Proliferation of inscriptions and transformations among preservice science teachers engaged in authentic science

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 44, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 538-564

  Lunsford, Eddie ^a   Melear, Claudia T ^b   Roth, Wolff Michael ^c   Perkins, Matthew ^d   Hickok, Leslie G ^b  

^a Southwestern Community College   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA   (Canada)

^d Oak Ridge High School   (United States)

Author keywords

Biology; Inquiry; Science teacher education

Indexed keywords

SCIENCE TEACHERS; TEXT-BASED INSCRIPTIONS; UNDERGRADUATE DEGREES;

DATABASE SYSTEMS; GRAPH THEORY; MATHEMATICAL TRANSFORMATIONS; NATURAL SCIENCES; STUDENTS;

TEACHING;

EID: 34247339217     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: 10982736     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.20160     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Bastide, F. (1990). The iconography of scientific texts: Principles of analysis. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 187-229). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
3. Bowen, G.M., & Roth, W.-M. (2002). Why students may not learn to interpret scientific inscriptions? Research in Science Education, 32, 303-327.
4. Bowen, G.M., & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Data and graph interpretation practices among preservice science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 1063-1088.
5. 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.
6. Crawford, T., Kelly, G., & Brown, C. (2000). Ways of knowing beyond facts and laws of science: An ethnographic investigation of student engagement in scientific practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 237-358.
7. Cunningham, A. (1988). Getting the game right: Some plain words on the identity and invention of science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 19, 365-389.
8. Darling, D.C., & Werenn, J.H. (1990). Biosystematics of Nasonia: Two new species reared from birds nests in North America. Annals of the Entomological Society of North America, 83, 352-370.
9. Denzin, N.K. (1988). The research act (3rd ed.) New York: Prentice Hall.
10. Denzin, N.K., & Lincoln, Y.S. (Eds.), (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) London: Sage.
11. Edgerton, S. (1985). The Renaissance development of the scientific illustration. In J. Shirley & D. Hoeniger (Eds.), Science and the arts in the Renaissance (pp. 168-197). Washington, DC: Folger Shakespeare Library.
12. Greeno, J.G., & Hall, R.P. (1997). Practicing representation. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 361-367.
13. Henderson, K. (1991). Flexible sketches and inflexible data bases: Visual communication. conscription devices, and boundary objects in design engineering. Science, Technology & Human Values, 16, 448-473.
14. Hickok, L.G., Warne, T.R., Baxter, S.L., & Melear, C.T. (1998). Sex and the C-Fern: Not just another life cycle. BioScience, 48, 1031-1037.
15. Jorgensen, D.L. (1989). Participant observation: A methodology for human studies. London: Sage.
16. Janvier, C. (1987). Translation processes in mathematics education. In C. Janvier (Ed.), Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics (pp. 27-32). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Kelly, G.J., & Green, J. (Eds.), (1997). Journal of Classroom Interaction, 32.
18. King, B.H. (1993). Flight activity in the parasitoid wasp Nasonia vitripennis. Journal of Insect Behavior, 6, 313-321.
19. Klaasen, W.W.J.M., & Lijnse, P.L. (1996). Interpreting students' and teachers' discourse in science classes: An underestimated problem? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 115-134.
20. Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russel, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for learning. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 9, 105-143.
21. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. London: Open University Press.
22. Latour, B. (1993). La clef de Berlin et autres leçons d'un amateur de sciences [The key to Berlin and other lessons of a science lover]. Paris: Éditions la D́couverte.
23. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. London: Sage.
24. Lehrer, R., Strom, D., & Confrey, J. (2002). Grounding metaphors and inscriptional resonance: Children's emerging understanding of mathematical similarity. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 359-398.
25. Lunsford, E., Melear, C.T., & Hickok, L.G. (2005). Knowing and teaching science: Just do it. In R.E. Yager (Ed.), Exemplary science: Best practices in professional development. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
26. Lynch, M., & Woolgar, S. (Eds.), (1990). Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
27. Meira, L. (1995). The microevolution of mathematical representations in children's activity. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 269-313.
28. Melear, C.T., Goodlaxson, J.D., Warne, T.R., & Hickok, L.G. (2000). Teaching preservice science teachers how to do science: Responses to the research experience. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 11, 77-90.
29. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.
30. National Research Council (NRC). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
31. Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.) London: Sage.
32. Popkewitz, T. (2004). The alchemy of the mathematics curriculum: Inscriptions and the fabrication of the child. American Educational Research Journal, 41, 3-34.
33. Pozzer, L.L., & Roth, W.-M. (2003). Prevalence, function, and structure of photographs in high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1089-1114.
34. Roth, W.-M. (1995). Authentic school science: Knowing and learning in open-inquiry science laboratories. Boston: Kluwer.
35. Roth, W.-M. (1996). Where is the context in contextual word problems?: Mathematical practices and products in Grade 8 students' answers to story problems. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 487-527.
36. Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G.M. (1994). Mathematization of experience in a Grade 8 open-inquiry environment: An introduction to the representational practices of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 293-318.
37. Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M.K. (1998). Inscriptions: Toward a theory of representing science as social practice. Review of Educational Research, 68, 35-59.
38. 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.
39. Roth, W.-M., McGinn, M.K., & Bowen, G.M. (1998). How prepared are preservice teachers to teach scientific inquiry? Levels of performance in science representation practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 9, 25-48.
40. Roth, W.-M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1992). The social construction of scientific concepts or The concept map as conscription device and tool for social thinking in high school science. Science Education, 76, 531-557.
41. Sandoval, W.A., & Millwood, K.A. (2005). The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 23-55.
42. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations (3rd ed.) London: Macmillan.
43. Wu, H.-K., & Krajcik, J.S. (2006). Inscriptional practices in two inquiry-based classrooms: A case study of seventh graders' use of data tables and graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 63-95.