Forms of reasoning used by prospective physical sciences teachers when explaining and predicting natural phenomena: The case of air pressure

Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 169-191

  Leite, Laurinda ^a   Afonso, Ana ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINHO   (Portugal)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011466988     PISSN: 14926156     EISSN: 19424051     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14926150409556604     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Afonso, A., & Leite, L. (in press). A inter-relagáo teoria-evidéncia-explicafao científica: Um estudo com alunos do 9° e do 11° anos de escolaridade. In Proceedings of the IV Encontro Nacional de Didácticas e Metodologías da Educaqdo. Evora, Portugal: Universidade de Evora.
2. Ball, J. (1999, March). Evidence, theory and student voice: Interactional relationships in cooperative and traditional chemistry lab structures. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA.
3. Caplan, J., Gerritsen, H., & LeDell, J. (1994). The hidden complexities of a ‘simple’ experiment. The Physics Teacher, 32, 310-314.
4. Chalmers, A. (1982). What is this thing called science? Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.
5. Costa, N., Marques, L., & Kempa, R. (2000). Science teachers’ awareness of findings from education research. Research in Science & Technological Education, 5(1), 39-44.
6. Dagher, Z., & Cossman, G. (1992). Verbal explanations given by science teachers: Their nature and implications. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29,361-374.
7. Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary science. London: Routledge.
8. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1997). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
9. Friedl, A. (2000). Enseñar ciencias a los niños. Barcelona: Gedisa.
10. Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1996). Practical work: Its role in the understanding of scientific evidence. International Journal of Science Education, 8(7), 791-806.
11. Gott, R., & Duggan, S. (1995). Investigative work in the science curriculum. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
12. Hodson, D. (1998). Science fiction: The continuing misrepresentation of science in the school curriculum. Curriculum Studies, 6(2), 191-216.
13. Horwood, R. (1988). Explanation and description in science teaching. Science Education, 72 (1), 41-49.
14. Kolsto, S. (2001). Scientific literacy for citizenship: Tools for dealing with the science dimension of controversial socioscientific issues. Science Education, 85(3), 291-310.
15. Kuhn, D. (1989). Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psychological Review, 96(4), 674-689.
16. Lawrence, M., & Pallrand, G. (2000). A case study of the effectiveness of teacher experience in the use of explanation-based assessment in high school physics. School Science and Mathematics, 100(1), 36-47.
17. Leach, J. (1999). Students’ understanding of the co-ordination of theory and evidence in science. International Journal of Science Education, 2 (8), 789-806.
18. Leite, L., & Afonso, A. (2002). Prospective physics teachers’ use of the laboratory activities: An analysis of its evolution due to a science teaching methods course. Revista electrónica de enseñanza de las ciencias, 1(3).
19. Leite, L., & Figueiroa, A. (2002). Os manuais escolares de ciencias da natureza e a inter-relaipao dados-evidéncias-conclusSes: O caso de ‘a importancia do ar para os seres vivos.’ In Proceedings of the XX Encuentros de Didáctico de las Ciencias Experimentales. La Laguna: Universidad de La Laguna.
20. Leite, L. (2002). A inter-relafao dados-evidencias-conclusoes: Um estudo com actividades labora-toriais incluidas em manuais escolares. In Proceedings of the II Congreso Internacional 'Didáctica de las Ciencias.’ [CD-ROM]. Havana, Cuba: Ministerio de Educación.
21. Lucas, A., & Garcia-Rodejo, I. (1989). Contra las interpretaciones simplistas de los resultados de los experimentos realizados en el aula. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 21(B), 789-806.
22. Metz, K. (1991). Development of explanation: Incremental and fundamental change in children’s physics knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(9), 785-797.
23. Meyer, K., & Woodruff, E. (1997). Consensually driven explanation in science teaching. Science Education, 81(2), 173-192.
24. Ogbom, J., Kress, G., Martins, I., & McGillicuddy, K. (1997). Explaining science in the classroom. Buckingham, UK: Open University.
25. Ohlsson, S. (1992). The cognitive skill of theory articulation: A neglected aspect of science education? Science & Education, 1, 182-192.
26. Ratcliffe, M. (2000, September). Towards evidence-based practice in science edication (EPSE). Paper presented at the BERA conference, Cardiff, Wales.
27. Rozier, S., & Viennot L. (1990). Students’ reasoning in thermodynamics. In P. Lijnse, P. Licht, W. De Vos, & A. Waarlo (Eds.), Relating macroscopic phenomena to microscopic particles: A central problem in secondary science education, pp. 36-49. Utrecht, Netherlands: CD-B Press.
28. Ryder, J. (2001, April). Identifying science understanding for functional scientific literacy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, Seattle, WA.
29. Solomon, J. (1995). Higher level understanding of nature of science. School Science Review, 75(276), 15-22.
30. Wellington, J. (2000). Teaching and learning secondary science. London: Routledge.