SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82, 417436.
  • Aikenhead, G. (1987). High-school graduates' beliefs about science-technology-society. III. Characteristics and limitations of scientific knowledge. Science Education, 71, 459487.
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: AAAS.
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy: A Project 2061 report. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Bady, R. A. (1979). Students' understanding of the logic of hypothesis testing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16, 6165.
  • Bell, R. L. (1999). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60 (09), 3310A. (University Microfilms No. AAI9944733.)
  • Brinckerhoff, R. F. (1992). One-minute readings: Issues in science, technology, and society. New York: Addison-Wesley.
  • Bybee, R. W. (1997). Achieving scientific literacy: From purposes to practices. Portsmouth, NH: Heineman.
  • Campbell, V., Lofstrom, J., & Jerome, B. (1997). Decisions based on science. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association.
  • Carey, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28, 235251.
  • Collins, H. M., & Pinch, T. (1998). The golem: What you should know about science (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
  • Collins, H. M., & Shapin, S. (1986, June 27). Uncovering the nature of science. Times Higher Educational Supplement. Reprinted in J.Brown, A.Cooper, T.Horton, F.Toates, & D.Zeldin (Eds.). (1986). Science in schools (pp. 7177). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
  • Cotham, J., & Smith, E. (1981). Development and validation of the conceptions of scientific theories test. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 18(5), 387396.
  • Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
  • Duschl, R. A. (1990). Restructuring science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2001). On the substance of a sophisticated epistemology. Science Education 85, 554567.
  • Fleming, R. (1986a). Adolescent reasoning in socioscientific issues, Part I: Social cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 677688.
  • Fleming, R. (1986b). Adolescent reasoning in socioscientific issues, Part II: Nonsocial cognition. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 689698.
  • Feyerabend, P. F. (1978). Against method. London: Verso Publications.
  • Giere, R. N. (1984). Understanding scientific reasoning (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
  • Hammer, D. (1994). Epistemological beliefs in introductory physics. Cognition and Instruction, 12, 151183.
  • Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2001). On the form of a personal epistemology. In B. K.Hofer and P. R.Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Hodson, D. (1985). Philosophy of science, science and science education. Studies in Science Education, 12, 2557.
  • Hodson, D. (1988). Toward a philosophically more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72, 1940.
  • Iozzi, L. (1978). The environmental issues test (EIT): A new assessment instrument for environmental education. In C.Davis and A.Sacks (Eds.), Current issues in environmental education-IV (pp. 200206). Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse for Science, Mathematics, and Environmental Education.
  • Kimball, M. E. (1967–68). Understanding the nature of science: A comparison of scientists and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 110120.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O'Loughlin, M. (1989). The development of scientific thinking skills. New York: Academic Press.
  • Lakatos, I. (1978). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In J.Worrall & G.Currie (Eds.), The methodology of scientific research programmes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  • Lederman, N. G. (1983). Delineating classroom variables related to students' conceptions of the nature of science. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, (02), 483A. (University Microfilms No. AAG8410728.)
  • Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students' and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331359.
  • Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers' understandings of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 916929.
  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F. S., Bell, R. L., Schwartz, R. (in press). Views of nature of science questionnaire (VNOS): Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
  • Lederman, N., & O'Malley, M. (1990). Students' perception of tentativeness in science: Development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74(2), 225239.
  • Lederman, N. G., Wade, P., & Bell, R. L. (1998). Assessing understanding of the nature of science: A historical perspective. In W.McComas (Ed.), The nature of science in science education: Rationales and strategies. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Matthews, M. R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
  • Millar, R., & Wynne, B. (1988). Public understanding of science: From contents to processes. International Journal of Science Education, 10(4), 388398.
  • Miller, P. E. (1963). A comparison of the abilities of secondary teachers and students of biology to understand science. Iowa Academy of Science, 70, 510513.
  • Munby, H. (1982). What is scientific thinking? A discussion paper. Ottawa: Science Council of Canada.
  • Nadeau, R., & Desautels, J. (1984). Epistemology and the teaching of science. Ottawa: Science Council of Canada.
  • National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
  • National Science Teachers Association (NSTA). (1982). Science-technology-society: Science education for the 1980s. (An NSTA position statement.) Washington, DC: NSTA.
  • Norris, S. P. (1992). Practical reasoning in the production of scientific knowledge. In R. A.Duschl & R. J.Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 195225). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  • Piaget, J. (1972). Intellectual evolution from adolescence to adulthood. Human Development, 15, 112.
  • Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of ethical and intellectual development in the college years. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
  • Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge.
  • Popper, K. R. (1988). The open universe: An argument for indeterminism. London: Routledge.
  • Robinson, J. T. (1965). Science teaching and the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 6, 99104.
  • Rubba, P. A., & Anderson, H. O. (1978). Development of an instrument to assess secondary school students' understanding of the nature of science. Science Education, 62(4), 449458.
  • Rubba, P., Horner, J., & Smith, J. M. (1981). A study of two misconceptions about the nature of science among junior high school students. School Science and Mathematics, 81, 221226.
  • Schommer, M. S., & Walker, K. (1995). Are epistemological beliefs similar across the disciplines? Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 424432.
  • Shamos, M. (1995). The myth of scientific literacy. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
  • Shapiro, B. (1989). What children bring to light: Towards understanding what the primary school science learner is trying to do. In P.Fensham (Ed.), Development and dilemmas in science education (pp. 96120). London: Falmer Press.
  • Smith, M. U., Lederman, N. G., Bell, R. L., McComas, W. F., & Clough, M. P. (1997). How great is the disagreement about the nature of science? A response to Alters. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 11011103.
  • Songer, N. B., & Linn, M. C. (1991). How do students' views of science influence knowledge integration? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 36173.
  • Spector, B., & Lederman, N. G. (1990). Science and technology as enterprises. Dubuque, IA: Kendal-Hunt.
  • Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In L.West & A. L.Pines (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 211231). New York: Academic Press.
  • Winchester, I. (1993). “Science is dead. We have killed it, you and I”—How attacking the presuppositional structures of our scientific age can doom the interrogation of nature. Interchange, 24, 191198.
  • Zeidler, D. L., & Schafer, L. E. (1984). Identifying meditating factors of moral reasoning in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 21(1), 115.