Issues in Science Learning: An International Perspective

Handbook of Research on Science Education

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 227-256

  Guo, Chorng Jee ^a  

^a NATIONAL TAITUNG UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85145533990     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203824696-11     Document Type: Chapter

References (54)

1. Australian Capital Territory Department of Education and Training. (n.d.). Curriculum profiles for Australian schools. Retrieved August 1, 2004, from http://www.decs.act.gov.au/publicat/ profiles.htm
2. Beaton, A. E., Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzalez, E. J., Smith, T. A., and Kelly, D. L. (1996). The science achievement in the middle school years: IEA’S third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
3. Bennett, J. (2003). Teaching and learning science. London: Continuum.
4. Caillods, F., Gottelmann-Duret, G., and Lewin, K. M. (1997). Science education and development: Planning and policy issues at secondary level. Paris: UNESCO.
5. Chabbott, C., and Elliott, E. J. (Eds.). (2003). Understanding others, educating ourselves: Getting more from international comparative studies in education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
6. Cheng, Y. C. (2000a). A CMI-tripilization paradigm for reforming education in the new millennium. International Journal of Educational Management, 14(4), 156-174.
7. Cheng, Y. C. (2000b). Foreword. Aparadigm shift in science learning and teaching. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 1(2). Retrieved August 1, 2004, from http://www.ied. edu.hk/apfslt/issue_2/foreword/index.htm
8. Cobern, W. W. (1996). Constructivism and non-western science education research. International Journal of Science Education, 4, 287-302.
9. Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., and Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary science. London: Routledge.
10. Duit, R., and Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science-from behaviorism towards social constructivism and beyond. In B. J. Fraser and K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3-25). London: Kluwer Academic.
11. Entwistle, N. J. (1998). Improving teaching through research on student learning. In J. J. Forest (Ed.), University teaching: International perspectives (pp. 73-112). New York: Garland.
12. Entwisle, N. J. (2000, November). Promoting deep learning through teaching and assessment: conceptual frameworks and educational contexts. Paper presented at the meeting of the Teaching and Learning Research Programme, Leicester, United Kingdom.
13. Fensham, P. J. (1992). Science and technology. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum (pp. 789-829). New York: Macmillan.
14. Fensham, P. J., Gunstone, R., and White, R. (Eds.). (1994). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. London: Falmer Press.
15. Goto, M. (2001). Japan. In M. Poisson (Ed.), Science education for contemporary society: Problems and dilemmas (pp. 31-38). Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education.
16. Hallak, J. (2001). Foreword. In M. Poisson (Ed.), Science education for contemporary society: Problems and dilemmas (pp. 3-4). Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education.
17. Huitt, W. (1995). A system model of the teaching/learning process. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University.
18. Hurd, P. D. (1998). Scientific literacy: New minds for a changing world. Science Education, 82, 408-416.
19. Ilan, M. (2001). Israel. In M. Poisson (Ed.), Science education for contemporary society: Problems and dilemmas (pp. 90-92). Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education.
20. Keeves, J., and Aikenhead, G., (1995). Science curricula in a changing world. In B. J. Fraser and H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Improving science education (pp. 13-45). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
21. Kelly, F. (2001). New Zealand. In M. Poisson (Ed.), Science education for contemporary society: Problems and dilemmas (pp. 46-50). Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education.
22. Lewin, K. M. (2000). World bank, human development network secondary education series: Mapping science education policy in developing countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.
23. Malleus, P. (2001). France. In M. Poisson (Ed.), Science education for contemporary society: Problems and dilemmas (pp. 74-82). Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education.
24. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Beaton, A. E., Gonzalez, E. J., Smith, T. A., and Kelly, D. L. (1997). The science achievement in the primary school years: IEA’S third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
25. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzalez, E. J., Gregory, K. D., Smith, T. A., Chrostowski, S. J., et al. (2000). TIMSS 1999 international science report: International study center. Chestnut Hill, MA:Boston College.
26. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gonzalez, E. J., Smith, T. A., and Kelly, D. L. (1999). The school contexts for learning and instruction: IEA’S third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
27. Martin, M. O., Mullis, I. V. S., Gregory, K. D., Hoyle, C., and Shen, C. (2000). Effective schools in science and mathematics: IEA’S third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
28. Matthews, M. R. (Ed.). (1998). Constructivism in science education. Dordrecht, the Netherlands:Kluwer Academic.
29. Matthews, M. R. (2000). Constructivism in science and mathematics education. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), National society for the study of education, 99th yearbook (pp. 161-192). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30. Millar, R., and Osborne, J. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: King’s College.
31. Mintzes, J. J., and Wandersee, J. H. (1998). Research in science teaching and learning: Ahuman constructivist view. In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, and J. D. Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for understanding:A human constructivist view (pp. 60-92). San Diego: Academic Press.
32. Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., and Novak, J. D. (Eds.). (1998). Teaching science for understanding: A human constructivist view. San Diego: Academic Press.
33. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Beaton, A. E., Gonzalez, E. J., Kelly, D. L., and Smith, T. A. (1998). The mathematics and science achievement in the final years of secondary school: IEA’S third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
34. Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Fierros, E. G., Goldberg, A. L., and Stemler, S. E. (2000). Gender differences in achievement: IEA’S third international mathematics and science study (TIMSS). Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College.
35. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
36. National Science Teachers Association. (2003). Standards for science teacher preparation (Rev. ed.). Retrieved August 1, 2004, from http://www.nsta.org/main/pdfs/NSTAstandards2003.pdf
37. OECD. (1999). Measuring student knowledge and skills: A new framework for assessment. Retrieved August 1, 2004, from http://www.pisa.oecd.org/docs/books.htm
38. OECD. (2003a). Literacy skills for the world of tomorrow: Further results from PISA 2000. Retrieved August 1, 2004, from the OECD/PISAWeb site: http://www.pisa.oecd.org/docs/books.htm
39. OECD. (2003b). Student engagement at school: A sense of belonging and participation. Retrieved August 1, 2004, from http://www.pisa.oecd.org/docs/books.htm
40. OECD. (2003c). Learners for life: Student approaches to learning. Retrieved August 1, 2004, from http://www.pisa.oecd.org/docs/books.htm
41. Osborne, J. (1996). Beyond constructivism. Science Education, 80, 53-82.
42. Osborne, J. (2001). United Kingdom (England). In M. Poisson (Ed.), Science education for contemporary society: Problems and dilemmas (pp. 99-101). Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education
43. Osborne, R., and Freyberg, P. (1985). Learning in science: The implications of children’s science. Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.
44. Poisson, M. (Ed.). (2001). Science education for contemporary society: Problems, issues and dilemmas. Geneva, Switzerland: International Bureau of Education.
45. Proctor, C. (1984). Teacher expectations: A model for school improvement. The Elementary School Journal, 84, 469-481.
46. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. (2002). National curriculum for England. Retrieved August 10, 2004, http://www.nc.uk.net/index.html
47. Sjøberg, S. (2000). Science and scientists: The SAS study. Retrieved August 25, 2004, from http:// folk.uio.no/sveinsj/SASweb.htm#_Toc483975184
48. Sjøberg, S. (2002). Science and technology education: Current challenges and possible solutions. Retrieved August 23, 2004, from http://folk.uio.no/sveinsj/STE_paper_Sjoberg_UNESCO2.htm
49. Stufflebeam, D. L. (2000). The CIPP model for evaluation. In D. L. Stufflebeam, G. F. Madaus, and T. Kellaghan (Eds.), Evaluation models (2nd ed., pp. 279-317). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
50. Tobin, K. (Ed.). (1993). The practice of constructivism in science and mathematics education. Washington, DC: AAAS Press.
51. van den Akker, J. (1998). The science curriculum: Between ideals and outcomes. In B. J. Fraser and K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 421-447). London: Kluwer Academic.
52. Zembylas, M. (2002). The global, the local, and the science curriculum: A struggle for balance in Cyprus. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 499-519.
53. Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J., and Novak, J. D. (1994). Research on alternative conceptions in science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 177-234). New York: Macmillan.
54. White, R. T. (1988). Learning science. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.