Learning and teaching science as inquiry: A case study of elementary school teachers' investigations of light

Science Education

Volumn 89, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 1007-1042

  Van Zee, Emily H ^a   Hammer, David ^a   Bell, Mary ^b   Roy, Patricia ^b   Peter, Jennifer ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

^b Prince George's County Public Schools   (United States)

^c Montgomery County Public Schools   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 28444499075     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20084     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. American Association of Physics Teachers (2001). Powerful ideas in physical science. College Park, MD: AAPT. http://www.aapt.org/programs/programs. html
2. Anderson, B., & Karrqvist, C. (1983). How Swedish pupils aged 12-15 years understand light and its properties. European Journal of Science Education, 5, 387-402.
3. Atkin, J. M., Black, P., & Coffey, J. (Eds.). (2001). Classroom assessment and the National Science Education Standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
4. Barnett, J., & Hodson, D. (2001). Pedagogical context knowledge: Toward a fuller understanding of what good science teachers know. Science Education, 85, 426-453.
5. Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE (Knowledge Integration Environment). International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797-817.
6. Bendall, S., Goldberg, F., & Galili, I. (1993). Prospective elementary teachers' prior knowledge about light. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1169-1187.
7. Bereiter, C. (1994). Implications of postmodernism for science, or, science as progressive discourse. Educational Psychologist, 29, 3-12.
8. Brickhouse, N. W. (1994). Children's observations, ideas, and the development of classroom theories about light. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 639-656.
9. Chazan, D., & Ball, D. L. (1999). Beyond being told not to tell. For the Learning of Mathematics, 19(2), 2-10.
10. Colin, P., Chauvet, F., & Viennot, L. (2002). Reading images in optics: students' difficulties and teachers' views. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 313-332.
11. diSessa, A. (1993). Towards an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2-3), 105-225.
12. diSessa, A. A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B., & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Meta-representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10(2), 117-160.
13. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
14. Einstein, A. (1936). Physics and reality. Journal of the Franklin Institute, 221(3), 349-382.
15. Fetherstonhaugh, T., & Treagust, D. F. (1992). Students' understanding of light and its properties: Teaching to engender conceptual change. Science Education, 76, 653-672.
16. Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science: Hearing children's questions and theories, responding with curricula. New York: Teachers College Press.
17. Goldberg, F. M., & McDermott, L. C. (1987). An investigation of student understanding of the real image formed by a converging lens or concave mirror. American Journal of Physics, 55, 108-119.
18. Guesne, E. (1985). Light. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children's ideas in science. Philadelphia, PA: Open University Press.
19. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement vs traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.
20. Hammer, D. (1995). Student inquiry in a physics class discussion. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 401-430.
21. Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics, Physics Education Research Supplement, 68(Suppl. 1), S52-S59.
22. Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 53-91.
23. Hammer, D., & van Zee, E. H. (1999). Case studies of elementary student inquiry in physical science. Grant #99-86846, National Science Foundation.
24. Herrenkohl, L., Palinscar, A. S., DeWater, L. S., & Kawasaki, K. (1999). Developing scientific communities in classrooms: A sociocognitive approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 451-493.
25. Hestenes, D. (1997). Modeling methodology for physics teachers. In E. Redish & J. Rigden (Eds.), The changing role of the physics department in modern universities (Part II, pp. 935-957). College Park, MD: American Institute of Physics. http://modeling.la.asu.edu/modeling.html
26. Hodson, D. (1988). Toward a philosophically more valid science curriculum. Science Education, 72(1), 19-40.
27. Hogan, K. (1999). Thinking aloud together: A test of an intervention to foster students' collaborative scientific reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1085-1109.
28. Hymes, D. (1962). The ethnography of speaking. In T. Gladwin & W. Sturtevant (Eds.), Anthropology and human behavior (pp. 15-52). Washington, DC: Anthropology Society of Washington.
29. Hymes, D. (1972). Models for the interaction of language and social life. In J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication (pp. 35-71). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
30. Iwasyk, M. (1997). Kids questioning kids: "Experts" sharing. Science and Children, 35(1), 42-46.
31. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.
32. Laws, P. W. (1991). Calculus-based physics without lectures, Physics Today, 44(12). http://physics.dickinson.edu/~wp_web/Introduction/ Introduction_home.htm
33. Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
34. Linn, M., & Hsi, S. (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35. McDermott, L. C. (1990). A perspective on teacher preparation in physics and other sciences: The need for special science courses for teachers. American Journal of Physics, 58, 734-742.
36. McDermott, L. C. (1996). Physics by inquiry. New York: Wiley. http://www.phys.washington.edu/groups/peg/pbi.html
37. Meyer, K., & Woodruff, E. (1997). Consensually driven explanation in science teaching. Science Education, 81, 173-192.
38. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/4962.html
39. National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/9596.html
40. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of argumentation in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553-576.
41. Philipsen, G. (1982) The qualitative case study as a strategy in communication inquiry. The Communicator, 12, 4-17.
42. Philipsen, G. (1992). Speaking culturally: Explorations in social communication. New York: State University of New York Press.
43. Polman, J. L., & Pea, R. D. (2001). Transformative communication as a cultural tool for guiding inquiry science. Science Education, 85, 223-238.
44. Reiner, M. (1998). Thought experiments and collaborative learning in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 20, 1043-1058.
45. Rice, K., & Feher, E. (1987). Pinholes and images: Children's conceptions of light and vision. Science Education, 71, 629-639.
46. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating: convergent conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 235-276.
47. Roth, W.-M. (1996). Teacher questioning in an open-inquiry learning environment: Interactions of context, content, and student responses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 709-736.
48. Saha, P. K. (1984). Bengali. In W. S., Chisholm, L. T., Milic, & J. A. C. Greppin (Eds.), Interrogativity: A colloquium on the grammar, typology, and pragmatics of questions in seven diverse languages. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
49. Shapiro, B. (1994). What children bring to light: A constructivist perspective on children's learning in science. New York: Teachers College Press.
50. Simpson, D. (1997). Collaborative conversations: Strategies for engaging students in productive dialogues. The Science Teacher, 64(8), 40-43.
51. Smith, J. P., diSessa, A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 115-163.
52. van Zee, E. H. (2000). Analysis of a student-generated inquiry discussion. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 115-142.
53. van Zee, E. H., Iwasyk, M., Kurose, A., Simpson, D., & Wild, J. (2001). Student and teacher questioning during conversations about science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 159-190.
54. van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997a). Reflective discourse: Developing shared understandings in a high school physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 209-228.
55. van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997b). Using questioning to guide student thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 229-271.