Design-based Research: Case of a teaching sequence on mechanics

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 31, Issue 17, 2009, Pages 2275-2314

  Tiberghien, Andree ^a   Vince, Jacques ^a   Gaidioz, Pierre ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ LUMIÈRE LYON 2   (France)

Author keywords

Classroom; Curriculum; Design study; Inquiry based teaching; Modelling; Science education; Teaching sequence; Theoretical approach

Indexed keywords

EID: 77649107383     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690902874894     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Bachelard, S. (1979). Quelques aspects historiques des notions de modèle et de justification des modèles [Some historical aspects of notions of model and of justification of models]. In P. Delattre & M. Thellier (Eds.), Elaboration et justification des modèles (Vol. 1, pp. 3-19). Paris: Maloine S.A.
2. Bannan-Ritland, B., & Baek, J. Y. (2008). Investigating the act of design in design research: The road taken. In A. E. Kelly, R. A. Lesh, & J. Y. Baek (Eds.), Handbook of design research methods in education: Innovations in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics learning and teaching (pp. 299-319). New York: Routledge.
3. Brousseau, G. (1997). Theory of didactical situations in mathematics. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
4. Brousseau, G. (1998). Théorie des situations didactiques. Grenoble, France: La Pensée Sauvage.
5. Bunge, M. (1973). Method and matter. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
6. Buty, C., Tiberghien, A., & Le Maréchal, J. F. (2004). Learning hypotheses and associated tools to design and to analyse teaching-learning sequences. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 579-604.
7. Chevallard, Y. (1991). La transposition didactique [Didactical transposition] (2nd ed.). Grenoble, France: La Pensée Sauvage.
8. Clement, J., & Rea-Raminez, M. A. (Eds.). (2008). Model based learning and instruction in science. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
9. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13.
10. Cobb, P., Gresalfi, M., & Hodge, L. L. (2009). An interpretive scheme for analyzing the identities that students develop in mathematics classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(1), 40-68.
11. Coulaud, M. (2005). Evaluer la compréhension des concepts de mécanique chez des élèves de secondes: développement d'outils pour les enseignants [Assessment of students' understanding of mechani-cal concepts (grade 10): Development tools for teachers]. Thèse de doctorat, Université Lyon 2, Lyon.
12. Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.
13. diSessa, A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research: Threads and fault lines. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265-282). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Dumas-Carré, A., & Weil-Barais, A. (Eds.). (1998). Tutelle et médiation dans l'enseignement scientifique [Scafolding and mediation in Education in scientific]. Paris/Berne: Peter Lang.
15. Duval, R. (1995). Sémiosis et pensée humaine, registres sémiotiques et apprentissage intellectuels [Semiosis and human thought, semiotic registers and intellectual learning]. Berne: Peter Lang.
16. Erickson, G., Minnes Brandes, G., Mitchell, I., & Mitchell, J. (2005). Collaborative teacher learning: Findings from two professional development projects. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(7), 787-798.
17. Gaidioz, P., & Tiberghien, A. (2003). Un outil d'enseignement privilégiant la modélisation [A teaching tool favouring modelling]. Bulletin de l'union des physiciens, 850, 71-83.
18. Gaidioz, P., Vince, J., & Tiberghien, A. (2004). Aider l'élève à comprendre le fonctionnement de la physique et son articulation avec la vie quotidienne [Helping students to understand how physics works and its relationship with everyday life]. Bulletin de l'union des physiciens, 866, 1029-1042.
19. Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. L. (Eds.). (1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20. Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21. Givry, D. (2003). Étude de l'évolution des idées des élèves de seconde durant une séquence d'enseignement sur les gaz [Study of evolution of students' ideas during a teaching sequence on gases (grade 10)]. Thèse, Université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon.
22. Givry, D., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). Toward a new conception of conceptions: Interplay of talk, gestures, and structures in the setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(10), 1086-1109.
23. Guillaud, J.-C. (1998). Enseignement et apprentissage du concept de force en classe de troisième [Teaching and learning of the concept of Force at grade 9]. Thèse, Université Joseph Fourier Grenoble 1, Grenoble, France.
24. Hacking, I. (1983/2005). Representing and intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Jeannin, L. (2006). Appropriation par un enseignant de physique d'une nouvelle séquence d'enseigne-ment: cas de la mécanique en seconde [Physics teacher learning of a new teaching sequence: The case of mechanics at grade 10]. Lyon: Université Lumière Lyon 2.
26. Koyré, A. (1990). Cohérence de la physique artistotélicienne [Coherence of Aristotelian Physics]. In Leçons de physique. Aristote (pp. 375-380). Paris: Presses pocket.
27. Küçüközer, A. (2000). Une compréhension de la notion d'interaction dans le cadre d'un enseignement de mécanique [Understanding of the notion of interaction in the case of mechanics teaching]. Mémoire du DEA Didactiques et Interactions, Université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon.
28. Küçüközer, A. (2005). L'étude de l'évolution de la compréhension conceptuelle des élèves avec un enseignement. Cas de la mécanique en 1ère S [The study of students' evolution of the conceptual understanding with teaching. Case of mechanics (grade 11)]. Thèse, Université Lumière Lyon 2, Lyon.
29. Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2002). Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences: An approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38, 115-142.
30. Le Maréchal, J.-F., Barbe, E., Roux, M., Jean-Marie, O., Roue, B., & Vincent, D. (2004). Diffi-cultés des élèves sur l'utilisation des ions dans le cadre des nouveaux programmes [Students' difficulties on the use of ions in the framework of the new offical curricula]. Bulletin de l'Union des Professeurs de Physique et de Chimie, 98(867), 1399-1410.
31. Le Maréchal, J.-F., Perrey, S., Roux, M., & Jean-Marie, O. (2004). Tableau d'avancement: avan-tages et difficultés au long de la scolarité [Advancement table: advantages and difficulties during upper secondary school]. Bulletin de l'Union des Professeurs de Physique et de Chimie, 98(860), 93-100.
32. Levy-Strauss, C. (1962). La Pensée Sauvage [The savage mind]. Paris: Plon Collection Agora.
33. Lijnse, P. (2000). Didactics of science: The forgotten dimension in science education research? In R. Millar, J. Leach, & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education (pp. 308-326). Buckingham: Open University Press.
34. Lopes, J. B., Silva, A. A., Cravino, J. P., Costa, N., Marques, L., & Campos, C. (2008). Transversal traits in science education research relevant for teaching and research: A meta-interpretative study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 574-599.
35. Malkoun, L. (2007). De la caractérisation des pratiques de classes de physique à leur relation aux performances des élèves: étude de cas en France et au Liban [Characterization of physics class-room practices and their relationships to students' performances: A case study in France and Lebanon]. Thèse de doctorat, Université Lyon 2/Université Libanaise, Lyon/Beyrouth.
36. Méheut, M., & Psillos, D. (2004). Editorial-Teaching-learning sequences: Aims and tools for science education research. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 515-535.
37. Mercier, A., Schauber-Leoni, M. L., & Sensevy, G. (2002). Vers une didactique comparée [Towards comparative didactics]. Revue Française de Pédagogie, 141, 5-16.
38. Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (2000). Analysing discourse in the science classroom. In R. Millar, J. Leach, & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education: The contribution of research (pp. 126-142). Buckingham: Open University Press.
39. Nersessian, N. (1992). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science (Vol. 15, pp. 3-44). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
40. Niedderer, H., Budde, M., Givry, D., Psillos, D., & Tiberghien, A. (2007). Learning process studies. In R. Pintó & D. Couso (Eds.), ESERA selected contributions book (pp. 159-171). Berlin: Springer.
41. Pegase. (2009). pour les Professeurs et leurs Elèves: un Guide pour I'Apprentissage des Sciences et leur Enseignement [For the teachers and their students: A guide for learning sciences and their teaching (Pegase)]. Retrieved May 10, 2009, from http://pegase.inrp.fr/
42. Piaget, J., & Garcia, R. (1971). Les explications causales [Causal explanations]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
43. Psillos, D., & Kariotoglou, P. (1999). Teaching fluids: Intended knowledge and students? Actual conceptual evolution. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 17-38.
44. Rea-Raminez, M. A., Clement, J., & Nùñez-Oviedo, M. C. (2008). An instructional model derived from model construction and criticism theory. In J. Clement & M. A. Rea-Raminez (Eds.), Model based learning and instruction in science (pp. 23-43). Dordrecht, The Nether-lands: Springer.
45. Saint-Georges, M., & Richoux, H. (2005). Utiliser en formation des vidéos d'élèves; Quels apports pour les enseignants? [Using students video for teacher development; what learning for teachers?]. Communication aux Quatrièmes rencontres de l'ARDIST, Lyon. Retrieved June 17, 2007, from http://www.inrp.fr/ardist2005/recherche.php
46. Saxe, R., & Carey, S. (2006). The perception of causality in infancy. Acta Psychologica, 123(1-2), 144-165.
47. Scott, P. (1992). Pathways in learning science: A case study of the development of one student's ideas relating to the structure of matter. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies (pp. 203-224). Kiel, Germany: I.P.N.
48. Sensevy, G. (2007). Des catégories pour décrire et comprendre l'action didactique [Categories to describe and understand didactic action]. In G. Sensevy & A. Mercier (Eds.), Agir ensemble: Eléments de théorisation de l'action conjointe du professeur et des élèves [Acting together: Theoriz-ing elements of joint action of the teacher and students] (pp. 13-49). Rennes, France: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
49. Sensevy, G., Tiberghien, A., Santini, J., Laube, S., & Griggs, P. (2008). An epistemological approach to modeling: Cases studies and implications for science teaching. Science Education, 92(3), 424-446.
50. Spelke, E. S., Phillips, A., & Woodward, A. L. (1995). Infants' knowledge of object motion and human action. In D. Sperber, D. Premack, & A. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: A multidis-ciplinary debate (pp. 44-78). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
51. Tiberghien, A. (1980). Modes and conditions of learning-An example: Learning of some aspects of the concept of heat. In W. F. Archenhold, R. Driver, A. Orton, & C. Wood-Robinson (Eds.), Cognitive development research in science and mathematics: Proceedings of an international seminar (pp. 288-309). Leeds: University of Leeds.
52. Tiberghien, A. (2000). Designing teaching situations in the secondary school. In R. Millar, J. Leach, & J. Osborne (Eds.), Improving science education: The contribution of research (pp. 27-47). Buckingham: Open University Press.
53. Tiberghien, A. (2004). Causalité dans l'apprentissage des sciences [Causality in science learning]. Intellectica, 38(1), 69-102.
54. Tiberghien, A., Veillard, L., Le Maréchal, J.-F., Buty, C., & Millar, R. H. (2001). An analysis of labwork tasks used in science teaching at upper secondary school and university levels in several European countries. Science Education, 85(5), 483-508.
55. Tiberghien, A., & Malkoun, L. (2007). Différenciation des pratiques d'enseignement et acquisi-tions des élèves du point de vue du savoir. [Teaching practices differentiation and students' achievements in terms of knowledge] Education et Didactique, 1, 29-54.
56. Viennot, L. (2001). Reasoning in physics: The part of common sense. Berlin: Springer.
57. Viennot, L., & Rainson, S. (1999). Design and evaluation of a research-based teaching sequence: The superposition of electric field. International Journal of Science Education, 21(1), 1-16.
58. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535-585.
59. Vygotski, L. S. (1934/1997). Pensée et langage [Language and thought] (3rd ed.). Paris: La Dispute.
60. Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge: Havard University Press.