Making an innovation grow: On the shared learning within and between communities

Exploring the Landscape of Scientific Literacy

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 236-254

  Bulte, Astrid M W ^a   Seller, Frank ^b  

^a UTRECHT UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b Netherlands Ministry of Education   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873310975     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203843284     Document Type: Chapter

References (45)

1. Aikenhead, G. S. (2005). Science-based occupations and the science curriculum: Concepts of evidence. Science Education, 89, 242-275.
2. Appelhof, P., Bulte, A. M. W., & Seller, F. (2008). Innoveren met perspectief, vernieuwing van betatechnisch onderwijs [Innovation with perspective, renewal of science and technology education]. Utrecht, NL: Oberon, Onderzoek en Advies.
3. Bennett, J., & Lubben, F. (2006). Context-based chemistry: The Salter’s approach. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 999-1016.
4. Brickhouse, N. W. (2007). Scientific literates: What do they do? Who are they? Paper presented at the Linnaeus symposium, Promoting scientific literacy, Uppsala, Sweden.
5. Bulte, A.M.W. (2007). Symposium, May 28-29, 2007 and Working Seminar, May 30-31, 2007. How to connect concepts of science and technology when designing context-based science education. Paper presented at the Linnaeus Tercentenary 2007, Promoting Scientific Literacy: Science Education Research in Transaction; The LSL Meeting, in Uppsala, Sweden.
6. Bulte, A. M. W., Carelsen, F., Davids, W., Morelis, H., Pilot, A., Velthorst, N. et al. (1999). Dilemma’s in de schoolscheikunde [Dilemmas in school chemistry]. NVOX, 6, 289-291.
7. Bulte, A. M. W., & De Kleijn, E. (2009, May 27th-29th). Voorbeeldleerlijnen Nieuwe Scheikunde [Exemplar learning lines New Chemistry]. Paper presented at the ORD conference “Onderwijs een kwestie van emancipatie en (on)gelijkheid” [Education, a matter of emancipation and (in)equality], Leuven, Belgium.
8. Bulte, A. M. W., Klaassen, K., Westbroek, H. B., Stolk, M. J., Prins, G. T., Genseberger, R. J. et al. (2005). Modules for a new chemistry curriculum, research on a meaningful relation between contexts and concepts. In P. Nentwig & D. Waddington (Eds.), Making it relevant. Context based learning of science(pp. 273-299). Münster, Germany: Waxmann.
9. Bulte, A. M. W., Westbroek, H. B., De Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2006). A research approach to designing chemistry education using authentic practices as contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 1063-1086.
10. Campbell, B., Lazonby, J., Millar, R., Nicolson, P., Ramsden, J., & Waddington, D. (1994). Science: The Salters’ approach—A case study of the process of large scale development. Science Education, 78(5), 415-447.
11. Clandinin, J., & Connelly, F. M. (1992). Teacher as curriculum maker. In P. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on the curriculum(pp. 363-401). New York: Macmillan.
12. Driessen, H. P. W., & Meinema, H. A. (2003). Chemistry between context and concept, designing for renewal. Enschede, NL: SLO. Retrieved from: www.nieuwescheikunde.nl/international/.
13. Driessen, H. P. W., & Meinema, H. A. (2005). Annual report, New Chemistry, 2004 (No. VO/3197/06-091). Enschede, NL: SLO.
14. Fensham, P. J. (2007). Competences, within and without: New challenges and possibilities for scientific literacy. Paper presented at the Linnaeus symposium, Promoting scientific literacy, Uppsala, Sweden.
15. Gee, J. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. New York: Taylor and Francis.
16. Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the nature of “context” in chemical education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 957-976.
17. Greeno, J. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5 - 26.
18. Handley, K., Clark, T., Fincham, R., & Sturby, A. (2005). Researching situated learning: Participation, identity and practices in client-consultant relationships (EBK Working Paper 2005/16 No. 2005/16). London: Evolution of business knowledge (EBK).
19. KNAW. (2003). Robuuste profielen in het voortgezet onderwijs [Profiles for secondary science education]. Amsterdam, NL: KNAW [Dutch Royal Academic Society].
20. Knobel, M., & Lankshear, C. (1997). Constructing literacy and active citizenship. In S. Muspratt, A. Luke & P. Freebody (Eds.), Constructing critical literacies: Teaching and learning textual practice(pp. 95-124). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
21. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22. Meijer, M. R., Bulte, A. M. W., & Pilot, A. (2009). Structure-property relations between macro and micro representations: Relevant meso-levels in authentic tasks. In J. K. Gilbert & D. Treagust (Eds.), Linking the representational levels of chemistry(pp. 195-213). Dordrecht, NL: Springer.
23. Osborne, J., & Collins, J. (2001). Pupils’ views of the role and value of the science curriculum: A focus-group study. International Journal of Science Education, 23(5), 441-467.
24. Osborne, J., & Dillon, J. (2008). Science education in Europe: Critical reflections, a report to the Nuffield Foundation. London: King’s College London.
25. Parchmann, I., Gräsel, C., Bear, A., Demuth, R., Ralle, B., & the ChiK project group. (2006). Chemie im Kontext—a symbiotic implementation of a context-based teaching and learning approach. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 1041-1062.
26. Parchmann, I., Gräsel, C., & Nentwig, P. (2002). Evaluating science curriculum innovation: How do we know we have made a difference? Paper presented at the York-IPN International Symposium, York, UK.
27. Parke, H., & Coble, C. R. (1997). Teachers designing curriculum as professional development: A model for transformational science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(8), 773-789.
28. Pilot, A., & Bulte, A. M. W. (2006a). The use of “contexts” as a challenge for the chemistry curriculum: Its successes and the need for further development and understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 1087-1112.
29. Pilot, A., & Bulte, A. M. W. (2006b). Why do you “need to know”? Context-based education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 953-956.
30. Prins, G. T., Bulte, A. M. W., Van Driel, J. H., & Pilot, A. (2008). Selection of authentic modelling practices as contexts for chemistry education. International Journal of Science Education, 30(1), 1-24.
31. Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline, the art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
32. Sjøberg, S. (2007, May). Challenges for science education: A personal view. Paper presented at the Linnaeus symposium, Promoting scientific literacy, Uppsala.
33. Stolk, M. J., Bulte, A., De Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2005). Teaching concepts in contexts: Designing a chemistry teacher course in a curriculum innovation. In K. T. Boersma, M. Goedhart, O. De Jong & H. Eijkelhof (Eds.), Research and the Quality of Science Education(pp. 169-180). Dordrecht, NL: Springer.
34. Stolk, M. J., Bulte, A. M. W., De Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2009a). Strategies for a professional development programme: Empowering teachers for context-based chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research & Practice, 10, 154.
35. Stolk, M. J., Bulte, A. M. W., De Jong, O., & Pilot, A. (2009b). Towards a framework for a professional development programme: Empowering teachers for context-based chemistry education. Chemistry Education Research & Practice, 10, 164.
36. Van Aalsvoort, J. (2004). Activity theory as a tool to address the problem of chemistry’s lack of relevance in secondary school chemical education. International Journal of Science Education, 26(13), 1635-1651.
37. Van Berkel, B. (2005). The structure of current school chemistry—a quest for conditions for escape. Utrecht, NL: Utrecht University.
38. Van Berkel, B., De Vos, W., Verdonk, A. H., & Pilot, A. (2000). Normal science education and its dangers: The case of school chemistry. Science and Education, 9, 123-159.
39. Van den Akker, J., Gravemeijer, K., McKenny, S., & Nieveen, N. (2006). Educational design research. London: Routledge.
40. Van Koten, G., De Kruijff, B., Driessen, H. P. W., Kerkstra, A., & Meinema, H. A. (2003). Building chemistry, A blueprint to initiate renewal of chemistry programme in upper secondary education in the Netherlands (No. VO/2331/D/03-117). Enschede, NL: SLO.
41. Van Rens, E. M. M., Pilot, A., & Van Dijk, H. (2004). Enhancement of quality in chemical inquiry by pre-university students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(493-509).
42. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
43. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice. Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44. Westbroek, H. B. (2005). Characteristics of meaningful chemistry education, the case of water quality. Utrecht, NL: Utrecht University.
45. Westbroek, H. B., Klaassen, K., Bulte, A. M. W., & Pilot, A. (2010). Providing students with a sense of purpose by adapting a professional practice. International Journal for Science Education, 32(5), 603-627.