Narrowing the gulf between the practices of science and the elementary school science classroom

Elementary School Journal

Volumn 109, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 138-161

  Metz, Kathleen E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 54949107845     PISSN: 00135984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1086/590523     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
2. Brown, A. L., Ash, D. B., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. (1993). Distributed expertise in the classroom. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 188-228). New York: Cambridge University Press.
3. Brown, J. R. (2006). Thought experiments. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy [On-line]. Available: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2006/entries/thought-experiment/
4. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
5. Dunbar, K. (1999). How scientists build models in InVivo Science as a window in the scientific mind. In L. Magnani, N. Nersessian, & P. Thagard (Eds.), Model-based reasoning in scientific discovery (pp. 85-99). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
6. Duschl, R., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
7. Eslinger, E., & Metz, K. E. (2005, April). Enactment of epistemological message in the classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
8. Feynman, R. (1995). Six easy pieces: Essentials of physics explained by its most brilliant teacher. Reading, MA: Helix.
9. Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K. (1999). The scientist in the crib: Minds, brains, and how children learn. New York: William Morrow.
10. Gould, S. J. (1985). The flamingo's smile: Reflections in natural history. New York: W. W. Norton.
11. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1991). Sharing cognition through collective comprehension activity. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially-distributed cognition (pp. 331-348). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
12. Herrenkohl, L. R. (2006). Intellectual role taking: Supporting discussion in heterogeneous elementary science classes. Theory into Practice, 45(1), 47-54.
13. Latour, B. (1999). Pandora's hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2000). Modeling in mathematics and science. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 5, pp. 101-159). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2002). Symbolic communication in mathematics and science: Co-constituting inscription and thought. In E. Amsel & J. Byrnes (Eds.), Language, literacy, and cognitive development: The development and consequences of symbolic communication (pp. 167-192). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Mayr, E. (1997). This is biology: The science of the living world. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
17. Metz, K. E. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children's science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 93-127.
18. Metz, K. E. (2002a). Children doing science: Investigation of animal behavior. Unpublished science curriculum module for grades 1-3, University of California, Berkeley.
19. Metz, K. E. (2002b). Children doing science: Investigation of plants. Unpublished science curriculum module for grades 1-3, University of California, Berkeley.
20. Metz, K. E. (2004). Children's understanding of scientific inquiry: Their conceptualization of uncertainty in investigations of their own design. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 219-290.
21. Metz, K. E. (2006, March 15). Young children's scientific inquiry: Differentiating mutable from immutable constraints. Colloquium given to the Faculty of Education, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
22. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
23. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
24. Popper, K. (1972). Conjecture and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge (4th ed.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
25. Roseman, J. E., Kesidou, S., Stern, L., & Caldwell, A. (1999). Heavy books light on learning: AAAS Project 2061 evaluates middle grades science textbooks. Science Books & Films, 35(6) [On-line]. Available: http://www.project2061.org/publications/textbook/articles/heavy.htm
26. Schwab, J. J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. In J. Schwab & P. Brandwein (Eds.), The teaching of science (pp. 1-103). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
27. Simon, H. A. (2001). "Seek and ye shall find": How curiosity engenders discovery. In K. Crowley, C. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 5-20). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Smith, C. L., Maclin, D., Houghton, C., & Hennessey, M. G. (2000). Sixth-grade students' epistemologies of science: The impact of school experiences on epistemological development. Cognition and Instruction, 18(3), 349-422.
29. Valverde, G. A., & Schmidt, W. H. (2000). Great expectations: Learning from other nations in the quest for "world class" standards in U.S. school mathematics and science. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(5), 651-687.
30. Von Frisch, K. (1963). Man and the living world. Trans. E. B. Lowenstein. New York: Harcourt Brace.
31. Wong, N. (2006, April). Visual representation in science: A case study of an exemplary first-grade teacher. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.