Connected knowledge in science and mathematics education

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 28, Issue 13, 2006, Pages 1579-1599

  Zohar, Anat ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750627625     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690500439199     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Active Learning Practices for Schools.(2004) What is understanding? A deeper look. Retrieved May, 2004, from http://learnweb.harvard.edu/alps/ tfu/info1b.cfm
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science.(1993) Benchmarks for Science literacy. Washington DC: Author.
3. Arambula-Greenfield, T. and Feldman, A. (1997) Improving science teaching for all students School Science and Mathematics, 97, pp. 377-386.
4. Baxter Magolda, M. B.(1992) Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender-related patterns in students' intellectual development. San Francisco CA: Jossey-Bass.
5. Baxter Magolda, M. B.(2002) Epistemological reflections: The evolution of epistemological assumptions from age 18 to 30. In Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. (pp. 89-102). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Belenky, M. F and Clinchy, B. M and Goldberger, N. R and Tarule, J. M.(1986) Women's ways of knowing - The development of self, body, and mind. New York: Basic Books.
7. Boaler, J. (1997) Reclaiming school mathematics: The girls fight back. Gender and Education, 9, pp. 285-305.
8. (1999) How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington DC: National Research Council, National Academy Press.
9. Brickhouse, N. W.(1998) Feminism(s) and science education. In International handbook of science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
10. Chi, M. T. H. and Feltovich, P. J. and Glaser, R. (1981) Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices Cognitive Science 5, pp. 121-152.
11. Clinchy, B. M. (1989) The development of thoughtfulness in college women: Integrating reason and care American Behavioral Scientists, 32, pp. 647-657.
12. Clinchy, B. M.(2002) Revisiting women's ways of knowing. In Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing. (pp. 63-87). Mahwah NJ & London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. deGroot, A. D.(1965) Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.
14. Flavell, J. H. and Miller, P. H. and Miller, S. A.(2001) Cognitive development (4th ed.) Upper Saddle River NJ: Prentice Hall.
15. Galotti, K. M. and Clinchy, B. M. and Ainsworth Kathryn, H. and Mansfield, A. F. (1999) A new way of assessing ways of knowing: The Attitudes Toward Thinking and Learning Survey (ATTLS) Sex Roles, 40, pp. 745-766.
16. Galotti, K. M. and Drebus, D. W. and Reimer, R. L. (2001) Ways of knowing as learning styles: Learning MAGIC with a partner Sex Roles, 44, pp. 419-436.
17. Gilligan, C.(1982) In a different voice. Boston MA: Harvard University Press.
18. Gilligan, C.(1987) Moral orientation and moral development. In Women and moral theory. (pp. 19-33). Totowa NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.
19. Glaser, R. and Chi, M. T. H.(1988) Overview. In The Nature of Expertise. (pp. xv-xxvii). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Haraway, D.(1989) Primate visions: Gender, race and nature in the world of modern science. New York: Routledge.
21. Harding J. (1991) Whose science? Whose knowledge?. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.
22. Harding, J.(1998) Gender and science. In Encyclopedia of philosophy. (pp. 861-868). London: Routledge.
23. Harding, J.(1996) Science in a masculine strait-jacket. In Gender, science and mathematic. (pp. 3-15). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
24. Hart, C.(1996) Changing physics to suit the girls?. In Equity in the classroom. (pp. 236-241). London & Wasington DC: Falmer Press and UNESCO.
25. Haussler, P. and Hoffman, L. and Langeheine, R. and Rost, J. and Sivers, K. (1998) A typology of students' interest in physics and the distribution of gender and age within each type International Journal of Science Education, 20, pp. 223-238.
26. Head, J.(1996) Gender identity and cognitive style. In Equity in the classroom. (pp. 59-69). London & Washington DC: Falmer Press and UNESCO.
27. Hildebrand, G. M.(1996) Redefining achievement. In Equity in the classroom. (pp. 149-172). London & Washington DC: Falmer Press and UNESCO.
28. Hinsley, D. A. and Hayes, J. R. and Simon, H. A.(1977) From words to equations: Meaning and representation in algebra word problems. In Cognitive processes in comprehension. (pp. 89-106). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.
29. Keller, E. F.(1983) A feeling for the organism. New York: Freeman.
30. Keller, E. F.(1985) Reflections on gender and science. New Haven CT: Yale University Press.
31. Knight, H. K. and Elfenbein, M. H. and Martin, B. M. (1997) Relationship of connected and separate knowing to the learning styles of Kolb, formal reasoning and intelligence Sex Roles, 37, pp. 401-413.
32. Labudde, P. and Herzog, W. and Nevenschwander, M. P. (2000) Girls and physics: Teaching and learning strategies tested by classroom interventions in grade 11 International Journal of Science Education 22, pp. 143-157.
33. Lewis, S.(1996) Intervention programs in science and engineering education: From secondary schools to universities. In Equity in the classroom. Paris: UNESCO.
34. Longino, H.(1990) Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
35. Lyons, N. (1983) Two perspectives on self, relationships, and morality. Harvard Educational Review, 53, pp. 125-145.
36. Mather-Saul, J.(2003) Feminism: Issues and arguments. Oxford: Oxford Uninversity Press.
37. Millar, R. and Osborne, J.(1998) Beyond 2000; Science education for the future. London: King's College.
38. Miller, P. H.(2000) The development of interconnected thinking. In Toward a feminist developmental psychology. (pp. 45-59). New York & London: Routledge.
39. National Research Council.(1996) National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
40. National Research Council of Teachers of Mathematics.(2000) Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston VA: Author.
41. Noddings, N.(1984) Caring, a feminine approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.
42. Nuffield Curriculum Center.(2002) 21st Century Science. Nuffield Curriculum Center, University of York, Science Education Group. Retrieved July 8, 2005, from http://www.21stcenturyscience.org/newmodel/ index.asp
43. Okin, S. M.(1994) Thinking like a woman. In Feminism. (pp. 338-355). Aldershot: Edward Elgar Publishing.
44. Ormerod, M. B.(1981) Factors differentially affecting the science subject preferences, choices and attitudes of girls and boys. In The missing half: Girls and science education. (pp. 100-112). Manchester: Manchester University Press.
45. Perkins, D.(1992) Smart schools - From training memories to training minds. New York: The Free Press.
46. Perkins, D. (1993) Teaching for understanding American Educator 17((8)), pp. 28-35.
47. Perkins, D. N. and Salomon, G. (1989) Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18, pp. 16-25.
48. Perkins, D. N. and Simmons, R. (1988) Patterns of misunderstanding: An integrative model for science, math, and programming Review of Educational Research, 58, pp. 303-326.
49. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority.(2005) Science for public understanding Retrieved July, 2005, from http://www.qca.org.uk/index.html
50. Robinson, C. S. and Hayes, J. R.(1978) Making inferences about relevance in understanding problems. In Human reasoning. Washington DC: Winston.
51. Rogoff, B.(1990) Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
52. Roychoudhury, A. and Tippins, D. J. and Nichols, E. (1995) Gender-inclusive science teaching: A feminist constructivist approach Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, pp. 897-924.
53. Rutherford, F. J. and Ahlgren, A.(1990) Science for all Americans. New York & Oxford: Oxford University Press.
54. Schwab, J.(1978) Science, curriculum, and liberal education: Selected essays. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.
55. Smail, B.(1984) Organizing the curriculum to fit girls' interests. In Science for all girls?. Buckingham: Open University Press.
56. Staberg, E. M. (1994) Gender and science in Swedish compulsory school Gender and Education, 6, pp. 35-46.
57. Stadler, H. and Benke, G. and Duit, R.(2001) How do boys and girls use language in physics classes?. In Research in science education - Past, present, and future. (pp. 283-288). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
58. Stadler, H. and Duit, R. and Benke, G. (2000) Do boys and girls understand physics differently? Physics Education, 35, pp. 417-422.
59. Stewart, M. (1998) Gender issues in physics education Educational Research, 40, pp. 283-293.
60. Voss, J. F. and Greene, T. R. and Post, T. A. and Penner, B. C.(1984) Problem solving skills in the social science. In The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research theory. New York: Academic Press.
61. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
62. Wineburg, S. S. (1991) Historical problem solving: A study of the cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, pp. 73-87.
63. Zohar, A.(2004) Higher order thinking in science classrooms: Students' thinking and teachers professional development. dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
64. Zohar, A. and Bronstein, B. (2005) Physics teachers' knowledge and beliefs regarding girls' low participation rates in advanced physics classes International Journal of Science Education, 27, pp. 61-78.
65. Zohar, A. and Sela, D. (2002) Her physics, his physics: Gender issues in Israeli advanced placement physics classes International Journal of Science Education, 25, pp. 245-268.