Scientific literacy, discourse, and epistemic practices

Exploring the Landscape of Scientific Literacy

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 61-73

  Kelly, Gregory J ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84921313961     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203843284     Document Type: Chapter

References (62)

1. Aikenhead, G. S. (1997). Toward a first nations cross-cultural science and technology curriculum. Science Education, 81, 217-238.
2. Aikenhead, G. (2006). Science education for everyday life: Evidence-based practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1989). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. American Association for the Advancement of Science [AAAS]. (1993). Benchmarks for scientific literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Apple, M. (1993). Official knowledge: Democratic education in a conservative age. Boston, MA: Ark.
6. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
7. Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation.Science Education, 93, 26-55.
8. Bianchini, J. A., & Kelly G. J. (2003). Challenges of standards-based reform: The example of California’s science content standards and textbook adoption process. Science Education,87, 378-389.
9. Brown, B. A., Reveles, J. M., & Kelly G. J. (2005). Scientific literacy and discursive identity: A theoretical framework for understanding science learning. Science Education, 89, 779-802.
10. Brown, B. A. & Spang, E. (2008). Double talk: Synthesizing everyday and science language in the classroom. Science Education, 92, 708-732.
11. Calabrese Barton, A. (1998). Feminist science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
12. Calabrese Barton, A. & Osborne, M. (Ed.). (1998). Pedagogies in science education [Special Issue]. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35 (4).
13. Castanheira, M. L., Crawford, T., Dixon, C., & Green, J. L. (2001). Interactional ethnography: An approach to studying the social construction of literate practices. Linguistics & Education, 11, 353-400.
14. Cazden, C. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
15. Cunningham, C. M., & Helms, J. V. (1998). Sociology of science as a means to a more authentic, inclusive science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 483-499.
16. DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporarymeanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 582-601.
17. Duschl, R. A. (2008). Science education in three-partharmony: Balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Review of Research in Education, 32, 268-291.
18. Edwards, A. D., & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge. London: Methuen.
19. Eisenhart, M., Finkel, E., & Marion, S. F. (1996). Creating the conditions for scientific literacy: A re-examination. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 261-295.
20. Engestrom, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engestrom, R. Miettinen, &R.-L. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory(pp. 1-16). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21. Garfinkel, H., Lynch, M., & Livingston, E. (1981). The work of discovering science construed with materials from the optically discovered pulsar. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 11, 131-158.
22. Gee, J. P. (2001a). Literacy, discourse, and linguistics: Introduction and what is literacy? In E. Cushman, E. R. Kintgen, B. M. Kroll, & M. Rose (Eds.), Literacy: A critical sourcebook(pp. 525-544). Bedford: St. Martins.
23. Gee, J. P. (2001b). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99-126.
24. Gee, J. P., & Green, J. L. (1998). Discourse analysis, learning, and social practice: A methodological study. Review of Research in Education, 23, 119-169.
25. Habermas, J. (1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action (translated by C. Lenhardt & S. W. Nicholsen). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
26. Harding, S. (Ed.). (1993). The “racial” economy of science: Toward a democratic future. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
27. Hodson, D. (2003). Time for action: Science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 645-670.
28. Jasanoff, S., Markle, G. E., Petersen, J. C., & Pinch, T. (Eds.). (1995). Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
29. Jimenez-Aleixandre, M.-P., & Reigosa, C. (2006). Contextualizing practices across epistemic levels in the chemistry laboratory. Science Education, 90, 707-733.
30. Kelly G. J. (2006). Epistemology and educational research. In J. Green, G. Camilli, & P. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research(pp. 33-55). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31. Kelly G. J. (2007). Discourse in science classrooms. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education(pp. 443-469). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Kelly G. J. (2008). Inquiry, Activity, and Epistemic Practice. In R. Duschl & R. Grandy (Eds.), Teaching Scientific Inquiry: Recommendations for research and implementation (pp. 99-117; 288-291). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
33. Kelly G. J., Chen, C., & Crawford, T. (1998). Methodological considerations for studying science-in-the-making in educational settings. Research in Science Education, 28(1), 23-49.
34. Kelly G. J., Chen, C., & Prothero, W. (2000). The epistemological framing of a discipline: Writing science in university oceanography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 691-718.
35. Kelly G. J., & Green, J. (1998). The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction. In B. Guzzetti & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change: Multiple ways to understand knowing and learning in a complex world(pp. 145-181). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
37. Krugly-Smolska. (1996). Scientific culture, multiculturalism and the science classroom. Science & Education, 5(1), 21-29.
38. Kyle, W. C. (1991). The reform agenda and science education: Hegemonic control vs. counterhegemony. Science Education, 75, 403-411.
39. Lemke, J. (2000). Multimedia literacy demands of the scientific curriculum. Linguistics & Education, 10, 247-271.
40. Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E., & Ostman, L. (2006). Teaching and learning in the science classroom: The interplay between teachers’ epistemological moves and students’ practical epistemology. Science Education, 90, 148-163.
41. Longino, H. E. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
42. Lynch, M. (1993). Scientific practice as ordinary action: Ethnomethodology and the social studies of science. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
43. McNeill, K. L. (2009). Teachers’ use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena. Science Education, 93, 233-268.
44. National Research Council [NRC]. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
45. Norris, S. P. (1995). Learning to live with scientific expertise: Toward a theory of intellectual communalism for guiding science teaching. Science Education, 79, 201-217.
46. Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education87, 224-240.
47. Pfundt, H., & Duit, R. (1991). Bibliography: Students’ alternative frameworks and science. Kiel, Germany: IPN.
48. Reveles, J. M., Kelly G. J., & Durán, R. P. (2007). A sociocultural perspective on mediated activity in third grade science. Cultural Studies in Science Education, 1, 467-495.
49. Roberts, D. (2007). Scientific literacy/Science literacy. In S. K. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research on science education(pp. 729-780). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. Roth, W.-M., & Calabrese Barton, A. (2004). Rethinking scientific literacy. New York: Routledge/Falmer.
51. Roth, W.-M., & Lee, S. (2002). Scientific literacy as collective praxis. Public Understanding of Science, 11, 1-24.
52. Sadler, T. D., & Fowler, S. R. (2006). A threshold model of content knowledge transfer for socioscientific argumentation. Science Education, 90, 986-1004.
53. Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93, 448-484.
54. Sandoval, W. A. (2006). Understanding students’ practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89, 634-656.
55. Santa Barbara Classroom Discourse Group. (1992). Constructing literacy in classrooms: Literate action as social accomplishment. In H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining student learning: Roots of educational change(pp. 119-150). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
56. Schweizer, D. M., & Kelly G. J. (2005). An investigation of student engagement in a global warming debate. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(1), 75-84.
57. Street, B. (2001). The new literacy studies. In E. Cushman, E. R. Kintgen, B. M. Kroll, & M. Rose (Eds.), Literacy: A critical sourcebook(pp. 430-442). Bedford: St. Martins.
58. Strike, K. A. (1995). Discourse ethics and restructuring. Presidential address. In M. Katz (Ed.), Philosophy of Education, 1-14. Philosophy of Education Society.
59. Wells, G. (2000). Dialogic inquiry in education: Building on the legacy of Vygotsky. In C. D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: Constructingmeaning through collaborative inquiry. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
60. Wickman, P.-O. (2004). The practical epistemology of the classroom: A study of laboratory work. Science Education, 88, 325-344.
61. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations (3rd ed.). (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.).New York: Macmillan Publishing.
62. Zembal-Saul, C. (2009). Learning to teach elementary school science as argument. ScienceEducation, 93, 687-719.