The impact of the MARS curriculum on students' ability to coordinate theory and evidence

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 25, Issue 10, 2003, Pages 1247-1271

  Zimmerman, Corinne ^a   Raghavan, Kalyani ^b   Sartoris, Mary L ^b  

^a ILLINOIS STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CURRICULUM; STUDENT; VISUALIZATION;

EID: 0345530108     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0950069022000038303     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy (New York: Oxford University Press).
2. AOKI, T. (1991). The relation between tow kinds of U-shaped growth curves: balance-scale and weight-addition task. The Journal of General Psychology, 118, 251-261.
3. BAE, Y., CHOY, S., GEDDES, C., SABLE, J. and SNYDER, T. (2000). Trends in Educational Equity of Girls and Women (Washington, DC: US Department of Education, National Centre for Educational Statistics).
4. BAUER, H. H. (1992). Scientific Literacy and the Myth of the Scientific Method (Urbana: IL: University of Illinois Press).
5. BEATON, A. E., MARTIN, M. O., MULLIS, I. V. S., GONZALEZ, E. J., SMITH, T. A. and KELLY, D. L. (1996). Science Achievement in the Middle School Years: IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science Study (Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston College).
6. BLISS, J. (1995). Piaget and after: the case of learning science. In E. Jenkins (ed.) Studies in Science Education, 25, 139-172.
7. BRUER, J. T. (1993). Schools for Thought: A Science of Learning in the Classroom (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
8. CAMP, C. W. and CLEMENT, J. J. (1994). Preconceptions in Mechanics: Lessons Dealing with Students' Conceptual Difficulties (Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt).
9. CHLETSOS, P. N., DE LISI, R., TURNER, G. and MCGILLICUDDY-DE LISI, A. V. (1989). Cognitive assessment of proportional reasoning strategies. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 22, 18-27.
10. CLEMENT, J. J. (1989). Learning via model construction and criticism. In G. Glover, R. Ronning and C. Reynolds (eds.) Handbook of Creativity: Assessment, Theory and Research (New York: Plenum), 341-381.
11. DE VOS, W. and VERDONK, A. H. (1996). The particulate nature of matter in science education and in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 657-664.
12. DRIVER, R., GUESNE, E. and TIBERGHIEN, A. (1985). Children's Ideas in Science (Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press).
13. DUIT, R., GOLDBERG, F. and NIEDDERER, H. (eds.) (1992). Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies (Kiel, Germany: IPN/Institute for Science Education).
14. DUNBAR, K. and KLAHR, D. (1989). Developmental differences in scientific discovery strategies. In D. Klahr and K. Kotovsky (eds.) Complex Information Processing: The Impact of Herbert A. Simon (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), 109-143.
15. FREDERIKSEN, J. R. and WHITE, B. Y. (2000, April). Sources of difficulty in students' understanding causal models for physical systems. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
16. GLASER, R. (1984). Education and thinking: the role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93-104.
17. HARRISON, A. G. and TREAGUST, D. F. (2000). A typology of school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 1011-1026.
18. HESSE, M. B. (1966). Models and Analogies in Science (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press).
19. HESTENES, D. (1987). Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction. American Journal of Physics, 55, 440-454.
20. HOLLAND, J. H., HOLYOAK, K. J., NISBETT, R. E. and THAGARD, P. R. (1986). Induction (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press).
21. JONES, M. G., CARTER, G. and RUA, M. J. (2000). Exploring the development of conceptual ecologies: communities of concepts related to convection and heat. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 139-159.
22. JUSTI, R. S. and GILBERT, J. K. (2002). Modelling, teachers' views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 369-387.
23. KAPUT, J. J. (1991). Notations and representations as mediators of constructive processes. In E. von Glasersfeld (ed.) Radical Constructivism in Mathematics Education (Boston, MA: Kluwer), 53-74.
24. KLAHR, D. and CARVER, S. M. (1995). Scientific thinking about scientific thinking. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, Serial No. 245, 60, 137-151.
25. KLAHR, D. and DUNBAR, K. (1988). Dual search space during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1-48.
26. KLIMAN, M. (1987). Children's learning about the balance scale. Instructional Science, 15, 307-340.
27. KOSLOWSKI, B. (1996). Theory and Evidence: The Development of Scientific Reasoning (Cambridge: MA: MIT Press).
28. KUHN, D. and PEARSALL, S. (2000). Developmental origins of scientific thinking. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1, 113-129.
29. KUHN, D., AMSEL, E. and O'LOUGHLIN, M. (1988). The Development of Scientific Thinking Skills (Orlando, FL: Academic Press).
30. LAWSON, A. E. (1987). Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning: Revised Paper and PencilVersion (Tempe, AZ: Arizona State University).
31. LEHRER, R. and SCHAUBLE, L. (2000). Developing model-based reasoning in mathematics and science. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21, 39-48.
32. LESH, R. and LAMMON, S. J. (1992). Trends, goals, and priorities in mathematics assessment. In R. Lesh and S. J. Lammon (eds.) Assessment of Authentic Performance in School Mathematics (Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science), 3-62.
33. MARTIN, M. O., MULLIS, I. V. S., BEATON, A. E., GONZALEZ, E. J., SMITH, T. A. and KELLY, D. L. (1997). Science Achievement in the Primary SchoolYears: IEA's Third International Mathematics and Science Study (Chestnut Hill, MA: Center for the Study of Testing, Evaluation, and Educational Policy, Boston College).
34. MAYER, R. E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59, 43-64.
35. MCDERMOTT, L. C. (1996). Physics by Inquiry: An Introduction to Physics and the Physical Sciences (New York: John Wiley & Sons).
36. MULLIS, I. V. S. and JENKINS, L. B. (1988). The science report card: elements of risk and recovery. Trends and achievement based on the 1986 national assessment (Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service).
37. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS (1992). The 1990 Science Report Card: NAEP's Assessment of Fourth, Eighth, and Twelfth Graders (Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service).
38. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS (1994). NAEP 1992 Trends in Academic Progress: Achievement of U.S. Students in Science, 1969 to 1992; Mathematics, 1973 to 1992; Reading, 1971 to 1992; Writing, 1984 to 1992 (Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service).
39. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRESS (2001). The Nation's Report Card: Science Highlights 2000 (Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics).
40. NATIONAL ASSESSMENT GOVERNING BOARD (1996). Science Framework for the 1996 National Assessment of Educational Progress (Washington, DC: National Assessment Governing Board).
41. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL (1996). National Science Education Standards (Washington, DC: National Academy Press).
42. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Standards (Washington, DC: National Academy Press).
43. NATIONAL SCIENCE RESOURCE CENTER (1992). Experiments with Plants: Teacher's Guide (Burlington, NC: Carolina Biological Supply).
44. O'SULLIVAN, C. Y. and WEISS, A. R. (1999). Student work and teacher practices in science (Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics).
45. RAGHAVAN, K. and GLASER, R. (1994). Studying and teaching model-based reasoning in science. In S. Vosniadou, E. De Corte and H. Mandl (eds.) Technology-Based Learning Environments: Psychological and Educational Foundations (Berlin: Springer-Verlag), 104-111.
46. RAGHAVAN, K. and GLASER, R. (1995). Model-based analysis and reasoning in science: the MARS curriculum. Science Education, 79, 37-61.
47. RAGHAVAN, K. and SARTORIS, M. L. (2003). The impact of model-centered instruction on student learning (in preparation).
48. RAGHAVAN, K., GLASER, R. and SARTORIS, M. L. (1995). MARS, a computer-supported middle-school curriculum to foster model-based analytical reasoning. In Proceedings from the Working Conference on Applications of Technology in the Service Classroom (Columbia, OH: The National Centre for Science Teaching and Learning), 17-56.
49. RAGHAVAN, K., KESIDOU, S. and SARTORIS, M. L. (1993). Model-centered curriculum for model-based reasoning. The Proceedings of the Third International Seminar on Misconceptions and Educational Strategies in Science and Mathematics (Ithaca, NY: Misconceptions Trust).
50. RAGHAVAN, K., SARTORIS, M. L. and GLASER, R. (1998a). Why does it go up? The impact of the MARS curriculum as revealed through changes in student explanations of a helium balloon. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 547-567.
51. RAGHAVAN, K., SARTORIS, M. L. and GLASER, R. (1998b). Impact of the MARS curriculum: the mass unit. Science Education, 82, 53-91.
52. RAGHAVAN, K., SARTORIS, M. L. and ZIMMERMAN, C. (2002, April). Impact of model-centered instruction on student learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), New Orleans, LA.
53. RUFFMAN, T., PERNER, J., OLSON, D. R. and DOHERTY, M. (1993). Reflecting on scientific thinking: children's understanding of the hypothesis-evidence relation. Child Development, 64, 1617-1636.
54. SCHAUBLE, L. (1990). Belief revision in children: the role of prior knowledge and strategies for generating evidence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 49, 31-57.
55. SCHAUBLE, L. (1996). The development of scientific reasoning in knowledge-rich contexts. Developmental Psychology, 32, 102-119.
56. SCHAUBLE, L., GLASER, R., RAGHAVAN, K. and REINER, M. (1992). The integration of knowledge and experimentation strategies in understanding a physical system. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6, 321-343.
57. SCHAUBLE, L., KLOPFER, L. E. and RAGHAVAN, K. (1991). Students' transition from an engineering model to a science model of experimentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 859-882.
58. SIEGLER, R. S. (1981). Developmental sequences within and between concepts. Monographs for the Society for Research in Child Development, 46 (Whole No. 189)
59. SIMON, H. A. (1986). Understanding the processes of science: the psychology of scientific discovery. In T. Gamelius (ed.) Progress in Science and its Social Conditions (Oxford: Pergamon Press), pp. 159-170.
60. SMITH, C., MACLIN, D., GROSSLIGHT, L. and DAVIS, H. (1997). Teaching for understanding: a study of students' preinstruction theories of matter and a comparison of the effectiveness of two approaches to teaching about matter and density. Cognition and Instruction, 15, 317-393.
61. SOLOMON, J. (1992). Getting to Know About Energy - In School and Society (Bristol, PA: The Falmer Press).
62. STANOVICH, K. E. (1999). Who is Rational? Studies of Individual Differences in Reasoning (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum).
63. STEPANS, J. (1994). Targeting Students' Science Misconceptions: Physical Activities Using the Conceptual Change Model (Riverview, FL: Idea Factory).
64. TREAGUST, D., CHITTLEBOROUGH, G. and MAMIALA, T. (2002). Students' understanding of the role of scientific models in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 357-368.
65. WEINBURGH, M. (1995). Gender differences in student attitudes toward science: a meta-analysis of the literature from 1970 to 1971. Journal of Reseach in Science Teaching, 32, 387-398.
66. WISER, M., KIPMAN, D. and HALKIADAKIS, L. (1988). Can Models Foster Conceptual Change? The Case of Heat and Temperature (Technical Report 88-7) (Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education, Educational Technology Center).
67. ZIMMERMAN, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20, 99-149.