References

Abell, S.K., Anderson, G., and Chezem, J. (2000). Science as argument and explanation: Exploring concepts of sound in third grade. In J. Minstrell and E.H. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiry into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 100-119). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Akar, E. (2005). Effectiveness of 5E learning cycle model on students’ understanding of acid-base concepts. Dissertation Abstracts International.

Alonzo, A.C. (2002). Evaluation of a model for supporting the development of elementary school teachers’ science content knowledge. Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. Charlotte, NC.

American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. Washington, DC: Author.

American Association of School Librarians. (2009). Standards for the 21st-century learner. Available: http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/learningstandards/standards.cfm [retrieved June 18, 2009].

Anderman, E.M., and Anderman, L.H. (2009). Classroom motivation. Boston: Pearson.

Anderman, E.M., and Sinatra, G.M. (2009). The challenges of teaching and learning about science in the 21st century: Exploring the abilities and constraints of adolescent learners. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Development of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/AndermanSinatra.pdf [retrieved May 2009].

Anderman, E.M., Eccles, J.S., Yoon, K.S., Roeser, R.W., Wigfield, A., and Blumenfeld, P. (2001). Learning to value math and reading: Individual differences and classroom effects. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26, 76-95.

Anderman, E.M., Griessinger, T., and Westerfield, G. (1998). Motivation and cheating during early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 84-93.

Anderson, J.R. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 261-295.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 106
References Abell, S.K., Anderson, G., and Chezem, J. (2000). Science as argument and explanation: Ex- ploring concepts of sound in third grade. In J. Minstrell and E.H. Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiry into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 100-119). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. Akar, E. (2005). Effectieness of E learning cycle model on students’ understanding of acid- base concepts. Dissertation Abstracts International. Alonzo, A.C. (2002). Ealuation of a model for supporting the deelopment of elementary school teachers’ science content knowledge. Proceedings of the Annual International Conference of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. Charlotte, NC. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science lit- eracy. Washington, DC: Author. American Association of School Librarians. (2009). S tandards for the 21st-century l earner. Available: http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/ learningstandards/standards.cfm [retrieved June 18, 2009]. Anderman, E.M., and Anderman, L.H. (2009). Classroom motiation. Boston: Pearson. Anderman, E.M., and Sinatra, G.M. (2009). The challenges of teaching and learning about science in the 21st century: Exploring the abilities and constraints of adolescent learners. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Development of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http:// www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/AndermanSinatra.pdf [retrieved May 2009]. Anderman, E.M., Eccles, J.S., Yoon, K.S., Roeser, R.W., Wigfield, A., and Blumenfeld, P. (2001). Learning to value math and reading: Individual differences and classroom effects. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2, 76-95. Anderman, E.M., Griessinger, T., and Westerfield, G. (1998). Motivation and cheating during early adolescence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 0, 84-93. Anderson, J.R. (1983). A spreading activation theory of memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaior, 22, 261-295. 10

OCR for page 106
10 REFERENCES Andrew, J.P., DeRocco, E.S., and Taylor, A. (2009). The innoation imperatie in man- ufacturing: How the United States can restore its edge. Boston: Boston Consulting Group, Inc. Available: http://www.nam.org/~/media/AboutUs/ManufacturingInstitute/ innovationreport.ashx [retrieved March 2009]. Atkin, J.M., and Karplus, R. (1962). Discovery or invention? The Science Teacher, 2, 45-51. Autor, D.H., Levy, F., and Murnane, R.J. (2003). The skill content of recent technologi- cal change: An empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 11(4), 1279-1333. Baldi, S., Jin, Y., Skemer, M., Green, P., Herget, D., and Xie, H. (2007). Highlights from PISA 200: Performance of U.S. 1-year old students in science and mathematics literacy in an international context. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. Banilower, E., Cohen, K., Pasley, J. and Weiss, I. (2008). Effective science instruction: What does research tell us? Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on In- struction. Available: http://www.centeroninstruction.org/files/Characteristics%20of% 20Effective%20Science%20Instruction%20REVISED%20FINAL.pdf [retrieved Septem - ber 2009]. Barrows, H.S. (1985). How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years. New York: Springer. Bell, P., and Linn, M.C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817. Bennett, R.E., Persky, H., Weiss, A.R., and Jenkins, F. (2007). Problem-soling in technology- rich enironments. A report from the NAEP Technology-Based Assessment Project. Research and Development Series. Institute of Education Sciences, NCES 2007-466. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Available: http://nces.ed.gov/ nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2007466_1.pdf [retrieved June 23, 2009]. Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objecties, handbook I: The cognitie domain. New York: David McKay. Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Guzdial, M., and Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psy- chologist, 26(3/4), 369-398. Boddy, M., Watson, K., and Aubusson, P. (2003). A trial of the five Es: A referent model for constructivist teaching and learning. Research in Science Education, (1), 27-42. Bransford, J.D., and Schwartz, D.L. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Reiew of Research in Education, 2(1), 61-100. Brickhouse, N.W. (1990). Teacher beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 1(3), 53-62. Bybee, R.W. (2009). The BSCS E instructional model and 21st century skills. Paper pre- pared for the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Development of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http://www7. nationalacademies.org/bose/21CentSKillUploads.html [retrieved May 2009]. Bybee, R., Taylor, J., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J., Westbrook, A., and Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS E instructional model: Origins and effectieness. Colorado Springs, CO: BSCS. Cacioppo, J.T., Petty, R.E, Feinstein, J.A., and Jarvis, W.B.G. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 11(2), 197-253. Case, E., Stevens, R., and Cooper, M. (2007). Is collaborative grouping an effective instruc- tional strategy? Journal of College Science Teaching, (6), 42-47.

OCR for page 106
10 INTERSECTION OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND 21ST CENTURY SKILLS Casner-Lotto, J., and Barrington, L. (2006). Are they really ready to work? Washington, DC: Conference Board, Partnership for 21st Century Skills, Corporate Voices for Work- ing Families, and Society for Human Resource Management. Available: http://www. conference-board.org/Publications/describe.cfm?id=1218 [retrieved March 2009]. Chase, W.G., and Simon, H.A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitie Psychology, , 55-81. Chi, M.T.H. (2005). Common sense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconcep- tions are robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 161-199. Chi, M.T.H., and Koeske, R.D. (1983). Network representation of a child’s dinosaur knowl- edge. Deelopmental Psychology, 1, 29-39. Clark, D.B. (2004). Hands-on investigation in Internet environments: Teaching thermal equi- librium. In M.C. Linn, E.A. Davis, and P. Bell (Eds.), Internet enironments for science education (pp. 175-200). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Clark, D.B., and Sampson, V.D. (2005, June). Analyzing the quality of argumentation sup- ported by personally-seeded discussions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) Conference, Taipei, Taiwan. Clark, D.B., and Sampson, V.D. (2006, July). Ealuating argumentation in science: New as- sessment tools. Paper presented at the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Bloomington, Indiana. Clark, D.B., and Sampson, V.D. (2008). Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environ- ments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, (3), 6. Clark, D.B., D’Angelo, C.M., and Menekse, M. (in press). Initial structuring of online discus- sions to improve learning and argumentation: Incorporating students’ own explanations as seed comments versus an augmented-preset approach to seeding discussions. Submit- ted to the Journal of Science Education and Technology. Clark, D.B., Menekse, M., D’Angelo, C., Touchman, S., and Schleigh, S. (2008). Scaffolding students’ argumentation about simulations. Paper presented as part of a symposium organized by Hsin-Yi Chang to the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2008, Utrecht, Netherlands. Clark, D.B., Sampson, V., Stegmann, K., Marttunen, M., Kollar, I., Janssen, J., Weinberger, A., Menekse, M., Erkens, G., and Laurinen, L. (2009). Scaffolding scientific argumentation between multiple students in online learning enironments to support the deelopment of 21st century skills. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Development of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/21CentSKillUploads.html [retrieved May 2009]. Cooper, M.M., Sandi-Urena, S., and Stevens, R. (2008). Reliable multi-method assessment of metacognition use in chemistry problem-solving. Chemical Education Research and Practice, , 18-24. Cooper, M.M., Stevens, R., and Holme, T. (2006). Assessing problem-solving in chemistry using the IMMEX system. Proceedings of the National STEM Assessment Conference (pp. 118-129). Coulson, D. (2002). BSCS Science: An inquiry approach—2002 ealuation findings. Arnold, MD: PS International. Cuthbert, A.J., Clark, D.B., and Linn, M.C. (2002). WISE learning communities: Design considerations. In K.A. Renninger and W. Shumar (Eds.), Building irtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 215-246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Target time toward teachers. Journal of Staff Deelopment, 20, 31-36.

OCR for page 106
10 REFERENCES Darling-Hammond, L., and Cobb, V.L (Eds.). (1995). Teacher preparation and professional deelopment in APEC members: A comparatie study. ED 383 683. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. Darr, A. (2007). The knowledge worker and the future skill demands of the U.S. workforce. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Research Evidence Related to Future Skill De- mands, National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cfe/ Future_Skill_Demands_Asaf_Darr_Paper.pdf [retrieved March 2009]. Davis, E.A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Ge- neric and directed prompts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 91-142. Davis, E.A., and Linn, M.C. (2000). Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 819-837. Deloitte Development, LLC, and the Manufacturing Institute. (2005). 200 skills gap report—A surey of the American workforce. Washington, DC: Deloitte Development, LLC. Avail- able: http://www.nam.org/~/media/AboutUs/ManufacturingInstitute/innovationreport. ashx [retrieved March 2009]. DeSimone, L.M., Porter, A.S., Garet, M.S., Yoon, K.S., and Birman, B. (2002). Effects of professional development on teachers’ instruction: Results from a three-year longitudinal study. Educational Ealuation and Policy Analysis, 2(2), 81-112. Dole, J.A., and Sinatra, G.M. (1998). Reconceptualizing change in the cognitive construction of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, (2/3), 109-128. Fosnot, C.T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C.T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructiism: Theory, perspecties, and practice (pp. 8-33). New York: Teachers Col- lege Press. Franklin, J.C. (2007). Employment outlook: 2006-16: An overview of BLS projections to 2016. Monthly Labor Reiew, November. Available: http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2007/11/ art1abs.htm [retrieved March 2009]. Garet, M.S., Porter, A.C., Desimone, L., Birman, B.F., and Yoon, K.S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, (4), 915-945. Gatta, M., Boushey, H., and Appelbaum, E. (2007). High-touch and here-to-stay: Future skill demands in low wage serice occupations. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Research Evidence Related to Future Skill Demands, National Research Council. Avail- able: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cfe/Future_Skill_Demands_Mary_Gatta_Paper. pdf [retrieved September 2009]. Gess-Newsome, J., and Lederman, N. (1993). Pre-service biology teachers’ knowledge struc- tures as a function of professional teacher education: A year-long assessment. Science Education, (1), 25-46. Gobet, F., and Simon, H.A. (1996). Recall of random and distorted chess positions: Implica- tions for the theory of expertise. Memory and Cognition, 2(4), 493-503. Graber, K.C. (1996). Influencing student beliefs: The design of a “high impact” teacher educa- tion program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 451-466. Greene, J.A., and Azevedo, R. (2007). Adolescents’ use of self-regulatory processes and their relation to qualitative mental model shifts while using hypermedia. Journal of Educa- tional Computing Research, , 125-148. Guzdial, M., and Turns, J. (2000). Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchored forum. Journal of the Learning Sciences, (4), 437-470. Houston, J. (2007). Future skill demands, from a corporate consultant perspectie. Pre- sentation at the Workshop on Research Evidence Related to Future Skill Demands, National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/cfe/Future_ Skill_Demands_Presentations.html [retrieved March 2009].

OCR for page 106
110 INTERSECTION OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND 21ST CENTURY SKILLS Houston, J.S., and Cochran, C.C. (2009). Corporate assessment of 21st century skills. Pre- sentation at the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Development of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http://www7. nationalacademies.org/bose/Houston_21st_Century_Presentation.pdf [retrieved Septem- ber 2009]. Inhelder, B., and Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adoles- cence. New York: Basic Books. Iowa Area Education Agencies. (2005). Science standard 1. Interal benchmark, Grade 10. Available: http://www.integratingstandards.com/standards/science/standard1_benchmark3 _grade10.html [retrieved April 2009]. Jackson, S., Stratford, J., Krajcik, S., and Soloway, E. (1996). Making system dynamics modeling accessible to pre-college science students. Interactie Learning Enironments, , 233-257. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., and Kanselaar, G. (2007). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Be- haior, 2, 1105-1125. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., and Jaspers, J. (2007). Visualization of participation: Does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? Computers and Education, , 1037-1065. Kali, Y., Linn, M.C., and Roseman, J.E. (2008). Designing coherent science education: Impli- cations for curriculum, instruction, and policy. New York: Teachers College Press. Kansas Department of Education. (2007). Science standards. Available: http://www.ksde. org/Default.aspx?tabid=144 [retrieved April 2009]. Kardash, C.M. (2000). Evaluation of an undergraduate research experience: Perceptions of undergraduate interns and their faculty mentors. Journal of Educational Psychology, 2(1), 191-201. Karplus, R., and Their, H.D. (1967). A new look at elementary school science. Chicago: Rand McNally. Klahr, D., and Carver, S.M. (1988). Cognitive objectives in a logo debugging curriculum: Instruction, learning, and transfer. Cognitie Psychology, 20, 362-404. Klahr, D., and Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruc- tion: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 1(10), 661-667. Klein, S.P., Freedman, D., Shavelson, R.J., and Bolus, R. (in press). Assessing school effective- ness. Ealuation Reiew. Kolodner, J.L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann. Kolodner, J.L. (2009). Learning by Design’s framework for promoting learning of 21st century skills. Presentation to the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Development of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Kolodner.pdf [retrieved June 2009]. Kolodner, J.L., Camp, P.J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B.B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., Puntambekar, S., and Ryan, M. (2003). Problem-based learning meetings case-based reasoning in the middle school science classroom: Putting Learning by Design into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495-547. Kolodner, J.L., Gray, J., and Fasse, B.B. (2003). Promoting transfer through case-based reason- ing: Rituals and practices in learning by design classrooms. Cognitie Science Quarterly, (2), 183-232. Koschmann, T.D., Myers, A.C., Feltovich, P.J., and Barrows, H.S. (1994). Using technology to assist in realizing effective learning and instruction: A principled approach to the use of computers in collaborative learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, , 225-262.

OCR for page 106
111 REFERENCES Krajcik, J., and Blumenfeld, P.C. (2006). Project-based learning. In R K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 333-354). New York: Cambridge University Press. Krajcik, J.S., and Sutherland, L. (2009). IQWST materials: Meeting the challenges of the 21st century. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Edu- cation and the Development of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Avail- able: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Krajcik_Sutherland_Comm%20Paper.pdf [retrieved May 2009]. Krajcik, J., McNeill, K.L., and Reiser, B. (2008). Learning-goals-driven design model: Develop - ing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy. Science Education, 92(1), 1-32. Krajcik, J., Slotta, J., McNeill, K.L., and Reiser, B (2008). Designing learning environments Designing to support students constructing coherent understandings. In Y. Kali, M.C. Linn, and J.E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing coherent science education: Implications for curriculum, instruction, and policy. New York: Teachers College Press. Kuhn, D., and Phelps, E. (1982). The development of problem-solving strategies. In H. Reese (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (vol. 17, pp. 1-44). New York: Academic Press. Kuhn, L., and Reiser, B. (2005). Students constructing and defending evidence-based scientific explanations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Dallas. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cam- bridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lederman, N.G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929. Lemke, C., Coughlin, E., Thadani, V., and Martin, C. (2003). EnGauge 21st century skills for 21st century learners: Literacy in the digital age. Naperville, IL: North Central Regional Education Laboratory and the Metiri Group. Available: http://www.metiri.com/features. html [retrieved June 18, 2009]. Lemke, M., Sen, A., Pahlke, E., Partelow, L., Miller, D., Williams, T., Kastberg, D., and Jocelyn, L. (2004). International outcomes of learning in mathematics literacy and prob- lem solving: PISA 2003 Results from the U.S. perspective. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics (NCES-2005003). Available: http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/ pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2005003 [retrieved January 2005]. Lenhart, A., Madden, M., and Hitlin, P. (2005, July 27). Teens and technology: Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project. Available from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2005/ Teens-and-Technology.aspx [retrieved April 2009]. Levy, F., and Murnane, R.J. (2004). The new division of labor: How computers are creating the next job market. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Lewis, C., and Tsuchida, I. (1997). Planned educational change in Japan: The case of elemen- tary science instruction. Journal of Educational Policy, 12(5), 313-331. Li, J., Klahr, D., and Siler, S.A. (2006). What lies beneath the science achievement gap: The challenges of aligning science instruction with standards and tests. Science Educator, 15(1), 1-12. Li, M. (2001). A framework for science achievement and its link to test items. Unpublished dissertation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Li, M., and Tsai, S. (2007). Linking assessment to science achievement. NSF Technical report. [See http://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward.do?AwardNumber=0310360 for de - scription of the research project.]

OCR for page 106
112 INTERSECTION OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND 21ST CENTURY SKILLS Li, M., Ruiz-Primo, M.A., and Shavelson, R.J. (2006). Towards a science achievement frame- work: The case of TIMSS 1999. In S. Howie and T. Plomp (Eds.), Contexts of learn- ing mathematics and science: Lessons learned from TIMSS (pp. 291-311). London: Routledge. Linn, M. (2006). The knowledge integration perspective on learning and instruction. In R.K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 243-264). New York: Cambridge University Press. Linn, M.C., and Eylon, B.S. (2006). Science education: Integrating views of learning and instruction. In P.A. Alexander and P.H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychol- ogy, 2nd ed. (pp. 511-544). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Linn, M., Davis, E. and Bell, P. (Eds). (2004). Internet enironments for science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P.W., Love, N., and Stiles, K.E. (1998). Designing professional deelopment for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Ma, L. (1999). Knowing and teaching elementary mathematics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Maehr, M.L., and Midgley, C. (1996). Transforming school cultures. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Magnusson, S., Borko, H., Krajcik, J.S., and Layman, J.W. (1992). The relationship between teacher content and pedagogical content knowledge and student content knowledge of heat energy and temperature. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National American Association for Research in Science Teaching, Boston, MA. Maine Department of Education. (2007). Chapter 12—Learning results: Parameters for es- sential instruction. Available: http://www.maine.gov/education/lres/pei/ch132_0708.pdf [retrieved April 2009]. Mäkitalo, K., Weinberger, A., Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., and Fischer, F. (2005). Epistemic cooperation scripts in online learning environments: Fostering learning by reducing un- certainty in discourse? Computers in Human Behaior, 21(4), 603-622. Marton, F., and Tsui, A.B.M. (2004). Classroom discourse and the space of learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Marttunen, M., and Laurinen, L. (2006). Collaborative learning through argument visualisa- tion in secondary school. In S.N. Hogan (Ed.), Trends in learning research (pp. 119-138). New York: Nova Science. Marttunen, M., and Laurinen, L. (2007). Collaborative learning through chat discussions and argument diagrams in secondary school. Journal of Research on Technology in Educa- tion, 0(1), 109-126. Massachusetts Department of Education. (2006). Massachusetts science and technology/ engineering curriculum framework. Boston: Author. Available: http://www.doe.mass. edu/frameworks/scitech/1006.pdf [retrieved April 2009]. Mathews, J. (2009, January 5). The rush for “21st-century skills”: New buzz phrase draws mixed interpretations from educators. The Washington Post, p. B2. Maxwell, N.L. (2006). The working life: The labor market for workers in low-skilled jobs. Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. McNeill, K.L., and Krajcik, J. (2008a). Middle school students’ use of appropriate and inappropriate evidence in writing scientific explanations. In M. Lovett and P. Shah (Eds.), Thinking with data: The proceedings of rd Carnegie Symposium on Cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. McNeill, K.L., and Krajcik, J. (2008b). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers’ instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, (1), 53-78.

OCR for page 106
11 REFERENCES McNeill, K.L., Lizotte, D.J., Krajcik, J., and Marx, R.W. (2006). Supporting students’ con- struction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191. Merritt, J., Shwartz, Y., and Krajcik, J. (2008). Middle school students’ development of the particle model of matter. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Utrecht, Netherlands. Murnane, R.J., and Levy, F. (1996). Teaching the new basic skills: Principles for educating chil- dren to thrie in a changing economy. New York: Free Press and Simon and Schuster. National Research Council. (1984). High schools and the changing workplace: The employers’ iew. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school: Expanded edition. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2002). Learning and understanding: Improing adanced study of mathematics and science in U.S. high schools. Washington, DC: The National Acad- emies Press. National Research Council. (2005). America’s lab report: Inestigations in high school science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2007a). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2007b). Enhancing professional deelopment for teachers: Poten- tial uses of information technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2008a). Research on future skill demands: A workshop summary. Margaret Hilton, Rapporteur. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2008b). Common standards for K-12 education? Considering the eidence: Summary of a workshop series. Alexandra Beatty, Rapporteur. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Research Council. (2008c). Ready, set, science: Putting research to work in K- sci- ence classrooms. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. New Jersey Department of Education. (2004). New Jersey core curriculum content standards. Trenton: Author. Available from http://www.nj.gov/education/cccs/cccs.pdf [retrieved April 2009]. North Carolina Public Schools. (2004). Science standard course of instruction and grade-leel competencies. Raleigh: Author. Available: http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/curriculum/sci- ence/scos/2004/science.pdf [retrieved April 2009]. Ogle, D.S. (1986). K-W-L group instructional strategy. In A.S. Palincsar, D.S. Ogle, B.F. Jones, and E.G. Carr (Eds.), Teaching reading as thinking (Teleconference Resource Guide, pp. 11-17). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Ohlsson, S. (1992). The cognitive skill of theory articulation: A neglected aspect of science education? Science and Education, 1, 181-192. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2006). Assessing scientific lit- eracy, reading, and mathematical literacy: A framework for PISA 200 (p. 34). Available: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/63/35/37464175.pdf [retrieved June 24, 2009]. Paris, S.G., Lipson, M.Y., and Wixson, K.K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contempo- rary Educational Psychology, , 293-316.

OCR for page 106
11 INTERSECTION OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND 21ST CENTURY SKILLS Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2003). The road to 21st century learning: A poli- cymakers’ guide to 21st century skills. Washington, DC: Author. Available: http:// www.21stcenturyskills.org/index.php?option=com_contentandtask=viewandid=30and Itemid=185 [retrieved June 2009]. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009a). State initiaties: Oeriew of state leadership initiatie. Available: http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/index.php?option=com_content andtask=viewandid=505andItemid=189 [retrieved June 2009]. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (2009b). 21st century learning enironments. Tucson, AZ: Author. Available: http://www.21stcenturyskills.org/documents/le_white_paper-1.pdf [retrieved April 2009]. Peterson, N., Mumford, M., Borman, W., Jeanneret, P., and Fleishman, E. (1999). An occu- pational information system for the 21st century: The deelopment of O*NET. Wash- ington, DC: American Psychological Association. Pintrich, P.R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P.R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego: Academic. Pintrich, P.R., and Schunk, D.H. (2002). Motiation in education: Theory, research, and ap- plications, 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall. Pulakos, E.D., Arad, S., Donovan, M.A., and Plamondon, K.E. (2000). Adaptability in the workplace: Development of a taxonomy of adaptive performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, , 612-624. Putnam, R.T., and Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 2(1), 4-15. Ravitch, D. (2009). 21st century skills: An old familiar song. Washington, DC: Common Core. Available: http://www.commoncore.org/pressreleases.php [retrieved March 2, 2009]. Roehrig, G., and Luft, J. (2004). Constraints experienced by beginning secondary science teachers in implementing scientific inquiry lessons. Research Report. International Jour- nal of Science Education, 2(1), 3-24. Roth, K.J, and Garnier, H.E. (2006/2007). What science teaching looks like: An international perspective. Educational Leadership, (4), 16-23. Rotherham, A. (2008, December 15). 21st-century skills are not a new education trend, but could be a fad. U.S. News and World Report. Available : http://www.usnews.com/articles/ opinion/2008/12/15/21st-century-skills-are-not-a-new-education-trend-but-could-be-a- fad.html [retrieved March 2009]. Ruiz-Primo, M.A. (1997). Toward a framework of subject-matter achieement assessment. Unpublished manuscript. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Ruiz-Primo, M.A. (1998). Models for measuring science achieement. Invited talk. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing Conference, Univer- sity of California, Los Angeles. Ruiz-Primo, M.A. (2003). A framework to examine cognitie alidity. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Education Research Association, Chicago. Ruiz-Primo, M.A. (2009). Towards a framework for assessing 21st century science skills. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Development of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/RuizPrimo.pdf [retrieved June 2009]. Salminen, T., Marttunen, M., and Laurinen, L. (2007). Collaborative argument diagrams based on dyadic computer chat discussions. In R. Kinshuk, D.G., Sampson, J.M., Spector and P. Isaias (Eds.), Proceedings of the IADIS international conference on cognition and exploratory learning in the digital age (pp. 197-204). December 7-9, Algarve, Portugal.

OCR for page 106
11 REFERENCES Sanders, L.R., Borko, H., and Lockard, J.D. (1993). Secondary science teachers’ knowledge base when teaching science courses in and out of their area of certification. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 0(7), 723-736. Sandoval, W.A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students’ scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5-51. Sawchuk, S. (2009, January 7). “21st century skills” focus shifts teachers’ role. Education Week. Schank, R.C. (1982). Dynamic memory. New York: Cambridge University Press. Schank, R.C. (1999). Dynamic memory reisited. New York: Cambridge University Press. Schank, R.C., and Abelson, R.P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Schmidt, W.H., Wang, H.C., and McKnight, C.C. (2005). Curriculum coherence: An examina- tion of U.S. mathematics and science content standards from an international perspective. Journal of Curriculum Studies, (5), 525-559. Schunk, D.H., and Ertmer, P.A. (1999). Self regulatory processes during computer skill ac- quisition: Goal and self-evaluative influences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1, 251-260. Schunk, D.S., and Zimmerman, B.J. (2008). Motiation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Schunn, C. (2009). Are 21st century skills found in science standards? Paper prepared for the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Develop- ment of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http://www7. nationalacademies.org/bose/Schunn.pdf [retrieved March 2009]. Schwarz, C.V., Reiser, P., Davis, E.A., Kenyon, L.O., Acher, A., Fortus, D., Schwartz, Y., Hug, B., and Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression of scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, (6), 632-654. Shavelson, R.J., Ruiz-Primo, M.A., Li, M., and Ayala, C.C. (2002). Ealuating new approaches to assessing learning. CSE Technical Report 604. Los Angeles: Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing, University of California, Los Angeles. Shwartz, Y., Weizman, A., Fortus, D., Krajcik, J., and Reiser, B. (2008). The IQWST experi- ence: Using coherence as a design principle for a middle school science curriculum. The Elementary School Journal, 10(2), 199-219. Singley, M.K., and Anderson, J.R. (1989). The transfer of cognitie skill. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Slavin, R.E. (1995). Cooperatie learning, 2nd ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. State of Minnesota. (2009). Competency modeling clearinghouse. St. Paul: Author. Avail- able: http://www.careeronestop.org/CompetencyModel/learnCM.aspx [retrieved March 2009]. Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., and Fischer, F. (2007). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaboratie Learning, 2(4), 421-447. Stegmann, K., Wecker, C., Weinberger, A., and Fischer, F. (2007). Collaborative argumenta- tion and cognitive processing: An empirical study in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. In C. Chinn, G. Erkens, and S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Mice, minds, and society (pp. 661-670). New Brunswick, NJ: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Taylor, J., Van Scotter, P., and Coulson, D. (2007). Bridging research on learning and student achievement: The role of instructional materials. Science Educator, 1(2), 44-50. Thorndike, E.L., and Woodworth, R.S. (1901). The influence of improvement in one mental function upon the efficiency of other functions. Psychological Reiew, , 247-261.

OCR for page 106
11 INTERSECTION OF SCIENCE EDUCATION AND 21ST CENTURY SKILLS Tinnin, R. (2000). The effectiveness of a long-term professional development program on teachers’ self-efficacy, attitudes, skills, and knowledge using a thematic learning ap- proach. Dissertation Abstracts International, 1(11), 4345. Tomlinson, C.A. (2003). Fulfilling the promise of the differentiated classroom: Strategies and tools for responsie teaching. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curricu- lum Development. U.S. Department of Labor. (1991). What work requires of schools: A SCANS report for America 2000. Secretary’s Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. Available: http:// wdr.doleta.gov/SCANS/whatwork/whatwork.pdf [retrieved May 2009]. Vogel, G. (2007). Science education: Global review faults U.S. curricula. Science, 2(5286), 335. Von Secker, C. (2002). Effects of inquiry-based teacher practices on science excellence and equity. Journal of Educational Research, , 151-160. Wecker, C., and Fischer, F. (2007). Fading scripts in computer-supported collaborative learn- ing: The role of distributed monitoring. In C. Chinn, G. Erkens, and S. Puntambekar (Eds.), Mice, minds, and society (S. 763-771). New Brunswick, NJ: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Weinberger, A. (2008). CSCL scripts: Effects of social and epistemic scripts on computer- supported collaboratie learning. Berlin: VDM Verlag. Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., and Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, (1), 1-30. Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., Fischer, F., and Mandl, H. (2007). Scripting argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported learning environments. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, H. Mandl, and J. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported communication of knowledge—Cognitie, computational and educational perspecties (pp. 191-211). New York: Springer. Weiss, I.R., Pasley, J.D., Smith, P.S., Banilower, E.R., and Heck, D.J. (2003). Looking inside the classroom: A study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. West Virginia Department of Education. (2006). 21st century science K- content standards and objecties for West Virginia schools. Available: http://wvde.state.wv.us/policies/csos. html [retrieved April 2009]. Wideen, M.F., Mayer-Smith, J., and Moon, B. (1998). A critical analysis of the research on learning-to-teach. Reiew of Education Research, (2), 130-178. Wilson, C., Taylor, J., Kowalski, S., and Carlson, J. (2009). The relative effects of inquiry- based and commonplace science teaching on students’ knowledge, reasoning and argu- mentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching (accepted for publication July 2009). Available: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/122686765/PDFSTART [retrieved January 2010]. Windschitl, M. (2009). Cultiating 21st century skills in science learners: How systems of teacher preparation and professional deelopment will hae to eole. Paper prepared for the Workshop on Exploring the Intersection of Science Education and the Develop- ment of 21st Century Skills, National Research Council. Available: http://www7.national academies.org/bose/WindschitlPresentation.pdf [retrieved June 2009]. Windschitl, M., and Thompson, J. (2006) Transcending simple forms of school science in- vestigations: Can pre-service instruction foster teachers’ understandings of model based inquiry? American Educational Research Journal, (4), 783-835.

OCR for page 106
11 REFERENCES Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., and Braaten, M. (2009). Fostering ambitious pedagogy in no- ice teachers: The new role of tool-supported analyses of student work. Paper presented at the annual conference of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, April, San Diego. Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction. (2008). Science applications: Performance stan- dards G, Grade . Madison: Author. Available: http://dpi.wi.gov/standards/scig8.html [retrieved April 2009]. Yoshida, M. (1999). Lesson study: An ethnographic inestigation of school-based teacher deelopment in Japan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago. Zimmerman, B.J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P.R. Pintrich, and M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451- 502). San Diego: Academic Press. Zimmerman, B.J. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B.J. Zimmerman and D.H. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learn- ing and academic achieement: Theoretical perspecties, 2nd ed. (pp. 1-38). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

OCR for page 106