• Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999). All other things being equal: Children's acquisition of the control of variables strategy. Child Development, 70(5), 10981120.
  • Duschl, R., & Grandy, R. (2005). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Framing the debates. Unpublished manuscript, Rice University, Houston, TX.
  • Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 7586.
  • Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15, 661667.
    Direct Link:
  • Kuhn, D. (1995). Microgenetic study of change: What has it told us? Psychological Science, 6, 133139.
    Direct Link:
  • Kuhn, D. (2001). Why development does (and doesn't) occur: Evidence from the domain of inductive reasoning. In R.Siegler & J.McClelland (Eds.), Mechanisms of cognitive development: Neural and behavioral perspectives Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Kuhn, D., & Dean, D. (2005). Is developing scientific thinking all about learning to control variables? Psychological Science, 16, 866870.
    Direct Link:
  • Kuhn, D., & Franklin, S. (2006). The second decade: What develops (and how)? In W.Damon & R.Lerner (Series Eds.), D.Kuhn & R.Siegler (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2. Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  • Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59, 1419.
  • Metz, K. (2004). Children's understanding of scientific inquiry: Their conceptualization of uncertainty in investigations of their own design. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 219290.
  • National Research Council (1996). The National Science Education Standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
  • Reiser, B. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 273304.
  • Rittle-Johnson, B. (2006). Promoting transfer: Effects of self-explanation and direct instruction. Child Development, 77, 115.
  • Sandoval, W. (2005). Understanding students' practical epistemologies and their influence. Science Education, 89, 634656.
  • Siegler, R. (2006). Microgenetic studies of learning. In W.Damon & R.Lerner (Series Eds.), D.Kuhn & R.Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2 Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  • Siegler, R., & Crowley, K. (1991). The microgenetic method: A direct means for studying cognitive development. American Psychologist, 46(6), 606620.
  • White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (2005). A theoretical framework and approach for fostering metacognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 40, 211223.
  • Zimmerman, C. (2006). The development of scientific reasoning skills: What psychologists contribute to an understanding of elementary science learning. Final draft of a report to the National Research Council Committee on Science Learning Kindergarten through Eighth Grade. Washington, DC: National Research Council.