust