Journal of Science Teacher Education

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 93–106 | Cite as

Constructivism in Classroom: Theory into Practice

  • Stuart Naylor
  • Brenda Keogh

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asoko, H., Leach, J., & Scott, P. (1993). Learning science. In Hull, R. (Ed.), ASE secondary science teachers' handbook (pp.#46–63). Hemel Hempstead, UK: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  2. Barlex, D., & Carre, C. (1985). Visual communication in science. London, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Biddulph, F., & Osborne, R. (1984). Pupils' ideas about floating and sinking. Paper presented to Australian Science Education Research Association Conference. Cited in Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994), Making sense of secondary science. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Black, P., & Lucas, A. (Eds.) (1993). Children's informal ideas in science. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Campbell, B., & Ramsden, J. (1996). The perceived value of classroom research as an element of an initial teacher education course for science teachers. In G. Welford, J. Osborne, & P. Scott, (Eds.), Research in science education in Europe (pp.#351–355). London, UK: Falmer.Google Scholar
  6. De Fren, M. (1988). Using cartoons to develop writing and thinking skills. Social Studies Journal, 79(5), 221–224.Google Scholar
  7. Demetrulias, D. (1982). Gags, giggles, guffaws: Using cartoons in the classroom. Journal of Reading, 26(1), 66–68.Google Scholar
  8. Denzin, N.K. (1970). The research act in sociology: a theoretical introduction to sociological methods. London, UK: The Butterworth Group.Google Scholar
  9. Driver, R. (1983). The pupil as scientist? Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.Google Scholar
  10. Driver, R. (1989). Students' conceptions and the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, 481–490.Google Scholar
  11. Driver, R., Squires, A., Rushworth, P., & Wood-Robinson, V. (1994). Making sense of secondary science. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Fensham, P., Gunstone, R., & White, R. (1994). Science content and constructivist views of learning and teaching. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone, & R. White (Eds.), The content of science (pp.#1–8). London, UK: Falmer.Google Scholar
  13. Freyberg, P., & Osborne, R. (1985). Assumptions about teaching and learning. In R. Osborne & P. Freyberg (Eds.), Learning in science: The implications of children's science (pp.#82–90). Auckland, New Zealand: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  14. Goldstein, B. (1986). Looking at cartoons and comics in a new way. Journal of Reading, 29(7), 657–661.Google Scholar
  15. Gonick, L., & Huffman, A. (1990). The cartoon guide to physics. New York: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  16. Guttierez, R., & Ogborn, J. (1992). A causal framework for analysing alternative conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 14(2), 201–220.Google Scholar
  17. Hammrich, P. (1997). Confronting teacher candidates' conceptions of the nature of science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8(2), 141–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hand, B., & Treagust, D. (1994). Teachers' thoughts about changing to constructivist teaching/learning approaches within junior secondary science classrooms. Journal of Education for Teaching, 20(1) 97–112.Google Scholar
  19. Heintzmann, W. (1989). Historical cartoons: Opportunities to motivate and educate. Journal of the Middle States Council for Social Studies, 11, 9–13.Google Scholar
  20. Jones, D. (1987). Problem solving through cartoon drawing. In R. Fisher (Ed.), Problem solving in primary schools. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  21. Keogh, B., & Naylor, S. (1997). Starting points for science. Sandbach, UK: Millgate House Publishers.Google Scholar
  22. Lock, R. (1991). Creative work in biology. School Science Review, 72(260), 39–46.Google Scholar
  23. Meyer-Smith, J., & Mitchell, I. (1997). Teaching about constructivism: Using approaches informed by constructivism. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Constructivist teacher education (pp.#129–153). London, UK: Falmer.Google Scholar
  24. Naylor, S., & McMurdo, A. (1990). Supporting science in schools. Timperley, UK: Breakthrough Educational Publications.Google Scholar
  25. Novak, J., & Gowin, D.B. (1984). Learning how to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Novick, S., & Nussbaum, J. (1978). Junior high school pupils' understanding of the particulate nature of matter: an interview study. Science Education, 62(3), 273–281.Google Scholar
  27. Nuffield (1996). Nuffield primary science coordinators' handbook. London, UK: Collins Educational.Google Scholar
  28. Nussbaum, J. (1985a). The particulate nature of matter in the gaseous phase. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children's ideas in science (pp.#124–144). Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.Google Scholar
  29. Nussbaum, J. (1985b). The earth as a cosmic body. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children's ideas in science (pp.#170–192). Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.Google Scholar
  30. Ollerenshaw, C., & Ritchie, R. (1997). Primary science: Making it work (2nd ed.). London, UK: David Fulton.Google Scholar
  31. Osborne, J. (1996). Beyond constructivism. Science Education, 80(1) 53–82.Google Scholar
  32. Peacock, A. (1995). An agenda for research on text material in primary science for second language learners of English in developing countries. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 16(5), 389–401.Google Scholar
  33. Pekarek, R., Krockover, K., & Shepardson, D. (1996). The research-practice gap in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(2), 111–113.Google Scholar
  34. Piggott, A. (1989). Misconceptions in science. Richmond, UK: London Borough of Richmond.Google Scholar
  35. Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education 66, 211–227.Google Scholar
  36. Russell, t. (1993). Learning to teach science: Constructivism, reflection, and learning from experience. In K. Tobin (Ed.), The practice of constructivism in science education (pp.#247–258). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  37. Scott, P. (1987). A constructivist view of teaching and learning. Leeds, UK: Children's Learning in Science Project, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
  38. Shymansky, J., Yore, L., Treagust, D., Thiele, R., Harrison, A., Waldrip, A., Stocklmayer, S., & Venville, G. (1997). Examining the construction process: A study of changes in level 10 students' understanding of classical mechanics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(6), 571–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stavy, R., & Berkovitz, B. (1980). Cognitive conflict as a basis for teaching quantitative aspects of the concept of temperature. Science Education, 64(5), 679–92.Google Scholar
  40. Tiberghien, A. (1985). The development of ideas with teaching. In R. Driver, E. Guesne, & A. Tiberghien (Eds.), Children's ideas in science (pp.#67–84). Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.Google Scholar
  41. Watts, D.M., & Zylbersztajn, A. (1981). A survey of some children's ideas about force. Physics Education, 16, 360–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. White, R. (1994). Dimensions of content. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone, & R. White (Eds.), The content of science (pp.#255–262). London, UK: Falmer.Google Scholar
  43. Wittrock, M. (1994). Generative science teaching. In P. Fensham, R. Gunstone, & R. White (Eds.), The content of science (pp.#29–38). London, UK: Falmer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stuart Naylor
    • 1
  • Brenda Keogh
    • 2
  1. 1.Didsbury School of EducationManchester Metropolitan UniversityManchesterUK
  2. 2.Manchester Metropolitan UniversityCrewe, CheshireUK

Personalised recommendations