References
- Areljung, S. (2019). How does matter matter in preschool science? In C. Milne & K. Scantlebury (Eds.), Material practice and materiality: Too long ignored in science education (pp. 101–114). Springer International Publishing.
- Arias, A. M., Davis, E. A., Marino, J.-C., Kademian, S. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (2016). Teachers’ use of educative curriculum materials to engage students in science practices. International Journal of Science Education, 38(9), 1504–1526. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2016.1198059
- Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2013). The Australian curriculum: Science, Version 5.0.
- Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018001032
- Campbell, J. L., Quincy, C., Osserman, J., & Pedersen, O. K. (2013). Coding in-depth semistructured interviews: Problems of unitization and intercoder reliability and agreement. Sociological Methods & Research, 42(3), 294–320. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124113500475
- Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2002). Student-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(5), 521–549. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690110095249
- Crawford, B. A. (2007). Learning to teach science as inquiry in the rough and tumble of practice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(4), 613–642. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20157
- Davis, E. A., Petish, D., & Smithey, J. (2006). Challenges new science teachers face. Review of Educational Research, 76(4), 607–651. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543076004607
- Flick, L., & Bell, R. (2000). Preparing tomorrow’s science teachers to use technology: Guidelines for science educators. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1(1), 39–60.
- Gess-Newsome, J. (2015). A model of teacher professional knowledge and skill including PCK: Results of the thinking from the PCK summit. In A. Berry, P. Friedrichsen, & J. Loughran (Eds.), Re-examining pedagogical content knowledge in science education (pp. 28–42). Routledge, Taylor & Francis.
- Grossman, P., Compton, C., Igra, D., Ronfeldt, M., Shahan, E., & Williamson, P. (2009). Teaching practice: A cross-professional perspective. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, 111(9), 2055–2100. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810911100905
- Hug, B., & McNeill, K. L. (2008). Use of first-hand and second-hand data in science: Does data type influence classroom conversations? International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1725–1751. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701506945
- Justi, R. S., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Science teachers’ knowledge about and attitudes towards the use of models and modelling in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 24(12), 1273–1292. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210163198
- Kind, V. (2009). Pedagogical content knowledge in science education: Perspectives and potential for progress. Studies in Science Education, 45(2), 169–204. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/03057260903142285
- Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. SAGE Publications.
- McNeill, K., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students’ construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153–191. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1502_1
- Mullis, I. V. S., Martin, M. O., Foy, P., Kelly, D. L., & Fishbein, B. (2020). TIMSS 2019 international results in mathematics and science. TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center.
- NAE. (2018). Curriculum for the compulsory school, preschool class and school-age educare. The Swedish National Agency for Education Stockholm.
- National Academies of Science. (2021). Science and Engineering in Preschool Through Elementary Grades: The Brilliance of Children and the Strengths of Educators. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17226/26215.
- National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.
- NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: for states, by states. The National Academies Press.
- Nilsson, P., & van Driel, J. (2011). How will we understand what we teach? – Primary student teachers’ perceptions of their development of knowledge and attitudes towards physics. Research in Science Education, 41(4), 541–560. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-010-9179-0
- OECD. (2014). PISA 2012 results: What students know and can do: Student performance in mathematics, reading, and science (Vol. 1).
- Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307–332. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543062003307
- Ricketts, A. (2014). Preservice elementary teachers’ ideas about scientific practices. Science & Education, 23(10), 2119–2135. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-014-9709-7
- Rollnick, M., & Mavhunga, E. (2016). The place of subject matter knowledge in teacher education. In J. Loughran & M. L. Hamilton (Eds.), International handbook of teacher education (Vol. 1, pp. 423–452). Springer.
- Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88(3), 345–372. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10130
- Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j463w79r56455411
- Stroupe, D. (2015). Describing “science practice” in learning settings. Science Education, 99(6), 1033–1040. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21191
- Treagust, D. F., & Harrison, A. G. (2000). In search of explanatory frameworks: An analysis of Richard Feynman’s lecture ‘Atoms in motion’. International Journal of Science Education, 22(11), 1157–1170. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050166733
- United Kingdom Department for Education. (2015). National curriculum in England: Science programmes of study. Crown Publishing.
- Van Driel, J. H., Bulte, A. M. W., & Verloop, N. (2007). The relationships between teachers’ general beliefs about teaching and learning and their domain specific curricular beliefs. Learning and Instruction, 17(2), 156–171. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.010
- Van Driel, J. H., & Verloop, N. (2002). Experienced teachers’ knowledge of teaching and learning of models and modelling in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 24(12), 1255–1272. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690210126711
- Watson, J. (2014). Curriculum expectations for teaching science and statistics. In B. de Sousa, R. Gould, & K. Makar (Eds.), Sustainability in statistics education. Proceedings of the ninth international conference on teaching statistics (pp. 1–6). International Statistics Institute.