The productive disciplinary engagement framework: Origins, key concepts, and developments

Design Research on Learning and Thinking in Educational Settings: Enhancing Intellectual Growth and Functioning

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 161-200

  Engle, Randi A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84920743798     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (190)

1. Adiredja, A. P., Engle, R. A., Champney, D., Huang, A. Howison, M., Shah, N., & Ghaneian, P. (2008). Explaining student success in one PDP calculus section: A progress report. In Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education. (Available online at: http://sigmaa.maa.org/rume/crume/crume2008/Proceedings/Adiredja PRE LONG.pdf)
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
3. Ametller, J., Leach, J., & Scott, P. (2007). Using perspectives on subject learning to inform the design of subject teaching: an example from science education. Curriculum Journal, 18(4), 479-492.
4. Arcavi, A., Kessel, C., Meira, L., & Smith, J. P. III (1998). Teaching mathematical problem solving: An analysis of an emergent classroom community. CBMS Issues in Mathematics Education, 7, 1-70.
5. Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon.
6. Ball, D. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary-school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93(4), 373-397.
7. Ballenger, C. (1997). Social identities, moral narratives, scientific argumentation: Science talk in a bilingual classroom. Language and Education, 11(1), 1-14.
8. Barron, B. J. S., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., Bransford, J. D., and the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem and project-based learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 271-311.
9. Barron, B. (2000). Achieving coordination in collaborative problem solving groups. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 403-436.
10. Barron, B. & Darling-Hammond, L. (2008). How can we teach for meaningful learning? In L. Darling-Hammond (Ed.), Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding (pp. 11-70). New York: Jossey-Bass.
11. Barrows, H. S. (2000). Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
12. Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55.
14. Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2011). Classroom communities' adaptations of the practice of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 95(2), 191-216.
15. Bianchini, J. A. (1997). Where knowledge construction, equity, and context intersect: Student learning of science in small groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(10), 1039-1065.
16. Blumenfeld, P. C., Megendoller, J. R., & Puro, P. (1992). Translating motivation into thoughtfulness. In H. H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining student learning: Roots of educational change (pp. 207-239). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
17. Boaler, J. (2002). Experiencing school mathematics (Revised and expanded edition). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Boaler, J., & Greeno, J. (2000). Identity, agency and knowing in mathematical worlds. In J. Boaler (Ed.), Multiple perspectives on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 171-200). Westport, CT: Ablex.
19. Boaler, J., & Staples, M. (2008). Creating mathematical futures through an equitable teaching approach: The case of Railside School. Teachers College Record, 110(3), 608-645.
20. Brown, A. L. (1989). Analogical learning and transfer: What develops? In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning (pp. 369-412). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. TheJournal of Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.
22. Brown, A. L., Ash, D., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. C. (1993). Distributed expertise in the classroom. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 188-228). New York: Cambridge University Press.
23. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Communities of learning and thinking: Or a context by any other name. Contributions to Human Development, 21,108-126.
24. 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. 229-270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25. Brown, A., & Campione,J. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.). Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 289-325). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Brown, A. L., & Palincsar, A. S. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruciton, 1(2), 117-175.
27. Brown, A.L., Kane, M. J., & Eccols, C. H. (1986). Young children's mental models determine analogical transfer across problems with a common goal structure. Cognitive Development, 1, 103-121.
28. Brown, A. L., Metz, K., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Social interaction and individual understanding in a community of learners: Influence of Piaget and Vygotsky. In A. Tryphon & J. Voneche (Eds.), Piaget-Vygotsky: The social genesis of thought (pp. 146-170).
29. Buty, C., & Plantin, C. (2009). Argumentation and emotions in the quest for productive disciplinary engagement. In C. Buty (Chair) and R. A. Engle (organizer), Developing and challenging the productive disciplinary engagement framework. Symposium presented at the Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Amsterdam.
30. California State Department of Education (1985). Mathematics curriculum framework. Sacramento, CA: Author.
31. Campione, J. C., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Learning ability and transfer propensity as sources of individual differences in intelligence. In P. H. Brooks, C. McCauley, & R. Sperber (Eds.), Learning and cognition in the mentally retarded (pp. 265-293). Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
32. Campione, J. C., Brown, A. L., Ferrara, R. A., Jones, R. S., & Steinberg, E. (1985). Breakdowns in flexible use of information: Intelligence-related differences in transfer following equivalent learning performance. Intelligence, 9, 297-315.
33. Campione, J. C., Shapiro, A. M., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Forms of transfer in a community of learners: Flexible learning and understanding. In A. McKeough, J. Lupart, & A. Marini (Eds.), Teaching for transfer: Fostering generalization in learning (pp. 35-69). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471-533.
35. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175-218.
36. Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37. Cobb, P., Gravemeijer, K., Yackel, E., McClain, K., & Whitenack, J. (1997). Mathemat-izing and symbolizing: The emergence of chains of signification in one first-grade classroom. In D. Kirschner & J. A. Whitson (Eds.), Situated cognition: Social, semiotic and psychological perspectives (pp. 151-233). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
38. Cobb, P., Gresalfi, M., & Hodge, L. L. (2009). An interpretive scheme for analyzing the identities that students develop in mathematics classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(1), 40-68.
39. Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 237-248.
40. Cole, M. (1998). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
41. Cole, M., & Engestrom, Y. (2007). Cultural-historical approaches to designing for development. In J. Valsiner & A. Rosa, (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociocultural psychology (pp. 484-507). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42. Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). New York: Springer-Verlag.
43. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
44. Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15-42.
45. Conant, F. R., Rosebery, A., Warren, B., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2001). The sound of drums. In E. McIntyre, A. Rosebery, & N. Gonzalez (Eds.), Classroom diversity: Connecting curriculum to students' lives (pp. 51-61). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
46. Cornelius, L. L. (2004). When to participate in disciplinary discourses: What happens when the conversation ends? Proceedings of the International Society of the Learning Sciences.
47. Cornelius, L. L., & Herrenkohl, L. P. (2004). Power in the classroom: How the classroom environment shapes students' relationships with each other and with concepts. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 467-498.
48. D'Amico, L. (2006). The Center for Learning Technologies in Urban Schools: A case of designbased research in education. Pittsburgh, PA: The Meta-Study, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh. (Available online at: www.lrdc.pitt.edu/metastudy/PDF/LeTUS_Final2006.pdf, accessed July 23, 2011).
49. D'Amico, L. (2010). The Center for Learning Technologies in Urban Schools: Evolving relationships in design-based research. In C. E. Coburn & M. K. Stein (Eds.), Research and practice in education: Building alliances, bridging the divide (pp. 37-53). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
50. Design-based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-9.
51. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Boston, MA: Heath.
52. Dewey, J. (1929). The quest for certainty. New York: Minton, Balch & Co.
53. Dion, D. (1998). Evidence and inference in the comparative case study. Comparative Politics, 30(2), 127-145.
54. diSessa, A. A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77-103.
55. Duschl, R. A. (2006). A perspective on research in science education. In An international conference on research and development in mathematics and science education: US panelist papers. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
56. Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A., & Shouse, A. W. (Eds.) (2007). Participation in scientific practices and discourse. In Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8 (pp. 186-210). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
57. Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
58. Engestrom, Y. (2007). Enriching the theory of expansive learning: Lessons from journeys toward coconfiguration. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 14(1-2), 23-29.
59. Engle, R. A. (2004). Revisiting previous discussions to deepen teachers' engagement with mathematics and pedagogy. In M. S. Smith (Chair), Developing a knowledge base for teaching: Learning content and pedagogy in a course on patterns and functions. Symposium at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
60. Engle, R. A. (2006). Engaging diverse stakeholders in innovative curriculum design and research: The case of the Middle-school Mathematics through Applications Project (1990-2002). Technical report for the MacArthur and Spencer Foundation Meta-study on projects that sought to reconfigure the usual relationships between research and practice. Pittsburgh, PA: Learning Research & Development Center, University of Pittsburgh. (Available online at: www.lrdc.pitt.edu/metastudy/PDF/MMAPCase0706.pdf, accessed July 23, 2011).
61. Engle, R. A. (2007a). Leadership in the dance of agency during productive disciplinary engagement. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 2, 210-218.
62. Engle, R. A. (2007b, May). The power of learning communities: Lessons from research and practice. Talk presented at the Teaching learning and technology symposium: Cultivating communities in our learning landscape. University of California at Berkeley.
63. Engle, R.A. (2008). Establishing collaborations in design-based research projects: Insights from the origins of the MMAP project. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the Learning Sciences, 216-223.
64. Engle, R. A. (2010). The Middle-school Mathematics through Applications Project: Supporting productive collaborations during two different phases of curriculum design. In C. E. Coburn & M. K. Stein (Eds.), Research and practice in education: Building alliances, bridging the divide (pp. 19-35). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
65. Engle, R. A. & Adiredja, A. A. (2008). Increasing the cognitive demand of mathematical tasks. Paper presented at the Research Pre-Session of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics conference, Salt Lake City, UT.
66. Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. C. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399-483.
67. Engle, R. A., & Faux, R. B. (2006). Fostering substantive engagement of beginning teachers in educational psychology: Comparing two methods of case-based instruction. Teaching Educational Psychology, 1(2), 3-24.
68. Engle, R. A., Conant, F. C., & Greeno, J. G. (2007). Progressive refinement of hypotheses in video-supported research. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron, & S. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 239-254). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
69. Engle, R. A., Langer-Osuna, J., & McKinney de Royston, M. (2008). Toward a model of differential influence in discussions: Negotiating quality, authority, and access within a heated classroom argument. In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (2010-2015). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
70. Engle, R. A., Langer-Osuna, J., & McKinney de Royston, M. (2011). Toward an interactional model of differential influence in persuasive discussions: Negotiating quality, authority, and access within student-led argument. Manuscript under review.
71. Engle, R. A., Nguyen, P. D., & Mendelson, A. (2010). The influence of framing on transfer: Initial evidence from a tutoring experiment. Instructional Science. Published Online First and Open Access July 30, 2010. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-010-9145-2.
72. Engle, R. A., Roberts, S., Nguyen, P. D., Yee, P., & the Framing Transfer Research Group (2008). A design-based approach to experimental design: Investigating hypotheses about how framing influences transfer. Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Utrecht, Netherlands.
73. Esmonde, I. (2009). Mathematics learning in groups: Analyzing equity in two cooperative learning structures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(2), 247-284.
74. Foo, S. Y., & Looi, C. K. (2008). Understanding elementary students' emergent dialogic argumentation in science. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS-2008).
75. Ford, M. J. (2008). Disciplinary authority and accountability in scientific practice and learning. Science Education, 92, 404-423.
76. Ford, M. J., & Forman, E. A. (2006). Redefining disciplinary learning in classroom contexts. Review of Research in Education, 30, 1-32.
77. Furberg, A., & Arnseth, H. C. (2009). The importance of socio-cultural context for understanding students' meaning making in the study of genetics. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 4, 211-219
78. Gelman, R. (2001). [Unpublished comments]. Conference Commemorating the Contributions of Ann Brown to Children's Learning, Berkeley, CA.
79. Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Magliano, J. P. (1995). Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-to-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9(6), 495-522.
80. Greeno, J. G. (1989). A perspective on thinking. American Psychologist, 44(2), 134-141.
81. Greeno, J. G. (1991). Number sense as situated knowing in a conceptual domain. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 22(3), 170-218.
82. Greeno, J. G. & Saxe, G. B. (2007). Conceptual growth in children and in the learning sciences: Giyoo Hatano's contributions. Human Devleopment, 50, 55-64.
83. Greeno, J. G., McDermott, R., Cole, K., Engle, R. A., Goldman, S., Knudsen, J., Lauman, B., & Linde, C. (1999). Research, reform, and aims in education: Modes of action in search of each other. In E. Lagemann & L. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 299-335). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
84. Gresalfi, M. S., Hand, V. M., & Hodge, L. L. (2006). Creating opportunities for all: Unpacking equitable practices in mathematics classrooms. In S. Alatorre, J. L. Cortina, M. Sáiz, and A. Méndez (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual meeting of theNorth American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education.Mérida, México: Universidad Pedagógica Nacional.
85. Gresalfi, M. S., Martin, T., Hand, V., & Greeno, J. (2009). Constructing competence: An analysis of student participation in the activity systems of mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(1), 49-70.
86. Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher community. Teachers College Record, 103(6), 942-1012.
87. Hall, R., & Stevens, R. (1995). Making space: A comparison of mathematical work in school and professional design practices. In S. L. Star (Ed.), The cultures of computing (pp. 118-144). Oxford: Blackwell.
88. Hamm, J. V., & Perry, M. (2002). Learning mathematics in first-grade classrooms: On whose authority? Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 126-137.
89. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1991). Sharing cognition through collective comprehension activity. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine, & S. D. Teasley (Eds.) Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 331-348). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
90. Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (2003). When is conceptual change intended? A cognitive-sociocultural view. In G. M. Sinatra & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Intentional conceptual change (pp. 407-427). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
91. Henningsen, M., & Stein, M. K. (1997). Mathematical tasks and student cognition: Classroom-based factors that support or inhibit high-level mathematical thinking and reasoning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 28, 524-549.
92. Herrenkohl, L. R., Palincsar, A. S., Dewater, L. S., & Kawasaki, K. (1999). Developing scientific communities in classrooms: A sociocognitive approach. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3/4), 451-493.
93. Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Human, P., Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Wearne, D. (1996). Problem solving as a basis for reform in curriculum and instruction: The case of mathematics. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 12-21.
94. Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K. C., Wearne, D., Murray, H., Olivier, A., & Human, P. (1997). Making sense: Teaching and learning mathematics with understanding. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
95. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2008). Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition and Instruction, 26, 48-94.
96. Hoadley, C. (2002). Creating context: Design-based research in creating and understanding CSCL. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning 2002 (pp. 453-462). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
97. Hodge, L. L. (2008). Student roles and mathematical competence in two contrasting elementary classes. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(1), 32-51.
98. Hodge, L. L., Visnovska, J., Zhao, Q., & Cobb, P. (2007). What does it mean for an instructional task to be effective? In J. Watson & K. Beswick (Eds.), Mathematics: Essential research, essential practice (Proceedings of the 30th annual meeting of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia), Vol. 1, pp. 392-401). Hobart, TAS: MERGA.
99. Hogan, K. Nastasi, B. K., & Pressley, M. (2000). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, (17)4, 379-432.
100. Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2003). The use of argumentation in Haitian-Creole classrooms. Harvard Educational Review, 73(1), 73-93.
101. Hung, D., Tan, S. C. & Koh, T. S. (2006). Engaged learning: Making learning an authentic experience. In D. Hung & M. S. Khine (Eds.), Engaged learning with emerging technologies (pp. 29-48). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
102. Hutchins, E. (1995). How a cockpit remembers its speed. Cognitive Science, 19, 265-288.
103. Hutchison, P., & Hammer, D. (2010). Attending to student epistemological framing in a physics classroom. Science Education, 94(3), 506-524.
104. Imm, K. L., Stylianou, D. A., & Chae, N. (2008). Student representations at the center: Promoting classroom equity. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 13(8), 458-463.
105. Inagaki, K., Hatano, G., & Morita, E. (1998). Construction of mathematical knowledge through whole-class discussion. Learning and Instruction, 8, 503-526.
106. Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1995). Creative controversy: Intellectual challenge in the classroom (3rd ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction Book Company.
107. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., & Smith, K. (1997). Academic controversy: Enriching college instruction through intellectual conflict. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, 25(3), Washington, DC: George Washington University.
108. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2000). Constructive controversy: The educative power of intellectual conflict. Change, 32(1), 28-37.
109. Krange, I. (2007). Students' conceptual practices in science education: Productive disciplinary interactions in a participation trajectory. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 2, 171-203.
110. Kuhn, L., & Reiser, B. (2006). Structuring activities tofoster argumentative discourse. Paper presented at AERA, San Francisco, CA.
111. Lamon, M., Secules, T., Petrosino, A. J., Hackett, R., Bransford, J. D., & Goldman, S. R. (1996). Schools for thought: Overview of the project and lessons learned from one of the sites. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 243-288). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
112. Lampert, M. (1990a). Connecting inventions with conventions. In L. P. Steffe & T. Wood (Eds.), Transforming children's mathematics education (pp. 253-265). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
113. Lampert, M. (1990b). When the problem is not the question and the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 29-63.
114. Lampert, M. (1992). Practices and problems in teaching authentic mathematics. In F. K. Oser, A. Dick, & J.-L. Patry (Eds.), Effective and responsible teaching: The new synthesis (pp. 295-314). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
115. Lampert, M. (2001). Teaching problems and the problems of teaching. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
116. Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
117. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
118. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2007). A developmental approach for supporting the epistemology of modeling. Modeling and application in mathematics education: New ICMI study series, 10(3:3.1), 153-160.
119. Lehrer, R., Carpenter, S., Schauble, L., & Putz, A. (2000). Designing classrooms that support inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 80-99). Reston, VA: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
120. Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., Strom, D., & Pligge, M. (2001). Similarity of form and substance: Modeling material kind. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
121. Leinhardt, G., & Steele, M. D. (2005). Seeing the complexity of standing to the side: Instructional dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1), 87-163.
122. Lerner, J. S., & Tetlock, P. E. (1999). Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psychological Bulletin, 125(2), 255-275.
123. Lieberman, A., & Grolnick, M. (1996). Networks and reform in American education. Teachers College Record, 98, 7-45.
124. McCandliss, B. D., Kalchman, M., & Bryant, P. (2003). Design experiments and laboratory approaches to learning: Steps towards collaborative exchange. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 14-16.
125. McDermott, R. P., Gospodinoff, K., & Aron, J. (1978). Criteria for an ethnographically adequate description of concerted activities and their contexts. Semiotica La Haye, (24)3, 245-275.
126. McNeill, K. L., & Kuhn, L. (2006). Explanation and argumentation. In D. Fortus, et al. (organizers), Sequencing and supporting complex scientific inquiry practices in instructional materials of middle school students. Paper presented at NARST, San Francisco, CA.
127. Magnusson, S. J., & Palincsar, A. S. (1995). The learning environment as a site of science education reform. Theory Into Practice, 34(1), 43-50.
128. Mahoney, J., & Goertz, G. (1994). The possibility principle: Choosing negative cases in comparative research. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 653-669.
129. Martin, T., Rivale, S. D., & Diller, K. R. (2007). Comparison of student learning in challenge-based and traditional instruction in biomedical engineering. Annals of Biomedical Engineering, 35(8), 1312-1323.
130. Mead, G. H. (1913). The social self. Journal of Philosophy, Psychology, and Scientific Methods, 10, 374-380.
131. Michaels, S., O'Connor, C., & Resnick, L. B. (2007). Deliberative discourse idealized and realized: Accountable talk in the classroom and in civic life. Studies in the Philosophy of Education, 27(4), 283-297.
132. Mortimer, E. F., & Oliveira de Araujo, A. (2009). Productive disciplinary engagement in a Brazilian high school chemistry classroom: The lack of resources. In C. Buty (chair) and R. A. Engle (organizer), Developing and challenging the productive disciplinary engagement framework. Symposium presented at the conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Amsterdam.
133. Nasir, N. S. Hand, V., & Taylor, E. V. (2008). Culture and mathematics in school: Boundaries between "cultural" and "domain" knowledge in the mathematics classroom and beyond. Review of Research in Education, 32, 187-240.
134. National Center for History in the Schools (1996). National History Standards Basic Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Author.
135. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
136. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1991). Professional standards for teaching mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
137. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
138. National Research Council (2008). Participation in scientific practices and discourse. In R. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, & A. Shouse (Eds.), Taking science to school: Learning science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
139. National Science Foundation (1997). Foundations: The challenge and promise of K-8 science education reform (Vol. 1, NSF 97-76). Washington, DC: Author.
140. Nikitina, S. (2005). Pathways of interdisciplinary cognition. Cognition and Instruction, 23(3), 389-425.
141. O'Connor, M. C., & Michaels, S. (1996). Shifting participant frameworks: Orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning and schooling (pp. 63-103). New York: Cambridge University Press.
142. Palincsar, A. S. (1989). Less charted waters. Educational Researcher, 18(4), 5-7.
143. Palincsar, A. S., Magnussen, S. J., Marano, N., Ford, D., & Brown, N. (2001). Designing a community of practice: Principles and practices of the GIsML community. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 5-19.
144. Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
145. Pugh, K. J., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Koskey, K. L. K., Stewart, V. C., & Manzey, C. (2010). Teaching for transformative experiences and conceptual change: A case study and evaluation of a high school biology teacher's experience. Cognition and Instruction, 28(3), 273-316.
146. Radinsky, J. (2008). Students' roles in group-work with visual data: A site of science learning. Cognition and Instruction, 26(2), 145-194.
147. Reiser, B. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304.
148. Renninger, K. A. (2007). Interest and motivation in informal science learning. Commissioned report. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
149. Renninger, K. A. (2009). Interest and identity development in instruction: An inductive model. Educational Psychologist, 44(2), 105-118.
150. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
151. Romagnano, L. (1994). Wrestling with change: The dilemmas of teaching real mathematics. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
152. Rosebery, A., Warren, B., & Conant, F. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 61-94.
153. Saxe, G. B. (2002). Children's developing mathematics in collective practices: A framework for analysis. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(2&3), 275-300.
154. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67-98). Chicago: Open Court.
155. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97-115). New York: Cambridge University Press.
156. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2007). Fostering communities of learners and knowledge building: An interrupted dialogue. In J. C. Campione, K. E. Metz, & A. S. Palincsar (Eds.), Children's learning in the laboratory and in the classroom: Essays in honor of Ann Brown (pp. 197-212). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
157. Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Lamon, M. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into World 3. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and educational practice (pp. 201-228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
158. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. New York: Academic Press.
159. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1989). Teaching mathematical thinking and problem solving. In L. B. Resnick & L. E. Klopfer (Eds.), Toward the thinking curriculum: Current cognitive research (pp. 83-103). 1989 ASCD Yearbook. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
160. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2006). Mathematics teaching and learning. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Ed.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
161. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2007a). Method. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 69-107). New York: Macmillan.
162. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2007b). Problem solving in the United States, 1970-2008: Research and theory, practice and politics. ZDM Mathematics Education, 39, 537-551.
163. Schultz, J. J., Florio, S., & Erickson, F. (1982). Where's the floor? Aspects of the cultural organization of social relationships in communication at home and in school. In P. Gilmore & A. A. Glatthorn (Eds.), Ethnography and education (pp. 88-123). Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
164. Schwartz, D. L. (1999). The productive agency that drives collaborative learning. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 197-218). Amsterdam: Pergamon.
165. Schwartz, D.L., & Bransford, J.D. (1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475-522.
166. Schwartz, D.L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production I statistics instruction, Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 129-184.
167. Scott, P. H., Mortimer, E. F., & Aguiar, O. G. (2006). The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons. Science Education, 90(4), 605-631.
168. Shepardson, D. P. (1996). Social interactions and the mediation of science learning in two small groups of first-graders. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 159-178.
169. Smith, M. S., Hughes, E. K., Engle, R. A., & Stein, M. K. (2009). Orchestrating discussions of challenging tasks: Keeping your eye on the mathematics to be learned. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 14(9), 548-556.
170. Stein, M. K., & Kaufman, J. H. (2010). Selecting and supporting the use of mathematics curricula at scale. American Educational Research Journal. Online first publication, April 19, 2010.
171. Stein, M. K., Engle, R. A., Smith, M. S., & Hughes, E. K. (2008). Orchestrating productive mathematical discussions: Five practices for helping teachers move beyond show and tell. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 10(4), 313-340.
172. Stein, M. K., Grover, B. W., & Henningsen, M. (1996). Building student capacity for mathematical thinking and reasoning: An analysis of mathematical tasks used in reform classrooms. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 455-488.
173. Stein, M. K., Smith, M. S., Henningsen, M. A., & Silver, E. A. (2000). Implementing standards-based mathematics instruction: A casebook for professional development. New York: Teachers College Press.
174. Stipek, D., Salmon, J. M., Givvin, K. B., Kazemi, E., Saxe, G., & MacGyvers, V. L. (1998). The value and convergence of practices suggested by motivation research and promoted by mathematics education reformers. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 29, 465-488.
175. Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices: Repetition, dialogue, and imagery in conversational discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
176. Toma, C. (1991). Explicit use of others' voices for constructing arguments in Japanese classroom discourse: An analysis of the use of reported speech. Paper presented at the Boston University Conference on Language Development, Boston.
177. Tzou, C. (2006). Characterizing teachers' support of constructing scientific explanations from a discourse perspective. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
178. Van Zee, E., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questioning to guide student thinking. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(2), 227-267.
179. Venturini, P., & Amade-Escot, C. (2009). Conditions fostering productive disciplinary engagement during a regular physics lesson in a depressed area school. In C. Buty (chair) & R. A. Engle (organizer), Developing and challenging the productive disciplinary engagement framework. Symposium presented at the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Amsterdam.
180. Warren, B., & Rosebery, A. S. (1996). "This question is just too, too easy!" Students' perspectives on accountability in science. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 97-125). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
181. Warren, B., Ballenger, C., Ogonowski, M., Rosebery, A. S., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2001). Rethinking diversity in learning science: The logic of everyday sense-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 529-552.
182. Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.
183. Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.
184. Wertsch, J. V., & Toma, C. (1995). Discourse and learning in the classroom: A sociocultural approach. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp. 159-174). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
185. Windschitl, M., and Thompson, J. (2006). Transcending simple forms of school science investigation: The impact of preservice instruction on teachers' understandings of modelbased inquiry. American Educational Research Journal, 43, 783-835.
186. Wineberg, S. S. (1989). Remembrance of theories past. Educational Researcher, 18(4), 7-10.
187. Wood, D. (2007). Teachers' learning communities: Catalyst for change or a new infrastructure for the status quo? Teachers College Record, 109(3), 699-739.
188. Yackel, E., & Cobb, P. (1996). Sociomathematical norms, argumentation, and autonomy in mathematics. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 458-477.
189. Zaslavsky, O. (2005). Seizing the opportunity to create uncertainty in learning mathematics. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 60, 297-321.
190. Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 7-44.