SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Aikenhead, G. S. (2006). Science education for everyday life. New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Agarwal, A., Deepinder, F., Sharma, R. K., Ranga, G., & Li, J. (2008). Effect of cell phone usage on semen analysis in men attending infertility clinic. Fertility and Sterility, 89, 124128.
  • Bimber, B., & Guston, D. (1995) Politics by the same means. In S.Jasanoff, G.Markle, J.Petersen, & T.Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 554571), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Brown, B. A. (2004). Discursive identity: Assimilation into the culture of science and its implications for minority students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 810834.
  • Bucchi, M., & Neresini, F. (2008). Science and public participation. In E. J.Hackett, O.Amsterdamska, M.Lynch, & J.Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technologies studies (pp. 449472). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Callon, M. (1986). Some elements for a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St-Brieuc Bay. In J.Law (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge? London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
  • Callon, M. (1999). The role of lay people in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge. Science, Technology, & Society, 4, 8194.
  • Callon, M., Lascoumes, P., & Barthe, Y. (2001). Agir dans un monde incertain. Essai sur la démocratie technique [Acting in an uncertain world; An essay on technical democracy]. Paris: Seuil.
  • Cross, R. T., & Price, R. F. (2002). Teaching controversial science for social responsibility: The case of food production. In W.-M.Roth & J.Désautels (Eds.), Science education as/for sociopolitical action (pp. 99123). New York: Peter Lang.
  • Epstein, S. (1996). Impure science: AIDS, activism, and the politics of knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Flyvberg, B. (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 219245.
  • Fountain, R., Désautels, J., Larochelle, M., & Daignault, J. (2002). Technoscientific literacy via virtual research collectives. Grant no. 410-2002-0243. Ottawa, Canada: Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.
  • Fourez, G. (1997). Scientific and technological literacy as a social practice. Social Studies of Science, 27, 903936.
  • Grace, M., & Ratcliffe, M. (2002). The science and values that young people draw upon to make decisions about biological conservation issues. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 11571169.
  • Haarala, C., Takio, F., Rintee, T., Laine, M., Koivisto, M., Revonsuo, A., et al. (2007). Pulsed and continuous wave mobile phone exposure over left versus right hemisphere: Effects on human cognitive function. Bioelectromagnetics, 28, 289295.
  • Hardell, L., Carlberg, M., Söderqvist, F., Hansson Mild, K., & Morgan, L. L. (2007). Long-term use of cellular phones and brain tumours—increased risk associated with use for >10 years. Occupational and Environmental Medecine, 64, 626632.
  • Hogan, K. (2002). Small groups' ecological reasoning while making an environmental management decision. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 341368.
  • Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., & Pereiro-Munoz, C. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal in Science Education, 24, 11711190.
  • Kelly, G. J., & Crawford, T. (1997). An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science. Science Education, 81, 533559.
  • Kolstoe, S. D. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85, 291310.
  • Kolstoe, S. D., Bungum, B. Arnesen, E., Isnes, A. Kristensen, T., Mathiassen, K., et al. (2006). Science students' critical examination of scientific information related to socioscientific issues. Science Education, 90, 632655.
  • 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.
  • Latour, B. (1988). The pasteurization of France. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published 1984)
  • Oftedal, G., Straume, A., Johnsson, A., & Stovner, L. J. (2007). Mobile phone headache: A double blind, sham-controlled provocation study. Cephalalgia, 27, 447455.
  • Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 9941020.
  • Oulton, C., Dillon, J., & Grace, M. M. (2004). Reconceptualizing the teaching of controversial issues. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 411423.
  • Pestre, D. (2006). Introduction aux science studies [Introduction to science studies]. Paris: La Découverte.
  • Potter, J. (1996). Representing reality: Discourse, rhetoric and social construction. London: Sage.
  • Pouliot, C. (2007). Appréhension d'une controverse sociotechnique et rapport aux experts scientifiques: une étude de cas [Students' apprehension of a sociotechnical controversy and their relationship to scientific experts: A case study]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Université Laval, Quebec, Canada.
  • Roth, W.-M., & Désautels, J. (2004). Educating for citizenship: Reappraising the role of science education. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 4, 127.
  • Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. (1998). Knowing, researching, and reporting science education: Lessons from science and technology studies. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 213235.
  • Roth, W.-M., McGinn, M. K., & Bowen, G. M. (1996). Applications of science and technology studies: Effecting change in science education. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 21, 454484.
  • 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., Barab, S. A., & Scott, B. (2007). What do students gain by engaging in socioscientific inquiry? Research in Science Education, 37, 371391.
  • Sadler, T. D., Chambers, F. W., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). Student conceptualizations of the nature of science response to a socioscientific issue. International Journal of Science, 26, 387409.
  • Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engineering dilemmas. Science Education, 88, 427.
  • Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Wynne, B. (1996). May the sheep safely graze? A reflexive view of the expert-lay knowledge divide. In S.Lash, B.Szerszynski, & B.Wynne (Eds.), Risk, environment and modernity: Towards a new ecology (pp. 4485). London: Sage.
  • Wynne, B. (2005). Reflexing complexity, post-genomic knowledge and reductionist return in public science. Theory, Culture & Society, 22, 6794.
  • Yin, R. K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., & Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscientific issues education. Science Education, 89, 357377.
  • 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, 343367.
  • Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 3562.