SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2006). Over and over again: College students' views of nature of science. In L.B.Flick & N.G.Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and nature of science (pp. 389425). Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), Project 2061. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Barak, M., Ben-Chaim, D., & Zoller, U. (2007). Purposely teaching for the promotion of higher-order thinking skills: A case of critical thinking. Research in Science Education, 37, 353369.
  • Berg, C.A.R., Bergendahl, V.C.B., Lundberg, B.K.S., & Tibell, L.A.E. (2003). Benefiting from an open-ended experiment? A comparison of attitudes to, and outcomes of, an expository versus an open-inquiry version of the same experiment. International Journal of Science Education, 25(3), 351372.
  • Bybee, R.W., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (2001). National science education standards as a catalyst for change: The essential role of professional development. In J.Rhoton & P.Bowers (Eds.), Professional development planning and design Reston (pp. 112). VA: NSTA Press.
  • Carter, L. (2008). Globalisation and science education: The implication of science in new economy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 617633.
  • Castelfranchi, C., & Lorini, E. (2003). Cognitive Anatomy and Functions of Expectations. Paper presented in IJCAI'03 workshop on cognitive modeling of agents and multi-agent interactions, Acapulco, Mexico.
  • Chin, C., & Chia, L. (2004). Problem-based learning: Using students' questions to drive knowledge construction. Science Education, 88(5), 707727.
  • Chin, C., & Chia, L. (2006). Problem-based learning: Using ill-structured problems in biology project work. Science Education, 90(1), 4467.
  • Crawford, B.A. (2000). Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916937.
  • Crawford, B.A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613642.
  • Crawford, B.A., Krajcik, J.S., & Marx, R.W. (1999). Elements of a community of learners in a middle school science classroom. Science Education, 83(3), 701723.
  • Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N.K.Denzin & Y.S.Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Dori, Y.J. (2006). The inquiry approach in computerized learning environments: Implications on chemistry understanding levels and higher order thinking skills. In A.Zohar (Ed.), Taking the inquiry road: An ongoing challenge (pp. 279307). Jerusalem, Israel: Magnes Press, The Hebrew University. Publishing Company. (in Hebrew).
  • FlickL.B., & LedermanN.G. (Eds.). (2006). Scientific inquiry and nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education. The Netherlands: Springer.
  • Furtak, E.M. (2006). The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90(3), 453467.
  • Gallagher, J.J., & Tobin, K.G. (1987). Teacher management and student engagement in high school science. Science Education, 71(4), 535555.
  • Germann, P.J., Haskins, S., & Auls, S. (1996). Analysis of nine high school biology laboratory manuals: Promoting scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 475499.
  • Herron, M.D. (1971). The nature of scientific enquiry. School Review, 79, 171212.
  • Israeli Ministry of Education. (2006). Syllabus of Biological Studies (10th-12th grade) (in Hebrew).
  • Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y.J. (2008). Question posing, inquiry, and modeling skills of high school chemistry students in the case-based computerized laboratory environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education. Retrieved Feb 11, 2009, from http://www.springerlink.com/content/78803714871r16n4/.
  • Khishfe, R., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551578.
  • Krajcik, J., Czerniak, C., & Berger, C. (1998). Teaching children science: A project-based approach. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
  • Krajcik, J.S., Czerniak, C., & Berger, C. (2002). Teaching science in elementary and middle school classrooms: A project-based approach. 2nd edition. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
  • Krystyniak, R.A., & Heikkinen, H.W. (2007). Analysis of verbal interactions during an extended, open-inquiry general chemistry laboratory investigation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(8), 11601186.
  • Lunsford, E., Melear, C.T., Roth, W.-M., Perkins, M., & Hickok, L.G. (2007). Proliferation of inscriptions and transformations among preservice science teachers engaged in authentic science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 538564.
  • Lazarowitz, R. (2007). High school biology curricula development: Implementation, teaching, and evaluation from the 20th to the 21st century. In S.K.Abell & N.G.Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education (pp. 561599). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • McGlashan, P., Gasser, K., Dow, P., Hartney, D., & Rogers, B. (2007). Outdoor inquiries-Taking science investigations outside the classroom. Heinemann Portsmouth, NH. Retrieved August 19, 2008, from http://books.heinemann.com/shared/onlineresources/E01120/introduction.pdf.
  • Michalsky, T., Zion, M., & Mevarech, Z.R. (2007). Developing students' metacognitive awareness in asynchronous learning networks in comparison to face-to-face discussion groups. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(4), 421450.
  • MillarR., & OsbourneJ.F. (Eds.). (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: Kings College London, School of Education.
  • MinstrellJ., & van ZeeE.H. (Eds.). (2000). Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
  • Mooney, S.J. (2006). A simple group work approach for effective field work: A soil sciences case study. Journal of Geoscience Education, 54(1), 7479.
  • National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the National Science education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • OlsonS., & Loucks-HorsleyS. (Eds.). (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Orion, N., & Hofstein, A. (1994). Factors that influence learning during a scientific field trip in a natural environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 10971119.
  • Orion, N., Hofstein, A., Tamir, P., & Giddings, G.J. (1997). Development and validation of an instrument for assessing the learning environment of outdoor science activities. Science Education, 81(2), 161171.
  • Palmer, D.H. (2009). Student interest generated during an inquiry skills lesson. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 147165.
  • Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Quintana, C., Zhang, X., & Krajcik, J. (2005). A framework for supporting metacognitive aspects of on-line inquiry through software-based scaffolding. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 235244.
  • Roberts, R. (2001). Procedural understanding in biology: Thinking behind the doing. Journal of Biological Education, 35(3), 113117.
  • Roberts, R., & Gott, R. (1999). Procedural understanding: Its place in the biology curriculum. School Science Reviews, 81, 1925.
  • Roberts, R., & Gott, R. (2003). Assessment of biology investigations. Journal of Biological Education, 37(3), 114121.
  • Roth, W.-M. (1994). Experimenting in a constructivist high school physics laboratory. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 197223.
  • Roth, W.-M. (1999). Scientific research expertise from middle school to professional practice. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Quebec, Montreal.
  • Sabar, N. (1999). Qualitative research in teaching and learning. Tel Aviv: Modan (in Hebrew).
  • Schwab, J.J. (1962). The teaching of science as inquiry. In J.J.Schwab & P.F.Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science (pp. 3103). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Shkedi, A. (2003). Words of meaning. Qualitative research—Theory and practice. Tel-Aviv: Ramot. (in Hebrew).
  • Tabak, I., Sandoval, W.A., Smith, B.K., Agganis, A., Baumgartner, E., & Reiser, B.J. (1995). Supporting collaborative guided inquiry in a learning environment for biology. In J.L.Schnase & E.L.Cunnius (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL‘95: The first international conference on computer support for collaborative learning (pp. 362366). Bloomington, IN: Erlbaum.
  • Tamir, P., Nussinovitz, R., & Friedler, Y. (1982). A practical tests assessment inventory. Journal of Biological Education, 16, 4250.
  • Tamir, P., Stavy, R., & Ratner, N. (1998). Teaching science by inquiry: Assessment and learning. Journal of Biological Education, 33(1), 2732.
  • Trautmann, N., MaKinster, J., & Avery, L. (2004). What makes inquiry so hard? (and why is it worth it?). Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
  • Woods, P. (1996). Researching the art of teaching: Ethnography for educational use. London: Routledge.
  • Yen, C., & Huang, S. (2001). Authentic learning about Tree Frogs by preservice biology teachers in open-inquiry research settings. Proceedings of the National Science Council, Republic of China, ROC(D), 11(1), 110. Retrieved Feb 11, 2009, from http://nr.stpi.org.tw/ejournal/proceedingD/v11n1/1-10.pdf.
  • Yerrick, R.K. (2000). Lower track science students’ argumentation and open inquiry instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 807838.
  • Zion, M. (2007). Online forums scaffold students experiencing open and guided inquiry process. Paper presented at the ESERA (The European Science Education Research Association) International Conference, MalmÖ, Sweden.
  • Zion, M., Cohen, S., & Amir, R. (2007). The spectrum of dynamic inquiry teaching practices. Research in Science Education, 37(4), 423447.
  • Zion, M., & Sadeh, I. (2007). Curiosity and open inquiry learning. Journal of Biological Education, 41(4), 162168.
  • Zion, M., Shapira, D., Slezak, M., Link, E., Bashan, N., Brumer, M., Orian, T., Nussinovitch, R., Agrest, B., & Mendelovici, R. (2004a). Biomind—A new biology curriculum that enables authentic inquiry learning. Journal of Biological Education, 38(2), 5967.
  • Zion, M., & Slezak, M. (2005). It takes two to tango: In dynamic inquiry, the self-directed student acts in association with the facilitating teacher. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 875894.
  • Zion, M., Slezak, M., Shapira, D., Link, E., Bashan, N., Brumer, M., Orian, T., Nussinovitch, R., Court, D., Agrest, B., Mendelovici, R., & Valanides, N. (2004b). Dynamic, open inquiry in biology learning. Science Education, 88, 728753.