SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (in press). Modeling science classrooms after scientific laboratories: Sketching some affordances and constraints drawn from examining underlying assumptions. In R. A.Duschl & R. E.Grandy (Eds.), Establishing a consensus agenda for K-12 science inquiry. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense.
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2004). Learning about nature of science as conceptual change: Factors that mediate the development of preservice elementary teachers' views of nature of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785810.
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Akerson, V. L. (2006, April). The influence of training in metacognitive strategies on preservice elementary teachers' conceptions of nature of science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
  • 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(4), 417436.
  • Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665701.
  • Aikenhead, G. S., & Jegede, O. J. (1999). Cross-cultural science education: A cognitive explanation of a cultural phenomenon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(3), 269287.
  • Akerson, V. L., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2003). Teaching elements of nature of science: A yearlong case study of a fourth grade teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 10251049.
  • Akerson, V. L., Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a reflective explicit activity-based approach on elementary teachers' conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295317.
  • Alsop, S., & Watts, M. (1997). Sources from a Somerset village: A model for informal learning about radiation and radioactivity. Science Education, 81, 633650.
  • Bauersfeld, H. (1992). Classroom cultures from a social constructivist's perspective. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 23, 467481.
  • Benton, T., & Craib, I. (2001). Philosophy of social science: The philosophical foundation of social thought. New York: Palgrave.
  • Bettencourt, A. (1993). The construction of knowledge: A radical constructivist view. In K.Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 3950). Washington, DC: AAAS Press.
  • Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34, 315.
  • Brewer, W. F., & Chinn, C. A. (1994). The theory-ladenness of data: An experimental demonstration. In A.Ram & K.Eiselt (Eds.), Proceedings of the sixteenth annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 6165). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Chan, C., Burtis, J., & Bereiter (1997). Knowledge building as a mediator of conflict in conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 15(1), 140.
  • Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 1320.
  • Cobern, W. W. (1996). Worldview theory and conceptual change in science education. Science Education, 80(5), 579610.
  • Costa, V. B. (1995). When science is “another world”: Relationships between worlds of family, friends, school, and science. Science Education, 79(3), 313333.
  • Demastes-Southerland, S., Good, R., & Peebles, P. (1995). Students' conceptual ecologies and the process of conceptual change in evolution. Science Education, 79(6), 637666.
  • diSessa, A. A. (2002). Why “conceptual ecology” is a good idea. In M.Limon & M.Lucia (Eds.), Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (pp. 2960). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • Dressman, M. (2005, April). Other people's theories in qualitative literacy research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
  • Dreyfus, A., Jungwirth, E., & Eliovitch, R. (1990). Applying the “cognitive conflict” strategy for conceptual change—Some implications, difficulties, and problems. Science Education, 74(5), 555569.
  • Duhem, P. (1954). The aim and structure of physical theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • Ernest, P. (1991). The philosophy of mathematics education. London: Falmer Press.
  • Gess-Newsome, J. (2002, June). What is a theoretical framework and how will I know if I have one? Invited address to the C&I Doctoral Student Forum, College of Education, Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.
  • Hewson, P. W. (1981). A conceptual change approach to learning science. European Journal of Science Education, 3(4), 383396.
  • Hewson, P. W., Beeth, M. E., & Thorley, N. R. (1998). Teaching for conceptual change. In B. J.Fraser & K. G.Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 199218). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • Johnston, A., Southerland, S. A., & Sowell, S. (2006). Dissatisfied with the fruitfulness of “learning ecologies.” Science Education, 90(5), 907911.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The essential tension: Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  • Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I.Lakatos & A.Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91196). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Matthews, M. R. (1993). Old wine in new bottles: A problem with constructivist epistemology. In H.Alexander (Ed.), Proceedings of the forty-eighth annual meeting of the Philosophy of Education Society (pp. 303311). Urbana, IL: Philosophy of Education Society.
  • Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (1998). Constructivism and science education: A philosophical examination. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
  • Niaz, M., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Benarroch, A., Cardellini, L., Laburú, C. E., Marín, N., et al. (2003). Constructivism: Defense or a continual critical appraisal: A response to Gil-Pérez et al. Science & Education, 12, 787797.
  • Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24(7), 512.
  • Pines, A. L., & West, L. H. (1986). Conceptual understanding and science learning: An interpretation of research within a sources-of-knowledge framework. Science Education, 70, 583604.
  • Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63(2), 167199.
  • Popper, K. R. (1993). Normal science and its dangers. In I.Lakatos & A.Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 5158). London: Cambridge University Press. (First published 1970).
  • Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211227.
  • Scott, P. H., Asoko, H. M., & Driver, R. H. (1992). Teaching for conceptual change: A review of strategies. In R.Duit, F.Goldberg, & H.Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 310329). Kiel, Germany: Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel.
  • Shepardson, D. P., & Moje, E. B. (1999). The role of anomalous data in restructuring fourth graders' frameworks for understanding electric circuits. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 7794.
  • Solomon, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupils' understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14, 6382.
  • Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. A.Duschl & R. J.Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice (pp. 147176). New York: State University of New York Press.
  • Suppe, F. (Ed.). (1977). The structure of scientific theories (2nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
  • Thompson, P. W. (1995). Constructivism, cybernetics, and information processing: Implications for research on mathematical learning. In L. P.Steffe & J.Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 123134). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Tobin, K., & Tippins, D. (1993). Constructivism as a referent for teaching and learning. In K.Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp. 321). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Tyson, L. M., Venville, G. J., Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1997). A multidimensional framework for interpreting conceptual change events in the classroom. Science Education, 81(4), 387404.
  • Watkins, J. (1993). Against ‘normal science.’ In I.Lakatos & A.Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 2537). London: Cambridge University Press. (First published 1970).
  • von Glasersfeld, E. (1990). An exposition of constructivism: Why some like it radical. In R. B.Davis, C. A.Maher, & N.Noddings (Eds.), Constructivist views on the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 1929). Reston, VA: NCTM.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.