The pedagogical potential of drawing and writing in a primary science multimodal unit

References

• Adamec, L. (1997). Mineral nutrition of carnivorous plants: A review. The Botanical Review, 63(3), 273–299. doi: 10.1007/BF02857953
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adoniou, M. (2013). Drawing to support writing development in English language learners. Language and Education, 27(3), 261–277. doi: 10.1080/09500782.2012.704047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers and Education, 33(2–3), 131–152. doi: 10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00029-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, S., & Loizou, A. T. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27(4), 669–681. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2704_5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, S., Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2011). Drawing to learn in science. Science, 333(6046), 1096–1097. doi: 10.1126/science.1204153
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akaygun, S., & Jones, L. L. (2014). Words or pictures: A comparison of written and pictorial explanations of physical and chemical equilibria. International Journal of Science Education, 36(5), 783–807. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2013.828361
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. L., Ellis, J. P., & Jones, A. M. (2014). Understanding early elementary children’s conceptual knowledge of plant structure and function through drawings. CBE – Life Sciences Education, 13(3), 375–386.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aschbacher, P., & Alonzo, A. (2006). Examining the utility of elementary science notebooks for formative assessment purposes. Educational Assessment, 11(3), 179–203. doi: 10.1207/s15326977ea1103&4_3
   Google Scholar
• Askham, L. R. (1976). Effects of plants on classification behavior in an outdoor environment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 13, 49–54. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660130109
   Google Scholar
• Barman, C. R., Stein, M., McNair, S., & Barman, N. S. (2006). Students’ ideas about plants & plant growth. The American Biology Teacher, 68(2), 73–79. doi: 10.1662/0002-7685(2006)068[0073:SIAPPG]2.0.CO;2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowker, R. (2007). Children’s perceptions and learning about tropical rainforests: An analysis of their drawings. Environmental Education Research, 13(1), 75–96. doi: 10.1080/13504620601122731
   Google Scholar
• Bradbury, L. U. (2014). Linking science and language arts: A review of the literature which compares integrated versus non-integrated approaches. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(6), 465–488. doi: 10.1007/s10972-013-9368-6
   Google Scholar
• Bradbury, L. U., Wilson, R. E., Pepper, N., & Ledford, M. (2016). Capturing insects and student interest. Science and Children, 53(7), 41–47. doi: 10.2505/4/sc16_053_07_41
   Google Scholar
• Bybee, R. W., Taylor, J. A., Gardner, A., Van Scotter, P., Powell, J. C., Westbrook, A., & Landes, N. (2006). The BSCS 5E instructional model: Origins and effectiveness. Retrieved from http://bscs.org/bscs-5e-instructional-model
   Google Scholar
• Carolan, J., Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2008). Using representations for teaching and learning in science. Teaching Science: The Journal of The Australian Science Teachers Association, 54(1), 18–23.
   Google Scholar
• Chang, N. (2012). What are the roles that children’s drawings play in inquiry of science concepts? Early Child Development And Care, 182(5), 621–637. doi: 10.1080/03004430.2011.569542
   Google Scholar
• Charmaz, K. (2007). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Los Angeles: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Choi, A., Notebaert, A., Diaz, J., & Hand, B. (2010). Examining arguments generated by year 5, 7, and 10 students in science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 40(2), 149–169. doi: 10.1007/s11165-008-9105-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, J. M., McTigue, E. M., & Smolkin, L. B. (2011). Elementary teachers’ use of graphical representations in science teaching. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 22(7), 613–643. doi: 10.1007/s10972-010-9204-1
   Google Scholar
• Cowie, B., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2011). Exploring the value of ‘horizontal’ learning in early years science classrooms. Early Years, 31(3), 285–295. doi: 10.1080/09575146.2011.609157
   Google Scholar
• Cox, S. (2005). Intention and meaning in young children’s drawing. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 24(2), 115–125. doi: 10.1111/j.1476-8070.2005.00432.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danish, J. A., & Enyedy, N. (2007). Negotiated representational mediators: How young children decide what to include in their science representations. Science Education, 91(1), 1–35. doi: 10.1002/sce.20166
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danish, J. A., & Saleh, A. (2014). Examining how activity shapes students’ interactions while creating representations in early elementary science. International Journal of Science Education, 36(14), 2314–2334. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2014.923127
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehrlen, K. (2009). Drawings as representations of children's conceptions. International Journal of Science Education, 31(1), 41–57. doi: 10.1080/09500690701630455
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einarsdottir, J., Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2009). Making meaning: Children’s perspectives expressed through drawings. Early Child Development And Care, 179(2), 217–232. doi: 10.1080/03004430802666999
   Google Scholar
• Golembiewski, T. A. (2005). The weird, wild, wacky and wonderful world of carnivorous plants: An enrichment course for children ages seven through nine. Acta Botanica Gallica, 152(2), 251–255. doi: 10.1080/12538078.2005.10515477
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hand, B., & Choi, A. (2010). Examining the impact of student use of multiple modal representations in constructing arguments in organic chemistry laboratory classes. Research in Science Education, 40, 29–44. doi: 10.1007/s11165-009-9155-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hand, B., Gunel, M., & Ulu, C. (2009). Sequencing embedded multimodal representation in a writing to learn approach to the teaching of electricity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(3), 225–247. doi: 10.1002/tea.20282
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hubber, P., Tytler, R., & Haslam, F. (2010). Teaching and learning about force with a representational focus: Pedagogy and teacher change. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 5–28. doi: 10.1007/s11165-009-9154-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein, P. D. (2000). Elementary students’ strategies for writing-to-learn in science. Cognition and Instruction, 18(3), 317–348. doi: 10.1207/S1532690XCI1803_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kos, M., & Jerman, J. (2015). Observing natural objects: Characteristics of flowering plants perceived as important by 5- and 10- year old children. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 14(1), 109–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundin, M., & Jakobson, B. (2014). Situated meaning-making of the human body: A study of elementary school children’s reasons in two different activities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 9(1), 173–191. doi: 10.1007/s11422-013-9551-2
   Google Scholar
• McDermott, M. A., & Hand, B. (2013). The impact of embedding multiple modes of representation within writing tasks on high school students’ chemistry understanding. Instructional Science, 41(1), 217–246. doi: 10.1007/s11251-012-9225-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDermott, M. A., & Hand, B. (2015). Improving scientific literacy through multimodal communication: Strategies, benefits and challenges. School Science Review, 97(359), 15–20.
   Google Scholar
• Merriman, B., & Guerin, S. (2006). Using children’s drawings as data in child-centred research. The Irish Journal of Psychology, 27(1–2), 48–57. doi: 10.1080/03033910.2006.10446227
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
   Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Patrick, P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2011). What plants and animals do early childhood and primary students’ name? Where do they see them? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 630–642. doi: 10.1007/s10956-011-9290-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prain, V., & Tytler, R. (2012). Learning through constructing representations in science: A framework of representational construction affordances. International Journal of Science Education, 34(17), 2751–2773. doi: 10.1080/09500693.2011.626462
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2010). Representing science literacies: An introduction. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 1–3. doi: 10.1007/s11165-009-9153-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rivard, L. (1994). A review of writing to learn in science: Implications for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 969–983. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660310910
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rivard, L. P., & Straw, S. B. (2000). The effect of talk and writing on learning science: An exploratory study. Science Education, 84, 566–593. doi: 10.1002/1098-237X(200009)84:5<566::AID-SCE2>3.0.CO;2-U
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rybska, E., Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Sajkowska, Z. A. (2014). Young children’s ideas about snail internal anatomy. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 13(6), 828–838.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siegel, S. & Castellan, N. J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
   Google Scholar
• Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2001). Talking about plants – comments of primary school groups looking at plant exhibits in a botanical garden. Journal of Biological Education, 36(1), 27–34. doi: 10.1080/00219266.2001.9655792
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Reiss, M. J. (2000). Building a model of the environment: How do children see plants? Journal of Biological Education, 34(4), 172–177. doi: 10.1080/00219266.2000.9655714
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tytler, R., Prain, V., & Peterson, S. (2007). Representational issues in students learning about evaporation. Research in Science Education, 37(3), 313–331. doi: 10.1007/s11165-006-9028-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Meter, P., Aleksic, M., Schwartz, A., & Garner, J. (2006). Learner-generated drawing as a strategy for learning from content area text. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 31(1), 142–166. doi: 10.1016/j.cedpsych.2005.04.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawing: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 285–325. doi: 10.1007/s10648-005-8136-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varelas, M., Pieper, L., Arsenault, A., Pappas, C. C., & Keblawe-Shamah, N. (2014). How science texts and hands-on explorations facilitate meaning making: Learning from Latina/o third graders. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(10), 1246–1274. doi: 10.1002/tea.21173
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Villarroel, J., & Infante, G. (2014). Early understanding of the concept of living things: An examination of young children’s drawings of plant life. Journal of Biological Education, 48(3), 119–126. doi: 10.1080/00219266.2013.837406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldrip, B., Prain, V., & Carolan, J. (2010). Using multi-modal representations to improve learning in junior secondary science. Research in Science Education, 40(1), 65–80. doi: 10.1007/s11165-009-9157-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wallace, C. S. (2004). An illumination of the roles of hands-on activities, discussion, text reading, and writing in constructing biology knowledge in seventh grade. School Science and Mathematics, 104(2), 70–78. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2004.tb17984.x
   Google Scholar
• Williams, S. E. (1980). How Venus’ flytraps catch spiders and ants. Carnivorous Plant Newsletter, 9(3), 65–78.
   Google Scholar