Running head: DOMAIN F LITERATURE REVIEW 1

Domain F Literature Review

National University

Emily Atkins Wooldridge

DOMAIN F LITERATURE REVIEW 2

Abstract

The following paper is a literature review that partially meets the requirements to fulfill Domain

F of the California Teaching Performance Expectations (TPEs) that set the standard for a

Professional Development Quest Portfolio. Domain F of the California TPEs is Developing as

Professional Educator. This literature review discusses current research into effective

professional learning for science teachers since the debut of the Next Generation Science

Standards (NGSS) in 2013. Connections are made to these innovative professional learning

opportunities for science teachers and Domain F of the TPEs.

DOMAIN F LITERATURE REVIEW 3

Introduction

Domain F of the California Teaching Performance Expectations is about developing as a

professional educator (2013, p. 17). This domain gives specific guidelines for the professional,

legal, and ethical obligations of teachers as well as their responsibilities for professional growth.

Teachers are expected, and often required to improve their content knowledge and teaching

practices through constant reflection and professional learning. For science teachers I feel that

this is especially important as new knowledge is constantly being created in the science field.

Additionally, with the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) and the Framework for K-12

Science Education that debuted in 2013 and 2012, respectively, there has been an increased need

for science teachers to improve and refine their teaching practices and content knowledge

(National Research Council, 2012; National Research Council, 2013). The following literature

review discusses current trends that suggest a new direction for professional learning for science

teachers given the recent changes to science education standards.

Professional Development for Science Teachers

The NGSS and Framework require a method for science teaching that is radically

different from traditional methodologies. Reiser et al. (2017) explain that they “articulate a

vision of three-dimensional (3D) learning, identifying science literacy as the interaction of

science and engineering practices, disciplinary core ideas (DCIs), and crosscutting concepts” (p.

280). This proposed 3D learning engages students “in science and engineering practices to

develop and use science ideas to make sense of phenomena or solve problems” (Reiser et al.,

2017, p. 280). This shift in focus has a critical influence on science teacher professional learning.

Reiser et al. (2017) found that peer-facilitated teacher study groups helped teachers develop a

proficiency in 3D science, increase their confidence and develop more positive beliefs about
DOMAIN F LITERATURE REVIEW 4

science teaching and learning, and feel more prepared to incorporate science and engineering

practices in their instruction (pp. 287-289). The peer-facilitated teacher study groups were

comprised of teacher facilitators who had an expertise in 3D learning and facilitating teacher

study groups; and teacher study groups, led by the teacher facilitator “in 3D science activities,

analyzing student learning, and investigating classroom interactions” (Reiser et al., 2017, p. 280).

As mentioned previously, the Framework and NGSS focus on students solving problems

or investigating phenomena. This problem-based learning style has been found to be an effective

strategy for science teacher professional development as well (McConnell, Parker, & Eberhardt,

2013). Science educators have realized the necessity of improving science teachers’ content

knowledge through the same methods they will be using in their own classrooms with their K-12

students. Learning through problem-solving “leads to synthesis of ideas pushing participants

beyond learning isolated ideas” (McConnell et al., 2013, p. 217). Another challenge in science

education is the diverse backgrounds of teachers which results in varied content knowledge.

However, problem-based professional learning proved to “advance science content

understanding for teachers from all grades, even though participants entered the project with

widely different levels of prior knowledge” (McConnell et al., 2013, p. 221).

Conclusion

What both of these resources had in common was the professional growth of science

teachers through consistent and sustained support that was authentic and collaborative. These are

the types of professional development opportunities that science teachers need to participate in as

the NGSS are being fully implemented around California. If teachers are to continuously

improve and grow they need to remember that they “take responsibility for student academic

learning outcomes” (California TPEs, 2013, p. 17). For science teachers that involves increasing
DOMAIN F LITERATURE REVIEW 5

and/or refining content knowledge and becoming experts in innovative teaching strategies

through collaborative and reflective, problem-based learning professional learning.

DOMAIN F LITERATURE REVIEW 6

References

California Teaching Performance Expectations. (2013). Commission on Teacher Credentialing.

Retrieved from

https://www.ctc.ca.gov/docs/default-source/educator-prep/standards/adopted-tpes-

2013.pdf

McConnell, T. J., Parker, J. M., & Eberhardt, J. (2013). Problem-based learning as an effective

strategy for science teacher professional development. Clearing House: A Journal of

Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 86(6). 216-223. Doi:

10.1080/00098655.2013.826486.

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices,

crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (2013). Next generation science standards. Washington, DC:

National Academy Press. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org.

Reiser, B. J., Michaels, S., Moon, J., Bell, T., Dyer, E., Edwards, K. D., . . . .Park, A. (2017).

Scaling up three-dimensional science learning through teacher-led study groups across

the state. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(3). 280-298.