SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

REFERENCES

  • Anderson, C. W. (2007). Perspectives on science learning. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 330). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815843.
  • Corcoran, T., Mosher, F. A., & Rogat, A. (2009). Learning progressions in science: An evidence-based approach to reform. CPRE Research Report # RR-63: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
  • Dewey, J. (1996). Experience and education. In L. Hickman (Ed.), Collected works of John Dewey, 1882–1953: The electronic edition (Later Works, Volume 13). Charlottesville, VA: InteLex Corporation. (Original work published 1938)
  • diSessa, A. A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research. In K. R. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265281). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N. M., & Esterly, J. B. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28, 843900.
  • diSessa, A. A., & Sherin, B. L. (1998). What changes in conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 20(10), 11551191.
  • Duncan, R. G., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2009). Learning progressions: Aligning curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 606609.
  • Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992a). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electric circuits and oxidation-reduction equations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(2), 121142.
  • Garnett, P. J., & Treagust, D. F. (1992b). Conceptual difficulties experienced by senior high school students of electrochemistry: Electrochemical (galvanic) and electrolytic cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(10), 10791099.
  • Garrison, J. W. (1995). Deweyan pragmatism and the epistemology of contemporary social constructivism. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 716740.
  • Goodwin, C. (1993). The blackness of black: Color categories as situated practice. In L. B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo, & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools, and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (Vol. 160, pp. 111140). Berlin, Germany: Springer, in cooperation with NATO Scientific Affairs Division.
  • Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational Researcher, 26(1), 517.
  • Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In K. R. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 7996). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hamza, K. M., & Wickman, P.-O. (2008). Describing and analyzing learning in action: An empirical study of the importance of misconceptions in learning science. Science Education, 92(1), 141164.
  • Hamza, K. M., & Wickman, P.-O. (2009). Beyond explanations: What else do students need to understand science? Science Education, 93, 10261049.
  • Hwang, S., & Roth, W.-M. (2007). From designing artifacts to learning science: A dialectical perspective. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(3), 423450.
  • Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007a). The roles of aesthetic experience in elementary school science. Research in Science Education, 38, 4565.
  • Jakobson, B., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007b). Transformation through language use: Children's spontaneous metaphors in elementary school science. Science & Education, 16, 267289.
  • Jakobsson, A., Mäkitalo, Å., & Säljö, R. (2009). Conceptions of knowledge in research on students' understanding of the greenhouse effect: Methodological positions and their consequences for representations of knowing. Science Education, 93, 978995.
  • Jiménez-Aleixandre, M.-P., & Reigosa, C. (2006). Contextualizing practices across epistemic levels in the chemistry laboratory. Science Education, 90(4), 707733.
  • Kelly, G. J. (2004). Discourse, description, and science education. In R. Yerrick (Ed.), Establishing scientific classroom discourse communities: Multiple voices of teaching and learning research (pp. 79104). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Kelly, G. J., Brown, C., & Crawford, T. (2000). Experiments, contingencies, and curriculum: Providing opportunities for learning through improvisation in science teaching. Science Education, 84(5), 624657.
  • Kelly, G. J., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practices through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883.
  • Kelly, G. J., & Green, J. (1998). The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction. In B. Guzzetti & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change: Multiple ways to understand knowing and learning in a complex world (pp. 145181). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Kelly, G. J., McDonald, S., & Wickman, P. O. (2012). Science learning and epistemology. In K. Tobin, B. J. Fraser, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
  • Kirschner, P., & Huisman, W. (1998). “Dry laboratories” in science education: Computer-based practical work. International Journal of Science Education, 20(6), 665682.
  • Kruckeberg, R. (2006). A Deweyan perspective on science education: Constructivism, experience, and why we learn science. Science & Education, 15(1), 130.
  • Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Westport, CT: Ablex.
  • Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E., & Östman, L. (2006). Teaching and learning in the science classroom: The interplay between teachers' epistemological moves and students' practical epistemology. Science Education, 90(1), 148163.
  • Ligozat, F., Wickman, P. O., & Hamza, K. (2011). Using practical epistemology analysis to study the teacher's and students' joint action in the mathematics classroom. Paper presented at Seventh Congress of the European Society for Research in Mathematics Education (CERME 7), Rzezov, Poland.
  • Lindwall, O., & Lymer, G. (2008). The dark matter of lab work: Illuminating the negotiation of disciplined perception in mechanics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(2), 180224.
  • Lundegård, I., & Wickman, P.-O. (2007). Conflicts of interest: An indispensable element of education for sustainable development. Environmental Education Research, 13(1), 115.
  • Machamer, P., Darden, L., & Craver, C. F. (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67(1), 125.
  • Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we us language to think together. London: Routledge.
  • Mercer, N. (2008). Changing our minds: A commentary on “conceptual change–A discussion of theoretical, methodological and practical challenges for science education.” Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(2), 351362.
  • Mortimer, E. F., & Scott, P. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.
  • Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: What have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 112.
  • Ritchie, S. M. (1998). The teacher's role in the transformation of students' understanding. Research in Science Education, 28(2), 169185.
  • Ritchie, S. M. (1999). The craft of intervention: A personal practical theory for a teacher's within-group interactions. Science Education, 83(2), 213231.
  • Roberts, D. A. (1994). Developing the concept of “curriculum emphases” in science education. Nordisk Pedagogik, 1, 1024.
  • Rorty, R. (1991). Representation, social practice, and truth. In R. Rorty (Ed.), Objectivity relativism and truth (Vol. 1, pp. 150161). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  • Roth, W. M. (1999). Discourse and agency in school science laboratories. Discourse Processes, 28(1), 2760.
  • Roth, W.-M., & Hwang, S. (2006). On the relation of abstract and concrete in scientists' graph interpretations: A case study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 25(4), 318333.
  • Russ, R. S., Scherr, R. E., Hammer, D., & Mikeska, J. (2008). Recognizing mechanistic reasoning in student scientific inquiry: A framework for discourse analysis developed from philosophy of science. Science Education, 92(3), 499525.
  • Säljö, R., & Bergqvist, K. (1993). Seeing the light: Discourse and practice in the optics lab. In L. B. Resnick, R. Säljö, C. Pontecorvo, & B. Burge (Eds.), Discourse, tools, and reasoning: Essays on situated cognition (Vol. 160, pp. 385405). Berlin, Germany: Springer, in cooperation with NATO Scientific Affairs Division.
  • Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students' practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4), 634656.
  • Sanger, M. J., & Greenbowe, T. J. (1997). Common student misconceptions in electrochemistry: Galvanic, electrolytic, and concentration cells. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(4), 377398.
  • Schoultz, J., Säljö, R., & Wyndhamn, J. (2001a). Conceptual knowledge in talk and text: What does it take to understand a science question? Instructional Science, 29(3), 213236.
  • Schoultz, J., Säljö, R., & Wyndhamn, J. (2001b). Heavenly talk: Discourse, artifacts, and children's understanding of elementary astronomy. Human Development, 44(2/3), 103118.
  • Schwab, J. J. (1978). The nature of scientific knowledge as related to liberal education. In I. Westbury & N. J. Wilkof (Eds.), Science, curriculum, and liberal education: Selected essays. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
  • Scott, P., Asoko, H., & Leach, J. (2007). Student conceptions and conceptual learning in science. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 3156). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Sensevy, G., Schubauer-Leoni, M.-L., Mercier, A., Ligozat, F., & Perrot, G. (2005). An attempt to model the teacher's action in the mathematics class. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 59(1–3), 153181.
  • Sensevy, G., Tiberghien, A., Santini, J., Laube, S., & Griggs, P. (2008). An epistemological approach to modeling: Cases studies and implications for science teaching. Science Education, 92(3), 424446.
  • Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 413.
  • Sharpe, T. (2006). “Unpacking” scaffolding: Identifying discourse and multimodal strategies that support learning. Language & Education: An International Journal, 20(3), 211231.
  • Smith, C. L., Wiser, M., Anderson, C. W., & Krajcik, J. (2006). Implications of research on children's learning for standards and assessment: A proposed learning progression for matter and the atomic-molecular theory. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 4(1–2), 198.
  • Treagust, D. F., & Duit, R. (2008). Conceptual change: A discussion of theoretical, methodological and practical challenges for science education. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(2), 297328.
  • van Geert, P., & Steenbeek, H. (2005). The dynamics of scaffolding. New Ideas in Psychology, 23(3), 115128.
  • Wells, G. (2008). Learning to use scientific concepts. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(2), 329350.
  • Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • White, R. T. (1996). The link between the laboratory and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7), 761773.
  • Wickman, P.-O. (2004). The practical epistemologies of the classroom: A study of laboratory work. Science Education, 88, 325344.
  • Wickman, P.-O. (2006). Aesthetic experience in science education: Learning and meaning-making as situated talk and action. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Wickman, P.-O., & Ligozat, F. (2010). Scientific literacy as action: Consequences for content progression. In C. Linder, L. Östman, D. A. Roberts, P. O. Wickman, & G. Erickson (Eds.), Exploring the landscape of scientific literacy (pp. 145159). London: Routledge.
  • Wickman, P.-O., & Östman, L. (2002). Learning as discourse change: A sociocultural mechanism. Science Education, 86, 601623.
  • Wong, D., & Pugh, K. (2001). Learning science: A Deweyan perspective. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 317336.
  • Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89100.