SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCE

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F.(2001).Embedding nature of science instruction in preservice elementary science courses: Abandoning scientism, but….Journal of Science Teacher Education,12(3), 215233.
  • Aikenhead, G.(1994).What is STS in science teaching? InJ.Solomon &G.Aikenhead (Eds.),STS education: International perspectives on reform.New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Aikenhead, G.(1997).Toward a first nations cross-cultural science and technology curriculum.Science Education,81, 217238.
  • Aikenhead, G. S.(1985).Collective decision making in the social context of science.Science Education,69, 453475.
  • Aikenhead, G. S.(2000).Renegotiating the culture of school science. InR.Millar,J.Leach, &J.Osborne (Eds.),Improving science education: The contribution of researchBuckingham: Open University Press.
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science.(1989).Science for all Americans.Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science.(1993).Benchmarks for science literacy.New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Belenky, M. F.,Clinchy, B. M.,Goldberger, N. R., &Tarule, J. M.(1986).Women's ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind.New York: Basic Books.
  • Bell, R. L.(2003).Exploring the role of nature of science understanding in decision-making: Pipe dream or possibility? InD.L. Zeidler (Ed.),The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education.Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
  • Bell, R. L.(2004).Perusing Pandora's box: Exploring the what, when, and how of nature of science instruction, InL.Flick &N.Lederman (Eds.),Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education.Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Bell, R. L., &Lederman, N. G.(2003).Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technology based issues.Science Education,87(3), 352377.
  • Bell, R. L.,Lederman, N. G., &Abd-El-Khalick, F.(2000).Developing and acting upon one's conception of the nature of science: A follow-up study.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,37, 563581.
  • Berkowitz, M. W.(1997).The complete moral person: Anatomy and formation. In James M.DuBois, (Ed.), Moral issues in psychology: Personalist contributions to selected problems. New York: University Press of America.
  • Berkowitz, M. W.(1998).Finding common ground to study and implement character education: Integrating structure and content in moral education.Journal of Research in Education,8(1), 38.
  • Berkowitz, M., &Oser, F.(1985).Moral education: Theory and applications.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.
  • Berkowitz, M. W.,Oser, F., &Althof, W.(1987).The development of sociomoral discourse. InW. M.Kurtines &J. L.Gewitz (Eds.),Moral development through social interaction(pp. 337345).New York: Wiley.
  • Berkowitz, M. W., &Simmons, P.(2003).Integrating science education and character education: The role of peer discussion. In D. L.Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
  • Bingle, W. H., &Gaskell, P. J.(1994).Scientific literacy for decisionmaking and the social construction of scientific knowledge.Science Education,78(2), 185201.
  • Boyes, M. C., &Walker, L. J.(1988).Implications of cultural diversity for the universality claims of Kohlberg's theory of moral reasoning.Human Development,31, 4459.
  • Brickhouse, N. W.(2001).Embodying Science: A feminist perspective on learning.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38, 282295.
  • Bybee, Rodger (Ed.).(1985).Science–Technology–Society. In1985 NSTA yearbook.Washington: National Science Teachers Association.
  • Calabrese Barton, A.(1998a).Feminist science education.New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Calabrese Barton, A.(1998b).Teaching science with homeless children: Pedagogy, representation, and identity.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,35(4), 379394.
  • Carpendale, J. I., &Krebs, D. L.(1992).Situational variation in moral judgment: In a stage or on a stage?Journal of Youth and Adolescence,21, 203224.
  • Chiappetta, E. L., &Koballa, T. R.(2002).Science instruction in the middle and secondary schools(5th ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
  • Clark, C. M.(2003).Care of the soul in teacher education. Paper presented at the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education, New Orleans, LA.
  • Cobern, W. W.(1993).Contextual constructivism: The impact of culture on the learning and teaching of science. InK. G.Tobin (Ed.),The practice of constructivism in science education(pp. 5169).Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Cobern, W. W., &Loving, C. C.(2000).Defining “science'' in a multicultural world: Implications for science education.Science Education,85, 5067.
  • Cobern, W. W., &Loving, C. C.(2002).Investigation of preservice elementary teachers' thinking about science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39(10), 10161031.
  • Colby, A., &Kohlberg, L.(1987).The measurement of moral judgment.Vol. 2: Standard issue scoring manual. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Council of Ministers of Education Canada (CMEC) Pan Canadian Science Project.(1997).Common framework of science learning outcomes: K-12.Available at URL: http://www.qscc.qld.edu.au/kla.sose.publicatons.html.
  • Donenberg, G., &Hoffman, L.(1988).Gender differences in moral development.Sex Roles,18, 701717.
  • Driver, R.,Leach, J.,Millar, R., &Scott P.(1996).Young people's images of science.Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
  • Driver, R.,Newton, P., &Osborne, J.(2000).Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms.Science Education,84(3), 287312.
  • Endicott, L.,Bock, T., &Narvaez, D.(2002).Learning processes at the intersection of ethical and intercultural education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
  • Foster, M.(1995).African American teachers and culturally relevant pedagogy. In J. A.Banks & C. A.McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 570581). New York: Macmillan.
  • Fuglsang, L.(2001).Three perspective in STS in the policy context. In S. H.Cutcliffe & C.Mitcham (Eds.), Visions of STS: Counterpoints in science, technology, and science studies. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  • Gay, G.(2000).Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice.New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Gilligan, C.(1987).Moral orientation and moral development. In E.Kittay & D.Meyers (Eds.), Women and moral theory (pp. 1933). Totowa, NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.
  • Goodlad, J.(2003).Teaching what we hold sacred.Educational Leadership,61(4), 1821.
  • Gruen, L.(1994).Toward an ecofeminist moral epistemology. In K. J.Warren (Ed.), Ecological feminism, (pp. 120138). New York: Routledge.
  • Harding, S.(1998).Is science multicultural?: Postcolonialisms, feminisms, and epistemologies.Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
  • Hekman, S. J.(1995).Moral voices, moral selves: Carol Gilligan and feminist moral theory.University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
  • Hirsch, E. D., Jr.(1987).Cultural literacy: What every American needs to know.Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
  • Hodson, D.(1994).Seeking directions for change: The personalization and politicization of science education.Curriculum Studies,2, 7198.
  • Hodson, D.(2003).Time for action: Science education for an alternative future.International Journal of Science Education,25(6), 645670.
  • Hogan, K.(2002).Small groups' ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39, 341368.
  • Hollins, E. R., &Oliver, E. I.(1999).Pathways to school success: Culturally responsive teaching.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Howes, E. V.(2002).Connecting and science: Constructivism, feminism and science education reform.New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Huges, G.(2000).Marginalization of socioscientific material in science–technology–society science curricula: Some implication for gender inclusivity and curriculum reform.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,37(5), 426440.
  • Jenkins, E. W.(1990).Scientific literacy and school science education.School Science Review,71(256), 4351.
  • Jenkins, E. W.(1997).Towards a functional public understanding of science. In R.Levinson & J.Thomas (Eds.), Science today(pp. 137150). London: Routledge.
  • Jenkins, E. W.(2002).Linking school science education with action. In W. M.Toth & J.Desautels (Eds.), Science education as/for sociopolitical action. New York: Peter Lang.
  • Keefer, M. W.(2002).Designing reflections on practice: Helping teachers apply cognitive learning principles in an SFT—inquiry-based learning program. Interchange: A Quarterly Review of Education, 33(4), 395417.
  • Keefer, M. W.(2003).Moral reasoning and case-based approaches to ethical instruction in science. In D. L.Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
  • Keefer, M. W.,Zeitz, C. M., &Resnick, L. B.(2000).Judging the quality of peer-led student dialogues.Cognition and Instruction,18(1), 5583.
  • Kohlberg, L.(1986).A current statement on some theoretical issues. InS.Modgil &C.Modgil (Eds.),Lawrence Kohlberg: Consensus and controversy(pp. 485546).Philadelphia: The Falmer Press.
  • Kolstø, S. D.(2000).Consensus projects: Teaching science for citizenship.International Journal of Science Education,22(6), 645664.
  • Kolstø, S. D.(2001a).Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues.Science Education,85(3), 291310.
  • Kolstø, S. D.(2001b).‘To trust or not to trust,…’—pupils' ways of judging information encountered in a socio-scientific issue.International Journal of Science Education,23, 877901.
  • Korpan, C. A.,Bisanz, G. L.,Bisanz, J., &Henderson, J. M.(1997).Assessing literacy in science: Evaluation of scientific news briefs.Science Education,81, 515532.
  • Kozoll, R. H., &Osborne, M. D.(2004).Finding meaning in science: Lifeworld, identity, and self.Science Education,88: 157181.
  • Kuhn, D.(1991).The skills of argument.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Kuhn, D.(1993).Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking.Science Education,77, 319337.
  • Ladson-Billings, G.(1994).The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Latour, B.(1987).Science in action.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Laugksch, R. C.(2000).Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview.Science Education,84, 7194.
  • Lemke, J. L.(2001).Articulating communities: Sociocultural perspectives on science education.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38, 296316.
  • Levinson, R.(2003, March).Teaching bioethics in science: Crossing a bridge too far? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Loving, C. C.,Lowy, S. W., &Martin, C. (2003). Recognizing and solving ethical dilemmas in diverse science classrooms. In D. L.Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
  • Mastropieri, M. A., &Scruggs, T. E.(1992).Science for student with disabilities.Review of Educational Research,62, 377412.
  • McGinnis, J. R. (2000). Teaching science as inquiry for students with disabilities. In J.Minstrell & E.van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 425433). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
  • National Research Council.(1996).National science education standards.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • National Science Teachers Association.(1982).Science–technology–society: Science education for the 1980's.Washington, DC: National Science Teachers Association.
  • Newton, P.,Driver, R., &Osborne, J.(1999).The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science.International Journal of Science Education,21(5), 553576.
  • Noddings, N.(1984).Caring: A feminine approach to ethics and moral education.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  • Nucci, L. P. (1989). Challenging conventional wisdom about morality: The domain approach to values education. In L. P.Nucci (Ed.), Moral development and character education (pp. 183203). Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing.
  • Nucci, L. P.(2001)Education in the moral domain.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Partington, G.(1997).Cultural invariance and the denial of moral regression: A critique of Piaget and Kohlberg.International Journal of Social Education,11, 106119.
  • Pedretti, E.(1997).Septic tank crisis: A case study of science, technology and society education in an elementary schoolInternational Journal of Science Education,19(10), 12111230.
  • Pedretti, E.(2003). Teaching science, technology, society and environment (STSE) education: Preservice teachers' philosophical and pedagogical landscapes. In D. L.Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
  • Pedretti, E., &Hodson, D.(1995).From rhetoric to action: Implementing STS education through action research.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,32, 463485.
  • Plumwood, V.(1993).Ethics and the instrumentalising self. InFeminism and the mastery of nature(pp. 141164).New York: Routledge.Queensland School Curriculum Council (QSCC)(2001).Studies of society and environment.Available at URL: http://www.cmec.ca/science/framework/index.htm.
  • Quintanar-Sarellana, R.(1997). Culturally relevant teacher preparation and teachers' perceptions of the language and culture of linguistic minority students. In J. E.King, E. R.Hollins, & W. C.Hayman (Eds.), Preparing teachers for cultural diversity. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Ratcliffe, M.(1997).Pupil decision-making about socioscientific issues within the science curriculum.International Journal of Science Education,19(2), 167182.
  • Rest, J.,Narvaez,Bebeau, M. J., &Thoma, S. J.(1999).Postconventional moral thinking: A neo-Kohlbergian approach.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Roy, R.(1984).S-S/T/S Project: Teaching science via science, technology, and society material in the pre-college years.University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.
  • Ryder, J.(2001).Identifying science understanding for functional scientific literacy.Studies in Science Education,36, 146.
  • Sadler, T. D.(2004).Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,41, 513536.
  • Sadler, T. D.,Chambers, F. W., &Zeidler, D. L.(2004).Student conceptualizations of the nature of science in response to a socioscientific issue.International Journal of Science Education,26, 387409.
  • Sadler, T. D., &Zeidler, D. L.(2004).The morality of socioscientific issues construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas.Science Education,88(1), 427.
  • Sadler, T. D., &Zeidler, D. L.(2005).The significance of content knowledge for informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: Applying genetics knowledge to genetic engineering issues.Science Education,89, 7193.
  • Sadler, T. D., &Zeidler, D. L.(in press).Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision-making.Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
  • Seiler, G.(2001).Reversing the “standard” direction: Science emerging from the lives of African American students.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,38, 10001014.
  • Settelmaier, E.(2003, March).Dilemmas with dilemmas: Exploring the suitability of dilemma stories as a way of addressing ethical issues in science education. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Shamos, M. H.(1995).The myth of scientific literacy.New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
  • Simmons, M. L., &Zeidler, D. L.(2003).Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific issues. In D. L.Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Simonneaux, L.(2001).Role-play or debate to promote students' argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis.International Journal of Science Education,23, 903927.
  • Smith, M.(2004 June).Culturally responsive teaching strategies for Native students.Paper presented at the Integrating Mathematics and Science Education Research into Teaching Conference, University of Maine, Orono, ME.
  • Snarey, J. R.(1985).Cross-cultural universality of social-moral development: A critical review of Kohlbergian research.Psychological Bulletin,97, 202232.
  • Tate, William F.(1995).Returning to the root: A culturally relevant approach to mathematics pedagogy.Theory into Practice,34(3), 166173.
  • Tong, R.(1996).Feminist approaches to bioethics. In S. M.Wolf (Ed.), Feminism and bioethics: Beyond reproduction. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Toulmin, S.(1958).The uses of argument.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Trowbridge, L. W.,Bybee, R. W., &Powell, J. C.(2000).Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing scientific literacy(7th ed.).Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Tsai, C.(2000).The effects of STS-oriented instruction on female tenth graders' cognitive structure outcomes and the role of student scientific epistemological beliefs.International Journal of Science Education,22, 10991115.
  • Turiel, E.(1998).The development of morality. In W.Damon & N.Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 863932). New York: Wiley.
  • Vellom, P.(1999).Reasoning about data in middle school science.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,36(2), 179199.
  • Walker, K. A., &Zeidler, D. L.(2003, March).Students' understanding of the nature of science and their reasoning on socioscientific issues: A Web-based learning inquiry. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Wark, G., &Krebs, D. L.(1996).Gender and dilemma differences in real-life moral judgment.Developmental Psychology,32, 220230.
  • Yager, R. E.(1996).History of science/technology/society as reform in the United States. In R. E.Yager (Ed.), Science/technology/society as reform in science education. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  • Zeidler, D. L.(1984).Moral issues and social policy in science education: Closing the literacy gap.Science Education,68, 411419.
  • Zeidler, D. L.(1997).The central role of fallacious thinking in science education.Science Education,81, 483496.
  • Zeidler, D. L.(2001).Participating in program development: Standard F. In D.Siebert &W.McIntosh (Eds.), College pathways to the science education standards (pp. 1822). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Press.
  • Zeidler, D. L., &Keefer, M.(2003).The role of moral reasoning and the status of socioscientific issues in science education: Philosophical, psychological and pedagogical considerations. In D. L.Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • Zeidler, D. L.,Lederman, N. G., &Taylor, S. C.(1992).Fallacies and student discourse: Conceptualizing the role of critical thinking in science education.Science Education,76, 437450.
  • Zeidler, D. L.,Osborne, J.,Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Monk, M.(2003). The role of argument and fallacies during discourse about socioscientific issues. In D. L.Zeidler (Ed.), The role of moral reasoning on socioscientific issues and discourse in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
  • Zeidler, D. L., &Schafer, L. E.(1984).Identifying mediating factors of moral reasoning in science education.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,21(1), 115.
  • Zeidler, D. L.,Walker, K. A.,Ackett, W. A., &Simmons, M. L.(2002).Tangled up in views: Beliefs in the nature of science and responses to socioscientific dilemmas.Science Education,86(3), 343367.
  • Ziman, J.(1994).The rationale of STS education is in the approach. In J.Solomon & G.Aikenhead (Eds.), STS education: International perspectives on reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Zohar, A., &Nemet, F.(2002).Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics.Journal of Research in Science Teaching,39, 3562.