The diffusion and appropriation of ideas in the science classroom: Developing a taxonomy of events occurring between groups of learners

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 38, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 17-42

  Windschitl, Mark ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0011689766     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/1098-2736(200101)38:1<17::AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-C     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Alexopoulou, E., & Driver, R. (1996). Small-group discussion in physics: Peer interaction modes in pairs and fours. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(10), 1099-1114.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Artzt, A., & Armour-Thomas, E. (1992). Development of a cognitive-metacognitive framework for protocol analysis of mathematical problem solving in small groups. Cognition and Instruction, 9(2), 137-175.
4. Barab, S., Hay, K., & Duffy, T. (1998). Grounded constructions and how technology can help. Technology Trends, 43(2), 15-23.
5. Barnes, D., & Todd, F. (1977). Communication and learning in small groups. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
6. Bennett, N. (1991). Cooperative learning in classrooms: Processes and outcomes. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32, 581-594.
7. Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Guzdial, M., & Palinscar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning, Educational Psychologist, 26(3/4), 369-398.
8. Bogdan, R.C., & Bicklen, S.K. (1992). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
9. Bond, A.H. (1989). The cooperation of experts in engineering design. In L. Glasser & M.N. Huhn (Eds.), Distributed artificial intelligence (Vol. 2, pp. 463-484). London: Pitman; San Mateo CA: Morgan Kaufman Publishers.
10. Carter, G., Westbrook, S., & Thompkins, C. (1999). Examining science tools as mediators of students' learning about circuits. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 89-105.
11. Cazden, C. (1986). Classroom discourse. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed. pp. 432-463). New York: Macmillan.
12. Cobb, P. (1991). Change in teaching mathematics: A case study. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 587-616.
13. Denzin D.K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. New York: McGraw-Hill.
14. Duckworth, E. (1978). The African primary science program: An evaluation and extended thoughts. Grand Forks: North Dakota Study Group on Evaluation.
15. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
16. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1987). A theory of motivation for comprehension and its application to mathematics instruction. In T.A. Romberg & D.M. Stewart (Eds.), The monitoring of school mathematics: Background papers, Vol. 2: Implications from psychology; outcomes of instruction. (Program Report 87-2) (pp. 27-46). Madison: Wisconsin Center for Educational Research.
17. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1991). Sharing cognition through collective comprehension activity. In L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine, & S.D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 331-348). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
18. Henderson, K. (1991). Flexible sketches and inflexible databases: Visual communication, conscription devices, and boundary objects in design engineering. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 16, 448-473.
19. Hewitt, J., & Scardemalia, M. (1998). Design principles for distributed knowledge building processes. Educational Psychology Review, 10(1), 75-96.
20. Hogan, K. (1999). Relating students' personal frameworks for science learning to their cognition in collaborative contexts. Science Education, 8, 1-32.
21. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22. Inagaki, K. (1981). Facilitation of knowledge integration through classroom discussion. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 3, 26-28.
23. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39-103.
24. Kelly, G., & Brown, C. (2000). Communicative demands of learning science through technological design: Third grade students' construction of solar energy devices. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
25. Latour, B. (1992). Aramis or the love of technology. Paris: Editions la Decouverte.
26. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
27. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
28. Lynch, M. (1985). Art and artifact in laboratory science: A study of shop work and shop talk in a laboratory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
29. Nastasi, B., & Clements, D.H. (1991). Research on cooperative learning: Implications for practice. School Psychology Review, 20, 110-131.
30. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards.
31. Papert S. (1991). Situating constructivism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructivism: Research reports and essays, 1985-1990 (pp. 1-11). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
32. Pea, R. (1985). Beyond amplification: Using computers to reorganize human mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20, 167-182.
33. Pea, R. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions (pp. 47-87). New York: Cambridge University Press.
34. Resnick, L. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16(9), 3-21.
35. Richmond, G., & Striley, J. (1996). Making meaning in classrooms: Social processes in small-group discourse and scientific knowledge-building. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(8), 839-858.
36. Roth, W.-M. (1995). Inventors, copycats, and everyone else: The emergence of shared resources and practices as defining aspects of classroom communities. Science Education, 79(5), 475-502.
37. Roth, W-M. (1998). Designing communities. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
38. Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, M. (1995). Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a grade 8 open-inquiry science classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction, 13(1), 73-128.
39. Savery J., & Duffy T. (1996). Problem-based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
40. Scardemalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 3, 265-283.
41. Slavin, R. (1989-1990), Research on cooperative learning: Consensus and controversy. Educational Leadership, 47(4), 52-54.
42. Tabak, I., Sandoval, W., Smith, B., Steinmuller, F., & Reiser, B. (1998). Reflection as a vehicle toward local and global understanding. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the America Educational Research Association, San Diego CA.
43. Voight, J. (1985). Patterns and routines in classroom interaction. Recherches en Didactique des Mathematics, 6, 69-118.
44. Webb, N. (1992). Testing a theoretical model of student interaction and learning in small groups. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups: The theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 102-119). Cambridge MA: Cambridge University Press.
45. Windschitl, M. (1999). A vision educators can put into practice: Portraying the constructivist classroom as a cultural system. School Science and Mathematics, 99(4), 189-196.