1 |
Linn, M. C. (1992). The computer as learning partner: Can computer tools teach science. In K. Sheingold, L. G. Robert & S. M. Malcolm (Eds.). This year in school science, 1991: Technology for Teaching and Learning, pp. 31-69
|
2 |
McComas, W. F. (1996). Ten myths of science: Reexamining what we think we know about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 96(1), 10-15
DOI
|
3 |
National Society for the Study of Education. (1947). Science education in American schools: Forty sixth yearbook of the NSSE. Chicago, IL.: University of Chicago Press
|
4 |
Reiff, R., Harwood, W. S., & Phillipson, T. (2002). A scientific method based upon research scientists' conception of scientific inquiry. Paper presented at the AETS, Charlotte, NC
|
5 |
Roth, W. M. (1996). Teacher questioning in an open-inquiry learning environment: interactions of context, content, and student responses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 709-736
DOI
ScienceOn
|
6 |
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1992). Text-based and knowledge-based questioning by children. Cognition & Instruction, 9, 177-199
DOI
ScienceOn
|
7 |
Tweney, R. D. (1985). Faraday's discovery of induction: A cognitive approach. In D. Gooding & F. James(Eds.), Faraday rediscovered. New York: Stockton Press
|
8 |
White, Y. B., & Frederiksen, R. J. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition & Instruction, 16(1), 3-118
DOI
ScienceOn
|
9 |
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York, NY: Oxford University Press
|
10 |
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedure, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education, (pp.289-325) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Inc
|
11 |
Gooding, D. (1992). The procedural turn. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. Vol.15: Cognitive models of science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
|
12 |
Grandy, R., & Duschl, R. (2007). Reconsidering the character and role of inquiry in school science: Analysis of a conference. Science & Education, 16(2), 141-166
DOI
ScienceOn
|
13 |
Harwood, W. S. (2004b). A new model for inquiry: Is the scientific method dead? Journal of College Science Teaching, 33(7), 29-33
|
14 |
Harwood, W. S., Reiff, R., & Phillipson, T. (2005). Putting the puzzle together: Scientists' metaphors for scientific inquiry. Science Educator, 14(1), 25-30
|
15 |
Holmes, L. (1985). Lavoisier and the chemistry of life: An exploration of scientific creativity. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press
|
16 |
Kerlinger, F. N. (1970). Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston
|
17 |
Klopfer, L. E. (1969). The teaching of science and the history of science. Journal of Research for Science Teaching, 6, 87-95
DOI
|
18 |
Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Bass, K., & Fredricks, J. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. The Journal of the Learning Science, 7(3&4), 313-350
DOI
ScienceOn
|
19 |
Colburn, A. (2000). An inquiry primer. Science Scope, 23, 139-140
|
20 |
Dunbar, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. J. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.). (pp. 365-395) Mechanisms of insight. Cambridge MA: MIT press
|
21 |
Loucks-Horsely, S. (1997). Reforming teaching and reforming staff development. Journal of Staff Development. 18, 20-22
|
22 |
Dunbar, K., & Blanchette, I. (2001). The invivo/ invitro approach to cognition: The case of analogy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5, 334-339
DOI
ScienceOn
|
23 |
Robinson, W. R. (2004). The inquiry wheel, an alternative to the scientific method. Journal of Chemical Education, 81(6), 791-792
DOI
ScienceOn
|
24 |
Schank, R. C., Fano, A., Bell, B., & Jona, M. (1994). The design of goal based scenarios. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 305-345
DOI
ScienceOn
|
25 |
Schwab, J. (1962). The teaching of science as inquiry: In The teaching of science, 1-103, Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA
|
26 |
Taylor, C. (1962). Some educational implications of creativity research findings. School Science and Mathematics, 62, 593-606
DOI
|
27 |
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. Washington, D. C
|
28 |
DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education. New York: Teachers College Press
|
29 |
Haury, D. L. (1993). Teaching science through inquiry. ERIC Clearinghouse for Science Mathmatics and Environmental Education. ED 359 048
|
30 |
Metz, K. E. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children's sciences instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65, 93-128
DOI
ScienceOn
|
31 |
Sorenson-Johnson, K. (2001). Connecting components of scientific inquiry and instructional strategies for teaching students in urban classrooms: A Literature Review. NOVAtions, 1
|
32 |
White, B., Frederiksen, J., Frederiksen, T., Eslinger, E., Loper, S., & Collins, A. (2002). Inquiry Island: affordances of a multi-agent environment for scientific inquiry and reflective learning. In P. Bell, R. Stevens and T. Satwicz (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS). October 24-26. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
|
33 |
Variano, E., & Taylor, K. (2006). Inquiry in limnology lessons. The Science Teacher, 73(5), 36-39
|
34 |
Bauer, H. (1992). Scientific literacy and the myth of the scientific method. University of Illinois Press: Urbana, IL
|
35 |
Gilmer, P. J., & Alli, P. (1998). Action experiments: Are students learning physical science? In S. R. Steinberg & J. L. Kinchloe (Eds.). Students as researchers: Creating classrooms that matter. (pp. 199-211), London: Falmer Press
|
36 |
Bruner, J. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31 (1), 21
|
37 |
Roth, W. M., McGinn, M., & Bowen, G. M. (1998). How prepared are preservice teachers to teach scientific inquiry? Levels of performance in scientific representation practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 19, 25-48
|
38 |
Central Association of Science and Mathematics Teachers (1907). A consideration of the principles that should determine the courses in biology in the secondary schools. School Science and Mathematics, 7, 241-247
DOI
|
39 |
Chalmers, A. F. (1982). What is this thing called science? (2nd ed.). Queensland, Australia: University of Queensland Press
|
40 |
National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press
|
41 |
Kimball, M. E. (1967-1968). Understanding the nature of science: A comparison of scientists and science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 5, 110-120
DOI
|
42 |
Nersessian, N. J. (1992). How do the scientist think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 15: Cognitive models of science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
|
43 |
Roth, W. M. (1995). Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in open-inquiry laboratories. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers
|
44 |
Shwartz, Y., Ben-Zvi, R., & Hofstein, A. (2005). The importance of involving high-school chemistry teachers in the process of defining the operational meaning of chemical literacy. International Journal of Science Education, 27(3), 323-344
DOI
ScienceOn
|
45 |
Novak, A. (1964). Scientific inquiry. Bioscience, 14, 25-28
|
46 |
Collins, A. (1986). A sample dialogue based on a theory of inquiry teaching (Tech. Rep. No. 367). Cambridge, MA: Bolt, Beranek, and Newman, Inc. ED 266-423
|
47 |
Lunetta, V. N. (1997). The role of the laboratory in school science. In D. Tobin & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), International Handbook of Science Education. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers
|
48 |
Nersessian, N. J. (1995). Should physicists preach what they practice? Constructive modeling in doing and learning physics. Science & Education, 4, 203-226
DOI
|
49 |
Finley, F. N., & Pocovi, M. C. (2000). Considering the scientific method of inquiry. In J. Minstrell and E. H. van Zee (Eds.) Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science, American Association for the Advancement of Science: Washington, DC
|
50 |
White, Y. B., & Frederiksen, R. J. (1995). The Thinker Tools inquiry project: Making scientific inquiry accessible to students and teachers (Causal models research group report No. 95-02). Berkeley: University of California, School of Education
|
51 |
Lederman, N. G. (1998). The state of science education: Subject matter without context. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(2), 1-11
|
52 |
Martin-Hansen, L. (2002). Defining inquiry. The Science Teacher, 69, 34-37
|
53 |
National Science Teachers Association. (1982). Science-technology-society: Science education for the 1980s. (An NSTA position statement). Washington, DC: Author
|
54 |
Spiegel, S. A. (1997). Understanding science teacher enhancement programs: Essential components and a model. Unpublished Dissertation. Ann Arbor, MI
|
55 |
Harwood, W. S. (2004a). An activity models for scientific inquiry. The Science Teacher, 71(1), 44-46
|
56 |
Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students' and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29(4), 331-359
DOI
|
57 |
Linn, M. C., diSessa, A., Pea, R. D., & Songer, N. B. (1994). Can research on science learning and instruction inform standards for science education? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 3, 7-15
DOI
|
58 |
Bruce, B. C., & Bishop, A. P. (2002). Using the web to support inquiry-based literacy development. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(8), 706-714
|
59 |
Rakow, S. J. (1986). Teaching science as inquiry. Fastback 246. Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation. ED 275 506
|