 |
Asia-Pacific Forum
on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 11, Issue 2, Article 8 (Dec., 2010) |
Andaloro, G., Bellomonte, L., & Sperandeo-Mineo, R. M. (1997). A computer-based learning environment in the field of Newtonian mechanics. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 661–680.
Araujo, I.S., Veit, E.A., Moreira, M.A. (2008). Physics students' performance using computational modeling activities to improve kinematics graphs interpretation. Computers & Education, 50, 1128-1140
Beichner, R. J. (1996) The impact of video motion analysis on kinematics graphs interpretation skills. American Journal of Physics, 64, 1272-1277
Beichner, R.J. (1994). Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs. American journal of Physics, 62, 750-762.
Bowen, G.M. & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Data and graph interpretation practices among preservice science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 42, 1063-1088.
Bowen, G.M., Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M.K. (1999). Interpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: Toward a social practice view of scientific representation practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1020–1043.
Cajas, F. (1999). Public understanding of science: Using technology to enhance school science in everyday life. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 765–773.
Eshach H. Intuitive rules – a suggestion for an additional explanation of misconceptions in reading and forming kinematic graphs
Eshach, H. (2009). Using Photographs to Probe Students’ Understanding of Physical Concepts: The Case of Newton’s 3rd Law. Research in Science Education (Published on-line first).
Foster, P.A. (2004). Graphing in physics: Processes and sources of error in tertiary entrance examinations in Western Australia. Research in science Education, 34, 239-265.
Friedler, Y., Nachmias, R., & Linn, M. C. (1990). Learning scientific reasoning skills in microcomputer based laboratories. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(2), 173–191.
Hardwood, W. & McMahon, M. (1997). Effects of integrated video media on student achievement and attitudes in high school chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(6), 617-631.
Hershkowitz, R., Schwarz, B. B., & Dreyfus, T. (2001). Abstraction in context: Epistemic actions. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32(2), 195–222.
Kearney, M., & Treagust, D.F. (2001). Constructivism as a referent in the design and development of a computer program using interactive digital video to enhance learning in physics. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17, 64-79.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1983). The ethnographic study of scientific work: Towards a constructivist interpretation of science. In K. Knorr-Cetina&M. Mulkay (Eds.), Science observed: Perspectives on the social study of science (pp. 115–140). London: Sage.
Kozhevnikov, M., Motes, M., and Hegarty, M. (2007). Spacial Visualization in Physics Problem Solving. Cognitive Science, 31, 549-579.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
Lemke, J. L. (1998) Multiplying meaning: visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J. R. Martin and R. Veel, (eds), Reading Science (London: Routledge), 87-113.
Lynch, M. & Woolgar, S. (Eds.) (1990). Representation in scientific practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Mayoh, H., & and Knutton, S. (1997) Using out-of-school experience in science lessons: reality or rhetoric? International Journal of Science Education, 19, 849–867.
McDermott, L.C., Rosenquist, M.L., and van Zee, E.H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics. American Journal of Physics, 55, 503-513.
McKenzie, D.L., & Padilla, M.J. (1986). The construction and validation of the test of graphing in science (togs). Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23, 571-579.
Mitnik, R., Recabarren, M., Nussbaum, M., Soto, A. (2009). Collaborative robotic instruction: A graph teaching experience. Computers & education, 53, 330-342
Mokros, J.R., & Tinker, R.F. (1987). The impact of microcomputer-based labs on children’s ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 369-383.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1989). Curriculum and Evaluation Standards for School Mathematics. Reston, VA: The Council.
Piaget, J. (1976). The grasp of consciousness (S. Wedgwood, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Original work published in 1954).
Pozzer, L. L., & Roth, W. M. (2003). Prevalence, function, and structure of photographs in high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1089–1114.
Reiner, M. (1999). Conceptual construction of fields through tactile interface. Interactive Learning Environments, 7, 31-55
Reiner, M. and Gilbert, J. (2000) Epistemological resources for thought experimentation in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 489–506.
Roth, W.-M. & McGinn, M.K. (1998). Inscriptions: A social practice approach to ‘‘representations.’’ Review of Educational Research, 68, 35–59.
Schroeder, D. V., & Moore, T. A. (1993). A computer-simulated Stern-Gerlach laboratory. American Journal of Physics, 61, 798–805.
Sfard, A. (1991). On the dual nature of mathematical conceptions: Reflections on processes and objects as different sides of the same coin. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 22(1), 1–36.
Stavy, R. & Tirosh, D. (1996). Intuitive rules in science and mathematics: The case of more of A more of B. International Journal of Science Education, 18, 653-667.
Stavy, R. & Tirosh, D. (2000). How students (mis-)understand science and mathematics: Intuitive rules. New York: Teachers College Press.
Stylianidou, F. (2002). Analysis of science textbook pictures about energy and pupils' readings of them. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 257-283.
Svec, M. (1999). Improving graphing interpretation skills and understanding of motion using micro-computer based laboratories. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 3(4).
Tao, P. K. (1997). Confronting students alternative conceptions in mechanics with the force and motion microworld. Computers in Physics, 11(2), 199–207.
Teodoro, V. D., Vieira, J. P., & Clérigo, F. C. (1997). Modellus, interactive modelling with mathematics. San Mateo, CA: Knowledge Revolution.
Testa, I., Monroy, G., & Sassi, E. (2002). Students’ reading images in kinematics: the case of real-time graphs. International Journal of Science Education, 24, 235-256.
Thornton, R. K., & Sokoloff, D. R. (1990). Learning motion concepts using real-time microcomputer-based laboratory tools. American Journal of Physics, 58(9), 858–867.
Tversky, B. (2005). Prolegomenon to scientific visualization. In Gilbert, J. K. Visualization in Science Education. Netherlands: Springer.
Ulam, S. (1976) Adventures of a Mathematician. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Wu, H-K., & Krajcik, J.S. (2006). Inscriptional practices in two inquiry-based classrooms: A case of seventh graders’ use of data tables and graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 63-95.
Zohar A., & Peled, B. (2008). The effects of explicit teaching of metastrategic knowledge on low-and high- achieving students. Learning and Instruction, 18, 337-353.
Zohar, A., & Ben David, A. (2008). Explicit teaching of meta-strategic knowledge in authentic classroom situations. Metacognitive Learning, 4, 59-82.
