Students' Interaction with Computer Representations: Analysis of Discourse in Laboratory Groups

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 33, Issue 7, 1996, Pages 693-707

  Kelly, Gregory J ^a   Crawford, Teresa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000559606     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199609)33:7<693::AID-TEA1>3.0.CO;2-I     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Bleicher, R. (1994). High schools students presenting science: An interactional sociolinguistic analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 697-719.
2. Bloome, D., & Egan-Robertson, A. (1993). The social construction of intertextuality in classroom reading and writing lessons. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 305-333.
3. Brannigan, A. (1981). The social basis of scientific discoveries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Brasell, H. (1987). The effect of real-time laboratory graphing on learning graphic representations of distance and velocity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 385-395.
5. Collins, H.M., & Pinch, T. (1993). The Golem: All you need to understand science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
6. Gilbert, G.N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's box: A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. New York: Cambridge University Press.
7. Green, J., & Wallat, C. (1981). Mapping instructional conversations: A sociolinguistic ethnography. In J. Green & C. Wallat (Eds.), Ethnography and language in educational settings (pp. 161-205). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
8. Gumperz, J.J. (1992). Contextualization and understanding. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context (pp. 229-252). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
9. Kelly, G.J., Carlsen, W.S., & Cunningham, C.M. (1993). Science education in sociocultural context: Perspectives from the sociology of science. Science Education, 77, 207-220.
10. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1983). The ethnographic study of scientific work: Towards a constructivist interpretation of science. In K. Knorr-Cetina & M. Mulkay (Eds.), Science observed: Perspectives on the social study of science (pp. 115-140). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
11. Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
13. Lemke, J.L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
14. Lightman, A., & Gingerich, O. (1991). When do anomalies begin? Science, 255, 690-694.
15. Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Roth, W.-M. (1995). Affordances of computers in teacher-student interactions: The case of Interactive Physics™. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 329-347.
17. Spradley, J.P. (1980). Participant observation. New York: Holt, Rinehart, Winston.
18. Strike, K. (1982). Liberty and learning. Oxford: Martin Robertson.
19. Thornton, R.K., & Sokoloff, D.R. (1990). Learning motion concepts using real-time microcomputer-based laboratory tools. American Journal of Physics, 58, 858-867.
20. Toulmin, S. (1972) Human understanding. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
21. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical Investigations (3rd ed.) (G.E.M. Anscombe, Trans.). New York: Macmillan.
22. Woolgar, S. (1980). Discovery: Logic and sequence in scientific text. Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook, 4, 239-268.