How "scientific" is science education research?

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 257-275

  Lawson, Anton E ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Nature of science; Research methods; Research reporting; Science epistemologies

Indexed keywords

HYPOTHESIS GENERATION; LEVEL 2; LEVEL-1; NATURE OF SCIENCE; SCIENCE EDUCATION; SCIENCE TEACHING; TESTING HYPOTHESIS;

SURVEYS;

RESEARCH;

EID: 77449132890     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: 10982736     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.20328     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Allchin, D. (2006). Lawson's shoehorn-Reprise. Science & Education, 15, 113-120.
2. Alvarez, W. (1997). T. rex and the crater of doom. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University press.
3. Brito, A., Rodríguez, M.A.,&Niaz, M. (2005). A reconstruction of development of the periodic table based on history and philosophy of science and its implications for general chemistry textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 84-111.
4. Carey, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28, 235-251.
5. Cothron, J.H., Giese, R.N., & Rezba, R.J. (2006). Students and research. Dubuque: Kendall/Hunt.
6. Crawford, T. (2005). What counts as knowing: Constructing a communicative repertoire for student demonstration of knowledge in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 139-165.
7. Cuevas, P., Lee, O., Hart, J., & Deaktor, R. (2005). Improving science inquiry with elementary students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(3), 337-357.
8. Friedrichsen, P.M., & Dana, T.M. (2005). Substantive-level theory of highly regarded secondary biology teachers' science teaching orientations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 218-244.
9. Gleitman, L., & Papafragou, A. (2005). Language and thought. In: K.J. Holyoak & R.G. Morrison (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 633-662). New York: Cambridge University Press.
10. Hempel, C. (1966). Philosophy of natural science. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
11. Hsu, T. (2005). Foundations of physical science investigations (2nd ed.). Peabody, MA: CPO Science.
12. Inhelder,B.,&Piaget, J. (1958).The growth of logical thinking fromchildhood to adolescence.NewYork:BasicBooks.
13. Jarvis, T.,&Pell, A. (2005). Factors influencing elementary school children's attitudes toward science before, during, and after a visit to the UK National Space Centre. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 53-83.
14. Kelly, M.P.,&Staver, J.R. (2005). A case study of one school system's adoption and implementation of an elementary science program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 25-52.
15. Khourey-Bowers, C., Dinko, R.L., & Hart, R.G. (2005). Influence of a shared leadership model in creating a school culture of inquiry and collegiality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 3-24.
16. Lawson, A.E. (1985).A reviewof research on formal reasoning and science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 22(7), 569-618.
17. Lawson, A.E. (2000). The generality of hypothetico-deductive reasoning: Making scientific reasoning explicit. The American Biology Teacher, 62(7), 482-495.
18. Lawson, A.E. (2003). The neurological basis of learning, development and discovery: Implications for teaching science and mathematics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
19. Lawson, A.E. (2004). T. rex, the crater of doom, and the nature of scientific discovery. Science & Education, 13, 155-177.
20. Lawson, A.E. (2006). Allchin's errors and misrepresentations and the H-D nature of science. Science & Education, 90(2), 289-292.
21. Lawson, A.E. (2009). On the hypothetico-deductive nature of science-Darwin's finches. Science & Education, 18(1), 119-124.
22. Lewis, R.W. (1988). Biology: A hypothetico-deductive science. The American Biology Teacher, 50(6), 362-366.
23. Liu, X., & McKeough, A. (2005). Developmental growth in students' concept of energy: Analysis of selected items from the TIMSS database. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 493-517.
24. Magnusson, S.J. & Palinscar, A.S. (1995). The learning environment as a site of science education reform. Theory into Practice, 34, 43-50.
25. McCarthy, C.B. (2005). Effects of thematic-based, hands-on science teaching versus a textbook approach for students with disabilities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(3), 245-263.
26. McPherson,G.R. (2001). Teaching and learning the scientific method. The American Biology Teacher, 63(4), 242-245.
27. Novak, J. (1963). A preliminary statement on research in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 1(1), 3-9.
28. Platt, J.R. (1964). Strong inference. Science, 146, 347-353.
29. Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J.L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learnscience from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185-217.
30. Sadler, T.D.,&Zeidler, D.L. (2005). Patterns of informal reasoning in the context of socioscientific decision making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(1), 112-138.
31. Schick, T.S., Jr., & Vaughn, L. (2008). How to think about weird things. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
32. Shavelson R.J. & Towne C. (Eds.). (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Research Council, National Academies Press.
33. Simmons, R.E., & Scheepers, L. (1996). Winning by a neck: Sexual selection in the evolution of giraffes. The American Naturalist, 96, 771-786.
34. Smith, C.L., & Wenk, L. (2006). Relations among three aspects of first-year college students' epistemologies of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(8), 747-785.
35. Stake, J.E., & Mares, K.R. (2005). Evaluating the impact of science-enrichment programs on adolescents' science motivation and confidence: The splashdown effect. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(4), 359-375.
36. Watson, J.D. (1968). The double helix. New York: Mentor, Penguin Books.
37. Wivagg, D.,&Allchin, D. (2002). The dogma of 'the' scientific method. The American Biology Teacher, 64(9), 645-646.
38. Woodward, J., & Goodstein, D. (1996). Conduct, misconduct and the structure of science. American Scientist, 84, 479-490.
39. Yin, Y., Vanides, J., Ruiz-Primo, M.A., Ayala, C.C.,& Shavelson, R.J. (2005). Comparison of two concept-mapping techniques: Implications for scoring, interpretation, and use. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 166-184.