127

Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction:

Pedagogical Context Knowledge for Teachers

Jeffrey Frykholm George Glasson

University of Colorado at Boulder Virginia Tech

Although the reform literature in mathematics and science is replete with calls for the integration
of math and science, there remain precious few empirical studies examining the prerequisite skills,
beliefs, knowledge bases, and experiences necessary for teachers to implement integrated
instruction. The initial intent of this study was to examine the content knowledge, pedagogical
content knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs (with respect to the integration of mathematics and
science) that prospective secondary mathematics and science teachers bring to their respective
preparation programs. This study then explored a collaborative model intended to create
meaningful educational opportunities within the context of teacher preparation programs to foster
preservice teachers’ desire and ability to pursue connected teaching in the classroom. Presented
in the article are findings related to the initial beliefs and experiences prospective teachers bring
to the preparation process, the results of their collaborative work together in the creation of
interdisciplinary units connecting mathematics and science topics, and their ongoing efforts to
work together once engaged in schools for their student teaching internships. Moreover, this
article proposes subtle shifts in both the conceptualization of, and language used to describe, the
integration of mathematics and science. Building on sociocultural theories, this article proposes
the use of connections and pedagogical context knowledge as levers to promote integrated mathemat-
ics and science instruction.

Nearly 100 years ago, E.H. Moore (1902) deliv- the two subjects be integrated as a means of strengthening
ered a presidential address to the American Math- students’ understanding of and appreciation for the
ematical Society in which he stated, many connections and applications that link science and
Engineers tell us that in the schools algebra is taught mathematics (American Association for the
in one water-tight component, geometry in another, Advancement of Science, 1989; Good, 1991; National
and physics in another, and that the student learns Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 1989; National
to appreciate (if ever) only very late the absolutely Research Council, 1996; Roth & Bowen, 1994). In fact,
close connection between these different subjects, the natural overlaps in school science and mathematics
and then, if he credits the fraternity of teachers with have led some educators to suggest that the two
knowing the closeness of this relation, he blames subjects be integrated to the extent “that it becomes
them most heartily for their unaccountably stupid indistinguishable as to whether it is mathematics or
way of teaching him. science” (Berlin & White, 1992, p. 341).
Moore went on to advocate reforms in school Yet, is the educational community still running the
mathematics and science instruction that would prompt risk of being in the words of Moore, “unaccountably
a more coherent organization of the two subjects, stupid” in the ways in which teachers are prepared to
including overlaps between them. Now a century later, integrate mathematics and science? Certainly, foster-
one might pause to consider the progress teacher ing such strong interdisciplinary connections is a chal-
educators have made in helping both teachers and lenging task for teachers and teacher educators, made
students not only see the important connections be- all the more difficult given the paucity of research that
tween the disciplines, but also understand how one explores what it means to integrate science and math-
discipline can support learning of the other. ematics teaching (Berlin, 1991; Berlin & White, 1995).
It is true that the recent reform movements in The first purpose of this article is to present an
school science and mathematics include the notion that innovative model of secondary preservice teacher

Volume 105(3), March 2005

128 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction

education that was designed to provide rich and paradigm for thinking about the authenticity of experience
meaningful experiences for beginning teachers to begin as a catalyst for growth and learning.
seeing and seeking connections between science and Recent studies have begun to extend the notion of
mathematics. The second purpose of this article is to situativity to the teaching and learning of science and
share research examining the perspectives of preservice mathematics (e.g., Cobb, Boufi, McClain, & Whitenack,
teachers on connecting mathematics and science within 1997; McClain & Cobb, 2001; Putnam & Borko, 2000;
the context of this innovative preparation program and Roth & Bowen, 1994; Yackel & Cobb, 1996). It has
into their subsequent student teaching experience. By been recognized that the knowledge and skills that
examining the perspectives, lesson planning, and teachers acquire are fundamentally linked to the con-
teaching of the preservice teachers who participated in texts within which those attributes are introduced and
the program, this article provides empirical evidence developed (Barnett & Hodson, 2001; Greeno, Collins,
that points to the promise and potential of promoting & Resnick, 1996). Furthermore, as Shulman (1986) has
pedagogical context knowledge (Barnett & Hodson, argued convincingly, these contextually developed
2001) as a mechanism through which science and knowledge structures are centrally connected to the
mathematics may be more closely explored and ways teachers develop and practice their craft. It
understood by both teachers and, ultimately, learners in follows, therefore, that if science and mathematics
school classrooms. teachers are expected to develop expertise in fostering
integrated learning opportunities for their students, then
a significant part of their preparation experiences
Conceptual Framework for Connecting Science should be contextually based. As Putnam and Borko
and Mathematics (2000) have suggested, “How a person learns a par-
ticular set of knowledge and skills, and the situation in
The following conceptual framework for connect- which a person learns, become a fundamental part of
ing science and mathematics teaching describes the what is learned” (p. 4). A situative lens for teacher
ways in which contemporary theories of situated cog- development, therefore, focuses on “interactive sys-
nition in science and mathematics provided underpin- tems that include individuals as participants, interacting
nings for the conceptual design, implementation, and with each other as well as materials and representa-
evaluation of the program under examination. In par- tional systems (Greeno, 1997; Cobb & Bowers, 1999)”
ticular, the notion of situativity is explored as it applies (in Putnam & Borko, 2000, p. 4).
to teacher learning, as well as the role pedagogical
context knowledge plays in fostering integrated instruc- Examples of Integration From a Situative
tion in science and mathematics. Perspective
Responding to the call for research on connecting
Learning in Context: Situativity science and mathematics teaching and learning (Good,
Constructivist theories guiding reforms in science 1991), Roth and Bowen (1994) conducted an empirically
and mathematics education suggest a major shift from based research study on the situated and authentic
learning science and mathematics as an accumulation practice of eighth-grade physical science students.
of rote facts and procedures to learning science and Drawing on social studies of knowledge (e.g., Latour,
mathematics in authentic contexts – as socially nego- 1987), students worked collaboratively to frame
tiated constructions and explanations used to make problems themselves by generating “their own questions
sense of the world (Cobb, 2000; Cobb & Bowers, 1999; and problems, design[ing] solution strategies, and
Greeno, Collins, & Resnick, 1996; Putnam & Borko, share[ing] their findings in a peer culture of learning”
2000; Roth & Bowen, 1994; Roth & McGinn, 1998). (Roth & Bowen, 1994, p. 294). Similar to the way
Much of the debate about school science and math- scientists “mathematize” in their practices – the process
ematics in recent years, therefore, revolves around the of bringing mathematical order to natural phenomena –
differences between traditional classroom practice and students in Latour’s study engaged in developing
the ways in which science and mathematics are used representations or “inscriptions” of physical phenomena
in authentic settings (Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; and relationships. Like scientific research, inscriptions
Roth & Bowen, 1994; Roth & McGinn, 1998). Empha- take the form of graphs, charts, and equations that are
sizing the importance of situated uses of mathematics interpreted as authentic, socially constructed, and
in everyday life (Lave, 1988), Lave’s and Wenger’s negotiated “conscription” devices that enlist the
(1991) notion of situated learning has become a guiding participation and understanding of groups of people.

School Science and Mathematics

 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction 129

Moreover, in this study, negotiated inscriptions knowledge about schools and curriculum passed on
represented appropriate uses of mathematical principles from experienced practitioners to young practitioners.
and concepts in the context of using science. The professional knowledge of teachers, field tested in
In a later study, Roth and McGuin (1998) advo- the classroom, often eschews the academic knowledge
cated the importance of science and technology studies of educational research. Classroom knowledge is the
for providing a context for learning science and math- situational “craft knowledge” teachers have of their
ematics. In their study, students participated in a 10- own classroom and students. Thus, pedagogical con-
week ecology curriculum in which they researched a text knowledge embraces situated science teaching
40m2 square plot, or ecozone, on their school grounds. and learning in authentic contexts.
The researchers analyzed the student-generated in- For the research elaborated in this article, a par-
scriptions that illustrated the relationships between ticularly compelling question about this framework –
biotic and abiotic variables on a graph. Similar to these four elements of the knowledge landscape – is
scientists, Roth and McGuin contended students were when and under what conditions teachers develop this
engaged in the social practice of negotiating the science kind of context knowledge for teaching. Barnett and
and mathematical interpretations of their data. Hodson (2001) suggested that “there are three kinds of
‘places’ where knowledge is acquired, constructed,
Integration and Context Knowledge rationalized, and deployed: Private, semiprivate, and
One of the primary purposes of this article is to public” (p. 436). As they described, the teacher’s
generate ideas on what is necessary for teachers to personal reflections and cognitive activity is, of course,
integrate mathematics and science instruction effec- private and safe. Once teachers begin sharing the
tively. The previously elaborated examples of integra- contents of their “private” knowledge, however, they
tion naturally lead to another question: What kinds of enter into a zone where
knowledge structures are necessary for this kind of collective theories and values are constructed and
teaching? where teacher lore is formulated. It is here that
The work of Barnett and Hodson (2001) has been teachers’ networks sometimes flourish and action
instrumental in guiding our thinking about the research research occurs…. Moving comfortably between
presented in this article. They articulated a theoretical and among these places requires an ability to switch
framework that promoted the study of teachers’ peda- quickly and effectively between different elements
gogical context knowledge as a means for understand- of pedagogical context knowledge: Academic and
ing what science teachers know and how they use that research knowledge, pedagogical content knowl-
knowledge for teaching. This framework included four edge, professional knowledge, and classroom knowl-
overlapping dimensions that provide a context for teach- edge. (p. 437)
ers’ development: (a) pedagogical content knowledge, For the purposes of this research, we were most
(b) professional knowledge, (c) classroom knowledge, interested in the ways in which the preservice teachers
and (d) academic and research knowledge. Two of in our program could be encouraged to enter the
these dimensions – pedagogical content knowledge and “semiprivate” spaces as a way to begin to develop
academic and research knowledge – are common knowledge and know-how for integrated instruction.
elements of frameworks for teacher development.
Specifically, pedagogical content knowledge (Shulman, Toward a New Conceptual Model for Connected
1986) includes “such things as knowing how to set Science and Mathematics Teaching
teaching goals, organize a sequence of lessons into a The following framework is based on the previous
coherent course, conduct lessons, introduce particular synthesis of theories about teacher learning. Specifi-
topics, and allocate time for satisfactory treatment of all cally, by definition, the integration of science and
significant concepts” (Barnett & Hodson, 2001, p. mathematics is necessarily situative. That is, in terms of
438). Academic and research knowledge for teachers student’s construction of knowledge, in terms of cur-
refers to content knowledge in the subject, including the ricular innovation, and in terms of teachers’ pedagogi-
nature of science. cal practices, fostering understanding of the relationships
The other two dimensions – professional knowl- and connections between mathematics and science is
edge and classroom knowledge – are instrumental contextually based. Hence, grounded on these assump-
concepts in more recent and emerging frameworks that tions, the following two conceptual shifts are promoted
embrace a situative lens for teacher development. as potential turning points for integrated science and
Professional knowledge refers to “teacher lore” or mathematics teaching and learning.

Volume 105(3), March 2005

130 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction

From Integration to Connections. First, the lan- teachers understand the contexts that hold potentially
guage used to discuss the relationship between science significant mathematics and science connections. That
and mathematics must be carefully selected in order to is, if one ascribes to situative perspectives on learning
promote different perceptions of and practices for – that students and teachers construct meaningful
science and mathematics instruction. There has been knowledge of science and mathematics through inter-
much debate in the research literature about the defi- action – then rich contexts become essential in order to
nitions of terms such as interdisciplinary and inte- promote deep thinking and learning and recognition of
grated, and the implications of those definitions for the symbiotic relationship between mathematics and
practice (Berlin, 1991; Berlin & White, 1995). To science. Hence, pedagogical context knowledge
summarize briefly, definitions of interdisciplinary teaching must be a starting point for teachers’ growth and
include the assumption that the integrity of disciplinary development with respect to promoting connected
boundaries will be preserved through exploration of instruction.
common contexts that promote learning of both science
and mathematics. Such a view predicates that teachers Issues of Content Knowledge and Pedagogical
have both the content knowledge and pedagogical Content Knowledge
content knowledge to teach two disciplines success- To teach in a way that allows students to construct
fully, science and mathematics. meaningful knowledge structures, teachers must pos-
This expectation, however, is often unrealistic, sess richly connected understandings and content knowl-
considering that beginning teachers are usually still edge in their subject matter (Ball, 1990a). Yet, as
developing competence in one field. Similarly, common Shulman (1986) suggested, content knowledge alone is
definitions of “integrated” teaching imply that science inadequate unless the novice teacher has also acquired
and mathematics can be blended seamlessly so that it pedagogical content knowledge – the ways of “repre-
is difficult to tell where the mathematics stops and the senting and formulating the subject that make it com-
science begins. This view of integration certainly has prehensible to others” (p. 9).
its own demands and challenges, as well. Despite the many calls for rich content and pedagogi-
In what may be a more realistic and hopeful cal content knowledge for teachers, there is a consid-
approach, therefore, we advocate the use of terminol- erable body of research suggesting that novice teachers
ogy that includes the notion of connections between often do not possess the content and pedagogical
science and mathematics – connections that are situ- knowledge to teach for understanding in their respec-
ated authentically in the respective practices of each tive disciplines (e.g., Adams & Krockover, 1997; Ball
field and in the common experiences of learners. & McDiarmid, 1990; Brown & Borko, 1992). Re-
Although teachers may not have enough knowledge to search findings confirm that knowledge gaps exist in
“integrate” instruction, or are not able (i.e., lack of time, mathematics (Ball, 1990a, b; Brown, Cooney, & Jones,
school structure, etc.) to work collaboratively toward 1990; Frykholm, 1996, 1998) as well as in science
“interdisciplinary” teaching, many teachers are able to (Lederman, Gess-Newsome, & Latz, 1994).
recognize and build upon various connections between These deficits in content and pedagogical content
mathematics and science that they see as intuitive and knowledge are significant, considering the ways in
relevant. Rather than resting primarily within the con- which prospective teachers tend to rely heavily on
structs of each discipline, these mathematics and sci- previous knowledge and experiences when making
ence connections tend to emerge from the prerequisite teaching decisions (Brown & Borko, 1992; Frykholm,
knowledge bases and experiences of teachers. 1996; Hammrich, 1997; Lumpe, Haney, & Czerniak,
Pedagogical context knowledge. The concep- 2000). Important for this research is how issues of
tual shift toward connected mathematics and science content and pedagogical knowledge become even
teaching provides a new way to interpret the knowl- more salient when beginning teachers are asked to
edge bases that teachers bring to the classroom. connect and contextualize two bodies of knowledge –
Specifically, though the idea of pedagogical content science and mathematics.
knowledge is fundamental to good instruction of any Both the preparation program and research study
kind, one essential construct for connected mathemat- described in this article rest on the notion that any effort
ics and science instruction is the idea of pedagogical to connect science and mathematics with meaning
context knowledge (Barnett & Hodson, 2001). That is, must be situated in authentic contexts. This premise
given the situativity of connected science and math- holds for both the content of the learning itself, as well
ematics curriculum and learning, it is important that as the process in which teachers engage that helps

School Science and Mathematics

 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction 131

them develop the craft and content knowledge neces- university. With only a few exceptions, the participants
sary for guiding students through authentic, rich, inte- were “traditional” students in the sense that they had not
grated experiences in science and mathematics. returned to the university classroom for teaching creden-
tials after a previous career. Although there was no control
Research Context for differences in groups from year 1 to year 2, no
significant differences or trends in the data were found to
Research Purpose and Guiding Questions suggest variations in the existing knowledge structures
Theories about situated learning and contextualized or interactional patterns of the respective groups.
science and mathematics teaching provide a frame- In both years, an identical structure was used to
work with which to think about exploring teachers’ facilitate interactions between prospective mathemat-
knowledge for teaching. We viewed the preservice ics and science teachers that allowed the researchers
teacher education process as an opportunity for pro- to explore their students’ beliefs about connected
spective mathematics and science teachers to be both mathematics and science teaching, their content and
learners of subject matter content and learners of pedagogical content knowledge as related to con-
contexts for teaching these subjects. Specifically, this nected mathematics and science teaching and their
study was designed in an effort to examine three ability to collaborate to create a context for learning
particular research questions: science and mathematics through curriculum projects
1. What are prospective science and mathematics and activities. Five groups were created around con-
teachers’ understandings and experiences as related to tent areas, including biology, chemistry, earth science,
connecting science and mathematics teaching and physical science, and physics. The groups typically had
learning? a mixture of five to seven prospective teachers in
2. What are prospective science and mathematics mathematics and science. As often as possible, groups
teachers’ perceptions of their content and pedagogical were organized such that the prospective teachers
content knowledge with respect to connecting science would be able to work with peers who were going to be
and mathematics instruction? student teaching in the same schools in the following
3. How does a contextually based approach to semester. In addition to facilitating the group interac-
connecting science and mathematics teaching and tions, the two instructors for the respective courses
learning in the preparation process influence the think- completed all phases of the data collection and analysis.
ing and practices of the participants during their student To generate data about the existing knowledge of
teaching experience? the participants, each group was instructed to develop
a curriculum project that would connect science and
Methodology mathematics concepts. The participants were encour-
aged to design units (or, for some groups, lesson plans)
Research Study that they would be able to implement during their
This study was framed within the contexts of two teaching internships, if possible. Thus, the curriculum
secondary preservice teacher preparation strands (i.e., projects included statements of purpose, content focus,
one in mathematics and one in science) over a 2-year learning goals, and descriptions of learning activities
time period. The process described in this section was and outcomes as they pertained to connecting science
completed in 2 successive years, with two different and mathematics. As such, these connections involved
cohorts of preservice teachers. This study took place applications to scientific research or examples from
during the second course of a two-semester methodol- everyday experience.
ogy sequence that immediately preceded the student
teaching internship. Although the participants were not Data Sources
formally required to participate in the study, their To address the research questions framing this
engagement in this work was part of the context of the study, data were collected and triangulated in various
course. ways. Contributing to the data record were audiotaped
Thirty-four prospective teachers (12 science, 22 large-group discussions, audiotaped small group
math) participated in the study in the first year, and 31 collaborations, observation notes taken by researchers
preservice teachers (11 science, 20 math) participated during group interactions, written responses to various
in the second year. Of the 65 participants, 32 were questions posed by instructors at various points of the
graduate students, and 33 were undergraduate stu- semester, journal entries recorded by participants during
dents enrolled in a licensure program at a large state the teaching internship, audiotaped group presentations,

Volume 105(3), March 2005

132 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction

curriculum units created by each group, lesson plans, which their collective work emerged, and the ways in
and classroom observations completed during the student which their shared understandings contributed to the
teaching experience. curriculum projects. Third, evidence gathered during
the student teaching internships regarding the
Data Analysis participants’ dispositions (and steps taken) toward
As noted, the two instructors of the courses also connecting science and mathematics in the classroom
conducted the collection and analysis of data. All is presented.
analysis of data was done in parallel, with multiple
opportunities for the researchers to co-analyze data, Perceptions About Connecting Science and
discuss emerging findings, and develop reliable coding Mathematics Teaching and Learning
strategies. The data analysis was influenced by several The importance of connections. Almost without
models of qualitative research (Erickson, 1986; Spradley, exception, the participants conveyed strong convictions
1979a,b; Strauss, 1987; Wolcott, 1993). Although these about the importance of connecting mathematics and
researchers do not share identical views on the pro- science instruction. Representative of many similar
cesses of qualitative research, each provided advice statements in which teachers used the term “integra-
that was helpful in the systematic analysis of the data in tion” interchangeably with “connections,” one math-
this study. For example, Strauss (1987) recommended ematics student teacher suggested that it was “important
an iterative “coding” process, whereby a systematic to integrate mathematics and science because they can
and ongoing fracturing of the data leads to the identifi- further understanding of one another” (John, Cohort 1;
cation of core themes and categories emerging from the written reflection). Others stated their convictions more
data record. Once initial codes have been established, strongly, as in the case of one individual in science who
Spradley (1979b) emphasized the need to organize noted that he was “not willing to teach either mathemat-
codes based on their relationships to one another. These ics or science without integrating them with the rest of
“domain analyses” are helpful in generating empirical the curriculum” (Kevin, Cohort 1; written reflection). In
assertions based on confirming (or disconfirming) evi- no instance did a participant suggest that connecting
dence (Erickson, 1986). Specifically, as transcriptions mathematics and science was something that should
and written responses were read carefully, relevant not, or could not, be pursued.
data excerpts were categorized in reference to the The participants also indicated repeatedly that
questions guiding this investigation. connecting the two subjects was not only important, but
As a brief example, responses gathered from also possible. The very idea of linking mathematics and
writing exercises early in the semester revealed simi- science seemed intuitively obvious to many partici-
larities in the perceptions of the mathematics preservice pants, as represented in the following remarks of a
teachers with respect to their science content knowl- prospective mathematics teacher: “The connections
edge. As these mathematics majors repeatedly com- between mathematics and science exist at almost any
mented that they felt insecure in their knowledge of level or topic that you could choose. Asking if math-
science content, it became clear that this issue – ematics is necessary to teach the sciences or vice versa
knowledge across content areas – would inevitably play is like asking if scissors are necessary for a haircut”
a role in the collaborative projects developed by each (Michael, Cohort 2; written reflection). Similarly, Sarah
group. In the ongoing analysis of subsequent data (Cohort 2), a future science teacher, shared her conten-
sources, therefore, emerging evidence of “content tion in a large group discussion that “it is almost
knowledge” within the context of science and math- impossible not to combine mathematics and science, at
ematics and its effect on the collaborative process was least from the perspective of a scientist....After all,
aggregated and carefully examined. mathematics is just as integral and a part of chemistry
and biology as the scientific theories are themselves.”
Findings and Discussion Many of the prospective teachers commented
about the natural overlaps in mathematics, science, and
The findings of this study are organized under three real world events. As Angie (Cohort 2), a prospective
headings. First, the participants’ conceptions and mathematics teacher, summarized in a written reflec-
experiences related to connected mathematics and tion, “Integrating mathematics and science shows stu-
science are presented. Second, the group collaborations dents how applicable mathematics is in the natural
are used as a context to explore the participants’ world. They are using mathematics to make sense of
engagements with one other, the knowledge bases from the world around them.”

School Science and Mathematics

 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction 133

Apprehensions and concerns. Despite these ref- time studying any particular branch of science. One
erences to the many natural overlaps in science and prospective mathematics teacher expressed her concerns
mathematics, a number of these prospective teachers by noting, “I certainly don’t think I lack in the mathematics
commented about how seldom they had seen these background, but I feel shaky about having the science
connections emphasized in their classroom experi- background needed to truly connect the two” (Danielle,
ences. As Brian (Cohort 2) recalled during a classroom Cohort 1; classroom discussion). Similarly, another
discussion, “My personal experience with integrating mathematics major suggested the following:
math and science has been non-existent.” Another I am not very prepared to connect the two [math-
participant shared that integrating mathematics and ematics and science] because I do not have a good
science “intrigues me a great deal. But my exposure to grasp on science. I personally had a hard time in all
it in high school was horrible. My teachers were bad, as science classes and don’t particularly enjoy the
was the design of the class content” (Michelle, Cohort subject. But I feel it is important to connect the two,
1, written reflection). One of the mathematics preservice and I am willing to learn how (Christy, Cohort 2;
teachers similarly shared his perception of how frag- written reflection).
mented the school curriculum was: This quote represented the sentiments of many of
I feel like I would need to do a lot of research and the prospective mathematics teachers. Although they
preparing in order to connect mathematics and admitted that they were somewhat shaky in terms of
science in a meaningful way. I was not exposed to their science content knowledge, they were aware of
interdisciplinary settings during my school years. the importance of connecting the two subjects in their
The mathematics courses were specialized topics, teaching and were eager to learn more about how to do so.
and so were the [science] courses. Obviously,
some algebra was used in chemistry and other The Collaborative Projects: Situative Contexts
mathematics was used in physics, but connections for Learning
were never emphasized (Chris, Cohort 2, written Connecting knowledge. Despite the initial reser-
reflection). vations of the prospective teachers concerning the
Perhaps due, in part, to this general lack of expo- integration of subjects, a different picture emerged as
sure to settings in which mathematics and science were they began to collaborate on their curricular units that
connected, the participants expressed some hesitation were designed to provide an authentic context for
as they approached the collaborative experience. One teaching science and mathematics. The silence mark-
prospective mathematics teacher reported that she ing the initial moments of each group meeting was
could not come up with many specific examples of sharply contrasted with the animated interaction and
mathematics and science overlaps that would be ap- conversation once the groups began sharing ideas and
propriate for the secondary mathematics classroom possibilities for their unit creations.
and, therefore, “was kind of reluctant about meeting Due to the implied understanding that the project
with the science people” (Michelle, Cohort 1; class- from each group should fall within a particular broad
room discussion). science topic area – biology, for example – the pro-
In general, the participants seemed most con- spective science teachers tended to take the initial lead
cerned about their lack of content knowledge in which- in suggesting broad topic ideas. As they explained the
ever field was not their primary content area – either primary content of the topic, the mathematics majors
mathematics or science. Several of the prospective tended to interject ideas about how mathematical
science teachers made comments suggesting that they concepts might be appropriately connected. Raising
wished they had had a better experience in mathemat- the question of the degree to which each discipline
ics courses. As one noted, provides a context for pursuit of the other, one partici-
I never had a good mathematics teacher – they pant shared in the midst of his small group discussion,
seemed to have only one way to explain how to do “It seems easier to throw out science ideas first and
a problem, and if that didn’t make sense, you were then see what mathematics is in them, rather than to do
out of luck. I am fine with algebra, but uncomfort- it the other way around – math first” (Kevin, Cohort 2;
able with geometry and hopeless with calculus small group discussion). Following this process, each of
(Kevin, Cohort Two; written reflection). the five groups quickly generated a wealth of possible
The notion of adequate content knowledge in the ideas to pursue and easily developed elaborate unit
sciences was equally problematic for the prospective plans, complete with sketches of activities, labs, tech-
mathematics teachers, most of whom had spent little nology applications, and authentic assessments in which

Volume 105(3), March 2005

134 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction

the mathematics and science connections were explic- that the central mathematical topics explored (and, in
itly conveyed. fact, necessary) in the unit included various forms of
As they worked together on the curriculum projects, data collection and recording, data representation in the
there was a notable shared sense of purpose and spirit form of charts, graphs, scatterplots and tables, ratios
of cooperation. As one prospective mathematics teacher and proportions, functions, correlation coefficients, ge-
noted in a journal entry at the conclusion of the first ometry concepts such as perimeter and area, descrip-
interactive group session, tive statistics, and some aspects of probability.
I was hesitant about doing this, but since I did it, it
was very helpful. For one thing, it helped me realize Participants’ Reflections on the Collaborative
just indeed how many ideas and applications I could Projects.
think of...It was through the group’s conversations Despite their initial hesitations about collaborating,
that my thoughts were prompted (Sarah, Cohort 1; the participants expressed surprise at the success of
Journal reflection). their work together, as well as the depth of the activities
A number Sarah’s peers shared similar sentiments they had created. For example,
– that they were surprised not only at the collective I never experienced mathematics and science
wealth of knowledge in the group, but also at the depth taught so that definite connections were made
of their own knowledge as it was uncovered through between the two....The experience helped me
conversations with each other. realize the possible connections/projects that could
Connected unit plans. In developing a unit plan come out of working with other teachers. I would
around a particular science topic with applications from suggest devoting more time to our projects to come
scientific research or everyday experience, the partici- up with more detailed plans and projects. It seemed
pants examined the inherent mathematical and scien- like we were only able to scratch the surface with
tific principles and developed rough sketches of a series our ideas (Michael, Cohort 1; written reflection).
of lessons that would build upon each other throughout Several participants concluded their reflections by
the unit. The culmination of their work was a presenta- stating their intent to take what they learned through the
tion made to the rest of their peers. As they presented experience and apply it in their future classroom teach-
their ideas to the larger group, each team highlighted the ing. As one prospective science teacher offered, “This
connections between science and mathematics that activity was a good introduction into how we will be
were represented in the unit plans. expected to work not only with the faculty in our
Across the 2 years, numerous topics became the department, but also across disciplines. For me, this was
foci of the units of instruction developed through the probably the one thing I gained most from the experi-
collaborations. Although space does not allow for an ence” (Anne, Cohort 1; written reflection).
elaborate analysis of the content of each of the units
developed, references occur in the following data Student Teaching: Efforts Toward Connecting
excerpts to a number of the units that were developed, Mathematics and Science
taught, and observed, including tree growth, airplane The final aspect of this study was to document
flight, various physics phenomena, endangered species efforts the prospective teachers made to connect sci-
such as manatees, and invertebrates and vertebrates. ence and mathematics lessons during their student
To indicate the depth of integration present in many teaching experiences. First, examples are described of
of these units, one brief example is included here. mathematics student teachers who attempted to use
During the first year, the biology/mathematics group scientific contexts as connecting points for mathemati-
created a unit that explored tree growth. Among other cal explorations, followed by similar examples of sci-
ideas, they planned activities that would examine (a) ence student teachers who sought to integrate
tree age based on a cross section of the trunk; (b) ring mathematics into their science lessons. Finally, ex-
width as a function of the amount of rainfall in a given amples of collaborations between science and math-
year; (c) tree populations and density with respect to ematics student teachers are described.
climate; (d) leaf size, shape, surface area, and symme- Mathematics teachers’ efforts toward connec-
try; and (e) comparisons of age, ring width, climate, and tions. In reporting on their student teaching experi-
trunk diameter across tree species. As they presented ences, several mathematics student teachers noted
their ideas, they noted the occasions in which math- their surprise at how often they were able to use science
ematical principles and procedures were used to under- in their classrooms. As one reflected, “I used more
stand the science involved in tree growth. They reported science than I thought I would, and I have probably used

School Science and Mathematics

 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction 135

science more than I can even remember” (Michael, as to whether or not increased boating and human
Cohort 2, journal reflection). In most cases, the student activity in the natural habitat of manatees were
teachers discussed the value of using science to provide responsible for their decline. Significant about this
“real world” examples of instances in which math- activity was that students were using mathematics to
ematical tools and principles were relevant. For ex- explore a social issue that was nested within a scientific
ample, one participant described her use of Punnett context. The student teacher spoke to these connections
squares in biology when introducing ratios and propor- as she reflected,
tions in an Algebra I class. Another student teacher This project was successful and worked well in the
began to search for scientific models to enrich the context of my mathematics class, but would have
algebraic concepts they were studying. He recalled one been more powerful if it had been combined with a
lesson in which students began the class period by study of manatees in a science class (even a social
making paper airplanes: studies class – it is, after all, a social issue as well!).
One day I tied in airplanes and flight with a There is much room for extension and enrichment,
mathematics lesson. We talked about plane en- and it has the potential of being a lot more than just a
gines, how planes get off the ground, shapes of study of statistics. (Lesson observation interview)
wings, and the physics behind it all. Tying the two Science teachers’ efforts toward connections.
areas together [mathematics and science] with Perhaps to even a greater extent than did the math-
examples like this really helps the kids get involved ematics student teachers, the prospective science teach-
and understand. (Josh, Cohort 1; interview). ers noted the importance, if not the inevitability, of
Admittedly, one might question whether or not addressing connections between mathematics and sci-
making and flying paper airplanes as a component of a ence in their student teaching experience. In a number
mathematics and science lesson constitutes meaning- of journal entries and postlesson interviews, the student
ful instruction. It could quite easily be the case that teachers indicated that they often simply could not avoid
students simply thought of the airplanes as a “fun” including mathematics in their lessons. As one science
classroom activity. Yet, this is a notable and important student teacher engaged in the teaching of a physical
example for consideration. Conceivably, the student science class noted, “My field experience has really
teacher could have simply pushed ahead with the given me the needed dose of reality regarding the
mathematical concepts of the day without attempting to frequency of mathematics and science connections at
provide any meaningful context to support and motivate the middle school level. Every day is a science-math-
students’ learning. Given that this episode came in the ematics connection for me in my eighth grade Physical
classroom of a student teacher only several weeks into Science” (Sean, Cohort 1, journal reflection).
his solo teaching experience, it is significant that he Consistently, the student teachers were often sur-
chose to embed the mathematics at hand in a scientific prised at how easily they connected mathematics and
context. Regardless of how superficially the science of science concepts in their classrooms. As one individual
flight was treated, this example nevertheless repre- reported, “One thing I have found out through student
sents evidence that this beginning teacher was con- teaching is that it is fairly easy to integrate...After the
cerned enough about finding connections between methods class, I have been consciously aware of what
science and mathematics to incorporate the paper kinds of connections I can use in my lesson planning”
airplanes into the lesson. Such an attempt would likely (Sheri, Cohort 2, journal reflection).
not have occurred if not for the emphasis on connec- A number of participants provided specific ex-
tions made throughout the teacher preparation process. amples of instances in which they were able to connect
Another student teacher designed a week-long unit mathematics and science. One student teacher de-
entitled “Endangered Manatees.” The intent of the scribed a unit on Work, Energy, and Power by stating
project was for students to examine the decline of that “this was a heavily filled mathematics unit. We
manatees in the wild as related to increased human worked with unit conversions, problem solving, and
activity and recreation on ocean waters. Two lessons equation manipulation” (Mary, Cohort 1, journal reflec-
in this unit were observed by the researchers. As the tion). Another student teacher described the math-
student teacher described in an interview, “I had ematical tasks inherent in her unit on weather prediction
students research relevant facts about manatees and when she explained how students had to estimate
also gave them data about powerboat registrations and distances, use various mapping scales, and apply the
manatees killed per year.” Based on these findings, use of formulas to explore relationships between tem-
students were then to use statistics to make an argument perature and altitude. A third student teacher engaged

Volume 105(3), March 2005

136 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction

his biology students in a lab on disease transmission. As on their respective units. They presented an outline
he reported, detailing an eighth-grade integrated mathematics and a
I presented a way that the students could predict how life science unit on invertebrate and vertebrate species.
many incubation periods it would take for every The plans detailed their intent to use data about attributes
student in the room to get infected. I thought this would such as body mass, reproductive rate, life span, speed,
be a good way for students to see how scientists use and metabolic rate in order to examine correlations
mathematical models to predict the spread of disease. between animals within different phyla or classification
(Michael, Cohort 1, journal reflection) groups. Their intent was to help their students draw
These examples indicate how the prospective conclusions about vertebrates and invertebrates based
science teachers often viewed mathematics as provid- on their use of mathematical tools, procedures, and
ing the tools for examining scientific phenomena. This arguments. In addition to using data analysis strategies
perspective might be contrasted with the perspectives to organize, compare, and analyze various data for each
of the mathematics students who tended to see science species, mathematical concepts covered in the unit
as a means for providing “real world” examples for the included the use of exponents (related to metabolism),
mathematical principles at hand. exponential growth, graphing, proportions, inverse
Evidence of collaborative activity. There were relationships, and the application of various mathematical
encouraging signs of collaborative efforts throughout formulas.
the student teaching experience. Most common were Moving toward collaboration: Impressions and
instances in which the student teachers discussed concerns. These examples of integration are quite
possible areas of overlap between their classes and remarkable when one considers the challenges already
then made efforts to spend a portion of class time facing student teachers. Despite the pressures and
discussing mathematics and science connections. For constraints that many student teachers face in working
example, one pair of student teachers described their with their cooperating teachers (Frykholm, 1996), these
work together as follows: examples point toward the convictions that these stu-
One goal that [Jenni] and I share is to convince our dent teachers held about the importance of connecting
students that mathematics and science are inextri- science and mathematics.
cably linked together. The sharing of problems Yet, as the student teachers endeavored to create
between our classes furthers that goal...The day significant overlaps in mathematics and science in their
after I present an activity, Jenni will often use the own classrooms, several notable concerns arose. Pri-
same or similar mathematics problems for her 5- marily, the students realized not only the importance of
minute warm-up activity. This reinforces the math- content knowledge in mathematics and science, but the
ematics skills for the students who struggled with need to develop appropriate pedagogical strategies to
the mathematics in science class, and it also gives address these overlaps in content. As one science
the kids a chance to feel successful in mathematics student teacher reported, “I soon realized that I needed
class. (Lorrie, Cohort 2, postlesson interview). to learn some effective mathematics teaching strate-
Another pair of student teachers used weekly gies” (Michael, Cohort 2, written reflection). This
mathematics journals for their students to describe desire to learn effective teaching strategies in both
reactions to and explore connections between math- mathematics and science led several student teachers
ematics and science learning. As the science student to seek the advice of experienced teachers in their
teacher reported, schools. They soon found, however, additional con-
Questions we have used include: How do profes- straints that made meaningful connections of math-
sional scientists use math? Does mathematics ematics and science even more challenging. Central to
make science easier or harder? What is the rela- their concerns were issues of time and school structure.
tionship between mathematics and science?...What As one science student teacher noted,
kinds of science activities require math?... I am [Collaboration] takes time, both in conversation and
convinced that the journals are constructive. (Sa- observation. Time is probably one of the biggest
rah, Cohort 2, written reflection). roadblocks for collaborative efforts. It is hard to
One final example reveals a more significant find time during the day to talk, and even harder to
collaborative effort between two student teachers get out of your own classroom to watch other
placed in the same middle school. Early in the field teachers. This is certainly an argument for teams,
experience, these two participants requested help in with their common planning periods. (Sarah, Co-
thinking about ways in which they might work closely hort 1, journal reflection).

School Science and Mathematics

 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction 137

Another mathematics student teacher commented about how such efforts might actually take place in
about the difficulties inherent in her attempt to engage schools and teacher education programs. The findings
in a collaborative effort. of this research, therefore, appear worthy of discussion
The group of students that I am working with now inasmuch as they have implications for future
would benefit so much more from a block schedule developments in the effort to connect science and
and team teaching. Mrs. [Smith] and I could do a mathematics pedagogy in teacher education programs.
lesson that would incorporate both mathematics Although it was not our original intent to look beyond the
and science. We could take up two periods and immediate context of this project (e.g., following teachers
really try to reinforce correct procedures and into the classroom to observe their planning and
methods. Unfortunately, her trailer is on the other implementation after the preparation program), the
side of the school. It would be virtually impossible importance of further studies that would take aim at
for us to work together at the same time with the such topics now seems evident. In the ensuing discussion
same group of students. (Megan, Cohort 2, journal of the findings of this research, therefore, remarks are
reflection). situated within the context of the theoretical perspectives
Other participants were particularly insightful as to presented at the beginning of this paper, in an effort to
more subtle barriers that prevent teachers from provid- stimulate thought about what might be profitable ways
ing connected science and mathematics instruction for to extend both the program and research shared in this
their students. In the excerpt that follows, this student article.
teacher recognized the degree to which successful
collaboration requires similar philosophies and commit- Isolation and Fragmentation: The Necessity of
ment from participating teachers. Situativity
I think that it is absolutely essential for both teach- What was evident about the participants as they
ers to have similar goals in mind. I can collaborate entered the study was that they had rarely experienced
with Nancy [fellow student teacher] because we as learners the kinds of instruction that connects sci-
both aim to teach in a constructivist style. On the ence and mathematics as advocated in the reform
other hand, neither of us can truly collaborate with literature. Although these preservice teachers were
our cooperating teachers, who have very different well aware of the importance of advancing mathemat-
aims. We can team-teach, but even the [ Mr. Boyle ics and science connections, they were also quite clear
(cooperating teacher)] is pushing students to come in stating that they had rarely, if ever, seen or experi-
up with the right answers and to conform to his enced such teaching. A common statement was that
strict behavioral standards, rather than encourag- their mathematics classes, for example, tended to be
ing them to take time to struggle with concepts or taught independently from other courses – both other
even to record “wrong” answers on the way to a mathematics courses as well as science courses. More-
more complete understanding. (Amy, Cohort 2, over, the content was typically fragmented, often taught
written reflection). in isolation from other topics that may have provided
Amy later reported that the cooperative efforts various contexts and/or connections.
among teachers in her team were “almost entirely These experiences impacted the student teachers’
related to student behavior management and parent thinking as they approached the collaborative methods
relations, because our team members either have dif- class sessions. Several individuals felt intimidated be-
ferent instructional philosophies or attach little value to cause they knew that they had never engaged in the
collaboration itself.” These astute observations about kind of thinking (much less teaching) that they were
barriers to integration are notable. That student teach- being asked to produce and, therefore, were uncertain
ers would already be thinking critically about barriers to as to how they would function in their groups. More-
integrated instruction seems to be a positive indication over, the isolation they experienced as learners of
of the success of the program. mathematics and science heightened concerns about
their own content knowledge as a prerequisite for rich,
Conclusions and Implications contextualized instruction.
These findings certainly echo the concerns of
Despite the numerous references to connecting Lederman et al. (1994) – that preservice teachers’
mathematics and science instruction in the reform conceptions of mathematics and science are based
literature, there is a conspicuous absence of empirical largely on classroom experiences in which topics and
studies that help teachers and teacher educators think concepts were fragmented, introduced in the absence

Volume 105(3), March 2005

138 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction

of meaningful contexts, and taught in isolation of one By focusing on pedagogical context knowledge, the
another. The situative lens of connecting to real world potential problems inherent in the student teachers’
experiences and scientific research would certainly seem deficiencies in content knowledge dissipated as they
to hold promise as a way to avoid the common anxieties collaborated, shared ideas, and helped each other with
and gaps in understanding that these prospective teachers fundamental concepts and procedures that emerged as
brought to the experience. Notable about the instructional more general, realistic contexts were discussed. As
model promoted in this research were the ways in which Berlin and White (1995) argued, efforts to integrate
these students overcame these initial dispositions toward mathematics and science should be founded, in part, on
fragmented and narrow conceptions of mathematics the idea that knowledge is organized around big ideas,
and science as they collaborated in authentic planning concepts, or themes, and that knowledge is advanced
and delivery of integrated units of instruction. through social discourse. Berlin and White’s idea – that
knowledge is advanced through social discourse –
Beyond Barriers of Knowledge and Belief: speaks directly to the assertion that effective connected
Context as the Vehicle for Understanding instruction requires the development of socially medi-
By their own reports, the participants questioned ated and contextualized knowledge structures. As pro-
their ability to implement connected mathematics and spective teachers in this study worked together on the
science instruction, largely because they felt their development of units that were centered on broad
content knowledge in one (or both) of these disciplines scientific themes or concepts, and as they engaged in
was insufficient. Although it was more common for the social interactions and contributed to the discourse in
prospective mathematics teachers to suggest that their their small groups, they made significant gains in their
science background was weak, several science teach- own understandings of connections between math-
ers also made similar statements about their deficien- ematics and science. They also appeared to gain
cies in mathematics. This finding should not cause great confidence and eagerness to focus more intently on
surprise. Indeed, the research literature contains nu- making curricular connections.
merous examples of preservice teachers who do not
have adequate content knowledge in their own fields, A Potential Model for Teacher Preparation
much less in an additional content area. As noted Recent findings have suggested that preservice
previously, most prospective teachers have rarely ex- teachers rarely experience as learners the type of
perienced as learners richly connected ideas and con- instruction and professional responsibilities they are
cepts in mathematics and science classrooms. Indeed, expected to perform once in the schools. This certainly
in isolation, many student teachers were frustrated by appeared to be the case in this research. At the
their inability to articulate ideas and activities that illus- beginning of the study, the participants frequently com-
trated the links between mathematics and science. mented about how seldom they had seen or experi-
One response to these deficits in knowledge would be enced teaching that specifically connected science and
to require prospective mathematics and science teachers mathematics. Yet, they also reported feeling some
to take additional coursework so that their knowledge of pressure to implement integrated instruction as articu-
both mathematics and science would be sufficient to lated in the reform literature to which they were
promote teaching both subjects. Doing so within the exposed in the preparation program. Quite clearly, they
framework of most traditional teacher education programs, were in a difficult position – they believed that they
however, remains problematic. Moreover, as a number of were supposed to connect mathematics and science in
scholars have noted (see Adams & Krockover, 1997; their teaching, but they had seldom seen or experienced
Shulman, 1986), research findings continue to suggest that such models of instruction.
increasing academic coursework in science and One of the primary strengths of the model pro-
mathematics “will not guarantee that teachers have the moted in this research was that it gave these prospec-
specific kind of subject matter knowledge needed for tive teachers an opportunity to experience the kind of
teaching” (Floden, 1993, p. 2). Hence, the findings of this instructional models we hope they will one day imple-
study are valuable in the sense that they point to an ment in their own classrooms. Learners actively con-
alternative method of increasing beginning teachers’ ability struct ways of knowing as they strive to reconcile
to overcome deficits in their knowledge of mathematics or present experiences with existing knowledge struc-
science through engagement in active learning opportunities tures. If this applies to children’s learning, it also applies
in which authentic contexts provide fertile ground for to the learning of prospective teachers as they engage
understanding mathematics and science connections. in the process of acquiring knowledge about teaching.

School Science and Mathematics

 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction 139

Our intent was to “situate” the learning of these negotiated, and legitimated devices. Moreover, these tools
students by creating an opportunity for our prospective represented perfectly appropriate uses of mathematical
mathematics and science teachers to work together, to principles and concepts in the context of using science.
share ideas, to collaborate, and to participate in conver- These findings point toward the need for continued
sations about connecting science and mathematics. In exploration into the use and role of mathematical tools
short, we wanted to allow them to construct their own as inscription devices in science curricula.
understandings of the links between science and math- Third, what continues to be an obvious question at
ematics by engaging in collaborative groups – much like the conclusion of this study is one of content knowledge.
we hope they will provide for their own students. If teachers are to connect science and mathematics,
Moreover, the collaborative planning in which the what prerequisite knowledge bases must they have, and
participants engaged was a model for the type of what experiences best provide them? One option is to
cooperation and team-teaching that many of these require more content coursework in mathematics and
teachers will be expected to perform once in the school science. A growing number of institutions are offering
setting. integrated programs leading to licensure in science and
mathematics, particularly at the middle school level. At
Points of Consideration for Further Inquiry the middle school level, many teachers must demon-
Clearly, this project generated enthusiasm for con- strate competence in two teaching fields and be actively
necting science and mathematics instruction among the engaged in interdisciplinary teaching. In contrast, the
participants. The products of their collaborations indi- high school curriculum is primarily organized around
cated that they were able to build upon their knowledge disciplines with little incentive to connect the subjects.
bases to create significant learning opportunities for For the majority of students in more traditional second-
learners. Despite the positive findings of this study, we ary teacher preparation programs, it remains unlikely
were left with several questions and points of consid- that they will have the time and inclination throughout
eration that inevitably will continue to be a part of their course of study to take the additional coursework
discussions regarding the preparation of teachers for necessary for endorsements in a second teaching field.
connected teaching in these fields. How, then, can methodology courses be designed to
First, the number of the prospective teachers who provide a context for understanding and promoting the
had never had experiences with connected mathemat- connections between mathematics and science?
ics and science instruction prior to the student teaching In summary, it is evident that the task of providing
was notable. Though they lacked this experience, they rich experiences for future teachers to develop prereq-
nevertheless reported having strong beliefs that this uisite knowledge and experiences necessary for con-
kind of connection should indeed happen in schools. nected science and mathematics instruction continues
What, then, is the relationship between these two to rest largely on the experiences provided within the
seemingly disparate statements? Future research could context of the teacher preparation process. Despite the
more closely examine these various points of view. limitations and unresolved questions, the research pre-
A second, and perhaps more critical issue focuses sented in this article has a significant contribution to
on the uses of mathematics in the curriculum units make in that direction. The emphasis on contextualized
developed by the groups. What appeared to surface interaction in this program included opportunities for
regularly in the projects was the notion that mathemat- these prospective teachers to experience a model of
ics is a tool to collect data, to represent data, and to be reform pedagogy as learners and to participate in
used for computational purposes. This perception of collaborative activities that we hope they will implement
“mathematics as tools” may fall short of how some in in the school setting.
the mathematics education community define math- These preservice teachers not only learned about
ematics and promote its study in the K-12 experience. collaboration, they also grew in their knowledge of the
One might argue that the ways in which the mathemati- connections between science and mathematics. In a
cal ideas in these projects were often manifest as sense, these prospective mathematics and science
“tools” might leave students short of understanding the teachers became consultants to one another as they
underlying conceptual and mathematical systems fram- explored ways to situate mathematics in relevant con-
ing the tools. However, when mathematical tools are texts, as well as ways to mathematize scientific phe-
viewed as mathematical inscription devices (Roth & nomena. This research suggests that teacher education
Bowen, 1994) – that is, graphs, charts, equations, etc. programs can be the site where these fundamental
– they are perceived as authentic socially constructed, issues related to the connections of mathematics and

Volume 105(3), March 2005

140 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction

science can be explored with the potential for great Borko, H. (2004, April). Teacher learning and
success. It may be the case that this model of teacher professional development: Mapping the terrain.
education, or others like it, embodies, at least in part, Presidential Address delivered at the annual meeting of
what Fennema and Franke (1992) had in mind when the American Educational Research Association, San
they suggested a “total reorganization of both schools Diego, CA.
and teacher education programs” (p. 160). Brown, C.A., & Borko, H. (1992). Becoming a
mathematics teacher. In D.A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook
of research on mathematics teaching and learning.
References New York: Macmillan.
Brown, C., Cooney, T., & Jones, D. (1990).
Adams, P.E., & Krockover, G.H. (1997). Concerns Mathematics teacher education. In W.R. Houston
and perceptions of beginning secondary science and (Ed.), Handbook of research on teacher education
mathematics teachers. Science Education, 81(1), 29-50. (pp. 639-656). New York: Macmillan.
American Association for the Advancement of Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989).
Science. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Americans. Washington, DC: Author. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
American Association for the Advancement of Cobb, P. (2000). The importance of a situated view
Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. of learning to the design of research and instruction. In
New York: Oxford University Press. J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics
Ball, D.L. (1990a). Prospective elementary and teaching and learning. Westport, CT: Greenwood
secondary teachers’ understanding of division. Journal Publishing Group, Inc.
for Research in Mathematics Education, 21, 132- Cobb, P., & Bowers, J.S. (1999). Cognitive and
144. situated learning perspectives in theory and practice.
Ball, D.L. (1990b). The mathematical Educational Researcher, 28(2), 4-15.
understandings that prospective teachers bring to teacher Cobb, P., Boufi, A., McClain, K., & Whitenack, J.
education. Elementary School Journal, 90, 449-466. (1997). Reflective discourse and collective reflection.
Ball, D.L., & McDiarmid, G.W. (1990). The subject Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,
matter preparation of teachers. In W.R. Houston (Ed.), 28(3), 258-277.
Handbook of research on teacher education. New Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research
York: Macmillan. on teaching. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of
Barnett, J., & Hodson, D. (2001). Pedagogical research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119-161). New
context knowledge: Toward a fuller understanding of York: Macmillan.
what good science teachers know. Science Education, Fennema, E., & Franke, M. (1992). Teachers’
85(4), 426-453. knowledge and its impact. In D. Grouws (Ed.),
Benson, G.D. (1989). Epistemology and science Handbook for research on mathematics teaching
curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 21, 329- and learning. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers
344. of Mathematics.
Berlin, D.F. (1991). Integrating science and Floden, R.E. (1993). Findings on learning to
mathematics in teaching and learning: A teach. East Lansing: Michigan State University, College
bibliography (School Science and Mathematics of Education, National Center for Research on Teacher
Association Topics for Teachers Series, No. 6). Learning.
Columbus, Ohio: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Frykholm, J.A. (1996). Pre-service teachers in
Mathematics, and Environmental Education. mathematics: Struggling with the Standards. Teaching
Berlin, D.F., & White, A.L. (1992). Report from the and Teacher Education,12(1), 665-682.
NSF/SSMA Wingspread Conference: A network for Frykholm, J.A. (1998). Beyond supervision:
integrated science and mathematics teaching and learning. Learning to teach mathematics in community. Teaching
School Science and Mathematics, 92, 340-342. and Teacher Education,14(3), 305-322.
Berlin, D.F., & White, A.L. (1995). Connecting Good, R. (1991). Editorial: Research on science-
school science and mathematics. In P.A. House & mathematics connections. Journal of Research in
A.F. Coxford (Eds.), Connecting mathematics across Science Teaching, 28(2), 109.
the curriculum. Reston, VA: National Council of Greeno, J.G., Collins, A.M., & Resnick, L.B. (1996).
Teachers of Mathematics. Cognition and learning. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee

School Science and Mathematics

 Connecting Science and Mathematics Instruction 141

(Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. An introduction to the representational practices of

15-46). New York: Macmillan. science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
Hammrich, P.L. (1997). Teaching for excellence in 31(3), 293-318.
K-8 science education: Using Project 2061 benchmarks Roth, W.M., & McGinn, M.K. (1998). Knowing,
for more effective science instruction. Journal of researching, and reporting science education: Lessons
Teacher Education, 48(3), 222-232. from science and technology studies. Journal of
Knapp, M.S. (1997). Between systemic reforms Research in Science Teaching, 35(2), 213-235.
and the science and mathematics classroom: The Schram, P., Wilcox, S., Lappan, G., & Lanier, P.
dynamics of innovation, implementation, and professional (1989). Changing preservice teachers’ beliefs about
learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(2), mathematics education. In C. Maher, G. Goldin, & R.
227-266. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of the 11th annual meeting
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, of the North American Chapter of the International
mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Group for the Psychology of Mathematics
Cambridge University Press. Education. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Shulman, L. (1986). Those who understand:
Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational
Cambridge University Press. Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, Spradley, J. (1979a). Participant observation.
MA: Harvard University Press. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Lederman, N.G., Gess-Newsome, J., & Latz, M.S. Spradley, J (1979b). The ethnographic interview.
(1994). The nature and development of preservice New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
science teachers’ conceptions of subject matter and Strauss, A.L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for
pedagogy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University
31(2), 129-146. Press.
Lumpe, A. T., Haney, J., & Czerniak, C. (2000). Wolcott, H.F. (1993). Transforming qualitative
Assessing teachers’ beliefs about their science teaching data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
context. Journal of Research in Science Teaching Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical
37(3), 123-145. norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics.
McClain, K., & Cobb, P. (2001). An analysis of Journal for Research in Mathematics Education,
development of sociomathematical norms in one first- 27, 458-477.
grade classroom. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 32(3), 236-266.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
(1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for
school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
National Research Council. (1996). National
science education standards. Washington, DC:
National Academy Press.
Putnam, R., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new Editors’ Note: Correspondence concerning this
views of knowledge and thinking have to say about article should be addressed to Jeffrey Frykholm,
research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, School of Education, UCB 249, University of Colorado
29(1), 4-15. at Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309-0249.
Roth, W-M., & Bowen, M. (1994). Mathematization Electronic mail may be sent via Internet to
of experience in a grade 8 open-inquiry environment: [email protected]

Volume 105(3), March 2005