The DOI matches its Crossref record; 58 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
RESEARCH REPORT: Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons
Abstract
‘Science as inquiry’ is a key content standard in the National Science Education Standards to be enacted by US science teachers. This paper is the result of a study that was conducted in order to understand factors that impacted the inquiry-based instruction of 14 beginning secondary science teachers. These teachers were part of a collaborative university/school district induction program designed to facilitate inquiry-based instruction. For a period of 1 year, the teachers were followed in an attempt to understand their teaching beliefs, instructional practices, knowledge of the nature of science and scientific inquiry, and their experiences with inquiry instruction in the classroom. Case and cross-case comparisons revealed five main constraints that impacted their enactment of inquiry-based instruction: an understanding of the nature of science and scientific inquiry, content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, teaching beliefs, and concerns about management and students. This study reinforces the need for standards-based induction programs that offer various forms of support to assist beginning science teachers.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1984) · Cited by 81,983
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (2017) · Aldine (Routledge reprint) · doi:10.4324/9780203793206 · Cited by 25,789
Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform
Shulman, L. (1987) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411 · Cited by 16,787
(1996) · Cited by 11,584
Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods
Lotto, L. S., Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1986) · Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis · doi:10.2307/1163741 · Cited by 10,315
Designing qualitative research
(1989) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-1232 · Cited by 9,905
Teachers' beliefs and educational research: cleaning up a messy construct
Pajares, M. F. (1992) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543062003307 · Cited by 9,007
Perceived Problems of Beginning Teachers
Veenman, S. (1984) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.2307/1170301 · Cited by 2,622
Handbook of research on science teaching and learning
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.32-4019 · Cited by 2,062
The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching
Nespor, J. (1987) · Journal of Curriculum Studies · doi:10.1080/0022027870190403 · Cited by 2,052
Cited by
Wilson, C. D., Taylor, J. A., Kowalski, S. M., & Carlson, J. (2010) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20329 · Cited by 339
Improving teacher questioning in science inquiry discussions through professional development
Oliveira, A. W. (2010) · Journal of Research in Science Teaching · doi:10.1002/tea.20345 · Cited by 286
Metadata
- Authors
- Roehrig, G. H., & Luft, J. A.
- Venue
- International Journal of Science Education
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2004-01-23
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-24
- ISSN
- 0950-0693 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5289
- OpenAlex
- W199917971
- Cited by
- 321
- References
- 58
- FWCI
- 44.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: RESEARCH REPORT: Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/0950069022000070261
- The paper
- Roehrig, G. H., & Luft, J. A. (2004). RESEARCH REPORT: Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons. International Journal of Science Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069022000070261
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.