This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2005). Analyzing the quality of argumentation supported by personally seeded discussions. Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (pp. 76–85), International Society of the Learning Sciences. May 30 – June 04, 2005, Taipei, Taiwan.
Clement, J. (1989). Learning via model construction and criticism: Protocol evidence on sources of creativity in science. In J. Glover, R. Ronning, & C. Reynolds (Eds.), Handbook of creativity: Assessment, theory and research. NY: Plenum, 341–381.
Clement, J. (2000) Model based learning as a key research area for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1041–1053.
Clement, J. (to appear). The role of explanatory models in teaching for conceptual change. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), Handbook of research on conceptual change.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Clement, J., & Rea-Ramirez, M. (1998). The role of dissonance in conceptual change,Proceedings of National Association for Research in Science Teaching.
Cobb, P. (1988). The tension between theories of learning and instruction in mathematics education. Educational Psychologist, 23(2), 87–103.
di Sessa, A. A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G. Forman & P. B. Pufall(Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum Associates.
Driver, R. (1983). The pupil as a scientist? Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Driver, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Curriculum development as research: A constructivist approach to science curriculum development and teaching. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit, & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics (pp. 94–108). New York: Teachers College Press.
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education,2002; 38, 39–72.
Minstrell, J., & Krauss, P. (2005). Guided inquiry in the science classroom. In M. S. Donovan & J. D. Bransford (Eds.), How students learn: Science in the classroom (pp. 475–514). Washington: National Academies Press.
Nersessian, N. J. (1992). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In R. N. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science (Vol. 15, pp. 3–44). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Niedderer, H. (2001). Physics learning as cognitive development. In R. H. Evans, A. M. Andersen, & H. Sørensen (Eds.), Bridging research methodology and research aims. The Danish University of Education. (ISBN: 87-7701-875-3), (pp. 397–414). http://didaktik.physik.uni-bremen.de/niedderer/personal.pages/ niedderer/Pubs.html#lpipt
Osborne, J. F., Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Monk, M. (2001). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. School Science Review, 82 (301), 63–70.
Rea-Ramirez, M. A. (1998). Models of conceptual understanding in human respiration and strategies for instruction. DAI – 9909208, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1998). Toward a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in Education, 4(1), 1–93.
Scott, P. H., Asoko, H. M., & Driver, R. (1992). Teaching for conceptual change: A review of strategies. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies(pp. 310–329). Kiel: IPN.
Scott, P. H. (1992). Conceptual pathways in learning science: A case study of the development of one student’s ideas relating to the structure of matter. In R. Duit, F. Goldberg, & H. Niedderer (Eds.), Research in physics learning: Theoretical issues and empirical studies(pp. 203–224. Kiel: IPN.
Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Coulson, R. I., & Anderson, D. K. (1991). Multiple analogies for complex concepts: Antidotes for analogy-induced misconception in advanced knowledge acquisition. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity and analogical reasoning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Reflective discourse: Developing shared understandings in a high school physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 209–228.
Williams, E. G., & Clement, J. (April 2006). Teacher moves during large-group discussions of electricity concepts: Identifying supports for model-based learning. Proceedings of the NARST annual Meeting – San Francisco, CA.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Clement, J. (2008). Six Levels of Organization for Curriculum Design and Teaching. In: Clement, J.J., Rea-Ramirez, M.A. (eds) Model Based Learning and Instruction in Science. Models and Modeling in Science Education, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6494-4_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-6494-4_14
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-6493-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-6494-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)