The generative potential of students' everyday knowledge in learning science

Understanding Mathematics and Science Matters

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 55-80

  Rosebery, Ann S ^a   Warren, Beth ^a   Ballenger, Cindy ^a   Ogonowski, Mark ^a  

^a TERC ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84909147746     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410612618     Document Type: Chapter

References (58)

1. Arnheim, R. (1969). Visual thinking .Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
2. Bakhtin, M.M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (M. Holquist, Ed.; C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.
3. Ballenger, C. (1997). Social identities, moral narratives, scientific argumentation: Science talk in a bilingual classroom. Language and Education, 11 1-14.
4. Ballenger, C. (2000). Bilingual in two senses. In Beykont, Z. E (Ed.), Lifting every voice: Pedagogy and the politics of bilingualism (pp. 95-112). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Publishing Group.
5. Brown, A. L. & Campione, J. C. (1990). Communities of learning and thinking, or a context by any other name. In Kuhn, D. (Ed.), Contributions to human development: Vol. 21. Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills (pp. 108-125). New York: Karger.
6. Brown, A. L. & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In McGilly, K. (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229-272). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Clement, J. (1982). Students' preconceptions in introductory mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 50, 66-71.
8. Clement, J., Brown, D.E. ,& Zeitsman, A. (1989). Not all preconceptions are misconceptions: Finding "anchoring conceptions" for grounding instruction on students' "intuitions." International Journal of Science Education, 11, 555-565.
9. DiSchino, M. (1998). "Why do bees sting and why do they die afterward?" In Rosebery, A. & Warren, B. (Eds.), Boats, balloons, and classroom video: Science teaching as inquiry (pp. 109-133). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
10. diSessa, A. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2/3), 105-225.
11. diSessa, A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B. ,& Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Meta-representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117-160.
12. Education Development Center(1997). Insights: An elementary hands-on inquiry science curriculum. Dubuque, IA: Kendall-Hunt.
13. Eggers-Piérola, C. (1996. "We haven't still explored that": Science learning in a bilingual classroom. Doctoral dissertation, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.
14. Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science. Hearing children's questions and theories, responding with curricula. New York: Teachers College Press.
15. Gee, J.P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. New York:Routledge.
16. Gee, J. P. & Clinton, K. (2000). An African-American child's "science talk": Co-construction of meaning from the perspective of multiple discourses. In Gallego, M. & Hollingsworth, S. (Eds.), What counts as literacy: Challenging the school standard (pp. 118-135). New York:Teachers College Press.
17. Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist, 96(3), 606-633.
18. Goodwin, C. (2000 Practices of color classification. Mind Culture, and Activity color classification. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 7, 19-36.
19. Goody, J. (1977). The domestication of the savage mind .New York: Cambridge, University Press.
20. Hammer, D. (2000). Student resources for learning introductory physics. American Journal of Physics: Physics Education Research Supplement, 68(S1), S52-S59.
21. Herrenkohl, L.R., Palincsar, A.S., DeWater, L.S. ,& Kawasaki, K. (1999). Developing scientific communities in classrooms: A sociocognitive approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 451-493.
22. Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2003). The use of argumentation in Haitian Creole science classrooms. Harvard Educational Review, 73 73-93.
23. Hymes, D. (1996). Ethnography, linguistics, narrative inequality: Toward an understanding of voice. Bristol, PA: Taylor & Francis.
24. Keller, E.E (1983). A feeling for the organism: The life and work of Barbara McClintock .San Francisco: Freeman.
25. Klahr, D., Fay, A.L. ,& Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 111-146.
26. Kuhn, D., Arnsel, E. ,& O'Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
27. Kuhn, D., Schauble, L. ,& Garcia-Mila, M. (1992). Cross-domain development of scientific reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 9(4), 285-327.
28. Latour, B. (1986). Visualization and cognition: Thinking with eyes and hands. In Kuclick, H. (Ed.), Knowledge and society: Vol. 6. Studies in the sociology of culture past and present (pp. 1-40). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
29. Latour, B. ,& Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts (2nded.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
30. Lee, O. & Fradd, S. (1998). Science for all, including students from non-English-language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, 12-21.
31. Lee, O., Fradd, S. ,& Sutman, F. (1995). Science knowledge and cognitive strategy use among culturally and linguistically diverse students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32(8), 797-816.
32. Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2000). Modeling in mathematics and science. In Glaser, R. (Ed.),Advances in instructional psychology: Vol. 5. Educational design and cognitive science (pp. 101-159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Massachusetts Department of Education.(1995). Massachusetts curriculum frameworks for science and technology. Boston, MA: Author.
34. McCloskey, M., Caramazza, A. ,& Green, B. (1980). Curvilinear motion in the absence of external forces: Naïve beliefs about the motion of objects. Science, 210, 1139-1141.
35. McDermott, L.C., van Zee, E.H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs in physics: Examples from kinematics. American Journal of Physics, 55, 503-513.
36. Michaels, S. & Sohmer, R. (2000). Narratives and inscriptions: Cultural tools, power and powerful sensemaking. In Cope, B. & Kalantzis, M. (Eds.), Multiliteracies (pp. 267-288). New York: Routledge.
37. Minstrell, J. (1989). Teaching science for understanding. In Resnick, L. B. & Klopfer, L. E. (Eds.) 1989 Yearbook of the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development: Toward the thinking curriculum. Current cognitive research (pp. 131-149). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
38. Monk, G.S. (2005). "Why would run be in speed?" Artifacts and situated actions in a curricular plan. In Nemirovsky, R. Rosebery, A. Warren, B. & Solomon, J. (Eds.), Everyday matters in mathematics and science: Studies of complex classroom events (pp. 11-44). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
39. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
40. Nemirovsky, R., Tierney, C. ,& Wright, T. (1998). Body motion and graphing. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 119-172.
41. Ochs, E., Gonzales, P. ,& Jacoby, S. (1996). "When I come down I'm in the domain state": Grammar and graphic representation in the interpretive activity of physicists. In Ochs, E. E. Ochs, Schegloff, E.A. & Thompson, S. A. (Eds.), Interaction and grammar(pp. 328-369). New York: Cambridge University Press.
42. Paley, V.G. (1987). Watty's stories: Conversations in the kindergarten. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43. Rheinberger, H. (1997). Toward a history ofepistemic things: Synthesizing proteins in the test tube. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
44. Root-Bernstein, R.S. (1989). How scientists really think. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 32, 472-488.
45. Rosebery, A. (2005). "What are we going to do next?": A case study of lesson planning. In R. Nemirovsky, A. Rosebery, B. Warren, & J. Solomon (Eds.), Everyday matters in mathematics and science: Studies of complex classroom events (pp. 299-328). Mahwah roomevents
46. Rosebery, A., Warren, B. ,& Conant, F. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 61-94.
47. Salk, J. (1983). Anatomy of reality: Merging of intuition and reason .New York: Columbia, University Press.
48. Schauble, L. (1996). The development of scientific reasoning in knowledge-rich contexts. Developmental Psychology, 32, 102-119.
49. Schauble, L. & Glaser, R. (1990). Scientific thinking in children and adults. In Kuhn, D. (Ed.), Contributions to human development: Vol. 21. Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills (pp. 9-26). New York: Karger.
50. Smith, J.E, diSessa, A.A. ,& Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115-163.
51. Tierney, C., Nemirovsky, R., Noble, T. ,& Clements, D. (1996). Investigations in number, data, and space: Patterns of change. Columbus, OH: Scott, Foresman.
52. Ueno, N. (2000)> Ecologies of inscription: Technologies of making the social organization of work and the mass production of machine parts visible in collaborative activity. Mind Culture, and Activitynscription:Technologies of making the social organization of work and the mass production of machine parts visible in collaborative activity. Mind, Culture, andActivity, 7, 59-80.
53. Zee, E. ,& Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questions to guide student thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6, 227-269.
54. Warren, B., Ballenger, C., Ogonowski, M., Rosebery, A.S. ,& Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2001). Rethinking diversity in learning science: The logic of everyday languages. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 529-552.
55. Warren, B. ,& Rosebery, A. (1996). "This question is just too, too easy!": Perspectives from the classroom on accountability in science. In Schauble, L. & Glaser, R. (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp.97-125). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
56. Wittgenstein, L. (1953). Philosophical investigations. New York: Macmillan.
57. Wolpert, L. ,& Richards, A. (1997). Passionate minds: The inner world of scientists. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
58. Wright, T. (2001).Karen in motion: The role of physical enactment in developing an understanding of distance, time, and speedndspeed. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 20, 145-162.