The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations

Cognition and Instruction

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 23-55

  Sandoval, William A ^a   Millwood, Kelli A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 13944250656     PISSN: 07370008     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s1532690xci2301_2     Document Type: Review

References (59)

1. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
2. Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797-817.
3. Bowen, G. M., Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Interpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: Toward a social practice view of scientific representation practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1020-1043.
4. Brem, S. K., & Rips, L. J. (2000). Explanation and evidence in informal argument. Cognitive Science, 24, 573-604.
5. Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 63, 1-49.
6. Chinn, C. A., & Brewer, W. F. (1998). An empirical test of a taxonomy of responses to anomalous data in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 623-654.
7. Coleman, E. B. (1998). Using explanatory knowledge during collaborative problem solving in science. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 387-427.
8. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Darwin, C. (1985). The origin of species by means of natural selection. London: Penguin. (Original work published 1859)
10. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
11. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
12. Duschl, R. A. (1994). Research on the history and philosophy of science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 443-465). New York: Macmillan.
13. Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38, 39-72.
14. Endler, J. A. (1986). Natural selection in the wild. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
15. Feyerabend, P. (1993). Against method (3rd ed.). New York: Verso. (Original work published 1975)
16. Goldman, S. R., Duschl, R. A., Ellenbogen, K., Williams, S. M., & Tzou, C. (2003). Science inquiry in a digital world: possibilities for making thinking visible. In V. Oostendorp (Ed.), Cognition in a digital world (pp. 253-281). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
17. Grant, P. R. (1986). Ecology and evolution of Darwin's finches. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
18. Herrenkohl, L. R., & Guerra, M. A. (1998). Participant structures, scientific discourse, and student engagement in fourth grade. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 431-473.
19. Hogan, K., Nastasi, B. K., & Pressley, M. (1999). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 379-432.
20. Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodríguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). "Doing the lesson" or "doing science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792.
21. Kelly, G. J., Druker, S., & Chen, C. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: Combining performance assessments with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 849-871.
22. Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314-342.
23. Kitcher, P. (1991). Persuasion. In M. Pera & W. R. Shea (Eds.), Persuading science: The art of scientific rhetoric (pp. 3-27). Canton, MA: Science History Publications.
24. Koslowski, B. (1996). Theory and evidence: The development of scientific reasoning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.
26. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O'Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. San Diego, CA: Academic.
27. Kuhn, D., Garcia-Mila, M., Zohar, A., & Andersen, C. (1995). Strategies of knowledge acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 60(4, Serial No. 245).
28. Kuhn, D., Schauble, L., & Garcia-Mila, M. (1992). Cross-domain development of scientific reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 9, 285-327.
29. Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
31. Latour, B. (1990). Drawing things together. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 19-68). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: the construction of scientific facts (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
33. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
34. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
35. Lynch, M., & Woolgar, S. (Eds.). (1990). Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36. Mayr, E. (1988). Toward a new philosophy of biology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
38. Pera, M., & Shea, W. R. (Eds.). (1991). Persuading science: the art of scientific rhetoric. Canton, MA: Science History Publications.
39. Quammen, D. (1996). The song of the Dodo: Island biogeography in an age of extinctions. New York: Scribner.
40. Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. J. (2001). BGuILE: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 263-305). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
41. Resnick, L. B., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C. M., Wathen, S. H., & Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 347-364.
42. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
43. Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Conant, F. R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 61-94.
44. Roth, W.-M., Bowen, G. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Differences in graph-related practices between high school biology textbooks and scientific ecology journals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 977-1019.
45. Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. (1998). Inscriptions: Toward a theory of representing as social practice. Review of Educational Research, 68, 35-59.
46. Ruffman, T., Perner, J., Olson, D. R., & Doherty, M. (1993). Reflecting on scientific thinking: Children's understanding of the hypothesis-evidence relation. Child Development, 64, 1617-1636.
47. Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 5-51.
48. Sandoval, W. A., & Daniszewski, K. (2004). Mapping trade-offs in teachers' integration of technology-supported inquiry in high school science classes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13, 161-178.
49. Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic supports for science inquiry. Science Education, 88, 345-372.
50. Smith, C. L., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Hennessey, M. G. (2000). Sixth-grade students' epistemologies of science: The impact of school science experiences on epistemological development. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 349-422.
51. Sodian, B., Zaitchik, D., & Carey, S. (1991). Young children's differentiation of hypothetical beliefs from evidence. Child Development, 62, 753-766.
52. Stewart, J., Hafner, R., Johnson, S., & Finkel, E. (1992). Science as model building: Computers and high-school genetics. Educational Psychologist, 27, 317-336.
53. Suppe, F. (1998). The structure of a scientific paper. Philosophy of Science, 65, 381-405.
54. Takao, A., & Kelly, G. (2003). Assessment of evidence in university students' scientific writing. Science & Education, 12, 341-363.
55. Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. (2002). "Mapping to know": The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86, 264-286.
56. Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
57. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
58. White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 3-118.
59. Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20, 99-149.