Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002)

Hull, D. (1988). Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hutchins, E. (1995) Cognition in the Wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Jackson, S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A Design Retrospective. In M. Jacobson & R. Kozma (Eds.), Advanced Designs For The Technologies Of Learning: Innovations in Science and Mathematics Education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Jasanoff, S., Markle, G. E., Petersen, J. C., & Pinch, T., Eds. (1995). Handbook of science and technology studies. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Johnson, M. (1987). The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A., Eds. (1982). Judgments under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kanis, I., Doran, R., & Jacobson, W. (1990). Assessing Science Process Laboratory Skills at the Elementary and Middle/Junior High Levels. National Science Teachers’ Association. Washington, DC.

Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1988). The child is a theoretician, not an inductivist. Mind & Language, 3, 183-195.

Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Karmiloff-Smith, A., & Inhelder, B. (1975). "If you want to get ahead, get a theory". Cognition, 3, 195-212.

Karplus, R., & Thier, H. D. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Chicago: Rand McNally.

Keesing, R. (1987). Models, folk and cultural. In D. Holland & N. Quinn (Eds.), Folk theories in language and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Keller, E. F. (1983). A feeling for the organism: The life and work of Barbara McClintock. New York: W. H. Freeman.

Kelly, G. J. (1997). Research traditions in comparative context: A philosophical challenge to radical constructivism. Science Education, 81, 355-375.

Kelly, G. J. (2000). The Epistemological Framing of a Discipline: Writing Science in University Oceanography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 691-718.

Kelly, G. J. (in press). Epistemology and educational research. To appear in G. Camilli, P. Elmore, & J. Green, (Eds.), Complementary methods for educational research in education. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

Kelly, G. J. & Bazerman, C. (2003). How students argue scientific claims: A rhetorical-semantic analysis. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 28-55.

Kelly, G. J., & Brown, C. M. (2003). Communicative demands of learning science through technological design: Third grade students’ construction of solar energy devices. Linguistics & Education, 13(4), 483-532.

Kelly, G. J., Chen, C., & Crawford, T. (1998). Methodological considerations for studying science-in-the-making in educational settings. Research in Science Education, 28(1), 23-49.

Kelly, G. J., Chen, C., & Prothero, W. (2000). The epistemological framing of a discipline: Writing science in university oceanography. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 691-718.

Kelly, G. J. & Crawford, T. (1997). An ethnographic investigation of the discourse processes of school science. Science Education, 81(5), 533-560

Kelly, G. J., Crawford, T., & Green, J. (2001). Common tasks and uncommon knowledge: Dissenting voices in the discursive construction of physics across small laboratory groups. Linguistics & Education, 12(2), 135-174.

Kelly G. J., Drucker S., & Chen K. (1998). Students' reasoning about electricity: combining performance assessment with argumentation analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 20(7), 849-871.

Kelly, G. J. & Duschl, R. A. (2002). Toward a research agenda for epistemological studies in science education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.

Kelly, G. J., & Green, J. (1998). The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction. In B. Guzzetti & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change: Multiple ways to understand knowing and learning in a complex world (pp. 145-181). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students’ use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314-342.

Kempton, W., Boster, J. S., & Hartley, J. A. (1995). Environmental Values in American Culture. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Khishfe, R. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of Explicit and Reflective versus Implicit Inquiry-Oriented Instruction on Sixth Graders' Views of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578.

King, A. (1994). Inquiry as a tool in critical thinking. In D. F. Halpern (Ed.), Changing college classrooms: New teaching and learning strategies for an increasingly complex world. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Kitcher, P. (1993). The advancement of science: Science without legend, objectivity without illusions. New York: Oxford University Press.

Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.

Kornblith, H. (1994). A Conservative Approach to Social Epistemology. In F. Schmitt (Ed.), Socializing Epistemology: The Social Dimensions of Knowledge (pp. 93-110). Lanham MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13, 205-226.

Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The roles of representation and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 105-143.

Krajcik, J. (2005). Commentary on Chinn’s and Samarapungavan’s Paper. NSF Inquiry Conference Proceedings. Retrieved from http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~rgrandy/NSFCon Sched.html.

Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, B., Marx, R., & Soloway, E. (2000). Instructional, Curricular, and Technological Supports for Inquiry in Science Classrooms. In J. Minstell & E.Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiry into inquiry: Science learning and Teaching (pp. 283-315). Washington, D.C.: American Association for the Advancement of Science Press.

Krajcik, J., Czerniak, C., & Berger, C. (1999). Teaching children science: A project-based approach. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: "Seizing" and "freezing". Psychological Review, 103, 263-283.

Kuhn, D. (1989). Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psychological Review, 96, 674-689.

Kuhn D. (1993) Science as Argument: Implications for Teaching and Learning Scientific Thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337.

Kuhn, D. (1997). Constraints or guideposts? Developmental psychology and science education. Review of Educational Research, 67, 141-150.

Kuhn, D., Black, J., Keselman, A., & Kaplan, D. (2000). The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 495-523.

Kuhn, T. S. (1957). The Copernican Revolution: Planetary Astronomy in the Development of Western Thought . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). Reflections on my critics, originally in Lakatos and Musgrave, reprinted in Kuhn 2000.

Kuhn, T. S. (1977). The Essential Tension: Selected Essays in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1993). Afterwords. In P. Horwich (Ed.), World Changes: Thomas Kuhn and the Nature of Science. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (4th ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (2000). The Road since Structure: Philosophical Essays, 1970-1993 (with an autobiographical interview). J. Conant & J. Haugeland (Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480-498.

Kurz, E. M., &. Tweney, R. D. (1998). The practice of mathematics and science: From calculus to the clothesline problem. In M. Oakfield & N. Chater (Eds.), Rational Models of Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kurz-Milcke, E., Nersessian, N. J., & Newstetter, W. (2004). What has history to do with cognition? Interactive methods for studying research laboratories. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 4, 663-700.

Labov, J. (2004).

Lakatos, I. (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. J. Worrall & G. Currie (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lakatos, I., & Musgrave, E. (Eds.) (1970). Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge: University Press.

Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1998). Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.

Lansdown, B., Blackwood, P., & Brandwein, P. (1971). Teaching Elementary Science: Through Investigation and Colloquium. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.

Latour, B. (1986). Visualisation and cognition: Thinking with eyes and hands. Knowledge and Society, 6, 1-40.

Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Latour, B. (1999). Pandora's hope: Essays on the reality of science studies. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth. Berkeley, University of California Press.

Laudan, L. (1987). Progress or rationality? The prospects for normative naturalism. American Philosophical Quarterly, 24, 19-31.

Laudan, L. (1996). Beyond positivism and relativism: Theory, method, and evidence. Boulder, CO: Harper Collins.

Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in Practice: Mind, Mathematics, and Culture in Everyday Life. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lawson, A. E. (1995). Science teaching and the development of thinking. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Layton, D., Jenkins, E., Macgill, S. & Davey, A. (1993). Inarticulate Science? Perspectives on public understanding of science and some implications for science education. Nafferton: Studies in Education, Ltd.

Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2000). Inventing data structures for representational purposes: Elementary grade students’ classification models. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 2, 51-74.

Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2002). Symbolic communication in mathematics and science: Co-constituting inscription and thought. In J. Byrnes & E. D. Amsel (Eds.), Language, literacy, and cognitive development: The development and consequences of symbolic communication (pp. 167- 192). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Lemke, J. (1983). Classroom communication of science. Final report to the US National Science Foundation. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED222346).

Lemke J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Lemke, J. L. (2000). Across the scales of time: Artifacts, activities, and meanings in ecosocial systems. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 7(4), 273-290.

Leslie, A. (1984). Spatiotemporal continuity and the perception of causality in infants. Perception, 13, 287-305.

Leslie, A. M. (1987). Pretense and representation: The origins of “theory of mind.” Psychological Review, 94, 412-426.

Linn, M. (2000). Designing the Knowledge Integration Environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 781-796.

Lippmann, R. (2003). Students' Understanding of Measurement and Uncertainty in the Physics Laboratory: Social construction, underlying concepts, and quantitative analysis. Unpublished Doctoral, University of Maryland.

Lising, L., & Elby, A. (forthcoming). The impact of epistemology on learning: a case study from introductory physics. American Journal of Physics.

Loh, B., et al (2001). Developing Reflective Inquiry Practices: A case study of software, the teacher, and students. In K. Crowley, C. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Design for Science: implications from everyday classroom, and professional settings (pp.279-323). Mahwah, NJ: LEA, Inc.

Longino, H. E. (1990). Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Longino, H. E. (1993). Subjects, power, and knowledge: Description and prescription in feminist philosophies of science. In L. Alcoff & E. Potter (Eds.), Feminist Epistemologies (pp. 101-120). New York: Routledge.

Longino, H. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Lottero-Perdue, P. S. (2005). Critical Analysis of Science-related Texts in a Breastfeeding Information, Support, and Advocacy Community of Practice. Unpublished dissertation, University of Delaware.

Louca, L. (2004). Case Studies Of Fifth-Grade Student Modeling In Science Through Programming: Comparison Of Modeling Practices And Conversations. Unpublished Doctoral, University of Maryland, College Park.

Louca, L., Elby, A., Hammer, D., & Kagey, T. (2004). Epistemological resources: Applying a new epistemological framework to science instruction. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 57-68.

Louca, L., Hammer, D., & Bell, M. (2002). Developmental versus context-dependant accounts of abilities for scientific inquiry: A case study of 5-6th grade student inquiry from a discussion about a dropped pendulum. In P. Bell, R. Stevens, & T. Satwicz (Eds.), Keeping Learning Complex: The Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 261-267). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Louisell, W. H. (1973). Quantum statistical properties of radiation. New York: Wiley.

Lucas, D., Broderick, N., Lehrer, R. & Bohanan, R. (under review). Making the Grounds of Science Inquiry and Evidence Visible in the Classroom.

Lunetta, V. & Tamir, P. (1979). Matching Lab Activities With Teaching Goals. The Science Teacher, 46, 22-24.

Lunetta, V., Hofstein, A., & Giddings, G. (1981). Evaluating Science Laboratory Skills. The Science Teacher, 48, 22-25.

Lynch, M. (1993). Scientific practice as ordinary action: Ethnomethodology and the social studies of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lynch, M. & Macbeth, D. (1998). Demonstrating physics lessons. In J. Greeno & S. Goldman (Eds.), Thinking practices in mathematics and science learning (pp. 269-297). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Lynch, M. & Woolgar, S., Eds. (1990). Representation in Scientific Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

MacLachlan, G. L., & Reid, I. (1994). Framing and interpretation. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.

McCormick, B. H., DeFanti, T. A., & Brown, M. D. (1987, November). Special Issue on Visualization in scientific computing. Computer Graphics, 21.

Machamer, P., Darden, L., & Craver, C. F. (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67, 1-25.

Magnani, L., Nersessian, N., & Thagard, P., Eds. (1999). Model-based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Martin, J. R. (1993). Literacy in science: Learning to handle text as technology. In M. A. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 166-202). Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

Masterman, M. (1974). The Nature of a Paradigm. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (59-89). Cambridge: University Press.

Masuda, T., & Nisbett, R. E. (2001). Attending holistically versus analytically: Comparing the context sensitivity of Japanese and Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 922-934.

Matthews, M. (1994). Science Teaching: The role of history and philosophy of science. London:Routledge.

Maxwell, J. C. (1861-2). On physical lines of force. In W. D. Niven (Ed.). Scientific Papers. Cambridge: Cambridge University.

May, D. B., Hammer, D., & Roy, P. (under review). Children’s analogical reasoning in a 3rd-grade science discussion.

Mayo, D. G. (1996). Error and the growth of experimental knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Meichtry, Y. J. (1993). The impact of science curricula on student views about the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(5), 429-443.

Meldrum, A., Boatner, L. A., & Ewing, R. C. (2002). Nanocrystalline zirconia can be amorphized by ion radiation. Physical Review Letters, 88, 025503-1 - 025503-4.

Menard, H. W. (1986). The Ocean of Truth: A Personal History of Global Tectonics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Merton, R. K. (1973). The normative structure of science. In R. K. Merton (Ed.), The sociology of science (pp. 267-278). Chicago: University of Chicago Press (originally published 1942).

Metz, K. E. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children's science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65, 93-127.

Metz, K. E. (1997). On the complex relation between cognitive developmental research and children's science curricula. Review of Educational Research, 67, 151-163.

Metz, K. E. (2000). Young children’s inquiry in biology: Building the knowledge bases to empower independent inquiry. In J. Minstrell & E. H. van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry teaching and learning in science (pp. 371-404). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

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.

Metz, K. E. (to appear). The knowledge building enterprises in science and elementary school science classrooms: Analysis of problematic differences and strategic leverage points. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific inquiry and the nature of science: Implications for teaching, learning, and teacher education. Dortrect, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Michotte, A. (1963). The perception of causality. New York: Basic Books.

Mikeska, J. (in preparation). Falling Objects. In D. a. v. Z. Hammer & E. H. (Ed.), Video Case Studies of Children's Inquiry in Physical Science.

Miller, J. D. (1998). The measurement of civic scientific literacy. Public Understanding of Science, 7, 203-223.

Millar, R. & Driver, R. (1987). Beyond Processes. Studies in Science Education, 14, 33-62.

Millar, R., Leach, J., & Osborne, J., Eds. (2000). Improving science education: The contribution of research. Philadelphia: Open University Press.

Millar, R. & Osborne, J., Eds. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science education for the future. London: King’s College.

Millikan, R. A. (1965). The electron and the light-quant from the experimental point of view. Nobel Lectures--Physics 1922-41. Amsterdam.

Minsky, M. L. (1986). Society of Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Minstrell, J. & Van Zee, E., Eds. (2000). Teaching in the Inquiry-based Science Classroom. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Mitchell, S. (1996). Improving the Quality of Argument in Higher Education Interim Report. London: Middlesex University, School of Education.

Morgan, M. S. & Morrison, M., Eds. (1999). Models as Mediators. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Morgan, W. J. (1968). Rises, trenches, great faults, and crustal blocks. Journal of Geophysical Research, 73 (March 15), 1959-1982.

Myers, G. (1991). Lexical cohesion and specialized knowledge in science and popular science texts. Discourse Processes, 14, 1-26.

Myers, G. (1992). Textbooks and the sociology of scientific knowledge. English for Specific Purposes, 11, 3-17.

Myers, G. (1997). Words and pictures in a biology textbook. In T. Miller (Ed.), Functional approaches to written text: Classroom applications (pp. 93-104). Paris: USIA.

National Public Radio (Broadcast in March, 2002). Teaching curiosity and the scientific method.

National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.

National Research Council (1996). National Standards in Science Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu.

National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Standards in Science Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu.

Nelson, L. H. (1993). Epistemological communities. In L. Alcoff & E. Potter (Eds.) Feminist epistemologies (pp. 121-159). New York: Routledge.

Nelson, L. H. & Nelson, J., Eds. (2003). Feminist Interpretations of W.V. Quine. Penn State University Press.

Nersessian, N. J. (1984a). Aether/or: The creation of scientific concepts. Studies in the History & Philosophy of Science, 15, 175-212.

Nersessian, N. J. (1984). Faraday to Einstein: Constructing Meaning in Scientific Theories. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff/Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Nersessian, N. J. (1992a). Constructing and instructing: The role of 'abstraction techniques' in developing and teaching scientific theories. In R. Duschl & R. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of Science, Cognitive Science, & Educational Theory and Practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Nersessian, N. J. (1992b). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In R. Giere (Ed.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Nersessian, N. J. (1992c). In the theoretician's laboratory: Thought experimenting as mental modeling. In D. Hull, M. Forbes, & K. Okruhlik (Eds.), PSA 1992. East Lansing, MI: PSA.

Nersessian, N. J. (1995). Should physicists preach what they practice? Constructive modeling in doing and learning physics. Science & Education, 4, 203-226.

Nersessian, N. J. (1999). Model-based Reasoning in Conceptual Change. In L. Magnani, N. J. Nersessian, & P. Thagard (Eds.), Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

Nersessian, N. J. (2002a). The cognitive basis of model-based reasoning in science. In P. Carruthers, S. Stich,& M. Siegal (Eds.), The Cognitive Basis of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.