Teaching Mathematical Biology in High School Using Adapted Primary Literature

Research in Science Education

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 633-649

  Norris, Stephen P ^a   Stelnicki, Nathan ^a   de Vries, Gerda ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Adapted primary literature; Reading science; Scientific literacy

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863100065     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-011-9215-8     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., et al. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78, 1102-1134.
2. Alberta Education. (1995). Math 31. Retrieved January 6, 2010, from http://education. alberta. ca/teachers/program/math/programs. aspx.
3. Alberta Education. (2009). 2008/2009 class size averages by jurisdiction for all subjects. Retrieved July 3, 2009, from http://education. alberta. ca/department/ipr/classsize/averages. aspx.
4. Almeida, C. A., & Liotta, L. J. (2005). Organic chemistry of the cell: An interdisciplinary approach to learning with a focus on reading, analyzing, and critiquing primary literature. Journal of Chemical Education, 82, 1794.
5. Baram-Tsabari, A., & Yarden, A. (2005). Text genre as a factor in the formation of scientific literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 403-428.
6. Best, R., Ozuru, Y., Floyd, R. G., McNamara, D. S. (2006). Children's text comprehension: Effects of genre, knowledge, and text cohesion. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences, Bloomington, Indiana. 37-42.
7. Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural sciences and engineering research council of Canada, & social sciences and humanities research council of Canada. (1998 with 2000, 2002, 2005 amendments). Tri-council policy statement: Ethical conduct for research involving humans. Ottawa: Author.
8. Chiappetta, E. L., & Fillman, D. A. (2007). Analysis of five high school biology textbooks used in the united states for inclusion of the nature of science. International Journal of Science Education, 29, 1847-1868.
9. Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic.
10. Council of Ministers of Education, Canada. (1997). Common framework of science learning outcomes K to 12. Toronto: Author.
11. Ebbers, M., & Rowell, P. (2002). Description is not enough: Scaffolding children's explanations. Primary Science Review, 74, 10-13.
12. Elshout-Mohr, M., & van Daalen-Kapteijns, M. (2002). Situated regulation of science text processing. In J. Otero, J. A. Leon, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text comprehension (pp. 223-255). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Falk, H., Brill, G., & Yarden, A. (2008). Teaching a biotechnology curriculum based on adapted primary literature. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1841-1866.
14. Friedman, H. (1968). Magnitude for experimental effect and a table for it rapid estimation. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 245-251.
15. Gehring, K. M., & Eastman, D. A. (2008). Information fluency for undergraduate biology majors: Applications of inquiry-based learning in a developmental biology course. CBE Life Sciences Education, 7, 54-63.
16. Gillen, C. M. (2007). Reading primary literature: A practical guide to evaluating research articles in biology. San Francisco: Pearson/Benjamin Cummings.
17. Hoskins, S. G., Stevens, L. M., & Nehm, R. H. (2007). Selective use of the primary literature transforms the classroom into a virtual laboratory. Genetics, 176, 1381-1389.
18. Janick-Buckner, D. (1997). Getting undergraduates to critically read and discuss primary literature. Journal of College Science Teaching, 27, 29.
19. Kozeracki, C. A., Carey, M. F., Colicelli, J., Levis-Fitzgerald, M., & Grossel, M. (2006). An intensive primary-literature-based teaching program directly benefits undergraduate science majors and facilitates their transition to doctoral programs. CBE Life Sciences Education, 5, 340-347.
20. Kuldell, N. (2003). Read like a scientist to write like a scientist. Journal of College Science Teaching, 33, 32-35.
21. Martin, J. R. (1993). Literacy in science: Learning to handle text as technology. In M. A. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 166-202). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
22. Mourez, M., Kane, R. S., Mogridge, J., Metallo, S., Deschatelets, P., Sellman, B. R., et al. (2001). Designing a polyvalent inhibitor of anthrax toxin. Nature Biotechnology, 19, 958-961.
23. Myers, G. (1992). Textbooks and the sociology of scientific knowledge. English for Specific Purposes, 11, 3-17.
24. Myers, G. (1997). Words and pictures in a biology textbook. In T. Miller (Ed.), Functional approaches to written text: Classroom applications (pp. 93-104). Paris: USIA.
25. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington: National Academies Press.
26. Newton, D. P., & Newton, L. D. (2000). Do teachers support causal understanding through their discourse when teaching primary science? British Educational Research Journal, 26, 599-613.
27. Newton, L. D., Newton, D. P., Blake, A., & Brown, K. (2002). Do primary school science books for children show a concern for explanatory understanding? Research in Science & Technological Education, 20, 227-240.
28. Norris, S. P., Phillips, L. M., & Korpan, C. A. (2003). University students' interpretation of media reports of science and its relationship to background knowledge, interest, and reading difficulty. Public Understanding of Science, 12, 123-145.
29. Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: A review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049-1079.
30. Phillips, L. M. (1988). Young readers' inference strategies in reading comprehension. Cognition and Instruction, 5, 193-222.
31. Phillips, L. M., & Norris, S. P. (2009). Bridging the gap between the language of science and the language of school science through the use of adapted primary literature. Research in Science Education, 39, 313-319.
32. Roecker, L. (2007). Introducing students to the scientific literature. Journal of Chemical Education, 84, 1380-1384.
33. Russell, J. S., Martin, L., Curtin, D., Penhale, S., & Trueblood, N. A. (2004). Non-sciences majors gain valuable insight studying clinical trials literature: An evidence-based medicine library assignment. Advances in Pysiology Education, 28, 188-194.
34. Scott, L. K., & Simmons, S. R. (2006). Incorporating primary literature in undergraduate crop science courses. Journal of Natural Resources & Life Sciences Education, 35, 225-233.
35. Snow, C. E. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward a research and development program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica: RAND.
36. Suppe, F. (1998). The structure of a scientific paper. Philosophy of Science, 65, 381.
37. Tenopir, C., & King, D. W. (2004). Communication patterns of engineers. Hoboken: Wiley.
38. VanTassel-Baska, J., Zuo, L., Avery, L. D., & Little, C. A. (2002). A curriculum study of gifted-student learning in the language arts. Gifted Child Quarterly, 46, 30.
39. von Aufschnaiter, C., Erduran, S., Osborne, J., & Simon, S. (2008). Arguing to learn and learning to argue: Case studies of how students' argumentation relates to their scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 101-131.
40. Wang, D. (2009). Factors affecting the comprehension of global and local main idea. Journal of College Reading & Learning, 39, 34-52.
41. Wonham, M. J. (2004). The mathematics of mosquitoes and west nile virus. Pi in the Sky, 5-9.
42. Wonham, M. J., de-Camino-Beck, T., & Lewis, M. A. (2004). An epidemiological model for west nile virus: Invasion analysis and control applications. Proceedings: Biological Sciences, 271, 501-507.
43. Yarden, A., Brill, G., & Falk, H. (2001). Primary literature as a basis for a high-school biology curriculum. Journal of Biological Education, 35, 190.
44. Yu, G. (2009). The shifting sands in the effects of source text summarizability on summary writing. Assessing Writing, 14, 116-137.
45. Zhu, C., Valcke, M., Schellens, T. (2008). Students'perceptions of, motivation and learning strategies in a constructivist e-learning environment: Comparing chinese and flemish university students. Proceedings of the First EARLI Advanced Study Colloquium (ASC), 208-222.