The co-construction of epistemological framing in clinical interviews and implications for research in science education

References

• Berge, M., & Danielsson, A. (2013). Characterising learning interactions: A study of university students solving physics problems in groups. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 1177–1196. doi: 10.1007/s11165-012-9307-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berland, L., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68–94. doi: 10.1002/tea.20446
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown, N. J. S. (2015). Feedback-relevant places: Interpreting shifts in explanatory narratives. In A. diSessa, M. Levin, & N. J. S. Brown (Eds.), Knowledge and interaction: A synthetic agenda for the learning sciences (pp. 403–426). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Clement, J. (2000). Analysis of clinical interviews: Foundations and model viability. In R. Lesh, & A. Kelly (Eds.), Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education (pp. 341–385). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• diSessa, A. (2007). An interactional analysis of clinical interviewing. Cognition and Instruction, 25(4), 523–565. doi: 10.1080/07370000701632413
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dominguez, H., LópezLeiva, C. A., & Khisty, L. L. (2014). Relational engagement: Proportional reasoning with bilingual Latino/a students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 85(1), 143–160. doi: 10.1007/s10649-013-9501-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2010). Epistemological resources and framing: A cognitive framework for helping teachers interpret and respond to their students’ epistemologies. Personal Epistemology in the Classroom: Theory, Research, and Implications for Practice, 4(1), 409–434. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511691904.013
   Google Scholar
• Engle, R. A. (2006). Framing interactions to foster generative learning: A situative explanation of transfer in a community of learners classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(4), 451–498. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls1504_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fouse, A., Weibel, N., Hutchins, E. & Hollan, J. D. (2011). ChronoViz: a system for supporting navigation of time-coded data. In CHI ‘11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA ‘11) (299–304). New York, NY: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Ginsburg, H. (1997). Entering the child’s mind: The clinical interview in psychological research and practice. London: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gravel, B., & Wilkerson, M. H. (2017). Integrating computational artifacts into the multi-representational toolkit of physics education. In D. Treagust, R. Duit, & H. E. Fischer (Eds.), Multiple representations in physics education (pp. 47–70). Cham: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-58914-5_3
   Google Scholar
• Hammer, D., Elby, A., Scherr, R. E., & Redish, E. F. (2005). Resources, framing, and transfer. In J. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning: Research and perspectives (pp. 89–119). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Jakab, C. (2013). Small talk: Children’s everyday “molecule” ideas. Research in Science Education, 43(4), 1307–1325. doi: 10.1007/s11165-012-9305-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joseph, D. (2004). The practice of design-based research: Uncovering the interplay between design, research, and the real-world context. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 235–242. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3904_5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Piaget, J. (1929). The child’s conception of the world. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, C., Wawro, M., & Zandieh, M. (2014). Examining individual and collective level mathematical progress. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 88(2), 259–281. doi: 10.1007/s10649-014-9583-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ribeiro, B. T. (2006). Footing, positioning, voice. Are we talking about the same things? In A. De Fina, D. Schiffrin, & M. Bamberg (Eds.), Discourse and identity (pp. 48–82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roth, W.-M., & Middleton, D. (2006). Knowing what you tell, telling what you know: Uncertainty and asymmetries of meaning in interpreting graphical data. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 1(1), 11–81. doi: 10.1007/s11422-005-9000-y
   Google Scholar
• Russ, R., Lee, V., & Sherin, B. (2012). Framing in cognitive clinical interviews about intuitive science knowledge: Dynamic student understandings of the discourse interaction. Science Education, 96(4), 573–599. doi: 10.1002/sce.21014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russ, R. S., Sherin, B. L., & Lee, V. R. (2015). The intersection of knowledge and interactions: Challenges of clinical interviewing. In A. diSessa, M. Levin, & N. J. S. Brown (Eds.), Knowledge and interaction: A synthetic agenda for the learning sciences (pp. 377–402). New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A Simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50(4), 696–735. doi: 10.1353/lan.1974.0010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scherr, R. E., & Hammer, D. (2009). Student behavior and epistemological framing: Examples from collaborative active-learning activities in physics. Cognition and Instruction, 27(2), 147–174. doi: 10.1080/07370000902797379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld, A. H., Smith, J. P., & Arcavi, A. (1993). Learning: The microgenetic analysis of one student’s evolving understanding of a complex subject matter. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 55–175). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erblaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Sherin, B., Krakowski, M., & Lee, V. (2012). Some assembly required: How scientific explanations are constructed during clinical interviews. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(2), 166–198. doi: 10.1002/tea.20455
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith III, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1994). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115–163. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0302_1
   Google Scholar
• Suchman, L., & Jordan, B. (1990). Interactional troubles in face-to-face survey interviews. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 85(409), 232–241. doi: 10.1080/01621459.1990.10475331
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannen, D. (1993). Framing in discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tannen, D., & Wallat, C. (1987). Interactive frames and knowledge schemas in interaction: Examples from a medical examination/interview. Social Psychology Quarterly, 50(2), 205–216. doi: 10.2307/2786752
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Langenhove, L., & Harré, R. (1999). Introducing positioning theory. In R. Harré, & L. van Langenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. 14–31). Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, J. F. (2006). Transfer in pieces. Cognition and Instruction, 24(1), 1–71. doi: 10.1207/s1532690xci2401_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warren, B., Ballenger, C., Ogonowski, M., Rosebery, A. S., & Hudicourt-Barnes, J. (2001). Rethinking diversity in learning science: The logic of everyday sense-making. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(5), 529–552. doi: 10.1002/tea.1017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watkins, J., Hammer, D., Radoff, J., Jaber, L., & Phillips, A. (2018). Positioning as not-understanding: The value of showing uncertainty for engaging in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(4), 573–599. doi: 10.1002/tea.21431
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Welzel, M., & Roth, W. (1998). Do interviews really assess students’ knowledge? International Journal of Science Education, 20(1), 25–44. doi: 10.1080/0950069980200103
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkerson, M., Gravel, B., & Macrander, C. (2013). SiMSAM: An integrated toolkit to bridge student, scientific, and mathematical ideas using computational media. Proceeding of the international conference of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL 2013), Madison, WI, USA (Vol. 2, pp. 379–381).
   Google Scholar
• Wilkerson, M. H., Shareff, R. L., & Laina, V. (Under Review). Learning from “interpretations of innovation” in the co-design of digital tools with students.
   Google Scholar
• Zhou, G. (2012). A cultural perspective of conceptual change: Re-examining the goal of science education. McGill Journal of Education/Revue des Sciences de L’éducation de McGill, 47(1), 109–129. doi: 10.7202/1011669ar
   Google Scholar