Preservice science teachers’ epistemological framing in their early teaching

References

• Barnett, S. M., & Ceci, S. J. (2002). When and where do we apply what we learn?: A taxonomy for far transfer. Psychological Bulletin, 128(4), 612–637. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.4.612
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bell, P., Bricker, L., Tzou, C., Lee, T., & Van Horne, K. (2012). Exploring the science framework: Engaging learners in scientific practices related to obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information. Science Scope, 36(3), 17–22. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43184234
   Google Scholar
• Berland, L. K., & Hammer, D. (2012). Framing for scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(1), 68–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20446
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campbell, T., Schwarz, C., & Windschitl, M. (2016). What we call misconceptions may be necessary stepping-stones on a path towards making sense of the world. NSTA Journals: The Science Teacher, 83(3), 69–74.
   Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2005). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (2nd ed.). Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, B. (1996). Teaching mathematics: Toward a sound alternative. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, B. (1997). Listening for differences: An evolving conception of mathematics teaching. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 28(3), 355–376. https://doi.org/10.2307/749785
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• diSessa, A. (1993). Towards an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2–3), 105–225. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.1985.9649008
   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. In L. D. Bendixen & F. C. Feucht (Eds.), Personal epistemology in the classroom: Theory, research, and implications for practice (pp. 409–434). Cambridge University Press.
   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. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1504_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399–483. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford, M. (2008). ‘Grasp of practice’ as a reasoning resource for inquiry and nature of science understanding. Science & Education, 17(2–3), 147–177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-006-9045-7
   Google Scholar
• Ford, M. (2015). Educational implications of choosing “practice” to describe science in the Next Generation Science Standards. Science Education, 99(6), 1041–1048. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21188
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2000). Stimulated recall methodology in second language research. Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Greeno, J. G. (2009). A theory bite on contextualizing, framing, and positioning: A companion to son and goldstone. Cognition and Instruction, 27(3), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000903014386
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Groenewald, T. (2004). A phenomenological research design illustrated. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 3(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690400300104
   Google Scholar
• Hammer, D. (1997). Discovery learning and discovery teaching. Cognition and Instruction, 15(4), 485–529. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci1504_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer, D., & Elby, A. (2002). On the form of a personal epistemology. In B. K. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 169–190). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Hammer, D. M., & Elby, A. (2003). Tapping epistemological resources for learning physics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 53–90. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1201_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammer, D. M., Elby, A., Scherr, R. E., & Redish, E. F. (2005). Resources, framing, and transfer. In J. P. Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of learning: Research and perspectives (pp. 89–119). Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Hutchison, P., & Hammer, D. (2010). Attending to student epistemological framing in a science classroom. Science Education, 94(3), 506–524. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20373
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ko, M.-L. M., & Krist, C. (2019). Opening up curricula to redistribute epistemic agency: A framework for supporting science teaching. Science Education, 103(4), 979–1010. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21511
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krajcik, J. S., & Shin, N. (2014). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 275–297). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, J., & Kim, H.-B. (2017, April 22-25). From unproductive to productive: Understanding productive argumentation from the perspective of the epistemological resource network [Paper presentation]. NARST Annual International Conference, San Antonio, TX, United States. https://narst.org/sites/default/files/2019-07/2017_abstracts.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2006). Scientific thinking and scientific literacy. In K. A. Renninger & I. E. Siegel (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 4, pp. 153–196). Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Levin, D. M., Hammer, D., & Coffey, J. E. (2009). Novice teachers’ attention to student thinking. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(2), 142–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487108330245
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lidar, M., Lundqvist, E., & Östman, L. (2006). Teaching and learning in the science classroom: The interplay between teachers’ epistemological moves and students’ practical epistemology. Science Education, 90(1), 148–163. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louca, L., Elby, A., Hammer, D., & Kagey, T. (2004). Epistemological resources: Applying a new epistemological framework to science instruction. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3901_6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Machamer, P. (2004). Activities and causation: The metaphysics and epistemology of mechanisms. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 18(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698590412331289242
   Google Scholar
• Miller, E. C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2019). Promoting deep learning through project-based learning: A design problem. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(7), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0009-6
   Google Scholar
• Miller, E., Manz, E., Russ, R., Stroupe, D., & Berland, L. (2018). Addressing the epistemic elephant in the room: Epistemic agency and the next generation science standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(7), 1053–1075. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21459
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2018). How people learn II: Learners, contexts, and cultures. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24783
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school: Expanded edition. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/9853
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science standards: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Next Generation Science Standards Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For states, by states. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (3rd ed.). Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Reiser, B. J. (2014). Designing coherent storylines aligned with NGSS for the K-12 classroom [Paper presentation]. National Science Education Leadership Association, Boston, MA, United States.
   Google Scholar
• Reiser, B. J., Novak, M., & Fumagalli, M. (2015). NGSS storylines: How to construct coherent instruction sequences driven by phenomena and motivated by student questions [Paper presentation]. Illinois Science Education Conference 2015, Tinley Park, IL, United States.
   Google Scholar
• Richards, J., Elby, A., Luna, M. J., Robertson, A. D., Levin, D. M., & Nyeggen, C. G. (2020). Reframing the responsiveness challenge: A framing-anchored explanatory framework to account for irregularity in novice teachers’ attention and responsiveness to student thinking. Cognition and Instruction, 38(2), 116–152. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2020.1729156
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudolph, J. L. (2019). How we teach science: What’s changed, and why it matters. Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Russ, R. S. (2014). Epistemology of science vs. epistemology for science. Science Education, 98(3), 388–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russ, R. S. (2018). Characterizing teacher attention to student thinking: A role for epistemological messages. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 94–120. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russ, R. S., & Berland, L. K. (2019). Invented science: A framework for discussing a persistent problem of practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 28(3), 279–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1517354
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russ, R. S., Coffey, J., Hammer, D., & Hutchison, P. (2009). Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking. Science Education, 93(5), 875–891. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Russ, R. S., & Luna, M. J. (2013). Inferring teacher epistemological framing from local patterns in teacher noticing. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 50(3), 284–314. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21063
   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. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000902797379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sikorski, T.-R., & Hammer, D. (2017). Looking for coherence in science curriculum. Science Education, 101(6), 929–943. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21299
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115–163. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0302_1
   Google Scholar
• Stroupe, D. (2015). Describing “science practice” in learning settings. Science Education, 99(6), 1033–1040. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21191
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stroupe, D., & Windschitl, M. (2015). Supporting ambitious instruction by beginning teachers with specialized tools and practices. In J. Luft & S. Dubois (Eds.), Newly hired teachers of science: A better beginning (pp. 181–196). Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Wendell, K. B., Swenson, J. E. S., & Dalvi, T. S. (2019). Epistemological framing and novice elementary teachers’ approaches to learning and teaching engineering design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(7), 956–982. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2014a). Teaching practice set: Eliciting students’ ideas and adapting instruction. Tools for Ambitious Science Teaching. http://ambitiousscienceteaching.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Primer-Eliciting-Students-Ideas.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2014b). Teaching practice set: Pressing for evidence-based explanations. Tools for Ambitious Science Teaching. http://ambitiousscienceteaching.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Primer-Pressing-for-Explanations.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2014c). Teaching practice set: Supporting on-going changes in student thinking. Tools for Ambitious Science Teaching. http://uwcoeast.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Primer-Supporting-Changes-in-Thinking.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2018). Ambitious science teaching. Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar