Teacher, text, and experience: A case of young children's scientific inquiry

Journal of the Learning Sciences

Volumn 13, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 455-505

  Hapgood, Susanna ^a   Magnusson, Shirley J ^a   Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 7444227528     PISSN: 10508406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327809jls1304_1     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Anderson, R. D. (1983). A consolidation and appraisal of science education meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 495-507.
2. Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C. Metz, K. E., & Ash, D. B. (1997). The development of science learning abilities in children. In K. H@228>rnqvist & A. Burgen (Eds.), Growing up with science: Developing early understanding of science (pp. 7-40). Bristol, PA: Jessica Kingsley, Adademia Europaea.
3. Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4. Carpenter, P. A., & Shah, P. (1998). A model of the perceptual and conceptual processes in graph comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 4, 75-100.
5. Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999). All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. Child Development, 70, 1098-1120.
6. Clement, J. J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1241-1257.
7. The Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1994). From visual word problems to learning communities: Changing conceptions of cognitive research. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 157-200). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Curtis, S., & Millar, R. (1988). Language and conceptual understanding in science: A comparison of English and Asian language speaking children. Research in Science and Technological Education, 6, 61-77.
9. Donaldson, M. L. (1996). Contextual influences on children's spoken and written explanations. Applied Psycholinguistics, 17, 355-375.
10. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
11. Education Development Center. ( 1997). Balls and ramps. An elementary insights hands-on inquiry science curriculum. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
12. Ford, D. J. ( 1999). The role of text is supporting and extending first-hand investigations in guided inquiry science. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
13. Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1996). Practical work: Its role in the understanding of evidence in science. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 791-806.
14. Hapgood, S. E. (2003). Motion in action: A study of second graders ' trajectories of experience during guided inquiry science instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
15. Hood, L., & Bloom, L. (1979). What, when, and how about why: A longitudinal study of early expressions of causality. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 44(6, Serial No. 181).
16. Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. London: Sage.
17. Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., Strom, D., & Pligge, M. (2001). Similarity of form and substance: Modeling material kind. In S. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 39-74). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
18. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
19. Lemke, J. L. (1998). Multiplying meaning: Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science (pp. 87-113). London: Routledge.
20. Lomangino, A.G. (2000). Emergent self-regulatory activity among young children during scientific inquiry: An analysis of six kindergarten children. Dissertation Abstracts International, A 61/07, 2595.
21. Lubben, F., & Millar, R. (1996). Children's ideas about the reliability of experimental data International Journal of Science Education, 18, 955-968.
22. Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. ( 1995). The learning environment as a site of science education reform. Theory into Practice, 34, 43-50.
23. Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (in press). Teaching and learning inquiry-based science in the elementary school. In J. Bransford & S. Donovan (Eds.), Visions of teaching subject matter guided by the principles of how people learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
24. McCabe, A., & Peterson, C. (1985). A naturalistic study of the production of causal connectives by children. Journal of Child Language, 12, 145-159.
25. Merriam, S. B. (2001 ). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
26. Metz, K. E. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children's science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65, 93-127.
27. Metz (2004). The knowledge building enterprises in science and elementary school science classrooms. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and the nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education. Dortrect, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
28. Millar, R., & Kragh, W. ( 1994). Alternative frameworks or context-specific reasoning? Children's ideas about the motion of projectiles. School Science Review, 75(272), 27-34.
29. Millar, R., Lubben, F., Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1994). Investigating in the school science laboratory: Conceptual and procedural knowledge and their influence on performance. The School Science Laboratory, 9, 207-248.
30. Mokros, J. R., & Tinker, R. F. (1987). The impact of microcomputer-based labs on children's ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 369-383.
31. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32. Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The place of arguments in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553-576.
33. Orsolini, M. ( 1993). "Dwarfs do not shoot": An analysis of children's justifications. Cognition and Instruction, 11, 281-297.
34. Palincsar, A. S., & Magnusson, S. J. (2001 ). The interplay of first-hand and second-hand investigations to model and support the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning. In S. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 151-194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
35. Palincsar, A. S., Magnusson, S. J., Marano, N., Ford, D., & Brown, N. (1998). Designing a community of practice: Principles and practices of me GIsML Community. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 5-19.
36. Penner, D. E. (2000). Explaining systems: Investigating middle school students' understanding of emergent phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 784-806.
37. Penner, D. E., Giles, N. D., Lehrer, R., & Schanble, L. (I997). Building functional models: Designing an elbow. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 125-143.
38. Penrose, A. M., & Katz, S. B. (1998). Writing in the sciences: Exploring the conventions of scientific discourse. New York: St Martin's Press.
39. Piaget, J. ( 1970). The child's conception of movement and speed (G. E. T. Holloway & M. J. Mackenzie, Trans.). New York: Basic Books.
40. Piaget, J. (1971). Science of education and the psychology of the child. New York; Grossman.
41. Piaget, J. (1973). The child and reality: Problems of genetic psychology. New York: Grossman.
42. Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Duschl, R. A., Schulze, S., & John, J. (1995). Students' understanding of the objectives and procedures of experimentation in the science classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4. 131-166.
43. Schwab, J. J. (1962). Problems, topics, and issues. In S. Elam (Ed.), Education and the structure of knowledge (pp. 4-43). Chicago : Rand McNally.
44. Schwab, J. J. (1964). Structure of the disciplines: Meanings and significances. In G. W. Ford & L. Pugno (Eds.), The structure of knowledge and the curriculum (pp. 6-30). Chicago: Rand McNally.
45. Shah, P., Mayer, R. E., & Hegarty, M. (1999). Graphs as aids to knowledge construction: Signaling techniques for guiding the process of graph comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 690-702.
46. Smith, C., Snir, J., & Grosslight, L. (1992). Using conceptual models to facilitate conceptual change: The case of weight-density differentiation. Cognition and Instruction 9, 221-283.
47. Teichmann, J. (1999), Studying Galileo at secondary school: a reconstruction of his "jumping-hill" experiment and the process of discovery. Science & Education, 8, 121-136.
48. vanZee, E. H. (2000). Analysis of a student-generated inquiry discussion. International journal of Science Education 22, 115-142.
49. Vekiri, I. (2001 ). An investigation of the role of graphical design and student characteristics in scientific reasoning with weather maps. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
50. Vekiri, I., Baxter, G., & Pintrich, P. ( 1998, April). Scientist invent, discover, and explain; Images of science in elementary hands-on science instruction. Paper presented at the 79th annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
51. Weiss, I. R., Banilower, E. R., McMahon, K. C., & Smith, P. S. (2001). Report of the 2000 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. Retrieved August 17, 2004, from http://www.horizon-research.com/reports/2001/2000survey/full_report.php
52. Wells, C. G. (1995). Language ad the inquiry-oriented curriculum. Curriculum Inquiry, 25, 233-269.
53. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
54. White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 3-118.