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.
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 10571095.
  • Aikenhead, G. (1973). The measurement of high-school students' knowledge about science and scientists. Science Education, 57, 539549.
  • Alters, B. J. (1997). Whose nature of science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(1), 3955.
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Barab, S. A., & Hay, K. (2001). Doing science at the elbows of scientists: Issues related to the scientist apprentice camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 70102.
  • Bell, R. L., Blair, L. M., Crawford, B. A., & Lederman, N. G. (2003). Just do it? Impact of a science apprenticeship program on high-school students' understanding of the nature of science and scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(3), 487509.
  • 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, 352377.
  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher; 18(1), 3242.
  • Carey, S., Evans, R., Honda, M., Unger, C., & Jay, E. (1989). An experiment is when you try and see if it works: Middle school conception of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 514529.
  • Carey, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28(3), 235251.
  • Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Quantifying qualitative analysis of verbal protocol data. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(3), 271315.
  • Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175218.
  • Chinn, C. A., & Samarapungavan, A. (2005). Toward a broader conceptualization of epistemology in science education. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eighth International History, Philosophy, Sociology, and Science Conference. University of Leeds, England.
  • Conant, J. B. (1957). The overthrow of the phlogiston theory. The chemical revolution of 1775–1789. In J. B.Conant & L. K.Nash (Eds.), Harvard case histories in experimental science (pp. 67115). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Curd, M., & Cover, J. A. (Eds.). (1998). Philosophy of science: The central issues. New York: Wiley.
  • Del Carlo, D., & Bodner, G. M. (2004). Students' perceptions of academic dishonesty in the chemistry classroom laboratory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(1), 4764.
  • Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R.J.Sternberg & J.Davidson (Eds.), Mechanisms of insight (pp. 365395). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Duschl, R. A. (1988). Abandoning the scientistic legacy of science education. Science Education, 72, 5162.
  • Duschl, R. A. (2000). Making the nature of science explicit. In R.Millar, J.Leach, & J.Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education: The contribution of research (pp. 187206). Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
  • Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Goldman, A. (1986). Epistemology and cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Goodman, N. (1983). Fact, fiction, and forecast. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive engagement versus traditional methods: A six thousand student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66, 6474.
  • Hegarty-Hazel, E. (1990). The student laboratory and the science curriculum. London: Routledge.
  • Hodson, D. (1985). Philosophy of science and science education. Studies in Science Education, 12, 2557.
  • Hodson, D. (1988). Towards a philosophically more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72, 1940.
  • Hodson, D. (1993). Re-thinking old ways: Towards a more critical approach to practical work in school science. Studies in Science Education, 22, 85142.
  • Hofer, B., & Pintrich, P. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67(1), 88140.
  • Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students' knowledge about the nature of science. Science & Education, 84(1), 5170.
  • Hollander, M., & Wolfe, D. A. (1999). Nonparametric statistical methods (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
  • Husserl, E. (1973). Experience and judgment (J. S. Churchill & K. Ameriks, Transl.). London: Routledge.
  • Kitcher, P. (1992). The naturalists' return. Philosophical Review, 101, 53114.
  • Kitcher, P. (1993). The advancement of science: Science without legend, objectivity without illusions. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredericks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Middle school students' initial attempts at inquiry in project-based science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313350.
  • Kruskal, W. H., & Wallis, W. A. (1952). Use of ranks in one-criterion variance analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47(260), 583621.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (2000). The road since structure: Philosophical essays, 1970–1993 (J.Conant & J.Haugeland, Eds.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
  • Laudan, L. (1984). Science and values. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
  • Laudan, L. (1990). Science and relativism: Some key controversies in the philosophy of science. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.
  • Laudan, L., Donovan, A., Laudan, R., Barker, P., Brown, H., Leptn, J., Thagard, P., & Wykstra, S. (1986). Scientific change: Philosophical models and historical research. Synthese, 69, 141223.
  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Lawson, A. E. (2000). The generality of hypothetico-deductive reasoning: Making scientific reasoning explicit. The American Biology Teacher, 62(7), 482495.
  • Leach, J., Hind, R., & Ryder, J. (2003). Designing and evaluating short interventions about the epistemology of science in high school science classrooms. Science Education, 87, 831848.
  • Leach, J., Millar, R., Ryder, J., & Séré, G. M. (2000). Epistemological understanding in science learning: Consistency of representation across contexts. Learning and Instruction, 10(6), 497527.
  • Lederman, N. G. (1986). Students' and teachers' understanding of the nature of science: A reassessment. School Science and Mathematics, 86, 9199.
  • Lederman, N. G., & O'Malley, M. (1990). Students' perceptions of tentativeness in science: Development, use, and sources of change. Science Education, 74, 225239.
  • Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners' conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(6), 497521.
  • Linn, M. C., & Songer, N. B. (1993). How do students make sense of science? Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39(1), 4773.
  • Longino, H. (1990). Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Nersessian, N. (1984). Faraday to Einstein: Constructing meaning in scientific theories. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Wilson.
  • Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.
  • Popper, K. (1972). Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Quine, W. V. (1970). Philosophy of logic. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  • Royuk, B., & Brooks, D. W. (2003). Cookbook procedures in MBL physics exercises. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(3), 317324.
  • Ryder, J., & Leach, J. (1999). University science students' experiences of investigative project work and their images of science. International Journal of Science Education, 21(9), 945956.
  • Ryder, J., Leach, J., & Driver, R. (1999). Undergraduate science students' images of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(2), 201219.
  • Sahdra, B., & Thagard, P. (2003). Procedural knowledge in molecular biology. Philosophical Psychology, 16, 477498.
  • Samarapungavan, A. (1992, April). Scientists' conceptions of science: A study of epistemic beliefs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
  • Samarapungavan, A., & Westby, E. L., & Bodner, G. M. (1997, April). Scientist as engineers: Epistemic beliefs and values in the applied sciences. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
  • Samarapungavan, A., & Wiers, R. (1997). Children's thoughts on the origin of species: A study of explanatory coherence. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 147177.
  • Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 498504.
  • Schommer, M. (1993). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 406411.
  • Seehausen, O., & van Alphen, J. J. M. (1998). The effect of male coloration on female choices in closely related Lake Victoria cichlids (Haplochromis nyererei complex). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 42, 18.
  • Smith, C. L., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Hennessy, M. G. (2000). Sixth grade students' epistemologies of science: The impact of school science experiences on epistemological development. Cognition & Instruction, 18(3), 349422.
  • Steele, R. G. D. (1960). A rank sum test for comparing all pairs of treatments. Technometrics, 2, 197207.
  • 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.
  • Thagard, P. (1990). The conceptual structure of the chemical revolution. Philosophy of Science, 57, 183209.
  • Thagard, P. (2003). Pathways to biomedical discovery. Philosophy of Science, 70, 235254.
  • Thagard, P. (2004). Rationality and science. In A.Mele & P.Rawlings (Eds.), Handbook of rationality (pp. 363379). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  • Tobin, K., & Gallagher, J. J. (1987). What happens in high school science classrooms? Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19, 549560.
  • Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535585.
  • Westby, E. L. (2003). The influence of disciplinary expertise on epistemic beliefs in chemistry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
  • Westby, E., Samarapungavan, A., & Bodner, G. M. (2000, April). Strategic decision making about the direction of research programs: A comparison of decision making by chemistry graduate students and research faculty in applied chemistry. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.