Abdulwahed, M., & Nagy, Z. K. (2013). Applying Kolb’s experiential learning cycle for laboratory education. J Eng Educ, 98, 283–294.
Acevedo, J. A. (2008). El estado actual de la naturaleza de la ciencia en la didáctica de lasciencias [The state of the art on nature of science in Science Education]. Revista Eureka sobre Enseñanza y Divulgación de las Ciencias, 5(2), 134–169.
Ainsworth, S. (2008). The educational value of multiple-representations when learning complex scientific concepts. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Visualization: Theory and practice in science education (pp. 191–208). London: Springer.
Ates, Ö., & Erylmaz, A. (2011). Effectiveness of hands-on and minds-on activities on students’ achievement and attitudes towards physics. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 12, 1–23.
Bamberger, Y. M., & Davis, E. A. (2011). Middle-school science students’ scientific modelling performances across content areas and within a learning progression. Int J Sci Educ, 35(2), 213–238.
Bortz, J., & Döring, N. (1995). Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation [research methods and evaluation] (2nd ed.) springer, Berlin.
Bos, W., & Tarnai, C. (1999). Content analysis in empirical social research. Int J Educ Res, 31(8), 659–671.
Brody, M., Bangert, A., & Dillon, J. (2007). Assessing learning in informal science contexts. National Research Council for Science Learning in Informal Environments Committee. http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Brody_Commissioned_Paper.pdf. .
Bryce, C. M., et al. (2016). Exploring models in the biology classroom. Am Biol Teach, 8, 35–42.
Carpenter, S. L., et al. (2018). Models are a “metaphor in your brain”: How potential and preservice teachers understand the science and engineering practice of modeling. Sci Educ, 119, 275–286.
Chen, W., Shah, U., & Brechtelsbauer, C. (2016). The discovery laboratory – A student-centred experiential learning practical: Part I – Overview. Educ Chem Eng, 17, 44–53.
Cohen, J. (1968). Weighted kappa: Nominal scale agreement provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychol Bull, 70(4), 213–220.
Cook, T. D., & Campell, D. (1979). Quasi-experimentation. Design & analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing Company.
Declaration of Helsinki. (2013). World Medical Association. Journal of the American Medical Association, 310, 2191–2194.
De Houwer, J., Barnes Holmes, D., & Moors, A. (2011). Why the cognitive approach in psychology would profit from a functional approach and vice versa. Perspect Psychol Sci, 6(2), 202–209.
Domjan, M. (2015). The principles of learning and behavior (7th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.
Field, A. (2012). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). London: SAGE.
Franco, C., & Colinvaux, D. (2000). Grasping mental models. In J. K. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 93–118). Springer.
Gilbert, J. K., & Justi, R. (2016). Modelling-based teaching in science education. Berlin: Springer International Publishing.
Glowinski, I., & Bayrhuber, H. (2011). Student labs on a university campus as a type of out-of-school learning environment: Assessing the potential to promote students’ interest in science. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 6, 371–392.
Grünkorn, J., Upmeier zu Belzen, A., & Krüger, D. (2014). Assessing students’ understandings of biological models and their use in science to evaluate a theoretical framework. Int J Sci Educ, 36(10), 1651–1684.
Haselgrove, M. (2016). Learning: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hernández, M. I., Couso, D., & Pintó, R. (2015). Analyzing students’ learning progressions throughout a teaching sequence on acoustic properties of materials with a model-based inquiry approach. Journal of Science Education Technology, 24(2-3), 356–377.
Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and learning science - A personalized approach. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Howell, M. E., Booth, C. S., Sikich, S. M., Helikart, T., Roston, R. L., Couch, B. A., & van Dijk, K. (2019). Student understanding of DNA structure–function relationships improves from using 3D learning modules with dynamic 3D printed models. Biochem Mol Biol Educ, 47(3), 303–317.
Jackson, J., Dukerich, L., & Hestenes, D. (2008). Modeling instruction: An effective model for science education. Sci Educ, 17, 10–17.
José, M. O., Del Mar Aragón, M., & Cuesta, J. (2015). The competence of modelling in learning chemical change: A study with secondary school students. Int J Sci Math Educ, 13, 751–791.
Justi, R. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Modelling, teachers’ views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. Int J Sci Educ, 24(4), 369–387.
Kalyuga, S. (2009). Knowledge elaboration: A cognitive load perspective. Learn Instr, 19(5), 402–410.
Kim, et al. (2015). Cycles of exploration, reflection, and consolidation in model-based learning of genetics. J Sci Educ Technol, 24(6), 789–802.
Kind, V. (2015). Preservice science teachers’ science teaching orientations and beliefs about science. Sci Educ, 100, 122–152.
KMK (2005). Beschlüsse der Kultusministerkonferenz – Bildungsstandards im Fach Biologie für den Mittleren Bildungsabschluss [resolution of the standing conference of the ministers of education and cultural Affairs of the Länder in the Federal Republic of Germany - standards of biology education for secondary school]. Munich: Luchterhand.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Kovanović, V., et al. (2018). Understanding the relationship between technology-use and cognitive presence in MOOCs. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 582–583. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
Krajcik, J., & Merritt, J. (2012). Engaging students in scientific practices: What does constructing and revising models look like in the science classroom? Sci Child, 49, 10–13.
Lachman, S. J. (1997). Learning is a process: Toward an improved definition of learning. J Psychol, 131(5), 477–480.
Langheinrich, J., & Bogner, F. X. (2015). Student conceptions about the DNA structure within a hierarchical organizational level: Improvement by experiment- and computer-based outreach learning. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 43(6), 393–402.
Lienert, G. A., & Raatz, U. (1998). Testaufbau und Testanalyse [test setup and test analysis] (6th ed.). Psychologie Verlags Union: Weinheim.
Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Louca, L. T., Zacharia, Z. C., & Constantinou, C. P. (2011). In quest of productive modelling-based learning discourse in elementary school science. J Res Sci Teach, 48(8), 919–951.
Lovey, B. R., & Riggs, K. M. (2019). Flipping the laboratory: Improving student engagement and learning outcomes in second year science courses. Int J Sci Educ, 41(1), 64–79.
Mierdel, J., & Bogner, F.X. (2019a). Investigations of modellers and model viewers in an out-of-school gene technology laboratory. Research in Science Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09871-3.
Mierdel, J., & Bogner, F. X. (2019b). Comparing the Use of Two Different Model Approaches on Students’ Understanding of DNA Models. Education Sciences, 9(115), 1–18.
Nasir, N. S., Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Lee, C. D. (2006). Learning as a cultural process: Achieving equity through diversity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 489–504). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oh, P. S., & Oh, S. J. (2011). What teachers of science need to know about models: An overview. Int J Sci Educ, 33(8), 1109–1130.
Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Sci Educ, 96(1), 21–47.
Orhan, T. Y., & Sahin, N. (2018). The impact of innovative teaching approaches on biotechnology knowledge and laboratory experiences of science teachers. Education Sciences, 8(4), 213–237.
Passmore, C., Stewart, J., & Cartier, J. (2009). Model-based inquiry and school science: Creating connections. Sch Sci Math, 109(7), 394–402.
Pearson, K. (1900). On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from random sampling. Philos Mag, 50, 157–175.
Peel, A., Zangori, L., Friedrichsen, P., Hayes, E., & Sadler, T. (2019). Students‘ model-based explanations about natural selection and antibiotic resistance through socio-scientific issues-based learning. Int J Sci Educ, 41(4), 510–532.
Prabha, S. (2016). Laboratory experiences for prospective science teachers: A meta-analytic review of issues and concerns. Eur Sci J, 12(34), 235–250.
Quigley, D., Ostwald, J., & Sumner, T. (2017). Scientific modelling: Using learning analytics to examine student practices and classroom variation. Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, 329–338. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
Raviv, A., Cohen, S., & Aflalo, E. (2019). How should students learn in the school science laboratory? The benefits of cooperative learning. Res Sci Educ, 49(2), 331–345.
Rinehart, R., Duncan, R., Chinn, C., Atkins, T., & DiBenedetti, J. (2016). Critical design decisions for successful model-based inquiry in science classroom. International Journal of Design for Learning, 7, 17–40.
Rost, J. (2004). Lehrbuch Testtheorie–Testkonstruktion [textbook test theory–test construction] (2nd ed.). Bern: Hans Huber.
Rotbain, Y., Marbach-Ad, G., & Stavy, R. (2006). Effect of bead and illustrations models on high school students’ achievement in molecular genetics. J Res Sci Teach, 43(5), 500–529.
Saka, A., Cerrah, L., Akdeniz, A. R., & Ayas, A. (2006). A cross-age study of the understanding of three genetic concepts: How do they imagine the gene, DNA and chromosome? J Sci Educ Technol, 15(2), 192–202.
Sarmouk, C., et al. (2019). Pre-laboratory online learning resource improves preparedness and performance in pharmaceutical sciences practical classes. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, online first, 1–12.
Scharfenberg, F. J., Bogner, F. X., & Klautke, S. (2007). Learning in a gene technology laboratory with educational focus: Results of a teaching unit with authentic experiments. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 35(1), 28–39.
Scharfenberg, F. J., & Bogner, F. X. (2013). Teaching Gene Technology in an Outreach Lab: Students’ Assigned Cognitive load clusters and the clusters’ relationships to learner characteristics, laboratory variables, and cognitive achievement. Research in Science Education, 43, 141–161.
Schwarz, C., et al. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. J Res Sci Teach, 46(6), 632–654.
Solomon, J. (1980). Teaching children in the laboratory. London: Crom Helm.
Svoboda, J., & Passmore, C. (2013). The strategies of modeling in biology education. Sci & Educ, 22(1), 119–142.
Thorpe, W. H. (1943). Types of learning in insects and other arthropods. Br J Psychol, 33, 220–234.
Torres, B. B., & Correia, P. R. M. (2007). Using denatured egg white as a macroscopic model for teaching protein structure and introducing protein synthesis for high school students. J Chem Educ, 84(12), 1941–1944.
Usher, S. (2013). Letters of note. Correspondence deserving of a wider audience. Edinburgh: Canongate.
Werner, S., et al. (2017). Investigating how German biology teachers use three-dimensional physical models in classroom instruction: A video study. Res Sci Educ, 49, 1–27.
Windschitl, M., & Thompson, J. (2006). Transcending simple forms of school science investigation: The impact of preservice instruction on teachers’ understandings of model-based inquiry. Am Educ Res J, 43(4), 783–835.
Wolf, R. (1997). Rating scales. In J. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research, methodology and measurement: An international handbook (pp. 958–965). Oxford: Elsevier.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Pract, 41(2), 64–70.