Integrating technology into teaching and learning of school science: A situated perspective on pedagogical issues in research

Studies in Science Education

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 1-48

  Hennessy, Sara ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85012524262     PISSN: 03057267     EISSN: 19408412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03057260608560219     Document Type: Note

References (158)

1. ALEXANDER, R. (2004). Still no pedagogy? Principle, pragmatism and compliance in primary education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 34(1), 7-33.
2. BAGGOTT, L. & NICHOL, J. (1998). Multimedia simulation. A threat to or enhancement of practical work in science education? In J. Wellington (Ed.) Practical work in school science (pp.252-270). London, New York, Routledge.
3. BAGGOTT LA VELLE, L., MCFARLANE, A., JOHN, D. & BRAWN, R. (2004). According to the promises: the sub-culture of school science, teachers' pedagogic identity and the challenge of ICT. Education, Communication & Information, 4, 109-129.
4. BAGGOTT LA VELLE, L. M., MCFARLANE, A. & BRAWN, R. (2003). Knowledge driven curriculum development. British Journal of Educational Technology, 34, 183-200.
5. BARTON, R. (1997). Computer-aided graphing: a comparative study. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 6(1), 59-72.
6. BARTON, R. (1998). IT in practical work: assessing and increasing the value-added. In J. Wellington (Ed.) Practical work in school science (pp.237-51). London, New York, Routledge.
7. BARTON, R. (2004). Teaching secondary science with ICT. Cambridge, Open University Press.
8. BARTON, R. (2005). Supporting teachers in making innovative changes in the use of computer- aided practical work to support concept development in physics education. International Journal of Science Education, 27(3), 345-365.
9. BARTON, R. & STILL, C. (2004). Planning, teaching and assessment using computer-aided practical work. In R. Barton (Ed.) Teaching secondary science with ICT (pp.52-68). Cambridge, Open University Press.
10. BECKER, H. (2000). Findings from the teaching, learning and computing survey: is Larry Cuban right? Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8. http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v8n51 (accessed 25/01/06).
11. BIELACZYC, K. (2001). Designing social infrastructure: the challenge of building computer- supported learning communities. In P. Dillenbourg, A. Eurelings & K. Hakkarainen (Eds.) European perspectives on computer- supported collaborative learning. Proceedings of the First European Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (pp.106-114). Maastricht, Netherlands, University of Maastricht.
12. BONNETT, M., MCFARLANE, A. & WILLIAMS, J. (1999). ICT in subject teaching: an opportunity for curriculum renewal? The Curriculum Journal, 10(3), 345-359.
13. BOYLE, T. (2004). Designing multimedia e-learning for science education. In R. Holliman & E. Scanlon (Eds.) Mediating science learning through information and communications technology (pp. 103-19). London, RoutledgeFalmer.
14. BROWN, J.S., COLLINS, A. & DUGUID, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32-42.
15. BROWN, S. & MCINTYRE, D. (1993). Making sense of teaching. Buckingham, Open University Press.
16. BRUNER, J. (1985). Vygotsky: a historical and conceptual perspective. In J. Wertsch (Ed.) Culture, communication and cognition: Vygotsky an perspectives (pp.21-34). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
17. BUCKLEY, B. C., GOBERT, J. D., KINDFIELD, A. C. H., HORWITZ, P. TINKER, B. & GERLITS, B. (2004) Model-based teaching and learning with hypermodels: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know? Journal of Science, Education and Technology, 13(1), 23-41.
18. CASWELL, B. & LAMON, M. (1999). Development of scientific literacy: the evolution of ideas in a knowledge-building classroom. In J. Leach & B. Moon (Eds.) Learners and Pedagogy (pp. 140-57). London, Paul Chapman/Open University.
19. CHAMPAGNE, A.B., KLOPFER, L.E. & ANDERSON, J.H. (1980). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physics, 48(12), 1074-1079.
20. CHANG, C.-Y. & TSAI, C. C. (2005). The interplay between different forms of CAI and students' preferences of learning environment in the secondary science class. Science Education, 89(5), 707-724.
21. COBB, P., CONFREY, J., DISESSA, A., LEHRER, R. & SCHAUBLE, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher; 32(1), 9-13.
22. COGHILL, J. (2003). The use of interactive whiteboards in the primary school: effects on pedagogy. ICT Research Bursaries: a compendium of research reports. London, Becta/DfES.
23. COLE, M. (1988). Cross-cultural research in the sociohistorical tradition. Human Development, 31(3), 137-152.
24. 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.
25. COMEAUX & HUBER, R. (2001). Students as scientists; using interactive technologies and collaborative inquiry in an environmental science project for teachers and their students. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18(4), 235-252.
26. COX, M., ABBOTT, C., WEBB, M., BLAKELY, B., BEAUCHAMP, T. & RHODES, V. (2003a) ICT and attainment: a review of the research literature. DfES/Becta www.becta.org.uk/research (accessed 25/01/06).
27. COX, M., WEBB, M., ABBOTT, C., BLAKELY, B., BEAUCHAMP, T. & RHODES, V.(2003b) ICT and pedagogy: a review of the research literature. London, DfES and Becta www.becta.org.uk/research (accessed 25/01/06).
28. COX, M.J. (1997). The effects of information technology on students' motivation: summary report. London, Kings College London/NCET.
29. COX, M.J. (2000). Information and communications technologies: their role and value for science education. In M. Monk & J. Osborne (Eds.) Good practice in science teaching: what research has to say (pp.190-207). Buckingham, Open University Press.
30. CUBAN, L. (1989). Neoprogressive visions and organizational realities. Harvard Educational Review, 59(2), 217-222.
31. CUBAN, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: computers in the classroom. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
32. CUBAN, L., KIRKPATRICK, H. & PECK, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 813-834.
33. DE JONG, T. & VAN JOOLINGEN, W.R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179-201.
34. DEANEY, R., HENNESSY, S. & RUTHVEN, K. (submitted) Teachers’ strategies for making effective use of data logging in secondary science lessons
35. DEANEY, R., RUTHVEN, K. & HENNESSY, S. (2003). Pupil perspectives on the contribution of information and communication technology in to teaching and learning in the secondary school. Research Papers in Education, 18(2), 141-165.
36. DESIGN-BASED RESEARCH COLLECTIVE (2003). Design-based research: an emerging paradigm for educational enquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.
37. DFEE/QCA (1999). The National Curriculum. London, QCA, HMSO.
38. DFES (2004a) ICT across the curriculum: ICT in Science. Key Stage 3 National Strategy. London, DfES.
39. DFES (2004b) Information and communications technology in schools in England:2004 (Provisional). London, DfES www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000480/index.shtml (accessed 25/01/06).
40. DOISE, W. & MUGNY, G. (1984). The social development of the intellect. Oxford, Pergamon Press.
41. DONNELLY, J. E (1999). Schooling Heidegger: on being in teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(8), 933-949.
42. DRIVER, R., ASOKO, H., LEACH, J., MORTIMER, E. & SCOTT, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher; 23(7), 5-12.
43. DRIVER, R., GUESNE, E. & TIBERGHIEN, A. (Eds.) (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
44. EDELSON, D.C. (2001). Learning-for-use: a framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 355-385.
45. ENYEDY, N. & GOLDBERG, J. (2004). Inquiry in interaction: how local adaptations of curricula shape classroom communities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(9)
46. FACER, K., FURLONG, J., FURLONG, R. & SUTHERLAND, R. (2003). Screen play: children and computing in the home. London, RoutledgeFalmer.
47. FURNHAM, A. (1992). Lay understanding of science: young people and adults’ ideas of scientific concepts. Studies in Science Education, 20, 29-64.
48. GALTON, M., HARGREAVES, L., COMBER, C., PELL, T. & WALL, D. (1999). Inside the primary classroom: 20 years on. London, Routledge.
49. GLOVER, D., MILLER, D., AVERIS, D. & DOOR, V. (2005). The interactive whiteboard: a literature survey. Technology, Pedagogy & Education, 14(2), 155-170.
50. GOMPERTZ, B. (2003). Interpreting science data: children’s perceptions of success. British Educational Research Association Conference. Heriot-Watt University.
51. GRAY, B.V. (1999). Science education in the developing world: issues and considerations. Journal of Research in Teaching, 36(3), 261-268.
52. GREENO, J. & MIDDLE SCHOOL MATHEMATICS THROUGH APPLICATIONS PROJECT GROUP (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning and research. American Psychologist, 55(1), 5-26.
53. HACKER, R.G. &: ROWE, M.J. (1997). The impact of a National Curriculum development on teaching and learning behaviours. International Journal of Science Education, 19(9), 997-1004.
54. HAKKARAINEN, K. (2003). Progressive inquiry in a computer-supported biology class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1072-1088.
55. HAMMOND, M. (1994). Measuring the impact of IT on learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 10, 251-260.
56. HARLEN, W. (1996). The teaching of science in primary schools. London, David Fulton Plublishers Ltd.
57. HARRISON, C., COMBER, C., FISHER, T., HAW, K., LEWIN, C., LUNZER, E., MCFARLANE, A., MAVERS, D., SCRIMSHAW, P., SOMEKH, B. & WATLING, R. (2002). ImpaCT2: The impact of information and communication technologies on pupil learning and attainment. A report to the DfES. ICT in Schools Research and Evaluation Series No. 7, Coventry, Becta. www.becta.org.uk/research (accessed 25/01/06).
58. HART, S., DIXON, A., DRUMMOND, M.-J. & MCINTYRE, D. (2004). Learning without limits. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
59. 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.331-48). Washington, American Psychological Association.
60. HATANO, G. & INAGAKI, K. (1992). Desituating cognition through the construction of conceptual knowledge. In P. Light & G. Butterworth (Eds.) Context and cognition: ways of knowing and learning (pp. 155-33). New York, Harvester.
61. HENNESSY, S. (1993). Situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship: implications for classroom learning. Studies in Science Education, 22, 1-41.
62. HENNESSY, S., DEANEY, R. & RUTHVEN, K. (2005a). Developing pedagogical expertise for integrating use of the interactive whiteboard in secondary science. Keynote Symposium Paper. BERA 2005. University of Glamorgan.
63. HENNESSY, S., DEANEY, R. & RUTHVEN, K. (2005b). Emerging teacher strategies for mediating ‘Technology-integrated Instructional Conversations’: a socio-cultural perspective. Curriculum Journal, 16(3), 265-292.
64. HENNESSY, S., DEANEY, R. & RUTHVEN, K. (in press-a) Situated pedagogy for integrating use of multimedia simulation into secondary science teaching. International Journal of Science Education.
65. HENNESSY, S. & O’SHEA, T. (1993). Learner perceptions of realism and ‘magic’ in computer simulation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 24(2), 125-138.
66. HENNESSY, S., TWIGGER, D., BYARD, M., DRIVER, R., DRAPER, S., HARTLEY, R., MOHAMED, R., O’MALLEY, C., O’SHEA, T. & SCANLON, E. (1995). A classroom intervention using a computer-augmented curriculum for mechanics. International Journal of Science Education, 17(2), 189-206.
67. HOLLIMAN, R. & SCANLON, E. (Eds.) (2004). Mediating science learning through information and communications technology. London, RoutledgeFalmer.
68. HOUSE OF COMMONS SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE (2002). Science Education from 14 to 19. London, Stationery Office.
69. HOWE, C. & TOLMIE, A. (1999). Productive interaction in the context of computer-supported collaborative learning in science. In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.) Learning with computers: analysing productive interaction (pp.24-45). London, Routledge.
70. JEDESKOG, G. & NISSEN, J. (2004). ICT in the classroom: is doing more important than knowing? Education and Information Technologies, 9(1), 37-45.
71. JENKINS, E.W. (2000). Research in science education: time for a health check? Studies in Science Education, 35, 1-26.
72. KENNEWELL, S. (2004). Researching the influence of interactive presentationtools on teachers’ pedagogy. Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association (BERA, September 2004). Manchester www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/151717.htm (accessed 03.02.06).
73. KENNEWELL, S. (in preparation) Analysing the influence of ICT on teaching and learning.
74. KERR, S.T. (1991). Lever and fulcrum: educational technology in teachers’ thought and practice. Teachers College Record, 93(1), 114-136.
75. KOZULIN, A. (1998). Psychological tools: a sociocultural approach to education. London, Harvard University Press.
76. KRESS, G.R., JEWITT, C., OGBORN, J. & TSATSARELIS, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning: the rhetorics of the science classroom. London and New York, Continuum.
77. KUHN, D. (1993). Science as argument: implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337.
78. LAURILLARD, D. (Ed.) (1993). Rethinking university teaching. A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London, Routledge.
79. LAURILLARD, D. (2004). Rethinking the teaching of science. In R. Holliman E. Scanlon (Eds.) Mediating science learning through information and communications technology (pp.27-50). London, RoutledgeFalmer.
80. LAVE, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
81. LEACH, J. & MOON, B. (2000). Pedagogy, information and communications technology and teachers’ professional knowledge. The Curriculum Journal, 11, 385-404.
82. LEACH, J. & SCOTT, P. (2002). Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences: an approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand socia constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38, 115-142.
83. LINN, M. (2004). Using ICT to teach and learn science. In R. Holliman & E. Scanlon (Eds.) Mediating science learning through information and communications technology (pp.9-26). London, RoutledgeFalmer.
84. LOVELESS, A. & ELLIS, V. (Eds.) (2001). ICT, pedagogy and the curriculum: subject to change. London, RoutledgeFalmer.
85. MARTIN, M.O., MULLIS, I.V.S., GONZALEZ, E.J., GREGORY, K.D., SMITH, T. A., CHROSTOWSKI, S.J., GARDEN, R.A. & O’CONNOR, K M. (2000). TIMSS 1999 International Science Report: findings from IEA’s report of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the Eighth Grade. Chestnut Hill MA, Boston College www.timss.com/timssl999i/science achievement report.html (accessed 25/01/06).
86. MCCORMICK, R. & SCRIMSHAW, P. (2001). Information and communication technology, knowledge and pedagogy. Education, Communication and Information, 1(1), 37-57.
87. MCFARLANE, A. & SAKELLARIOU, S. (2002). The role of ICT in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 219-232.
88. MELLAR, H. & BLISS, J. (1994). Introduction: modelling and education. In H. Mellar, J. Bliss, J., R. Boohan, J. Ogborn & C. Tompsett (Eds.) Learning with artificial worlds: computer- based modelling in the curriculum (pp. 1-7). London, Falmer.
89. MELLAR, H., BLISS, J., BOOHAN, R., OGBORN, J. & TOMPSETT, C. (Eds.) (1994). Learning with artificial worlds: computer based modelling in the curriculum. London, Falmer Press.
90. MERCER, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon; Philadelphia, Multilingual Matters.
91. MICHEL, R.G., CAVALLARI, J.M., ZNAMENSKAIA, E., YANG, K. X., SUN, T. & BENT, G. (1999). Digital video clips for improved pedagogy and illustration of scientific research - with illustrative video clips on atomic spectrometry. Spectrochimica Acta Part B-Atomic Spectroscopy, 54(13), 1903-1918.
92. MIKYAKE, N. (1986). Constructive interaction and the iterative process of understanding. Cognitive Science, 10(2), 151-177.
93. MILLAR, R. & OSBORNE, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: science education for the future. Report of a seminar series funded by the Nuffield Foundation. London, King’s College London, School of Education www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/education/hpages/jopubs.html (accessed 25/01/06).
94. MILLER, L. & OLSON, J. (1994). Putting the computer in its place: a study of teaching with technology. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 26(2), 121-141.
95. MORTIMER, E. F. & SCOTT. P.H. (2003). Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Milton Keynes, Open University Press.
96. MOSELEY, D., HIGGINS, S., BRAMALD, R., HARDMAN, F., MILLER, J., MROZ, M., HARRISON, T., NEWTON, D., THOMPSON, I., WILLIAMSON, J., HALLIGAN, J., BRAMALD, S., NEWTON, L., TYMMS, P., HENDERSON, B. & STOUT, J. (1999). Ways forward with ICT: effective pedagogy using information and communications technology for literacy and numeracy in primary schools. Newcastle, Newcastle University, Durham University and CEM Centre, Durham University.
97. MUMTAZ, S. (2000). Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 9(3), 319-341.
98. MURPHY, C. (2003). Literature review in primary science and ICT. Bristol
99. NESTA Future Lab www.nestafuturelab.org/research/lit reviews.htm#lr05 (accessed 25/01/06).
100. NEWTON, L.R. (2000). Data-logging in practical science: research and reality. International Journal of Science Education, 22(12), 1247-1259.
101. NEWTON, L.R. & ROGERS, L. (2001). Teaching science with ICT. London, Continuum.
102. NIEDERHAUSER, D. & STODDART, T. (2001). Teachers’ instructional perspectives and use of educational software. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(1), 15-31.
103. NORDKVELLE, Y.T. & OLSON, J.K. (2005). Visions for ICT, ethics and the practice of teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 10(1/2), 21-32.
104. NOSS, R. & PACHLER, N. (1999). The challenge of new technologies: doing old things in a new way, or doing new things? In P. Mortimore (Ed.) Understanding pedagogy and its impact on learning (pp. 195-211). London, Paul Chapman.
105. NRC (NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL) (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC, National Academy Press.
106. OFSTED (2004). ICT in schools: the impact of government initiatives five years on. London, Office for Standards in Education www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/docs/1043.pdf accessed 25/01/06).
107. OGBORN, J., KRESS, G., MARTINS, I. & MCGILLICUDDY, K. (1996). Explaining science in the classroom. Buckingham, Open University Press.
108. OLSON, J. (1981). Teacher influence in the classroom: a context for understanding curriculum change. Instructional Science, 10(3), 259-275.
109. OLSON, J. (2000). Trojan horse or teacher’s pet? Computers and the culture of the school. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32(1), 1-8.
110. OSBORNE, J. & HENNESSY, S. (2003). Literature review in science education and the role of ICT: promise, problems and future directions. Bristol, Nesta FutureLab. www.nestafuturelab.org/research/reviews/se01.htm (accessed 25/01/06).
111. PARKER, J. (2004). The synthesis of subject and pedagogy for effective learning and teaching in primary science education. British Educational Research Journal, 30(6), 819-839.
112. PEA, R. D. (1993) Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon, R. Pea, J. Seely Brown & C. Heath (Eds.) Distributed cognitions: psychological and educational considerations (pp.47-87). Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
113. PEA, R.D. (1994). Seeing what we build together: distributed multimedia learning environments for transformative communications. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 285-299.
114. POL, H., HARSKAMP, E. & SUHRE, C. (2005). Solving physics problems with thehelp of computer-assisted instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 27(4),451-469.
115. ROGERS, L. (2002). Physics in new fields and modern applications. Conference of Groupe International de Recherche sur l’Enseignment de la Physique (GIREP). Lund.
116. ROGERS, L. (2004). Integrating ICT into science education and the future (ch. 9). In R. Barton (Ed.) Teaching secondary science with ICT (pp.139-54). Cambridge, Open University Press.
117. ROGERS, L. & FINLAYSON, H. (2003) Does ICT in science really work in the classroom? Part 1, the individual teacher experience. School Science Review, 84(309), 105-111.
118. ROGERS, L. & FINLAYSON, H. (2004). Developing successful pedagogy with ICT-how are science teachers meeting the challenge? Technology, Pedagogy & Education, 13(3), 287¬305.
119. RUDDUCK, J. & FLUTTER, J. (2000). Pupil participation and pupil perspective: carving a new order of experience. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30(1), 75-88.
120. RUTHVEN, K. (2002). Linking researching with teaching: towards synergy of scholarly and craft knowledge. In L. English (Ed.) Handbook of international research in mathematics education (pp.581-98). Mahwah NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum.
121. RUTHVEN, K., HENNESSY, S. & BRINDLEY, S. (2004). Teacher representations of the successful use of computer-based tools and resources in teaching and learning secondary english, mathematics and science. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 259-275.
122. RUTHVEN, K., HENNESSY, S. & DEANEY, R. (2005). Incorporating Internet resources into classroom practice: pedagogical perspectives and strategies of secondary-school subject teachers. Computers & Education, 44(1), 1-34.
123. SALJO, R. (1999). Learning as the use of tools: a sociocultural perspective on the human- technology link. In K. Littleton & R Light (Eds.) Learning with computers: analysing productive interaction (pp.144-61). London, Routledge.
124. SCANLON, E. (2004). ICT for science education: current prospects and trends in research. In R. Holliman & E. Scanlon (Eds.) Mediating science learning through information and communications technology (pp.l88-202). London, RoutledgeFalmer.
125. SCANLON, E., ISSROFF, K. & MURPHY, P. (1999). Mediating science activities through new technology. In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.,) Learning with computers: analysing productive interaction (pp.62-78). London, Routledge.
126. SCANLON, E., MORRIS, E., DI PAOLO, T. & COOPER, M. (2002). Contemporary approaches to learning science: technology-mediated practical work. Studies in Science Education, 38, 73-114.
127. SCHOENFELD, A.H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL, Academic Press.
128. SCHOFIELD, J.W. (1995). Computers and classroom culture. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
129. SCOTT, P. H. & JEWITT, C. (2003). Talk, action and visual communication in teaching and learning science. School Science Review, 84(308), 117-124.
130. SCRIMSHAW, P. (1993). Cooperative writing with computers. In P. Scrimshaw (Ed.) Language, classrooms and computers (pp. 100-10). London, Routledge.
131. SCRIMSHAW, P. (1997). Computers and the teacher’s role. In B. Somekh & N. Davis (Eds.) Using information technology effectively in teaching and learning (pp. 100-13). London, Routledge.
132. SEGALL, A. (2004). Revisiting pedagogical content knowledge: the pedagogy of content/the content of pedagogy. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(5), 489-504.
133. SELINGER, M. (2001). Information and communications technologies in representations of mathematics. In A. Loveless. & V. Ellis (Eds.) ICT, pedagogy and the curriculum (pp. 152¬78). London, Routledge.
134. SHULMAN, L.S. (1986). Those who understand: knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14.
135. SHULMAN, L.S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: the foundations of the new reforms. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
136. SIMON, B. (1981). Why no pedagogy in England? In B. Simon, B. & W. Taylor (Eds.) Education in the eighties: the central issues (pp. 124-45). London, Batsford.
137. SMITH, H.J., HIGGINS, S., WALL, K. & MILLER, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(2), 91-101.
138. SODERBERG, P. & PRICE, F. (2003). An examination of problem-based teaching and learning in population genetics and evolution using EVOLVE, a computer simulation. International Journal of Science Education, 25(1), 35-55.
139. SOLOMON, J. (1994). The rise and fall of constructivism. Studies in Science Education, 23, 1-19.
140. SOMEKH, B. (2000). New technology and learning: policy and practice in the UK, 1980-2010. Education and Information Technologies, 5(1), 19-37.
141. SOMEKH, B. & DAVIES, R. (1991). Towards a pedagogy for information technology.The Curriculum Journal, 2(2), 153-170.
142. SOMEKH, B., LEWIN, C., MAVERS, D., FISHER, T., HARRISON, C., HAW, K., LUNZER, E., MCFARLANE, A. & SCRIMSHAW: (2002). ImpaCTl: pupils’ and teachers’ perceptions of ICT in the home, school and community. Coventry/London, Becta/DfES www.becta. or g.uk/research (accessed 25/01/06).
143. SUCHMAN, L.A. (1987). Plans and situated actions. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
144. SUTHERLAND, R., ARMSTRONG, V., BARNES, S., BRAWN, R., BREEZE, N., GALL, M., MATTHEWMAN, S., OLIVERO, F., TAYLOR, A., TRIGGS, P., WISHART, J. & JOHN, P. (2004). Transforming teaching and learning: embedding ICT into everyday classroom practices. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(6), 413-425.
145. TAO, P. K. & GUNSTONE, R. F. (1999). Conceptual change through collaborative learning at the computer. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 39-57.
146. THARP, R. & GALLIMORE, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life: teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
147. THOMAS, R.C. & MILLIGAN, C.D. (2004). Putting teachers in the loop: tools for creating and customising simulations. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, Special Issue, www- jime.open.ac.uk/2004/15 (accessed 25/01/06)
148. WALKER, D. (2002). No crossed wires. TES Teacher, November 2, 30-31.
149. WARDLE, J. (2004). Handling and interpreting data in school science. In R. Barton (Ed.) Teaching secondary science with ICT (pp.107-26). Cambridge, Open University Press.
150. WATKINS, C. & MORTIMORE, P. (1999). Pedagogy: What do we know? In P. Mortimore (Ed.) Understanding pedagogy and its impact on learning (pp. 1-19). London, Paul Chapman.
151. WEGERIF, R., MERCER, N. & DAWES, L. (1998). Software design to support discussion in the primary classroom. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(3), 199-211.
152. WELLINGTON, J. (2000). Teaching and learning secondary science-contemporary issues and practical approaches. London, Routledge.
153. WELLINGTON, J. (2004). Multimedia in science teaching. In R. Barton (Ed.) Teaching secondary science with ICT (pp.87-104). Cambridge, Open University Press.
154. WELLINGTON, J. (2005). Has ICT come of age? Recurring debates on the role of ICT in education, 1982-2004. Research in Science & Technological Education, 23, 25-39.
155. WERTSCH, J. (1998). Mind as action. New York, Oxford University Press.
156. WHITELOCK, D., SCANLON, E., TAYLOR, J. & O’SHEA, T. (1995). Computer support for pupils collaborating: a case study on collisions. In J.L. Schnase & E.L. Cunnius (Eds.) CSCL 95: The First International Conference on Computer Supportfor Collaborative Learning. Indiana, USA, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
157. YIN, R.K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods. Thousand Oaks, London, Sage.
158. YORE, D.L. (2001). What is meant by constructivist science teaching and will the science education community stay the course for meaningful reform? Electronic Journal of Literacy through Science Education, 4 http://unr.edu/homepage/crowther/eise/vore.html (accessed 11 January 2006).