Teaching to promote the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning about light at the elementary school level

How Students Learn: History, Mathematics, and Science in the Classroom

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 421-474

  Magnusson, Shirley J ^a   Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan ^b  

^a CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b School of Education at the University of Michigan   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85014423202     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.17226/10126     Document Type: Chapter

References (38)

1. Barnes, D. (1976). From communication to curriculum. Hammondsworth, UK: Penguin Books.
2. Blumenfeld, P.C., and Meece, J.L. (1988). Task factors, teacher behavior, and students' involvement and use of learning strategies in science. Elementary School Journal, 88(3), 235-250.
3. Brown, A.L., and Campione, J.C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classrooms lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229-272). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Bybee, R.W., Buchwald, C.E., Crissman, S., Heil, D.R., Kuerbis, P.J., Matsumoto, C., and McInerney, J.D. (1989). Science and technology education for the elementary years: Frameworks for curriculum and instruction. Washington, DC: National Center for Improving Science Education.
5. Campanario, J.M. (2002). The parallelism between scientists' and students' resistance to new scientific ideas. International Journal of Science Education, 24(10), 1095-1110.
6. Chi, M.T.H. (1992). Conceptual change within and across ontological categories:Examples from learning and discovery in science. In R. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (pp. 129-186). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
7. Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1241-1257.
8. Crawford, S.Y., Hurd, J.M., and Weller, A.C. (1996). From print to electronic: The transformation of scientific communication. Medford, NJ: Information Today.
9. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., and Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
10. Eaton, J.F., Anderson, C.W., and Smith, E.L. (1984). Students' misconceptions interfere with science learning: Case studies of fifth-grade students. Elementary School Journal, 84, 365-379.
11. Einstein, A. (1950). Out of my later years. New York: Philosophical Library.
12. Ford, D. (1999). The role of text in supporting and extending first-hand investigations in guided inquiry science. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(7), 2434.
13. Galili, I., and Hazan, A. (2000). Learners' knowledge in optics: Interpretation, structure and analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 22(1), 57-88.
14. Hapgood, S., Magnusson, S.J., and Palincsar, A.S. (in press). Teacher, text, and experience:A case of young children's scientific inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences.
15. Herrenkohl, L., Palincsar, A.S., DeWater L.S., and Kawasaki, K. (1999). Developing scientific communities in classrooms: A sociocognitive approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3-4), 451-494.
16. Karplus, R. (1964). Theoretical background of the science curriculum improvement study. Berkeley, CA: Science Curriculum Improvement Study, University of California.
17. Klahr, D., Chen, Z., and Toth, E. (2001). Cognitive development and science education:Ships that pass in the night or beacons of mutual illumination? In S. Carver and D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 75-120). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
18. Lehrer, R., and Schauble, L. (2000). Modeling in mathematics and science. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology, vol. 5: Educational design and cognitive science (pp. 101-159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19. Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., and Petrosino, A.J. (2001). Reconsidering the role of experiment in science education. In K. Crowley, C.D. Schunn, and T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Magnusson, S.J., and Palincsar, A.S. (1995). The learning environment as a site of science education reform. Theory into Practice, 34(1), 43-50.
21. Magnusson, S.J., and Palincsar, A.S. (in press-a). The application of theory to the design of innovative texts supporting science instruction. In M. Constas and R. Sternberg (Eds.), Translating educational theory and research into practice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22. Magnusson, S.J., and Palincsar, A.S. (in press-b). Learning from text designed to model scientific thinking. In W. Saul (Ed.), Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
23. Magnusson, S.J., Templin, M., and Boyle, R.A. (1997). Dynamic science assessment:A new approach for investigating conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(1), 91-142.
24. Magnusson, S.J., Borko, H., and Krajcik, J.S. (1999). Nature, sources, and development of pedagogical content knowledge for science teaching. In J. Gess-Newsome and N. Lederman (Eds.), Science teacher knowledge. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
25. Magnusson, S.J., Palincsar, A.S., and Templin, M. (in press). Community, culture, and conversation in inquiry-based science instruction. In L. Flick and N. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and the nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic.
26. Metz, K.E. (2004). Children's understanding of scientific inquiry: Their conceptualization of uncertainty in investigations of their own design. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 219-290.
27. Mortimer, E.F. (1995). Conceptual change or conceptual profile change? Science and Education, 4, 267-285.
28. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. National Committee on Science Education Standards and Assessment, Center for Science, Mathematics, and Engineering Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29. National Research Council. (2003). Learning and instruction: A SERP research agenda. M.S. Donovan and J.W. Pellegrino (Eds.), Panel on Learning and Instruction, Strategic Education Research Partnership. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
30. Newmann, F.M., Marks, H.M., and Gamoran, A. (1995). Authentic pedagogy: Standards that boost student performance. (Issue Report #8, Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools.) Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, University of Wisconsin.
31. Osborne, R. (1983). Towards modifying children's ideas about electric current. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1(1), 73-82.
32. Osborne, R., and Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children's science. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
33. Palincsar, A.S., and Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
34. Palincsar, A.S., and Magnusson, S.J. (2001). The interplay of first-hand and text-based investigations to model and support the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning. In S. Carver and D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction:Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 151-194). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35. Palincsar, A.S., Anderson, C.A., and David, Y.M. (1993). Pursuing scientific literacy in the middle grades through collaborative problem solving. Elementary School Journal, 93(5), 643-658.
36. Palincsar, A S., Magnusson, S.J., and Hapgood, S. (2001). Trafficking ideas through the rotaries of science instruction: Teachers' discourse moves and their relationships to children's learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
37. Schwab, J.J. (1964). Structure of the disciplines: Meanings and significances. In G.W. Ford and L. Pugno (Eds.), The structure of knowledge and the curriculum (pp. 6-30). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
38. Wilson, S.M., Shulman, L.S., and Richert, E.R. (1988). '150 different ways' of knowing:Representations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers' thinking. New York: Taylor and Francis.