Is 'doing science' in New Zealand classrooms an expression of scientific inquiry?

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 215-226

  Haigh, Mavis ^a   France, Bev ^a   Forret, Mike ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WAIKATO   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 12944300159     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0950069042000276730     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1967). Science - A Process Approach (Washington, DC: Ginn and Co.).
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for Scientific Literacy: Project 2061 (New York: Oxford University Press).
3. Baker, R. (1999). Teachers' views: 'Science in the New Zealand Curriculum' and related matters. New Zealand Science Teacher, 91, 3-17.
4. Berliner, D. (2002). Educational research: the hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18-20.
5. Berry, A. Mulhall, P., Gunstone, R. and Loughran, J. (1999). Helping students learn from laboratory work. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 45(3), 27-31.
6. Crooks, T. and Flockton, L. (2000a). Graphs, tables and maps: assessment results 1999. National education monitoring report 15 (University of Otago: National Assessment Research Unit).
7. Crooks, T. and Flockton, L. (2000b). Science assessment results 1999. National education monitoring report 13 (University of Otago: National Assessment Research Unit).
8. Davies, J. and France, B. (2001). Science and technology extensions in schools: CREST and the Olympiads. Final report to the Ministry of Research, Science and Technology.
9. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R. and Scott, P. (1996) Young People's Images of Science (Buckingham: Open University Press).
10. Education Review Office (1996). Science in Schools: Implementing the 1995 Curriculum (Wellington: Education Evaluation Reports).
11. Education Review Office (2002). Science Now: Science Education for Students in Years 1 to 8. (Wellington: Education Evaluation Reports).
12. Eichelbaum, T., Allan, J., Fleming, J. and Randerson, R. (2001) Report of the Royal Commission on Genetic Modification. Report and Recommendations (Wellington: Royal Commission on Genetic Modification).
13. Fisher, B.W. (1998). Whither scientific investigation? School Science Review, 79(289), 43-46.
14. Gee, B. and Clackson, S. (1992). The origin of practical work in the English school science curriculum. School Science Review, 73(265), 79-83.
15. Gott, R. and Mashiter, J. (1994). Practical work in science: a task based approach. In R. Levinson (ed.) Teaching Science (London: Routledge), 179-190.
16. Haigh, M. (1993). 'Hands on - minds on': introducing openness into senior biology programmes. Research in Science Education, 23, 110-117.
17. Haigh, M. (1997). 'I really know I have learned something': investigative work in science education. In B. Bell and R. Baker (eds.) Developing the Science Curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand (Auckland: Longman), 53-66.
18. Haigh, M. (1998). Investigative practical work in Year 12 biology programmes. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton.
19. Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J. and Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 655-675.
20. Hipkins, R., Bolstad, R., Baker, R., Jones, A., Barker, M., Bell, B., Coll, R., Cooper, B., Forret, M., France, B., Haigh, M., Harlow, A. and Taylor, I. (2002). Curriculum, Learning and Effective Pedagogy: A Literature Review in Science Education (Wellington: Ministry of Education).
21. Hodson, D. (1996). Laboratory work as scientific method: three decades of confusion and distortion. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 28(2), 115-135.
22. Hogan, K. (2000) Exploring a process view of students' knowledge about the nature of science. Science Education, 84(1), 51-70.
23. Hurd, P. (1998). Scientific literacy: new minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82(3), 407-416.
24. Jones, A. and Simon, S. (1991). Strategies for educational change: the work of the OPENS project in the context of a new national curriculum for science. In SAMEPapers 1991 (Hamilton: Centre for Science and Mathematics Education Research, University of Waikato), 15-35.
25. Klinckmann, E. (1970). Biology Teachers' Handbook, 2nd edn. (New York: John Wiley).
26. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
27. Leach, J. (2002). Students' understanding of the nature of science and its influence on labwork. In D. Psillos and H. Niedderer (eds.) Teaching and Learning in the Science Laboratory (Dordrecht: Kluwer), 41-48.
28. Leslie, S., Keiler, L. and Woolnough, B. (2002). Practical work in school science: the dominance of assessment. School Science Review 83(304), 83-88.
29. Martin, M., Mullis, I., Gonzalez, E., Gregory, K., Smith, T., Chrowstowski, S., Garden, R. and O'Connor, K. (2000). TIMSS 1999 International Science report: findings from IEA's repeat of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the Eight Grade (Chestnut Hill, MA: International Study Centre).
30. Mayer, V. and Kumano, Y. (1999). The role of system science in future school science curricula. Studies in Science Education, 34, 71-91.
31. McKinnon, D., Nolan, C., Openshaw, R. and Soler, J. (1991). New Zealand curriculum innovation in historical and political context: the Freyberg Integrated Studies Project and parallel projects of the 1940's. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 23(2), 155-175.
32. Miller, R. (1998). Rhetoric and reality: what practical work in science education is really for. In J. Wellington (ed.) Practical Work in School Science: Which Way Now? (London: Routledge), 16-31.
33. Ministry of Education (1993). Science in the New Zealand Curriculum (Wellington: Learning Media).
34. Ministry of Education (1995). Making Better Sense of the Material World (Wellington: Learning Media).
35. Ministry of Education (1996a). Making Better Sense of the Physical World (Wellington: Learning Media).
36. Ministry of Education (1996b). Making Better Sense of the Planet Earth and Beyond (Wellington: Learning Media).
37. Ministry of Education (1996c). Making Better Sense of the Living World (Wellington: Learning Media).
38. Murphy, C., Beggs, J., Hickey, I., O'Meara, J. and Sweeney, J. (2001). National Curriculum: compulsory school science - is it improving scientific literacy? Educational Research, 43(2), 189-199.
39. Newton, L. & Newton, D. (1995). The draw-a-scientist test. Set Research Information for Teachers, 2, 1-4.
40. Nuffield Foundation (1966). Physics: Teachers' Guide 1 (London: Longman).
41. Osborne, J. (2002). Science without literacy: a ship without a sail? Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 203-218.
42. Peterson, N. and Jungck, J. (1988). Problem-posing, problem-solving and peer persuasion in biology education. Academic Computing, 2(6), 14-17, 48-50.
43. Psillos, D. and Neidderer, H. (eds.) (2002a). Teaching and Learning in the Science Laboratory (Dordrecht: Kluwer).
44. Psillos, D. and Neidderer, H. (2002b). Issues and questions regarding the effectiveness of labwork. In Psillos, D. and Neidderer, H. (eds.) Teaching and Learning in the Science Laboratory (Dordrecht: Kluwer), 21-30.
45. Ravetz, J. (1995). Scientic Knowledge and its Social Problems (New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction).
46. Robertson, I. (1999) Key evidence in testing hypotheses. In M. Bandiera, S. Caravita, E. Torracca and M. Vicenti (eds.) Research in Science Education in Europe (Dordrecht: Kluwer).
47. Screen, P. (1986). The Warwick Process Science Process Project. School Science Review, 72(260), 17-24.
48. Séré, M.-G. (2002). Towards targeted labwork. In D. Psillos and H. Niedderer (eds.) Teaching and Learning in the Science Laboratory (Dordrecht: Kluwer), 255-259.
49. Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 4-14.
50. Solomon, J. (2001). Teaching for scientific literacy: What could it mean? School Science Review, 82(300), 93-96.
51. Solomon, J. Scott, L. and Duveen, J. (1996). Large-scale exploration of pupils' understanding of the nature of science. Science Education, 80(5), 493-508.
52. Tasker, R. and Freyberg, P. (1985). Facing mismatches in the classroom. In R. Osborne and P. Freyberg (eds.) Learning in Science: The Implications of Children's Science (Auckland: Heinemann), 66-80.
53. Watson, R. (2000). The role of practical work. In M. Monk and J. Osborne (eds.) Good Practice in Science Teaching: What Research has to Say (Buckingham and Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press), 57-71.
54. Watson, R. Goldsworthy, A. and Wood-Robinson, V. (1999). What is not fair with investigations? School Science Review, 80(292), 101-106.
55. White, R. (1988). Learning Science (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).
56. Wolpert, L. (1997). In praise of science. In R. Levinson and J. Thomas (eds.) Science Today. Problem or Crisis? (London: Routledge), 9-21.
57. Yore L., Hand, B. and Prain V. (2002). Scientists as writers. Science Education, 86, 672-692.
58. Ziman, J.M. (2000). Real Science: What it Is, and What it Means (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press).