Indeed, modeling effective inquiry strategies can change the practice of elementary teachers, causing them to use more inquiry in their own classrooms ( Staples, 2002 ). Because elementary teachers feel the least prepared to teach science compared with other subjects ( Fulp, 2002 Dorph et al., 2007 ), it is crucial that any undergraduate science classes they do experience employ the inquiry strategies and constructivist approaches that characterize best practices in science education. Many elementary teachers, even experienced ones, are uncomfortable teaching science for a variety of reasons, including poor scientific literacy, negative attitudes toward science, and the belief that science is difficult to teach (see van Aalderen-Smeets et al. Thus, a targeted approach to teacher education must begin in their undergraduate science preparation, and prospective teachers should be taught science in a manner that replicates the inquiry strategies and active learning that we hope they will employ in their own classrooms ( McDermott, 2006 ). Unfortunately, the contrast between what is expected of future teachers in their K–12 classrooms and what they experience in content and instruction in typical college or university science courses can be quite striking ( Darling-Hammond and Bransford, 2005 ). Teachers model their own teaching after the classroom experiences they had as learners more than on the theory or even the classroom experiences they encounter in teacher education programs ( Grossman, 1991 ). Reform in these areas is particularly critical when considering the training of our nation's future teachers. Unfortunately, the available textbooks and curricula commonly stress memorization over the deep conceptual understanding that develops when students engage in inquiry-based activities and discussions that help them construct their own understanding of science concepts. Nearly 100 yr later, this sentiment that science is best learned through active inquiry and exploration rather than a traditional lecture approach is echoed by the reports and recommendations of the American Association for the Advancement of Science ( AAAS, 1997, 2011 ), the National Science Foundation ( NSF, 1996 ), and the National Research Council (NRC Bransford et al., 1999 ). In 1910, the educator and philosopher John Dewey noted that “science teaching has suffered because science has been so frequently presented just as so much ready-made knowledge, so much subject-matter of fact and law, rather than as the effective method of inquiry into any subject-matter” (cited in Archambault, 1964, p. We illustrate this tension through an analysis of our adaptations of the physics curriculum for instruction on the cycling of matter and energy we show that modifications of the physics curriculum to address the biological framework promotes strong gains in student understanding of these topics, as evidenced by analysis of student work. In modifying the curriculum to address these challenges, we have come to see them as speaking to deeper differences between the disciplines, namely that introductory physics-for example, Newton's laws, magnetism, light-is a science of pairwise interaction, while introductory biology-for example, photosynthesis, evolution, cycling of matter in ecosystems-is a science of linked processes, and we suggest that this is how the two disciplines are presented in introductory classes. Among these challenges were: representations of energy, introducing definitions, the placement of Scientists’ Ideas, and the replicability of data. While some approaches were easily adapted, others provided significant challenges.

Our paper describes the collaborative development process and necessary modifications required to apply a physics pedagogical model in a life sciences context.

We report on the development of a life sciences curriculum, targeted to undergraduate students, which was modeled after a commercially available physics curriculum and based on aspects of how people learn.

Physics science lessons