In their own words: Understanding student conceptions of writing through their spontaneous metaphors in the science classroom

Instructional Science

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 227-278

  Levin, Tamar ^a   Wagner, Tili ^b  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b BEIT BERL COLLEGE   (Israel)

Author keywords

Cognitive processes; Metaphors; Science education; Student views; Writing to learn

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744725174     PISSN: 00204277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11251-005-6929-x     Document Type: Article

References (168)

1. Alamargot, D. & Chanquoy, L. (2001). General introduction. A definition of writing and a presentation of the main models. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series ed.) & D. Aalamargot & L. Chanquoy (Volume eds), Studies in writing, Vol. 9. Through the models of writing, pp. 1-29. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Netherlands.
2. Bahns, M. (1989). Writing in science education classes for elementary school teachers classroom applications: What works and how. In P. Connolly & T. Vilardi, (eds), Writing to learn mathematics and science, pp. 178-189. Teachers College Press: New York.
3. Bartel, R. (1983). Metaphors and symbols: Forays into language. Urbana: NCTE.
4. Baxter, G.P., Bass, K.M. & Glasser, R. (2001). Notebook writing in three fifth-grade science classrooms. Elementary School Journal 102(2): 123-140.
5. Bereiter, C. (1980). Development in writing. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg, (eds), Cognitive processes in writing, Lawrence Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ.
6. Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The Psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
7. Berry, J. & Sahlberg, P. (1996). Investigating pupils' ideas of learning. Learning and Instruction 6: 19-36.
8. Biggs, J.B. (1988a). Approaches to learning and essay writing. In R.R. Schmeck, (ed.), Learning strategies and learning styles, pp. 185-226. Plenum: New York.
9. Biggs, J. (1988b). The role of metacognition in enhancing learning. Australian Journal of Education 32: 127-138.
10. Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for quality learning at university. Buckingham: SRHE/Open University Press.
11. Biggs, J.B., Lai, P., Tang, C. & Lavelle, E. (1999). The effect of a graduate workshop on graduate students writing in English as a second language. British Journal of Educational Psychology 69: 293-306.
12. Blair, I.V. & Banaji, M.R. (1996). Automatic and controlled processes in stereotype priming. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 70: 1142-1163.
13. Boscolo, P. & Mason, L. (2001). Writing to learn, writing to transfer. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series ed.) & P. Tynjala, L. Mason & K. Lonka (Volume eds) Studies in writing, Vol. 7, writing as a learning tool: Integrating theory and practice pp. 83-104. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Netherlands.
14. BouJaoude, S. (2000). Conceptions of science teaching revealed by metaphors and by answers to open-ended questions. Journal of Science Teacher Education 11(2): 173-186.
15. Braaksma, M.A.H., Rijlaarsdam, G., van den Bergh, H. & van Hout-Wolters, B.H.A.M. (2004). Observational learning and its effects on the orchestration of writing processes. Cognition and Instruction 22(1): 1-36.
16. Braaksma, M.A.H., van den Bergh, H., Rijlaarsdam, G. & Couzijn, M. (2001). Effective learning activities in observation tasks when learning to write and read argumentative texts. European Journal of Psychology of Education 1: 33-48.
17. Brand, A. (1987). The why of cognition: Emotion and the writing process. CCC 38: 436-43.
18. Briscoe, C. (1991). The dynamic interactions among beliefs, role metaphors, and teaching practices: A case study of teacher change. Science Education 75(2): 185-199.
19. Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
20. Calderhead, J. & Robson, M. (1991). Images of teaching: Student teachers' early conceptions of classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education 7(1): 1-8.
21. Cameron, L. (2002). Metaphors in the learning of science: A discourse focus. British Educational Research Journal 28(5): 673-688.
22. Champagne, A.B. & Bunce, D.M. (1991). Learning-theory-based science teaching. In S.M. Glynn, R.H. Yeany & B.K. Britton, (eds), The psychology of learning science, pp. 21-42. Erlbaum: Hillsdale NJ.
23. Campbell, J., Smith, D. & Brooker, R. (1998). From conception to performance: How undergraduate students conceptualise and construct essays. Higher Education 36: 449-489.
24. Chinn, P.W.U. & Hilgers, T.L. (2000). From corrector to collaborator: The range of instructor roles in writing-based natural and applied science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 37: 3-25.
25. Connolly, P. (1989). Writing and the ecology of learning. In P. Connolly & T. Vilardi, (eds), writing to learn mathematics and science, pp. 1-14. Teachers College Press: New York.
26. Cook-Sather, A. (2002). Authorizing students' perspectives: Toward trust, dialogue, and change in education. Educational Researcher 31(4): 3-14.
27. Cook-Sather, A. & Shultz, J. (2001b). Negotiating worlds and words: Writing about students' experiences of school. In J. Shultz & A. Cook-Sather, (eds), In our own words: Students' perspectives on school, pp. 165-178. Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham, MD.
28. Cook-Sather, A. & Shultz, J. (2001a). Starting where the learner is: Listening to students. In J. Shultz & A. Cook-Sather, (eds), In our own words: Students' perspectives on school, pp. 1-17. Rowman & Littlefield: Lanham, MD.
29. Cordova, D.I. & Lepper, M.R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology 88: 715-730.
30. Duit, R. (1991). On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Science Education 75(6): 649-672.
31. Dyson, A.H. (1987). Individual differences. I Beginning composing. Witten Communication 4: 411-442.
32. Dunbar, K. (1999). The scientist in vivo: How scientists think and reason in the laboratory. In L. Magnani, N. Nersessian & P. Thagard (eds). Model-based reasoning in scientific discovery. Plenum Press.
33. Emig, J. (1977). Writing as a mode of learning. College Composition and Communication 28: 122-128.
34. Erickson, F. & Schultz, J. (1992). Students' experience of the curriculum. In P. Jackson, (ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum, pp. 465-485. Macmillan: New York.
35. Fauconnier, G. & Turner, M. (1998). Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science 22(2): 133-187.
36. Fauconnier G. (1994). Mental spaces. New York: Cambridge University Press. [Originally published (1985) Cambridge: MIT Press.].
37. Fellows, N.J. (1994). A window into thinking: Using student wridug to understand conceptual change in science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 31: 9X5-1001.
38. Flower, L. (1994). The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
39. Galbraith, D. & Torrance, M. (1999). Conceptual processes in writing: from problem solving to text production. In G. Rijlaarsdam & E. Esperet (Series eds), & M. Torrence & D. Galbraith (Vol. eds), Studies in writing. Vol. 4. Knowing what to write: Conceptual processes in text production pp. 1-12. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
40. Galbraith, D. (1996). Self-monitoring, discovery through writing and individual differences in drafting strategy. In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. van den Bergt & M. Couzijn, (eds), Theories, models and methodology in writing research, pp. 121-141. Amsterdam University Press: Amsterdam.
41. Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science: Hearing children's questions and theories, responding with curricula. New York: Teachers College Press.
42. Galley, S. (1996). Talking their walk: Interviewing fifth graders about their literacy journeys. Language Arts 73: 249-254.
43. Gaskins, I.W., Guthrie, J.T., Satlow, E., Ostertag, LS., Byrne, J. & Connor, B. (1994) Integrating instruction of science, reading, and writing: Goals, teacher development, and assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 31, 1039-1056. Special issue: The reading-science learning-writing connection.
44. Glynn, S.M., Yeany, R.H. & Btitton, B.K. (1991). The psychology of learning science. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
45. Gibbs, R.W. (1994). The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language and understanding. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. Gilbert, J. & Boulter, C. (1998). Learning science through models and modelling. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin, (eds), International handbook of science education, pp. 52-66. Kluwer: Netherlands.
47. Gentner, D., Holyoak, K.J. & Kokinov, B.N. (eds). (2000). The analogical mind: Perspectives from cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48. Gentner, D. & Gentner, D.R. (1983). Flowing waters and teeming crowds: Mental models of electricity. In D. Gentner & A.L. Stevens, (eds), Mental models, pp. 99-129. Erlbaum: Hillsdale NJ.
49. Glanz, J. (1998). Action research: An educational leader's guide to action research. Norwood MA: Christopher-Gordon.
50. Grady J.E., Oakley T. & Coulson S. (1999) Blending and metaphor. In G. Steen & R. Gibbs (eds), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics. Current issues in linguistic theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (http://cogweb.ucla.edu/CogSci/Grady_99.html).
51. Graham, S. & Harris, K.R. (1994). Implications of constructivism for teaching writing to students with special needs. The Journal of Special Education 28: 275-289.
52. Graves, D. (1973). An examination of the writing processes of seven-year-old children. Research in the Teaching of English 9: 227-241.
53. Hand, B. & Keys, C. (1999). Inquiry investigation. The Science Teacher 66(4): 27-29.
54. Hand, B.M. & Prain, V. (1995). Using writing to help improve students' understanding of science knowledge. Science Education 77: 112-117.
55. Hand, B., Prain, V. & Wallace, C. (2002). Influences of writing tasks on students' answers to recall and higher-level test questions. Research in Science Education 32: 19-34.
56. Hand, B., Treagust, D. & Vance, K. (1997). Student perceptions of the social constructivist classroom. Science Education 81: 561-576.
57. Hand, B., Wallace, K.W. & Yang, E. (2004). Using a Science writing heuristic to enhance learning outcomes from laboratory activities in seventh-grade science: Quantitative and qualitative aspects. International Journal of Science Education 26(2): 131-149.
58. Hanrahan, M. (1999). Rethinking science literacy: Enhancing communication and participation in school science through affirmational dialogue journal writing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36(6): 699-717.
59. Harrison, R. (2000). Learner managed learning: Managing to learn or learning to manage? International Journal of Lifelong Education 19(4): 312-321.
60. Hayes, J.R. (1996). A new framework for understanding cognition and affect in writing. In CM. Levy & S. Ransdell, (eds), The science of writing: Theories, methods, individual differences, and applications, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah N.J.
61. Hayes, J.R. & Flower, L.S. (1983) Uncovering cognitive processes in writing: An introduction of protocol analysis. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (eds), Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisicplinary approach, pp. 3-30. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
62. Heisenberg, W. (1958). Physics and philosophy: The Revolution in modern science. New York: Harper & Row.
63. Hildebrand, G.M. (1998). Disrupting hegemonic writing practices in school science: Contesting the right way to write. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 35: 345-362.
64. Hildebrand G.M. (1999) Breaking the pedagogic contract: Teacher's and student's voices. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), Boston.
65. Holliday W.G., Yore L.D. & Alvermann D.E. (1994) The reading-science learning-writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 31(9): 877-896. Special issue: The reading-science learning-writing connection.
66. Hounsell, D. (1984). Essay planning and essay writing. Higher Education & Research 3(1): 13-31.
67. Hounsell, D. (1997). Learning and essay-writing. In F. Marton, D. Hounsell & N. Entwistle, (eds), The experience of learning, pp. 103-123. Scottish Academic Press: Edinburgh.
68. Howard, V.A. & Barton, J.H. (1986). Thinking on paper. New York: Quill.
69. Inbar, D. (1997). The liberal educational prison: Metaphors and imagery. In A. Playi (ed.), Education under the test of time, pp. 109-125. Teachers Association for Advancing Teaching and Education, Ramot, Tel Aviv university.
70. Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
71. Johnson-Laird, P.N. (1989). Mental models. In M.I. Posner, (ed.), Foundations of cognitive science, pp. 469-499. MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
72. Kern, R. (2000). Literacy and language teaching. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
73. Key, C.W. (1999a) Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education 83: 115-130.
74. Keys, C.W. (1999b). Language as an indicator of meaning generation: The analysis of middle school students' written discourse about scientific investigations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36(9): 1044-1106.
75. Keys, C.W. (2000). Investigating the thinking processes of Eighth Grade writers during the composition of a scientific laboratory report. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 37(7): 676-690.
76. Keys, C.W., Hand, B.M., Prain, V. & Collins, S. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36(10): 1065-1084.
77. Keys, C.W., Hand, B., Prain, V. & Sellers, S. (1998) Promoting conceptual understanding of investigatory science through writing heuristics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
78. Keystone, D. (1993). Reflective questions. In J. Scott, (ed.), Science and language link, pp. 3-18. Heinemann: Portsmouth.
79. King, T. (2002). Development of student skills in reflective writing, presentation in conference, "Spheres of Influence: Ventures and Visions in Educational Development," 3-6 July, 2002, The University of Western Australia, available at http://www.csd.uwa.edu.au/iced2002/publication/Terry_King.pdf.
80. King, P. & Kitchener, K. (1994). Developing reflective judgment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
81. Klein, P.D. (1999). Learning science through writing: The role of rhetorical structures. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research 45: 132-153.
82. Klein, P.D. (2000). Elementary students' strategies for writing-to-learn in science. Cognition and Instruction 18(3): 317-348.
83. Klein, P.D. (2004). Constructing scientific explanations through writing. Instructional Science 32: 191-231.
84. Kohn, A. (1993). Choices for children: Why and how to let students decide. Phi Delta Kappan 75(1): 9-20.
85. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
86. Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony, (eds), Metaphor and thought, pp. 202-251. 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
87. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
88. Lakoff, G. & Nunez, R.E. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York, NY: Basic Books.
89. Lakoff, G. & Turner, M. (1989). More than cool reason. Chigaco, Illinois: University of Chicago Press.
90. Lavelle, E. (1993). Development and validation of an inventory to assess processes in college composition. British Journal of Educational Psychology 63: 489-499.
91. Lavelle, E. (1997). Writing style and the narrative essay. British Journal of Educational Psychology 67: 475-482.
92. Lavelle, E. (2003). The quality of university writing: A preliminary analysis of undergraduate portfolios. Quality in Higher Education 9: 313-332.
93. Lavelle, E. & Guarino, A. (2003). A multidimensional model approach to understanding college writing processes. Educational Psychology 23: 295-305.
94. Lavelle, E., Smith, J. & O'Ryan, L. (2002) The writing approaches of secondary students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 72.
95. Lavelle, E. & Zuercher, N. (2001). Writing approaches of university students. Higher Education 40: 373-391.
96. Lea, M. & Street, B. (1998). Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach in. Studies in Higher Education 23(2): 157-172.
97. Lee, O. & Fradd, S.H. (1998). Science for all, including students from non-English-language backgrounds. Educational Researcher 27: 12-21.
98. Levin, T. & Wagner, T. (2004). Enhancing thinking dispositions through informal writing experiences in science classes. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series ed.) and G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Vol. eds), Studies in writing, Volume 14, Effective learning and teaching of writing, 2nd edition, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
99. Levin, B. (2000). Putting students at the center in education reform. International Journal of Educational Change 1(2): 155-172.
100. Light, G. (2002). From the personal to the public: Conceptions of creative writing in higher education. Higher Education 43: 257-276.
101. Locke, D. (1992). Science as writing. New Haven: Yale University Press.
102. Martinez, M.A., Sauleda, N. & Huber, G.L. (2001). Metaphors as blueprints of thinking about teaching and learning, Teaching and Teacher Education 17(8): 965-977.
103. Marton, F., Watkins, D. & Tang, C. (1997). Discontinuities and continuities in the experience of learning: An interview study of high school students in Hong Kong. Learning and Instruction 7: 21-48.
104. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science 10(2): 177-200.
105. Marshall, J.D., Smagorinsky, P. & Smith, M. (1995). The language of interpretation: Patterns of discourse in discussions of literature. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
106. Marshall, J. D. (1987/2000). The effects of writing on students' understanding of literary text. Research in the Teaching of English, 21: 30-63.
107. Mason, L. & Boscolo, P. (2000). Writing and conceptual change. What changes? Instructional Science 28(3): 199-226.
108. McLeod, S. (1991). Some thoughts about feelings: The affective domain and the writing process. College Composition and Communication 38(1987): 426-35.
109. McLeod, S. (1997). Notes on the heart: Affective issues in the writing classroom. Carbondale, IL: Southern llinois University Press.
110. Mitra, D.L. (2004). The significance of students: Can increasing "student voice" in schools lead to gains in youth development? Teachers College Record 106(4): 651-688.
111. Moon, J.A. (1999). Learning Journals: A handbook for academics, students, and professional development. London: Kogan.
112. Moore, R. (1994). Writing to learn biology. Journal of College Science Teaching 23:289-95.
113. Moser, K.S. (2000). Metaphor analysis in psychology - method, theory, and fields of application. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 1(2). Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/2-00/2-00moser-e.htm.
114. Munby, H. & Russell, T. (1990). Metaphors in the study of teachers' professional knowledge. Theory into Practice 29: 116-121.
115. Ogborn, J., Kress, G., Martins, I. & McGillicuddy, K (1996). Explaining science in the classroom. Buckingham: Open University Press.
116. Oldfather, P. (ed.). (1995). Learning from student voices. Theory Into Practice, 43: 2.
117. Ottati, V., Rhoads, S. & Graesser, A.C. (1999). The effect of metaphor on processing style in an persuasion task: A motivational resonance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 77(4): 688-697.
118. Ortony A. (1975). Why metaphors are necessary and not just nice. Educational Theory 25(Winter): 45-53.
119. Ortony A. (1993) (ed.). Metaphor and thought (2nd edn.). Cambridge University Press.
120. Petrie H. F. (1980). Metaphor and learning. In A. Ortony, (ed.), Metaphor and thought, pp. 438-461. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
121. Petrie, H.G. & Oshlag, R.S. (1993). Metaphor and learning. In A. Ortony, (ed.), Metaphor and thought, pp. 579-609. 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press: New York.
122. Powell, R. (1994). From field science to classroom science: A case study constrained emergence in a secondcareer science teacher. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 31: 273-291.
123. Prain, V. & Hand, B. (1996a). Writing for learning in secondary science: Rethinking practices. Teaching and Teacher Education 12(6): 609-626.
124. Prain, V. & Hand, B. (1996b). Writing for learning in the junior secondary science classroom: Issues arising from a case study. International Journal of Science Education 18(1): 117-128.
125. Prain, V. & Hand, B. (1999). Students perceptions of writing for learning in secondary school science. Science Education 83: 151-162.
126. Prosser, M. & Webb, C. (1994). Relating the process of undergraduate essay writing to the finished product. Studies in Higher Education 19: 125-138.
127. Ritchie, S.M. (1994). Metaphor as a tool for constructivist science teaching. International Journal of Science Education 16(3): 293-305.
128. Rizzuto, A. (2001). Metaphors of a bodily mind. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association 49(2): 535-568.
129. Rivard, L.P. (1994). A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 31: 969-983.
130. Rivard, L.P. & Straw, S.B. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study. Science Education 84: 566-593.
131. Rivers, W. (2001). Autonomy at all costs: An ethnography of metacognitive self-assessment and self-management among experienced language learners. Modern Language Journal 85(2): 279-290.
132. Rosebery, A.S., Warren, B. & Conant, F.R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 33: 569-600.
133. Ross, D. (1990). Programmatic structures for the preparation of reflective teachers. In R.T. Clift, W.R. Houston & M.C. Pugach, (eds), Encouraging reflective practice in education: An analysis of issues and programs, pp. 97-118. Teachers College Press: New York.
134. Routman, R. (1996). Literacy at the crossroads: Crucial talk about reading, writing, and other teaching dilemmas. NH: Heinemann.
135. Rowell, P.A. (1997). Learning in school science: The promises and practices of writing. Studies in Science Education 30: 19-56.
136. Rudduck, J., Chaplain, R. & Wallace, G. (eds). (1996) School improvement: What can pupils tell us? London: David Fulton Publishers.
137. Rudduck, J. & Flutter, J. (2000). Pupil participation and perspective: Carving a new order of experience. Cambridge Journal of Education 30(1): 75-89.
138. Rymer, J. (1988). Scientific composing processes: How eminent scientists write journal articles. In D.A. Jolliffe, (ed.), Advances in writing research, 2Ablex: Norwood.
139. Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1986). Helping students become better writers. School Administrator 42(4): 16-26.
140. Scheffler, I. (1991), 'Educational metaphors', 'computers in schools', In Praise of the cognitive emotions: And other essay in the philosophy of education, New York: Routledge.
141. Schon, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Towards a new design for teaching and learning in the profession. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
142. Stehney, A.K. (1990). A writing program and its lessons for mathematicians. In A. Sterrett, (ed.), Using writing to teach mathematics., pp. 26-29. Mathematical Association of America: Washington DC.
143. Shultz, J. & Cook-Sather, A. (eds), (2001) In our own words: Students' perspectives on school. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
144. Smees, R. & Thomas, S. (1998). Valuing pupils' views about school. British Journal of Curriculum and Assessment 8(3): 7-9.
145. Stadler, H., Benke, G. & Duit, R. (1999) How do boys and girls use language in physics classes? In research in science education. Past, present, and future. Proceedings of the Second International Conference of the European Science Education Research Association (E.S.E.R.A.). Kiel: 531-533.
146. Sternberg, R. J. & Horvath, J.A. (eds.) (1999). Tacit knowledge in professional practice. Researcher and practitioner perspectives. Mahwah, N J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
147. Stoddart, T., Pinal, A., Latzke, M. & Canaday, D. (2002). Integrating inquiry science and language development for English language learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39(8): 664-687.
148. Strike, K.L. & Posner, G.J. 1992. Conceptual change and science teaching. European Journal of Science Education, 4(3), 231-240.
149. Sutton, C. (1992). Words, science and learning. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
150. Sutton, C. (1996). Beliefs about science and beliefs about language. International Journal of Science Education 18: 1-18.
151. Taba, H. & Noel, E. (1975). Action research: A case study. Washington, DC: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
152. Taylor, C., Drury, H. & Lindsay, M. (2002). Investigating student attitudes to scientific writing - the effect of experience and expectations on performance in undergraduate writing programs and implications for program design. Paper presented at 8th International Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction: Writing Special Interest Group. Staffordshire University, Stafford, UK, 10-13 July.
153. Tobin, K. (1990). Changing metaphors and beliefs: A master switch for teaching? Theory into Practice 29(2): 122-127.
154. Tobin, K. (1993). Referents for making sense of science teaching. International Journal of Science Education 15: 241-254.
155. Tynjala, P. (2001). Writing, learning and the development of expertise in higher education. In P. Tynjala, L. Mason & K. Lonka, (eds), Writing as a learning tool, pp. 37-56. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht/London.
156. Turner, V. (1974). Ramas, fields, and metaphors. Ithaca: Cornell UP.
157. Vacca, R. & Linek, W.M. (1992). Writing to learn. In J.W. Irwin & M.A. Doyle, (eds), Reading/Writing connections: Learning from research, pp. 145-159. International Reading Association: Newark, DE.
158. Van Heerden, K.I. (2001). A phenomenological investigation into undergraduate students' experience of acquiring the discourse of engineering. Available at: http://www.ru.ac.za/library/theses/2001/vanheerden/.
159. Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction 4(1): 45-69.
160. Vosniadou, S. & Ortony, A. eds, (1989). Similarity and analogical reasoning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
161. Vygotsky, L. (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. M. Cole, V. Jon-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman, (eds) and trans.). MA: Harvard University Press.
162. Warwick, P., Sparks Linfield, R. & Stephenson, P. (1999). A comparison of primary school pupils' ability to express procedural understanding in science through speech and writing. International Journal of Science Education 21(8): 823-838.
163. Warwick, P., Stephenson, P. & Webster, J. (2003). Developing pupils' written expression of procedural understanding through the use of writing frames in science: Findings from a case study approach. International Journal of Science Education 25(2): 173-192.
164. Webb, G. (1997). Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography. Higher Education 33(2): 195-212.
165. Wellington, J. & Osborne, J. (2001). Language and literacy in science education. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
166. Woolnough, B.E. (1999). Learning by doing: Two classroom studies of pupils' preferred ways of learning science. The School Science Review 81(294): 27-34.
167. Woodford, F.P. (1967). Sounder thinking through clearer writing. Science 156: 743-745.
168. Yore, L.D. (2000). Enhancing science literacy for all students with embedded reading instruction and writing-to-learn activities. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 5: 105-122.