Thinking Like a Scientist: Using Vee-Maps to Understand Process and Concepts in Science

Research in Science Education

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 609-632

  Knaggs, Christine M ^a   Schneider, Rebecca M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO   (United States)

Author keywords

Scaffolds; Scientific content knowledge; Scientific inquiry; Scientific process knowledge; Vee maps; Writing in science

Indexed keywords

EID: 84863103084     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-011-9213-x     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999). All things being equal: acquision and transfer of the control variables strategy. Child Development, 70(5), 1098-1120.
2. Davis, E. A., & Miyake, N. (2004). Explorations of scaffolding in complex classroom systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 265-272.
3. Dunbar, K. (1993). Concept discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 17, 397-434.
4. Dunbar, K., & Klahr, D. (1989). Developmental differences in scientific discovery strategies. In D. Klahr & K. Kotovshy (Eds.), Complex information processing: The impact of Herbert A. Simon (pp. 109-143). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.
5. Eick, C., Meadows, L., & Balkcom, R. (2005). Breaking into inquiry: scaffolding supports beginning efforts to implement inquiry in the classroom. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 49-53.
6. Farber, P. (2003). Teaching evolution and the nature of science. The American Biology Teacher, 65(5), 347-354.
7. Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffolding ill-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research Development, 52(2), 5-22.
8. Jeanpierre, B., Oberauser, K., & Freeman, C. (2005). Characteristics of professional development that effect change in secondary science teachers classroom practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(6), 668-690.
9. Johnson, C. C., Kahle, J. B., & Fargo, J. (2007). A study of the effect of sustained, whole-school, professional development on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 775-786.
10. Kahle, J. B., Meece, J., & Scantlebury, K. (2000). Urban African-American middle school science students: does standards-based teaching make a difference. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 1019-1041.
11. Keys, C. W., Hand, B., Prain, V., & Collins, S. (1999). Using the Science Writing Heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(10), 1065-1084.
12. Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1-55.
13. Klahr, D., Fay, A., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: a developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 111-146.
14. Kuhn, D., Schauble, L., & Garcia-Mila, M. (1992). Cross-domain development of scientific reasoning. Cognition & Instruction, 9, 285-327.
15. Kuhn, D., Garcia-Mila, M., Zohar, A., & Anderson, C. (1995). Strategies of knowledge acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, Serial No. 245, 60(40), 1-128.
16. Lajoie, S. P. (2005). Extending the scaffolding metaphor. Instructional Science, 33, 541-557.
17. McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
18. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington: National Academy Press.
19. Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept maps and vee diagrams: two metacognitive tools to facilitate meaningful learning. Instructional Science, 19, 29-52.
20. Novak, J. D., & Gowin, B. D. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Okada, T., & Simon, H. A. (1997). Collaborative discovery in a scientific domain. Cognitive Science, 21, 109-146.
22. Penner, D. E., & Klahr, D. (1996). The interaction of domain-specific knowledge and domain-general discovery strategies: a study with sinking objects. Child Development, 67(6), 1207-2727.
23. Perlman, C. C. (2002). Performance assessment: Designing appropriate performance tasks and scoring rubrics. U. S. Department of Education.
24. Puntambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: what have we gained and what have we missed? Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1-12.
25. Richardson, V. (1997). Constructivist teacher education: Building a world of new understandings. Philadelphia: Routledge Palmer, Taylor & Francis, Inc.
26. Roehrig, G., Luft, J. A., & Edwards, M. (2001). Versatile vee maps. The Science Teacher, 68(1), 28-31.
27. Schauble, L. (1990). Belief revision in children: the role of prior knowledge and strategies for generating evidence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 49(1), 31-57.
28. Schauble, L. (1996). The development of scientific reasoning in knowledge-rich contexts. Developmental Psychology, 32, 102-119.
29. Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Raghaven, K., & Reiner, M. (1991a). Causal models and experimentation strategies in scientific reasoning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 201-238.
30. Schauble, L., Klopfer, L. E., & Raghaven, K. (1991b). Students' transition from an engineering model to a science model of experimentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 859-882.
31. Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Raghaven, K., & Reiner, M. (1992). The integration of knowledge and experimentation strategies in understanding a physical system. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 6, 321-343.
32. Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2002). Performance of students in project-based science classrooms on a national measure of science achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(5), 410-422.
33. Singer, S. (2005). Needing a new approach to science labs. The Science Teacher, 72(7), 10.
34. Singer, S. R., Hilton, M. L., & Schweingruber, H. A. (2006). America's lab report: Investigations in high school science. Washington: The National Academies Press.
35. Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy: a complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 305-335.
36. Yager, R. E., & Akcay, H. (2010). The advantages of an inquiry approach for science instruction in middle grades. School Science and Mathematics, 110(1), 5-12.
37. Yore, L. D. (2003). Examining the literary component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 689-725.
38. Zimmerman, C. (2000). The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20, 99-149.