Creativity in science education: Perspectives and challenges for developing school science

Studies in Science Education

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 37-

  Kind, Per Morten ^a   Kind, Vanessa ^a  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85012570565     PISSN: 03057267     EISSN: 19408412     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03057260708560225     Document Type: Note

References (190)

1. ABD-EL-KHALICK, E, BELL, R.L. & LEDERMAN, N.G. (1998). The nature of science & instructional practice: making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417-436.
2. ABD-EL-KHALICK, E, BOUJAOUDE, S., DUSCHL, R., LEDERMAN, N.G., HOFSTEIN, A., MAMLOK-NAAMAN, R., NIAZ, M., TREAGUST, D. & TUAN, H. (2004). Inquiry in science education: international perspectives. Science Education, 88, 397-419.
3. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE (1967). Science-a process approach. New York: Xerox Division, Ginn & Company.
4. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Washington, DC: AAAS.
5. ADEY, R, SHAYER, M. & YATES, C. (1989) Thinking science: the curriculum materials of the Cognitive Acceleration through Science Education (CASE) project. London: Nelson Thornes.
6. ANDERSON, H. (2000). Learning by ostension: Thomas Kuhn on science education. Science and Learning, 9, 91-106.
7. ANDERSON, R.D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: what research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12.
8. ANDERSON, R.P. (2001). Team disease presentation: a cooperative learning activity for large classroom. American Biology Teacher, 63(1), 40-43.
9. BARTHOLOMEW, H., OSBORNE, J. & RATCLIFFE, M. (2004) Teaching students ideas-about-science: Five dimensions of effective practice. Science Education, 88(5), 655-682.
10. BARRON, F. & HARRINGTON, D. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality. Annual Review of Pschology, 32, 439-476.
11. BEATON, A.E., MARTIN, M.O., MULLIS, I.V.S., GONZALEZ, E.J., SMITH, T.A. & KELLY D.L. (1996) Science achievement in the middle school years: IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study. TIMSS International Study Center, Boston College.
12. BELLOFIORE, R. (Ed.) (1999). Global money, capital restructuring and the changing patterns of labour. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
13. BENTLEY, T (1998). Learning beyond the classroom: education for a changing world. London: Routledge.
14. BILLS, F.L. (1971). Developing creativity through inquiry. Science Education, 55(3), 417-421.
15. BLOCK, N. Ed. (1981). Imagery. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press (A Bradford Book).
16. BODEN, M.A. 1990. The creative mind: myths and mechanisms. London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.
17. BODEN, M.A. (1999). Computer models of creativity. R. J. Sternberg, Handbook of creativity (pp.351-372). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. BODEN, M. (2001). Creativity & knowledge. In A. Craft, B. Jeffery, & M. Leibling (Eds.) Creativity in education (pp. 95-102). London Continuum.
19. BOHM, D. (1998). On creativity. New York: Routledge.
20. BOSS, S. (2001). Schoolyard lessons: more and more schools are finding ways to take education outdoors. Northwest Education, 6(4), 37-38.
21. BRUNER, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
22. BRYCE, T. & MACMILLIAN, K. (2005). Encouraging conceptual change: the use of bridging analogies in the teaching of action-reaction forces and the ’at rest’ condition in physics. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 737-763.
23. BURBULES, N.C. & TORRES, C.A. (Eds.) (2000). Globalization and education: critical perspectives. New York: Routledge.
24. CHI, M.T.H., FELTOVICH, P.J. & GLASER, R. (1981).Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
25. CLAXTON, G. (1999). Wise up. The challenge of life long learning. London: Bloomsbury.
26. CLEMENT, J. (2000). Model based learning as a key research area for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 2(9), 1041-1053.
27. CRAWFORD, B.A. (1999). Is it realistic to expect a preservice teacher to create an inquiry based classroom? Journal of Science Teacher Education, 10(3), 175-194.
28. CSIKSZENTMIHALYI, M (1996). Creativity: flow and psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper Collins.
29. DAWKINS, R. (1998). Unweaving the rainbow. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
30. DEBOER, G.E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education. Implications for practice. New York: Teacher College Press.
31. DEBOER, G.E. (2000). Scientific literacy: another look at its historical & contemporary meanings and is relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 582-601.
32. DEWEY, J. (1934/1980). Art as experience. New York, NY: Berkley
33. DIAKIDOY, I.A.N. & COSTANTINOU, C.P. (2000-2001) Creativity in physics: response fluency and task specificity Creativity Research Journal, 13(3), 401-410
34. DOBBS, S.M. (1995) Integrating science and the arts in the classroom. College Board Review 174, 14-21.
35. DONNELLY, J., BUCHAN, A., JENKINS, E., LAWS, P., & WELFORD, G. (1996). Investigations by Order. Policy, curriculum and science teachers’ work under the Education Reform Act. Nafferton: Studies in Education.
36. DRIVER, R., LEACH, J., MILLAR, R., & SCOTT, P. (1996). Young people’s images of science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
37. DRIVER, R., NEWTON, P. OSBORNE, J. (2000) Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84 (3), 287-312.
38. DUNBAR, K. (1995). How scientists really reason: scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R.J. Sternberg J.E. Davidson (Eds.) The nature of insight (pp. 365-395). Cambridge, Mass: Bradford/MIT Press.
39. DUNBAR, K. (1999). Scientific creativity. In M.A. Runco, S.R. Pritzker (Eds.) Encyclopedia of creativity (pp. 1379-1384). London: Academic.
40. EGAN, K. (1990). Romantic understanding. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
41. ENDEAN, L. & GEORGE, D.R. (1982). Observing thirty able youngsters at science enrichment course. School Science Review, 64(227), 213-224.
42. FEIST, G.J. (1999). The influence of personality on artistic and scientific creativity. In R.J. Sternberg R.J. (Ed.). Handbook of creativity (pp.273-296). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
43. FELDER, R.M. (1988). Creativity in engineering education. Chemical Engineering Education, 22(3), 120-125.
44. FEIST, G. J. & GORMAN, M. E. (1998). The psychology of science: review and integration of a nascent discipline. Review of General Psychology, 2(1), 3-47.
45. FELDMAN, D.H. (1999). The development of creativity. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.) Handbook of creativity (pp.169-188). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46. FINKE, R. A. (1989). Principles of mental imagery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
47. FREUD, S. (1961). The future of an illusion. New York: Norton.
48. FRANCO, C., DE BARROS, H. L., COLINVAUX, D., KRAPAST, S., QUEIROZ, G. & ALVEST, F. (1999). From scientists’ and inventors’ minds to some scientific and technological products: relationships between theories, models, mental models and conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 2, 277-291.
49. GAGNE, R.M. (1965). The psychological basis of Science: a Process Approach. Washington: Ginn.
50. GALLAGHER, J.J. (1991). Prospective and practicing secondary teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about the philosophy of science. Science Education, 75(1), 121-133.
51. GANGOLI, S. G. (1995). A study of the effectiveness of a guided open-ended approach to physics experiments. International Journal of Science Education, 17(2), 233-241.
52. GARDNER, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic
53. GETZELS, J.W.(1962) Creativity and intelligence: explorations with gifted students. London: Wiley.
54. GILBERT, J.K. (2004). Models and modelling: routes to more authentic science education International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 115-130.
55. GILBERT, J.K. & REINER, M. (2000). Thought experiments in science education: potential and current realization. International Journal of Science Education, 22(3), 265-284.
56. GIROD, M., RAU, C. & SCHEPIGE, A. (2003). Appreciating the beauty of science ideas: teaching for aesthetic understanding. Science Education, 87, 574-587.
57. GOTT, R. & DUGGAN, S. (1995). Investigative work in science curriculum. Buckingham: Open University Press.
58. GOTT, R. & DUGGAN, S. (1996) Practical work: its role in the understanding of evidenc science. International Journal of Science Education, 18(7), 791-806.
59. GRECA, I., M & MOREIRA, M., A. (2000). Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 1-11.
60. GRUBER, H.E. (1989). Networks of enterprise in creative scientific thought. In W. Gholson, R. Shadis and R. A. Neimeyer (Eds.) Psychology of science: contributions to metascience (pp.246-263). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
61. GUILFORD, J.P. (1950). Creativity. American Psychologist, 5, 444-454.
62. GUILFORD, J.P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
63. HADZIGEORGIOU, Y. (2005). The role of imagination in physics education. 3rd International Conference on Imagination and Education, Vancouver, BC, Canada http://www.ierg.net.
64. HARRIS, P. L. (2000). The work of the imagination. Oxford: Blackwell.
65. HARRISON, A. G. & TREAGUST, D. F. (2000). A typology of school science models. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1011-1026.
66. HEROLD, J.M. (1992). Lasting impressions in meteorology. Science Scope, 15(5), 14-17.
67. HEYWOOD, D. (2002). The place of analogies in science education. Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 233-247.
68. HODSON, D. (1998). Is this really what scientists do? Seeking a more authentic science in and beyond science education. In J. Wellington (Ed.) Practical work in school science. Which way now? (pp.93-108) London: Routledge.
69. HODSON, D. (2003). Time for action: science education for an alternative future. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 645-670.
70. HOLTON, G. (1978). The scientific imagination: case studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
71. HOLTON, G. (1996). Einstein, history and other passions. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
72. HOLTON, G. (1998). The scientific imagination. MA: Cambridge, Harvard University Press.
73. HOLYOAK, K.J., & THAGARD, P. (1995). Mental leaps. Cambridge: MIT Press.
74. HOROWITZ, T. & MASSEY, G. J., Eds. (1991). Thought experiments in science and philosophy. Savage, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
75. HU, W. & ADEY, P. (2002). A scientific creativity test for secondary school students. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 389-403.
76. IEONG, S. S. L. (2004). The power of imagination: its role in students’ participation. The 2nd International Conference on Imagination and Education. Vancouver, BC, Canada
77. IRESON, G. (2005). Einstein an the nature of though experiments. School Science Review, 86(317), 47-5.
78. IRWIN, A.R. (2000). Historical case studies: teaching the nature of science in context. Science Education, 84(1), 5-26.
79. JANNEROD, M. (1994). The representing brain: neural correlates of motor intention and imagery. Behavioral and Brain Science, 17, 187-245.
80. JENKINS, E. W. (1990). Scientific literacy and school science education. School Science Review, 71(256), 43-51.
81. JOHNSON-LAIRD, R (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
82. KHOUREY-BOWERS, C. & BAXTER, C. (1995). Drawing on art and physics. Science Teacher 62(1), 18-23.
83. KLAHR, D., & DUNBAR, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1-48.
84. KLAHR, D., DUNBAR, K. & FAY, A. L. (1990). Designing good experiments to test bad hypotheses. In J. Shrager and P. Langley (Eds.) Computational models of discovery and theory formation (pp.355-402). San Mateo, CA, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.
85. KOSSLYN, S. M. (1980). Image and mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
86. KOSSLYN, S. M. (1994). Image and brain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
87. KOSSLYN, S. M. (1999). Image and brain: the resolution of the imagery debate. Fourth printing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (A Bradford book).
88. KUHN, D., AMSTEL, E. & O’LOUGHLIN, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. New York: Academic Press.
89. KULKARNI, D. & SIMON, H. A. (1988). The process of scientific discovery: The strategy of experimentation. Cognitive Science, 12, 139-175.
90. KURTZBERG, T.R. & AMABILE, T.M. (2000-2001). From Guilford to creative synergy: opening the black box of team level creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 13 (3 and 4), 285-294
91. LARKIN, J. (1983). The role of problem representation in physics. In D. Gentner and A. L. Stevensen (Eds.) Mental models (pp.75-98). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,.
92. LATTERY, M.J. (2001). Thought experiments in physics education: A simple and practical example. Science & Education, 10(5), 485-492.
93. LAUD AN, L. (1980). ’Why was the Logic of Scientific Discovery abandoned? In T. Nickles (Ed.) Scientific discovery, logic and rationality, (pp.51-77). Dodrecht: Reidel.
94. LAWSON, A.E. (2004). T. rex, the Crater of Doom, and the Nature of Scientific Discovery. Science & Education, 13, 155-177.
95. LEACH, J. (1999) Learning in the science laboratory. The importance of epistemological understanding. In J. Leach and A. Paulsen (Eds.) Practical work in science, education. Recent research studies (pp.134-147). Roskilde: Roskilde University Press.
96. LEBOUTILLIER, N & MARKS, D.F. (2003). Mental imagery and creativity: A meta-analytic review study. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 29-44.
97. LEDERMAN, N.G. (1992). Students’ and teachers’ conceptions about the nature of science: A review of research. Journal of research in Science Teaching 29(4), 331-359.
98. LIN, C., HU, W., ADEY, P. & SHEN, J. (2003). The influence of CASE on scientific creativity. Research in Science Education, 33, 143-162.
99. LINDEN, R. (2005). The surfer wears a suit. A report on the II Symposium on Creativity, Imagination and Interactivity in Science Education. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research, 38, 315-319.
100. LOCK, R. (1991). Creative work in biology-a pot-pourri of examples. Part 1. Expressive and poetic writing, cartoons, cosmic and posters. School Science Review, 72(260), 39-46.
101. LUCAS, A.M. (1971). Creativity, discovery and inquiry in science education. The Australian Journal of Education, 15(2), 185-196.
102. MACKIN, J (1996). A creative approach to physics teaching. Physics Education, 31(4), 199-202.
103. MANSFIELD, R.S. & BUSSE, T.V. (1981). The psychology of creativity and discovery: scientists and their work. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
104. MARAZZI, L. (1999). Camp invention. Momentum, 30 (3), 20-21.
105. MARTIN, M.O., MULLIS, I.V.S., GONZALEZ, E.J., GREGORY, E.J., SMITH, T.A., CHROSTOWISKI, S.T., GARDEN, R.A. & O’CONNOR, K.M. (2000). TIMSS 1999 International Science Report. Findings from IEA’s Repeat of the Third International Mathematics and Science Study at the Eight Grade. TIMSS International Study Center, Boston College.
106. MASSOUDI, M. (2003). Can scientific writing be creative? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(2), 115-128.
107. MATHEWSON, J.H. (1999). Visual-spatial thinking: an aspect of science overlooked by educators. Science Education, 83, 33-54.
108. MATHEWSON, J.H. (2005). The visual core of science: definition and applications to education. International Journal of Science Education., 27(5), 529-548.
109. MATTHEWS, M.R. (1994). Science teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
110. MCCOMAS, W. F. (1996). Ten myths of science: re-examining what we know about the nature of science. School Science and Mathematics, 91, 10-16.
111. MCCOMAS, W. F. (1998). The principal elements of the nature of science: dispelling the myths. In W. F. McComas. The nature of science in science education. Rationales and strategies (5370). Dordrecht, Nl: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
112. MCCOMAS, W.F. & OLSON, J.K. (1998). The nature of science in international science education standards documents. In W.F. MacComas (Ed.), The nature of science education: Rationales & strategies (pp.41-52). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer.
113. MELAR, C.T. (1993). Creativity and inventiveness in science: a reflective course for teachers and other majors. Journal of Teacher Education, 4(4), 137-143.
114. MERTON, R.K. (1961). Singletons and multiples in scientific discovery: a chapter in the sociology of science. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 105, 470-486.
115. MERVIS, C.B. & ROSCH, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology 32, 89-115.
116. MESURE, S. (2005). Creativity in science: the heart and soul of science teaching. Education in Science, 214, 12-14.
117. MIELL, D. & LITTLETON, K. (Eds.) 2004. Collaborative creativity, contemporary perspectives. London: Free Association Books.
118. MILLAR, R. & DRIVER, R. (1987) Beyond processes. Studies in Science Education, 14, 33-62.
119. MILLAR, R. & OSBORNE, J. (1998). Beyond 2000. Science Education for the Future. London: King’s College.
120. MYNATT, C. R., DOHERTY, M. E. & TENEY, R. D. (1977). Confirmation bias in simulated research environment: an experimental study of scientific inference. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 29, 85-95.
121. NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON CREATIVE & CULTURAL EDUCATION (NACCCE) (1999). All our futures: creativity; culture & education. London: DFEE
122. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
123. NERSESSIAN, N. J. (1999). Model-based reasoning in conceptual change. In L. Magnani N. J. Nersessian and P. Thagard (Eds.). Model-based reasoning in scientific discovery (pp.5-22). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
124. NEWTON, D. (1968). The dishonesty of inquiry teaching. School Science and Mathematics, 68, 807-810.
125. NICKERSON, R.S. (1999). Enhancing creativity. In Sternberg. Handbook of Creativity. 8th printing (pp.392-430). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
126. NUFFIELD FOUNDATION (1971). Secondary Science, London: Longman.
127. OECD (2003). The PISA 2003 Assessment Framework. Mathematics, Reading, Science and Problem Solving Knowledge and Skills. PISA Publications.
128. ØDEGAARD, M. (2003). Dramatic science: A critical review of drama in science education. Studies in Science Education, 39, 75-102.
129. OSBORNE, J., COLLINS, S., RATCLIFFE, M., MILLAR, R. & DUSCHL, R. (2003). What ideas-about-science should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692-720.
130. PENICK, J.E. & YAGER R.E. (1993). Student growth in creative skills in middle school science. Science Educator, 2(1), 21-27.
131. PIAGET, J. (1952). Logic and psychology. New York: Basic books.
132. PIAGET, J. (1962). Play, dreams and imitation. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
133. PITTMAN, K. M. (1999). Student-generated analogies: Another way of knowing? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1-22.
134. POPPER, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London : Hutchinson.
135. POPPER, K (1963). Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
136. REICHENBACH, H. (1938), Experience and prediction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
137. REINER, M. & BURKO, L.M. (2003). On the limitations of thought experiments in physics and the consequences for physics education. Science and Education, 12(4), 365-385.
138. REINER, M. & GILBERT, J. (2000). Epistemological resources for thought experimentation in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 489-506.
139. REISBERG, D. (Ed.) (1992). Auditory imagery. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
140. RHODES, M. (1961). An analysis of creativity. In S.G. Isaksen, Frontiers of creativity research: beyond the basics (pp.216-222). Buffalo, NY: Bearly.
141. RICHARDSON, J.T.E. (1969). Mental imagery. Hove, U.K., Psychology Press
142. ROOT-BERNSTEIN, R. (1997). The sciences and arts share a common creative aesthetic. In A.I. Tauber (Ed.) The elusive synthesis: aesthetic and science (pp.49-82). Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
143. ROTHENBERG, A. (1979a). The emerging goddess: the creative process in art, science and other fields. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
144. ROTHENBERG, A. (1979b). Einstein’s creative thinking and the general theory of relativity: a documented report. American Journal of Psychiatry, 136, 39-43.
145. ROTHENBERG, A. (1996). The Janusian process in scientific creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 9, 207-231.
146. RUGG, H. (1963). Imagination. An inquiry into the sources and conditions that stimulate creativity. London: Harper & Row Publishers.
147. RUNCO, M.A. (2004). Creativity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 657-687.
148. RYHAMMAR, L. & BROLIN, C. (1999). Creativity research: historical considerations and main lines of development. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 43(3), 259-273.
149. SALLAM, S.S. & KROCKOVER, G.H. (1982). The effect of inquiry in geosciences, instruction on the attitudes and creativity of junior high/middle school science teachers. School Science & Mathematics, 82(4), 279-283.
150. SAXON, J.A., TREFFINGER, D.J., YOUNG, GROVER C. & WITTIG, C.V. (2003). Camp invention: a creative, inquiry-based summer enrichment program for elementary Students. Journal of Creative Behavior, 37(1), 64-74.
151. SCHAMEL, D. & AYRES, M.P. (1992). The minds-on approach: student creativity and personal involvement in the undergraduate student laboratory. Journal of College Science Teacher, 21(4), 226-229.
152. SCHLICHTER, C.L. (1983). The answer is in the question. Science and Children, 20 (5) 8-10.
153. SCHWARZ, R.S., & LEDERMAN, N.G. (2002). ’It’s the nature of the beast’: the influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching the nature of science. Journal of Research of Science Teaching, 39(3), 205-236.
154. SCHWARTZ, R.S., LEDERMAN, N.G. & CRAWFORD, B.A. (2004). Developing views of nature of science in an authentic context: an explicit approach to bridging the gap between nature of science and scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 610-645.
155. SELZER, K. & BENTLEY, T. (1999). The creative age: knowledge and skills for the new economy. London: Demos.
156. SHEA, D.L., LUBINSKI, D. & BENBOW, C.R (2001). Importance of assessing spatial ability in intellectually talented young adolescents: a 20-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(3), 604-714.
157. SHEPARD, R.N. (1978). The mental image. The American Psychologist, 33, 125-137.
158. SHYMANSKY, J.A. & PENICK, J.E. (1981). Teacher behaviour does make a difference in hands-on science classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 81(5), 412-422.
159. SIMON, H. A. (1995). Machine discovery. Foundations of Science, 1(2), 171-200.
160. SIMONTON, D.K. (1988). Scientific genius: a psychology of science. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
161. SIMONTON, D. K. (2004). Creativity in science, chance, logic, genius and Zeitgeist. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
162. SOLOMON, J. (1991). School laboratory life. In B. Woolnough (Ed.) Practical Science, (pp. 101-111). Buckingham: Open University Press.
163. SORENSEN, R. (1992). Thought experiments. New York: Oxford University Press.
164. SPIER-DANCE, L., MAYER-SMITH, J., DANCE, N. & KHAN, S. (2005). The role of student¬generated analogies in promoting conceptual understanding for undergraduate chemistry students. Research in Science and Technological Education, 23(2), 163-178.
165. STERNBERG, R.J. (2006). Introduction. In Kaufman, J.C. &Sternberg, R.J. (Eds.) The international handbook of creativity (pp. 1-9). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
166. STERNBERG, R.J. & LUBART, L.A. (1999). The concept of creativity: prospects and paradigms. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.) Handbook of creativity (pp.3-15).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
167. STERNBERG, R.J. & O’HARA, L.A. (1999). Creativity and intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.) Handbook of creativity (pp. 251-272). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
168. STOKES, N.C. (2001). The art of science. Science Teacher, 68(3), 22-24.
169. SULER, J. R. (1980). Primary process thinking and creativity. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 144-961.
170. TAMBLYN, P. (2000). Qualities of success: lessons from a teaching career. Education Canada, 40(1), 16-19.
171. TARDIF, T.Z. & STERNBERG, R.J. (1988). What do we know about creativity? In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.) The nature of creativity: contemporary psychological perspectives (pp.429-440). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
172. TOBIN, K. & TIPPINS, D.J. (1996). Metaphors as seeds for conceptual change and the improvement of science teaching. Science Education, 80(6), 711-730.
173. TORRANCE, E.P. (1962). Building creative talent. Englewood Cliffe N.J.: Prentice Hall. INC.
174. TORRANCE, E.P. (1990). Torrance Test of Creative Talent. Beaconville, IL: Scholastic Testing Service.
175. TREAGUST, D F. (1993). The evolution of an approach for using analogies in teaching and learning science. Research in Science Education, 23, 293-301.
176. TWENEY, R.D., DOHERTY, M.E., & MYNATT, C.R. (Eds.) (1982). On scientific thinking. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
177. VYGOTSKY, L.S. (2004). Imagination & creativity in childhood. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(1), 7-97.
178. WARD, A. (1987). On being an imaginative science teacher. School Science Review, 68(245), 614-21.
179. WARD, T.B., SMITH, S.M. & FINKE, R.A. (1999). Creative cognition. In R.J. Sternbe (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp.189-212). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
180. WASHTON, N.S. (1965). Teaching for science creativity. Science Education, 50(1), 22-25.
181. WATTS, M. (2001). Science and poetry: passion v. prescription in school science? International Journal of Science Education, 23(2), 197-208.
182. WEIPING, H., ADEY, P., JILIANG, S. & CHONGDE, L. (2004). The comparisons of the development of creativity between English and Chinese Adolescents. Acta Psychologica Sinca. 36(6), 718-731.
183. WEISBERG, R.W. (1993). Creativity: beyond the myth of genius. New York: Freeman.
184. WELCH, W.W., KLOPFER, L.E., AIKENHEAD, G.S. & ROBINSON, J.T. (1981). The role of inquiry in science education: analysis and recommendations. Science Education, 65(1), 33-50.
185. WONG, E.D. (2002). To appreciate variation between scientists: a perspective for seeing science’s vitality. Science Education, 86(3), 386-400.
186. WOOLNOUGH, B.E. (1998). Authentic science in schools, to develop personal knowledge. In Wellington, J. (Ed.) Practical work in school science. Which way nowf (pp.109-125) London: Routledge.
187. YASSO, W.E. (1991). Discovering science in art, literature, and music. Science Activities, 28(1), 10-13.
188. YORE, L.D., HAND, B-M. & PRAIN, V. (2002). Scientists as writers. Science Education, 86(5), 672-692.
189. ZACHOS, P., HICK, T.L., DOANE, W.E.J., SARGENT, C. (2000). Setting theoretical and empirical foundations for assessing scientific inquiry and discovery in educational programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 938-962.
190. ZION, M., SLEZAK, M., SHAPIRA, D., LINK, E., BASHAN, N., NRUMER, M., ORIAN, T., NUSSIONWITZ, R., COURT, D. AGREST, B., MENDELOVICI, R. & VALANIDES, N. (2004). Dynamic, open inquiry in biology learning, Science Education, 88, 1-26.