Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 120Science Education and PedagogyEducational Methods and OutcomesStatistics Education and Methodologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fifth graders' science inquiry abilities: A comparative study of students in hands-on and textbook curricula

Pine, Jerome, Aschbacher, Pamela, Roth, Ellen, Jones, Melanie, McPhee, Cameron, Martin, Catherine, Phelps, Scott, Kyle, Tara, Foley, Brian·2006·Journal of Research in Science Teaching
DOI 10.1002/tea.20140
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A large number of American elementary school students are now studying science using the hands-on inquiry curricula developed in the 1990s: Insights; Full Option Science System (FOSS); and Science and Technology for Children (STC). A goal of these programs, echoed in the National Science Education Standards, is that children should gain "abilities to do scientific inquiry" and "understanding about scientific inquiry." We have studied the degree to which students can do inquiries by using four hands-on performance assessments, which required one or three class periods. To be fair, the assessments avoided content that is studied in depth in the hands-on programs. For a sample of about 1000 fifth grade students, we compared the performance of students in hands-on curricula with an equal number of students with textbook curricula. The students were from 41 classrooms in nine school districts. The results show little or no curricular effect. There was a strong dependence on students' cognitive ability, as measured with a standard multiple-choice instrument. There was no significant difference between boys and girls. Also, there was no difference on a multiple-choice test, which used items released from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS). It is not completely clear whether the lack of difference on the performance assessments was a consequence of the assessments, the curricula, and/or the teaching. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 43: 46…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/tea.20140

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Citations

Cites

Show all 31 references

Research works printed but not linked: 11

  1. & (2002). What's happening in the elementary inquiry science classroom and why? Examining patterns of practice and district factors affecting science reforms. Policy levers for urban systemic mathematics and science reform: Impact studies from four sites. Symposium at the annual meeting of the AERA, New Orleans, LA.
  2. (1995). What we learn from state assessments of elementary school science. In (Ed.), The assessment of hands-on elementary science programs. Grand Forks ND: North Dakota Study Group.
  3. Black, 1990, The School Science Review, 72, 13
  4. Bruner, 1961, Harvard Education Review, 31, 21
  5. (1991). A history of ideas in science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
  6. Department of Education and Science. (1984). Science in schools, age 13. London: His Majesty's Stationery Office.
  7. (c. 1910). Time space, gravity and light. Los Angeles, LA: Skirball Cultural Center.
  8. , , , , , , & (1997). Performance assessment in IEA's Third International Science Study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
  9. (1964, Summer/Fall). The curricular triangle and its style. ESI quarterly report. Boston: Education Development Center.
  10. Shavelson, 1992, Educational Researcher, 21, 22
  11. (1998). Individual performance tasks. Educative assessment (pp. 139–153). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cited by

See all 120

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Pine, J., Aschbacher, P., Roth, E., Jones, M., McPhee, C., Martin, C., Phelps, S., Kyle, T., & Foley, B.
Affiliations
California Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Pine, Jerome
ORCID
Jones, Melanie
Venue
Journal of Research in Science Teaching
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2006
Volume
43
Issue
5
Pages
467-484
ISSN
  • 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-2736
DOI
10.1002/tea.20140
OpenAlex
W2088851785
Cited by
120
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 7
FWCI
29.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 3530 d)
Locations
Journal of Research in Science Teaching (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Methods and Outcomes
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistics Education and Methodologies
Keywords
scientific inquiry skills, fifth grade students, elementary school science, performance evaluation, cognitive ability, TIMSS, gender differences, curriculum effectiveness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fifth graders' science inquiry abilities: A comparative study of students in hands-on and textbook curricula. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/tea.20140
The paper
Pine, J., Aschbacher, P., Roth, E., Jones, M., McPhee, C., Martin, C., Phelps, S., Kyle, T., & Foley, B. (2006). Fifth graders' science inquiry abilities: A comparative study of students in hands-on and textbook curricula. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20140

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.