Emergence, flexibility, and stabilization of language in a physics classroom

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 40, Issue 9, 2003, Pages 869-897

  Roth, Wolff Michael ^a   Duit, Reinders ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE FOR SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHAOS THEORY; COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; COLLEGE BUILDINGS; CURRICULA; PHYSICS;

ARTIFACTS; PHYSICS CLASSROOM; SCIENTIFIC LANGUAGE;

TEACHING;

EID: 0344064069     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.10114     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Agre, P. and Horswill, I. (1997). Lifeworld analysis. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 6, 111-145.
2. Anderson, J.R. (1985). Cognitive psychology and its implications. San Francisco: Freeman.
3. Briggs, J. and Peat, F.D. (1989). Turbulent mirror: An illustrated guide to chaos theory and the science of wholeness. New York: Harper & Row.
4. Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P. (1992). Enacting design for the workplace. In Adler, P.S. & Winograd, T.A. (Eds.), Usability: Turning technologies into tools (pp. 164-197). New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Chapman, D. (1991). Vision, instruction, and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6. Clancey, W.J. (1997). Situated cognition: On human knowledge and computer representation. Cambridge: Camridge University Press.
7. Davidson, D. (1986). A nice derangement of epitaphs. In Lepore, E. (Ed.), Truth and interpretation (pp. 433-446). Oxford: Blackwell.
8. Diakidoy, I.N. & Kendeou, P. (2001). Facilitating conceptual change in astronomy: A comparison of the effectiveness of two instructional approaches. Learning and Instruction, 11, 1-20.
9. diSessa, A.A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105-225.
10. Duit, R., Roth, W.M., Komorek, M., & Wilbers, J. (1998). Conceptual change cum discourse analysis to understand cognition in a unit on chaotic systems: Towards an integrative perspective on learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1059-1073.
11. Duit, R., Roth, W.M., Komorek, M., & Wilbers, J. (2001). Fostering conceptual change by analogies - between Scylla and Carybdis. Learning and Instruction, 11, 283-303.
12. Duit, R. & Treagust, D. (1998). Learning in science - from behaviourism towards social constructivism and beyond. In Fraser, B.J. & Tobin, K.G. (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3-25). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
13. Engeström, Y. (2001). Making expansive decisions: An activity-theoretical study of practitioners building collaborative medical care for children. In Allwood, C.M. & Selart, M. (Eds.), Decision making: Social and creative dimensions. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
14. Gee, J.P. (2003) Language in the science classroom: Academic social languages as the heart of school-based literacy. In Yerrick, R. & Roth, W.-M. (Eds.), Establishing scientific classroom discourse communities: Multiple voices of research on teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. In press.
15. Gentner, D., Brem, S., Ferguson, R.W., Markman, A.B., Levidow, B.B., Wolff, P., & Forbus, K.D. (1997) Analogical reasoning and conceptual change: A case study of Johannes Kepler. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 3-40.
16. Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Penguin.
17. Gooding, D. (1990). Experiment and the making of meaning: Human agency in scientific observation and experiment. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
18. Hall, R. (1996). Representation as shared activity: Situated cognition and Dewey's cartography of experience. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 209-238.
19. Hammond, K.J., Converse, T.M., & Grass, J.W. (1995). The stabilization of environments. Artificial Intelligence, 72, 305-327.
20. Hayles, N.K. (Ed.). (1991). Chaos and order: Complex dynamics in literature and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21. Heidegger, M. (1996). Being and time (Joan Stambaugh, Trans.). Albany: State University of New York Press.
22. Kelly, G. (2003). Discourse, description, and science education. In Yerrick, R. & Roth, W.-M. (Eds.), Establishing scientific classroom discourse communities: Multiple voices of research on teaching and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. In press.
23. Kirsh, D. (1995). The intelligent use of space. Artificial Intelligence, 73, 31-68.
24. Komorek, M., Stavrou, D., & Duit, R. (2001). Nonlinear physics in upper physics classes: Educational reconstruction as a frame for development and research in a study of teaching and learning basic ideas of nonlinearity. In Psillos, D., Kariotoglou, P., Tselfes, V., Fassoulopoulos, G. et al. (Eds.), Science education research in the knowledge based society (pp. 483-485). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
25. Kurth, L.A., Kidd, R., Garner, R., & Smith, E.L. (2002). Student use of narrative and paradigmatic forms of talk in elementary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 793-818.
26. Lave, J., Murtaugh, M., & de la Rocha, O. (1984). The dialectic of arithmetic in grocery shopping. In Rogoff, B. & Lave, J. (Eds.), Everyday cognition: Its development in social context (pp. 67-94). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27. Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
28. Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29. Markley, R. (1991). Representing order: Natural philosophy, mathematics, and theology in the Newtonian revolution. In Hayles, N.K. (Ed.), Chaos and order: Complex dynamics in literature and science (pp. 125-148). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Marton, F. (1993). Our experience of the physical world. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 227-237.
31. Maturana, H.R. (1978). Cognition. In Hejl, P.M., Köck, W.K., & Roth, G. (Eds.), Wahrnehmung und Kommunikation [Perception and communication] (pp. 29-49). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
32. Moje, E.B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R.W. (2001). "Maestro, what is 'quality'?" Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 469-498.
33. Moschkovich, J.N. (1996). Moving up and getting steeper: Negotiating shared descriptions of linear graphs. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5, 239-277.
34. Nemirovsky, R. (1993). Students making sense of chaotic behavior. Interactive Learning Environments, 3, 151-175.
35. Ochs, E., Gonzales, P., & Jacoby, S. (1996). "When I come down I'm in the domain state": Grammar and graphic representation in the interpretive activity of physicists. In Ochs, E., Schegloff, E.A., & Thompson, S.A. (Eds.), Interaction and grammar (pp. 328-369). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. O'Regan, J.K. & Noë, A. (2001). A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 883-917.
37. Paulson, W. (1991) Literature, complexity, interdisciplinarity. In Hayles, N.K. (Ed.), Chaos and order: Complex dynamics in literature and science (pp. 37-53). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
38. Petitot, J. (1994). Phenomenology of perception, qualitative physics and sheaf mereology. In Casati, R., Smith, B., & White, G. (Eds.), Philosophy and the cognitive sciences (pp. 307-408). Vienna: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky.
39. Prigogine, I. (1980). From being to becoming: Time and complexity in the physical sciences. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
40. Prigogine, I. & Stengers, I. (1979). La nouvelle alliance: Métamorphose de la science. Paris: ditions Gallimard.
41. Quine, W.V. (1995). From stimulus to science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
42. Resnick, L.B. (1993). Editor's comments. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 101-104.
43. Rorty, R. (1989). Contingency, irony, and solidarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: Convergent conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 235-276.
45. Rosebery, A.S., Warren, B., & Conant, F.R. (1992). Appropriating science discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 61-94.
46. Roth, W.-M. (2000). From gesture to scientific language. Journal of Pragmatics, 32, 1683-1714.
47. Roth, W.-M., & Lawless, D. (2002). Signs, deixis, and the emergence of scientific explanations. Semiotica, 138, 95-130.
48. Rummel, R.J. (1987). A catastrophe model of the conflict helix with tests. Behavioral Science, 32, 241-266.
49. Shore, L.S., Erickson, M.J., Garik, P., Hickman, P., Stanley, E., Taylor, E.F., & Trufino, P.A. (1992). Learning fractals by "doing science": Applying cognitive apprenticeship strategies to curriculum design and instruction. Interactive Learning Environments, 2, 205-226.
50. Snow, R.E. (1992). Aptitude theory: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Educational Psychologist, 27, 5-32.
51. Thom, R. (1981). Worüber soll man sich wundern? [What should we wonder about?] In Maurin, K., Michalski, K., & Rudolph, E. (Eds.), Offene Systeme II: Logik und Zeit (pp. 41-107). Stuttgart, Germany: Klett-Cotta.
52. Toulmin, S.E. (1972). Human understanding, vol. 1. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
53. Varelas, M., Becker, J., Luster, B., & Wenzel, S. (2002). When genres meet: Inquiry into a sixth-grade urban science class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 579-604.
54. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations (3rd ed.) New York: Macmillan.
55. Zeeman, E.C. (1995, March). Catastrophe theory. Unpublished paper presented at Trinity University, San Antonio, TX.