Investigating the quality of project-based science and technology learning environments in elementary school: a critical review of instruments

References

• Amaral, O. M., Garrison, L., & Klentschy, M. (2002). Helping English learners increase achievement through inquiry-based science instruction. Bilingual Research Journal, 26, 213–239.10.1080/15235882.2002.10668709
   Google Scholar
• American Association for the Advancement of Science (2002). Criteria for evaluating the quality of instructional support. Retrieved from http://www.project2061.org/publications/textbook/mgsci/summary/criteria.htm
   Google Scholar
• Atman, C. J., Kilgore, D., & McKenna, A. (2008). Characterizing design learning: A mixed-methods study of engineering designers' use of language. Journal of Engineering Education, 97, 309–326.10.1002/jee.2008.97.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Banks, D. L., Elser, M., & Saltz, C. (2005). Analysis of the K-12 component of the Central Arizona–Phoenix Long‐Term Ecological Research (CAP LTER) project 1998 to 2002. Environmental Education Research, 11, 649–663.10.1080/13504620500314272
   Google Scholar
• Barak, M. (2004). Issues involved in attempting to develop independent learning in pupils working on technological projects. Research in Science & Technological Education, 22, 171–183.10.1080/0263514042000290886
   Google Scholar
• Barak, M., & Doppelt, Y. (2000). Using portfolios to enhance creative thinking. Journal of Technology Studies, 26, 16–24.
   Google Scholar
• Barak, M., & Raz, E. (2000). Hot air balloons: Project centered study as a bridge between science and technology education. Science Education, 84, 27–42.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barth, R. S. (1972). Open education and the American school. New York, NY: Shoken Books.
   Google Scholar
• *Baxter, B. K., Jenkins, C. C., Southerland, S. A., & Wilson, P. (2004). Using a multilevel assessment scheme in reforming science methods courses. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 15, 211–232.10.1023/B:JSTE.0000047084.51834.a3
   Google Scholar
• Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26, 369–398.10.1080/00461520.1991.9653139
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Bodzin, A. M., & Beerer, K. M. (2003). Promoting inquiry-based science instruction: The validation of the Science Teacher Inquiry Rubric (STIR). Journal of Elementary Science Education, 15, 39–49.10.1007/BF03173842
   Google Scholar
• Bodzin, A., & Cates, W. M. (2002). Web-based inquiry for learning science (WBI) instrument manual. Retrieved from www.lehigh.edu/~amb4/wbi/wbi-v1_0.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Brandt, R. (1998). Powerful learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). Retrieved from: https://books.google.be/books?hl=nl&lr=&id=bD08AcMW7RIC&oi=fnd&pg=PT5&ots=D1ejE7QeGj&sig=9Ei37nABOyqhVeKpI-e3hJASwe4#v=onepage&q&f=false
   Google Scholar
• Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• *Braund, M., & Leigh, J. (2013). Frequency and efficacy of talk-related tasks in primary science. Research in Science Education, 43, 457–478.10.1007/s11165-011-9270-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buaraphan, K. (2012). Embedding nature of science in teaching about astronomy and space. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 353–369.10.1007/s10956-011-9329-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diehl, W., Grobe, T., Lopez, H., & Cabral, C. (1999). Project-based learning: A strategy for teaching and learning. Boston, MA: Center for Youth Development and Education, Corporation for Business, Work, and Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Donahue, T. P., Lewis, L. B., Price, L. F., & Schmidt, D. C. (1998). Bringing science to life through community-based watershed education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7, 15–23.10.1023/A:1022528030956
   Google Scholar
• Doppelt, Y. (2009). Assessing creative thinking in design-based learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19, 55–65.10.1007/s10798-006-9008-y
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Eick, J. C. (2011). Use of the outdoor classroom and nature-study to support science and literacy learning: A narrative case study of a third-grade classroom. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23, 789–803.
   Google Scholar
• *Forbes, C. T., & Davis, E. A. (2008). The development of preservice elementary teachers' curricular role identity for science teaching. Science Education, 92, 909–940.10.1002/sce.v92:5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Forbes, T. C., & Davis, A. E. (2011). Operationalizing identity in action: A comparative study of direct versus probabilistic measures of curricular role identity for inquiry-based science teaching. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 267–292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design-based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1081–1110.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraser, B. J. (1994). Research on classroom and school climate. In D. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 493–541). New York, NY: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, B. J. (2012). Classroom learning environments: Retrospect, context and prospect. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education ( Chapter 79, pp. 1191–1239). Dordrecht: Springer. Retrieved from: http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/778/bok%253A978-1-4020-9041-7.pdf?originUrl=http%3A%2F%2Flink.springer.com%2Fbook%2F10.1007%2F978-1-4020-9041-7&token2=exp=1439889125~acl=%2Fstatic%2Fpdf%2F778%2Fbok%25253A978-1-4020-9041-7.pdf%3ForiginUrl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Flink.springer.com%252Fbook%252F10.1007%252F978-1-4020-9041-7*~hmac=9afc8260e08180190d753e4323ffcf39a189852d49784c91aa47904f35aa0dd010.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7
   Google Scholar
• Fraser, B. J., & O’Brien, P. (1985). Student and teacher perceptions of the environment of elementary school classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 85, 567–580.10.1086/esj.1985.85.issue-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Furtak, E.M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Briggs, D.C. (2012). Experimental and quasi-experimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 82, 300–329.10.3102/0034654312457206
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Goldston, M. J., Dantzler, J., Day, J., & Webb, B. (2013). A psychometric approach to the development of a 5E lesson plan scoring instrument for inquiry-based teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 527–551.10.1007/s10972-012-9327-7
   Google Scholar
• Goldston, M. J., Day, J. B., Sundberg, C., & Dantzler, J. (2010). Psychometric analysis of a 5E Learning Cycle Lesson Plan Assessment Instrument. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8, 633–648.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goulart, M. I. M., & Roth, W.-M. (2010). Engaging young children in collective curriculum design. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5, 533–562.10.1007/s11422-009-9196-3
   Google Scholar
• Hakkarainen, K. (2009). A knowledge-practice perspective on technology-mediated learning. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 4, 213–231.10.1007/s11412-009-9064-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, G., & Hord, S. (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany: State University of New York.
   Google Scholar
• Hamilton, J. (2003). Interaction, dialogue and a creative spirit of enquiry? In E. W. L. Norman, D. Spendlove, P. Grover, & A. Mitchell (Eds.), DATA international research conference 2004 (pp. 35–44). Sheffield: Sheffield Hallam University.
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, R. (1997). The value of a utilitarian curriculum: The case of technological education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7, 111–119.10.1023/A:1008800818574
   Google Scholar
• Hansen, P. J. K. (2010). An effective introduction to technology and design in Norwegian primary education. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 15, 58–67.
   Google Scholar
• Harel, I., & Papert, S. (Eds.). (1991). Constructionism (pp. 141–150). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16, 235–266.10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hodson, D. (2008). Towards research-based practice in the teaching laboratory. Studies in Science Education, 41, 167–177.
   Google Scholar
• Hollon, R., Anderson, C., & Smith, E. (1980). A system for observing and analyzing elementary school science teaching: A user's manual. East Lansing: Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.
   Google Scholar
• Holubova, R. (2008). Effective teaching methods project-based learning in physics. US-China Educational Review, 5, 27–36.
   Google Scholar
• Horizon Research (2000). Inside the classroom observation and analytic protocol. Chapel Hill, NC: Horizon Research.
   Google Scholar
• Horizon Research, Inc. (2003). 2005–06 Data Collection Manual. Retrieved from http://www.horizon-research.com/LSC/manual/
   Google Scholar
• *Houston, L. S., Fraser, B. J., & Ledbetter, C. E. (2008). An evaluation of elementary school science kits in terms of classroom environment and student attitudes. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20, 29–47.10.1007/BF03173675
   Google Scholar
• *Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Thurston, A., Topping, K., Christie, D., Livingston, K., … Donaldson, C. (2007). Group work in elementary science: Towards organisational principles for supporting pupil learning. Learning and Instruction, 17, 549–563.10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, M. C., & Scharmann, L. C. (2007). Using analogies to improve the teaching performance of preservice teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 565–585.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Johnson, B., & McClure, R. (2004). Validity and reliability of a shortened, revised version of the Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (CLES). Learning Environments Research, 7, 65–80.10.1023/B:LERI.0000022279.89075.9f
   Google Scholar
• Jones, A., Buntting, C., & de Vries, M. J. (2013). The developing field of technology education: A review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23, 191–212.10.1007/s10798-011-9174-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, B. F., Rasmussen, C. M., & Moffitt, M. C. (1997). Real-life problem solving: A collaborative approach to interdisciplinary learning. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ISBN: 1557982945.
   Google Scholar
• Kafai, Y., & Resnick, M. (Eds.) (1996). Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking and learning in a digital world. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Kaldi, S., Filippatou, D., & Govaris, C. (2011). Project-based learning in primary schools: Effects on pupils’ learning and attitudes. Education 3–13: International Journal of Primary, Elementary and Early Years Education, 39, 35–47.
   Google Scholar
• Koch, J., & Appleton, K. (2007). The effect of a mentoring model for elementary science professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 209–231.10.1007/s10972-006-9036-1
   Google Scholar
• Kolodner, J. L. (2001). A note from the editor. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1–2), 1–4.10.1207/S15327809JLS10-1-2_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koutsides, G. (2001). Using cooperative learning in design and technology. The Journal of Design and Technology Education, 6, 55–59.
   Google Scholar
• Kozma, R., Belzer, S., & Jaffe, J. M. (1993). BioMap: An interactive hypermedia environment to promote conceptual understanding in biology. Paper presented at American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
   Google Scholar
• Laevers, F. (2011). Werkzame bestanddelen van een krachtige leeromgeving voor techniek [Active constituents of a powerful learning environment for technology]. In F. Laevers, & L. Heylen (Red.), Passie voor wetenschap en techniek. Onderzoekend en ontwerpend leren in de basisschool [Passion for science and technology. Inquiry and design learning in primary school] (pp. 44–64). Averbode: CEGO.
   Google Scholar
• Laevers, F., & Heylen, L. (2013). Een procesgerichte aanpak voor 6- tot 12-jarigen in het basisonderwijs [A process-oriented approach for 6- to 12-year olds in primary education]. Leuven: CEGO.
   Google Scholar
• *Lakshmanan, A., Heath, B. P., Perlmutter, A., & Elder, M. (2011). The impact of science content and professional learning communities on science teaching efficacy and standards-based instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 534–551.10.1002/tea.v48.5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrenz, F., Huffman, D., & Appeldorn, K. (2002). CETP core evaluation: Classroom observation handbook. Minneapolis-St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, O., Deaktor, R. A., Hart, J. E., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2005). An instructional intervention’s impact on the science and literacy achievement of culturally and linguistically diverse elementary students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 857–887.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Lee, O., Hart, J. E., Cuevas, P., & Enders, C. (2004). Professional development in inquiry-based science for elementary teachers of diverse student groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1021–1043.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Lee, O., Lewis, S., Adamson, K., Maerten-Rivera, J., & Secada, G. W. (2007). Urban elementary school teachers’ knowledge and practices in teaching science to English language learners. Science Teacher Education, 92, 733–758.
   Google Scholar
• *Lee, O., Luykx, A., Buxton, C., & Shaver, A. (2007). The challenge of altering elementary school teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding linguistic and cultural diversity in science instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 1269–1291.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Levy, J. A., Pasquale, M. M., & Marco, L. (2008). Models of providing science instruction in the elementary grades: A research agenda to inform decision makers. Science Educator, 17(2), 1–18.
   Google Scholar
• Liljeström, A., Enkenberg, J., & Pöllänen, S. (2013). Making learning whole: An instructional approach for mediating the practices of authentic science inquiries. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8, 51–86.10.1007/s11422-012-9416-0
   Google Scholar
• Liu, X. (2010). Using and developing measurement instruments in science education. A Rasch modeling approach. Science and Engineering Education Sources. Concordia University, Charlotte, North Carolina: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, X. (2012). Developing measurement instruments for science education. In B. J. Fraser, K. G. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education ( Chapter 43, 651–665). Dordrecht: Springer. Retrieved from: http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/778/bok%253A978-1-4020-9041-7.pdf?originUrl=http%3A%2F%2Flink.springer.com%2Fbook%2F10.1007%2F978-1-4020-9041-7&token2=exp=1439889125~acl=%2Fstatic%2Fpdf%2F778%2Fbok%25253A978-1-4020-9041-7.pdf%3ForiginUrl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Flink.springer.com%252Fbook%252F10.1007%252F978-1-4020-9041-7*~hmac=9afc8260e08180190d753e4323ffcf39a189852d49784c91aa47904f35aa0dd0
   Google Scholar
• Luera, G. R., & Otto, C. A. (2005). Development and evaluation of an inquiry-based elementary science teacher education program reflecting current reform movements. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 241–258.10.1007/s10972-005-4585-2
   Google Scholar
• *Luykx, A., & Lee, O. (2007). Measuring instructional congruence in elementary science classrooms: Pedagogical and methodological components of a theoretical framework. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 424–447.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Marshall, C. J., Horton, R., Igo, L. B., & Switzer, M. D. (2007). K-12 science and mathematics teachers’ beliefs about and use of inquiry in the classroom. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 575–596.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., Blunk, M., Crawford, B., Kelly, B., & Meyer, K. M. (1994). Enacting project-based science: Experiences of four middle grade teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 94, 517–538.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1997). Enacting project-based science. The Elementary School Journal, 97, 341–358.10.1086/esj.1997.97.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Moos, R. H. (1979). Evaluating educational environments. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• *Neale, D. C., Smith, D., & Johnson, V. G. (1990). Implementing conceptual change teaching in primary science. The Elementary School Journal, 91, 109–131.10.1086/esj.1990.91.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Newman, D., Finney, P. B., Bell, S., Turner, H., Jaciw, A. P., Zacamy, J. L., & Gould, L. F. (2012). Evaluation of the effectiveness of the Alabama Math, Science, and Technology Initiative (AMSTI). Final report. NCEE 2012–4008.
   Google Scholar
• Newmann, F.M., & Associates (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. In-depth study of restructuring in 24 elementary, middle and high schools.
   Google Scholar
• Newmann, F.M., Secada, W.G., & Wehlage, G.G. (1995). A guide to authentic instruction and assessment: Vision, standards and scoring. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center on Organization and Restructering of Schools, Wisconsin Center for Education Research.
   Google Scholar
• Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systemic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470754887
   Google Scholar
• Piburn, M., & Sawada, D. (2000). Reformed teaching observation protocol (RTOP) reference manual. Technical Report (ACEPT-TR-IN00-32). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• *Pop, M. M., Dixon, P., & Grove, C. M. (2010). Research experiences for teachers (RET): Motivation, expectations, and changes to teaching practices due to professional program involvement. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21, 127–147.10.1007/s10972-009-9167-2
   Google Scholar
• Pucel, D. (1992). Technology education: In changing role within general education. Paper presented at the American Vocational Association Convention, St. Louis, MO. Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED353400.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Rahm, J., Miller, H., Hartley, L., & Moore, J. (2003). The value of an emergent notion of authenticity: Examples from two student/teacher-scientist partnership programs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 737–756.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Rennie, L. J., Goodrum, D., & Hackling, M. (2001). Science teaching and learning in Australian schools: Results of a national study. Research in Science Education, 31, 455–498.10.1023/A:1013171905815
   Google Scholar
• Rivet, A. E., & Krajcik, J. S. (2008). Contextualizing instruction: Leveraging students' prior knowledge and experiences to foster understanding of middle school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 79–100.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, M. A. P., Cross, D. I., Gresalfi, M. S., Trauth-Nare, A. E., & Buck, G. A. (2011). First year implementation of a project-based learning approach: The need for addressing teachers’ orientations in the era of reform. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 893–917.10.1007/s10763-010-9248-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Conant, F. R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 61–94.10.1207/s15327809jls0201_2
   Google Scholar
• Roth, W.-M. (2001). Learning science through technological design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 768–790.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (1995). Knowing and interacting: A study of culture, practices, and resources in a Grade 8 open-inquiry science classroom guided by a cognitive apprenticeship metaphor. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 73–128.10.1207/s1532690xci1301_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sawada, D., Piburn, M., Falconer, K., Turley, J., Benford, R., & Bloom, I. (2000). Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP) (ACEPT Technical Report No. IN00-1). Tempe, AZ: Arizona Collaborative for Excellence in the Preparation of Teachers.
   Google Scholar
• Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111–139.10.1007/s11165-005-3917-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schweinhart, L. J., & Weikart, D. P. (1997). The high/scope preschool curriculum comparison study through age 23. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 117–143.10.1016/S0885-2006(97)90009-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–23.10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shymansky, A. J., Wang, T.-Z., Annetta, A. L., Yore, D. L., & Everett, A. S. (2010). How much professional development is needed to effect positive gains in K-6 student achievement on high stakes science tests. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 10, 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• *Tao, Y., Oliver, M., & Venville, G. (2013). A comparison of approaches to the teaching and learning of science in Chinese and Australian elementary classrooms: Cultural and socioeconomic complexities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50, 33–61.10.1002/tea.v50.1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, P., Dawson, V., & Fraser, B. (1995). A constructivist perspective on monitoring classroom learning environments under transformation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• *Taylor, P. C., & Fraser, B. J. (1991). CLES: An instrument for assessing constructivist learning environments. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva, WI.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, P., Fraser, B., & Fisher, D. (1993). Monitoring the development of constructivist learning environments. Paper presented at the annual convention of the National Science Teachers Association, Kansas City, MO.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, P., Fraser, B., & Fisher, D. (1997). Monitoring constructivist classroom learning environments. International Journal of Educational Research, 27, 293–302.10.1016/S0883-0355(97)90011-2
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. Report prepared for the Autodesk Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.bie.org/files/researchreviewPBL.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Thomas, J., Pedersen, J., & Finson, K. (2001). Validating the draw-a-science teacher-test checklist: Exploring mental models and teacher beliefs. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 12, 295–310.10.1023/A:1014216328867
   Google Scholar
• *Türkmen, H. (2009). An effect of technology based inquiry approach on the learning of ‘Earth, Sun, & Moon’ subject. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 10(1).
   Google Scholar
• *Wang, J.-R., & Lin, S.-W. (2009). Evaluating elementary and secondary school science learning environments in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 853–872.10.1080/09500690701636361
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, G. (2002). Using technology to promote success in PBL courses. The Technology Source. Retrieved from http://technologysource.org/article/using_technology_to_promote_success_in_pbl_courses/
   Google Scholar
• Wubbels, T., & Brekelmans, M. (2012). Teacher-students relationships in the classroom. In B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. J. McRobbie (Eds.), Second international handbook of science education (Chapter 80, pp. 1241–1255). Dordrecht: Springer. Retrieved from: http://download.springer.com/static/pdf/778/bok%253A978-1-4020-9041-7.pdf?originUrl=http%3A%2F%2Flink.springer.com%2Fbook%2F10.1007%2F978-1-4020-9041-7&token2=exp=1439889125~acl=%2Fstatic%2Fpdf%2F778%2Fbok%25253A978-1-4020-9041-7.pdf%3ForiginUrl%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Flink.springer.com%252Fbook%252F10.1007%252F978-1-4020-9041-7*~hmac=9afc8260e08180190d753e4323ffcf39a189852d49784c91aa47904f35aa0dd0
   Google Scholar
• *Yilmaz, H., Turkmen, H., Pedersen, J. E., & Huyuguzel Cavas, P. (2007). Evaluation of pre-service teachers’ images of science teaching in Turkey. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 8(1).
   Google Scholar
• *Young, B. J., & Lee, S. K. (2005). The effects of a kit-based science curriculum and intensive science professional development on elementary student science achievement. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14, 471–481.10.1007/s10956-005-0222-2
   Google Scholar