Moving from didactic to inquiry-based instruction in a science laboratory

American Biology Teacher

Volumn 68, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 342-345

  Lord, Thomas ^a   Orkwiszewski, Terri ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33748300536     PISSN: 00027685     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1662/0002-7685(2006)68[342:DTIIIA]2.0.CO;2     Document Type: Review

References (11)

1. Blank, L.M. (2000). A metacognitive learning cycle: A better warranty for student understanding? Science Education, 84, 486-503.
2. Enger, S. & Yager, R. (2001). Assessing Student Understanding in Science. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
3. Hart, C., Mulhall, P., Berry, A., Loughran, J. & Gunstone, R. (2000). What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? Journal in Science Teaching, 37, 655-675.
4. Healy, J. E. (2000). Assessment - A new way of thinking about learning. Journal of College Science Teaching, 29(6), 415-421.
5. Lord, T.R. (1999). Are we cultivating couch potatoes in our college science lectures? Journal for College Science Teachers, 29(1), 59-62.
6. Marbach-Ad, G. & Sokolove, P.G. (2000). Can undergraduate biology students learn to ask higher level questions? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 854-870.
7. Moore, R.W. (1996). A Scientific Attitude Inventory. Miami, OH: College of Education, Miami University.
8. Okey, J.R. & Dillashaw, F.G. (1995). Test of Integrated Process Skills. Athens, GA: College of Science Education, University of Georgia.
9. Weaver, G.C. (1998). Strategies in K-12 science instruction to promote conceptual change. Science Education, 82, 455-472.
10. Wiggins, G.P. & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
11. Yager, R. (1991). The constructivist learning model: Toward real reform in science education. The Science Teacher, 58(6), 53-57.