Connecting levels of representation: Emergent versus submergent perspective

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 30, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 1585-1603

  Rappoport, Lana T ^a   Ashkenazi, Guy ^a  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 52649167877     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690701447405     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Albanese, A. and Vicentini, M. (1997) Why do we believe that an atom is colorless? Reflections about the teaching of the particle model. Science & Education, 6, pp. 251-261.
2. Bodner, G. M. and Domin, D. S. (2000) Mental models: The role of representations in problem solving in chemistry. University Chemistry Education, 4:1, pp. 24-30.
3. Chi, M. T. H. (2005) Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14:2, pp. 161-199.
4. Dori, Y. J. and Hameiri, M. (2003) Multidimensional analysis system for quantitative chemistry problems: Symbol, macro, micro, and process aspects. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40:3, pp. 278-302.
5. Gabel, D. (1999) Improving teaching and learning through chemistry education research: A look to the future. Journal of Chemical Education, 76:4, pp. 548-554.
6. Johnstone, A. H. (1991) Why is science difficult to learn? Things are seldom what they seem. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 7, pp. 75-83.
7. Johnstone, A. H. (1993) The development of chemistry teaching. Journal of Chemical Education, 70, pp. 701-705.
8. Kozma, R. B. and Russel, J. (1997) Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34:9, pp. 949-968.
9. Lee, O., Eichinger, D. C., Anderson, C. W., Berkheimer, G. D. and Blakeslee, T. D. (1993) Changing middle school students' conceptions of matter and molecules. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30:3, pp. 249-270.
10. Nakhleh, M. B. (1993) Are our students conceptual thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers? Identifying conceptual students in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 70:1, pp. 52-55.
11. Nurrenbern, S. C. and Pickering, M. (1987) Concept learning versus problem solving: Is there a difference?. Journal of Chemical Education, 64:6, pp. 508-510.
12. Patton, M. Q. (1990) Qualitative evaluation and research methods, Sage, Newbury Park, CA
13. Penner, D. E. (2000) Explaining systems: Investigating middle school students' understanding of emergent phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37:8, pp. 784-806.
14. Rozier, S. and Viennot, L. (1991) Students' reasoning in thermodynamics. International Journal of Science Education, 13:2, pp. 159-170.
15. Sawrey, B. A. (1990) Concept learning versus problem solving: Revisited. Journal of Chemical Education, 67:3, pp. 253-254.
16. Shkedi, A. (2004) Second-order theoretical analysis: A method for constructing theoretical explanation. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 17:5, pp. 627-646.
17. Shkedi, A. (2005) Multiple case narrative: A qualitative approach to studying multiple populations, John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
18. Treagust, D. F., Chittleborough, G. and Mamiala, T. L. (2003) The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. International Journal of Science Education, 25:11, pp. 1353-1368.
19. Wilensky, U. (2001) Modeling nature's emergent patterns with multi-agent languages
20. Wilensky, U. and Resnick, M. (1999) Thinking in levels: A dynamic systems approach to making sense of the world. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8:1, pp. 3-19.