Critique in academic disciplines and active learning of academic content

Cambridge Journal of Education

Volumn 40, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 265-280

  Ford, Michael J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Classroom communication; Learning processes; Pedagogy; Thinking skills

Indexed keywords

EID: 77958081977     PISSN: 0305764X     EISSN: 14693577     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0305764X.2010.502885     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ball, D. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373-397.
2. Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
3. Bridgman, P.W. (1936). The nature of physical theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4. Brown, A.L., & Campione, J.C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229-272). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.
6. Chinn, C., & Malhotra, B. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175-218.
7. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
8. Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2008). From everyday to scientific observation: How children learn to observe the biologist's world. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 39-68.
9. Elmore, R., Peterson, P., & McCarthey, S. (1996). Restructuring in the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
10. Ernst, P. (1996). Varieties of constructivism: A framework for comparison. In L.P. Steffe, & P. Nesher (Eds.), Theories of mathematical learning (pp. 335-350). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Ford, M.J. (2005). The game, the pieces, and the players: Generative resources from alternative portrayals of experimentation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 49-487.
12. Ford, M.J. (2008a). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92, 404-423.
13. Ford, M.J. (2008b). 'Grasp of practice' as a reasoning resource for inquiry and nature of science understanding. Science & Education, 17(2/3), 147-177.
14. Ford, M.J., & Forman, E.A. (2006). Research on instruction and learning in science: Elaborating the design approach. In C.F. Conrad, & R.C. Serlin (Eds.), Sage handbook for research in education: Engaging ideas and enriching inquiry (pp. 139-155). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
15. Goldman, S.R., & Bisanz, G.L. (2002). Toward a functional analysis of scientific genres: Implications for understanding and learning processes. In J. Otero, J.A. Leon, & A.C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 19-50). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in academe: How schooling obscures the life of the mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
17. Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Hanson, N.R. (1958). Patterns of discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19. Hewson, P.W., & Hewson, M.G.A. (1984). The role of conceptual conflict in conceptual change and the design of science instruction. Instructional Science, 13, 1-13.
20. Hunt, E., & Minstrell, J. (1994). A cognitive approach to the teaching of physics. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 51-74). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Kang, S., Scharmann, L.C., & Noh, T. (2004). Reexamining the role of cognitive conflict in science concept learning. Research in science education, 34(1), 1573-1898.
22. Lampert, M. (1985). How do teachers manage to teach? Perspectives on problems of practice. Harvard Educational Review, 55(2), 178-194.
23. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
24. Longino, H. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
25. Matthews, M.R. (1997). Introductory comments on philosophy and constructivism in science education. Science & Education, 6, 5-14.
26. Matthews, M.R. (Ed.). (1998). Constructivism in science education: A philosophical examination. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
27. McGinn, M.K., & Roth, W.M. (1999). Preparing students for competent scientific practice: Implications of recent research in science and technology studies. Educational Researcher, 28(3), 14-24.
28. Mill, J.S. (1913/1869). On liberty. New York: Longman's, Green, & Company.
29. National Research Council, (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
30. Osborne, J. (1996). Beyond constructivism. Science Education, 80(1), 53-82.
31. Pera, M. (1994). The discourses of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
32. Phillips, L.A., & Norris, S.P. (1999). Interpreting popular reports of science: What happens when the readers' world meets the world on paper. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 317-327.
33. Rouse, J. (1996). Engaging science: How to understand its practices philosophically. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
34. Schwab, J.J. (1962). The teaching of science as enquiry. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35. Sfard, A. (2008a). When the rules of discourse change, but nobody tells you: Making sense of mathematics learning from a commognitive standpoint. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 567-615.
36. Sfard, A. (2008b). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
37. Solomon, J. (1994). The rise and fall of constructivism. Studies in Science Education, 23, 1-19.
38. Tabak, I., & Baumgartner, E. (2004). The teacher as partner: Exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity work in scaffolding. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 393-429.
39. von Glasersfeld, E. (1995). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
40. Whitehead, A.N. (1929). The aims of education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41. Windschitl, M. (2002). Framing constructivism in practice as the negotiation of dilemmas: An analysis of the conceptual, pedagogical, cultural, and political challenges facing teachers. Review of Educational Research, 72(2), 131-175.
42. Wood, T., Cobb, P., & Yackel, E. (1995). Reflections on learning and teaching mathematics in elementary school. In L.P. Steffe, & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 401-422). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.