Opportunities and hindrances for promoting interdisciplinary learning in schools

References

• Acosta, A., & Slotta, J. (2018). Ckbiology: An active learning curriculum design for secondary biology. Frontiers in Education. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2018.00052
   Google Scholar
• Ahmed, W. (2018). The polymath: Unlocking the power of human versatility. John Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• Alexander, R. J. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.). Dialogos.
   Google Scholar
• Ariely, M., Livnat, Z., & Yarden, A. (2019). Analyzing the Language of an Adapted Primary Literature Article: Towards a Disciplinary Approach of Science Teaching Using Texts. Science & Education, 28(1–2), 63–85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. ( M.C. Emerson & M. Holquist Trans.). University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Barzilai, S., & Chinn, C. A. (2018). On the goals of epistemic education: Promoting apt epistemic performance. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 27(3), 353–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2017.1392968
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bateson, G. (1978). Steps to an ecology of mind: Collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution and epistemology. Paladin.
   Google Scholar
• Bateson, G. (1980). Mind and nature: A necessary unity. Fontana.
   Google Scholar
• Bateson, M. C. (1989). Composing a life. Atlantic Monthly Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ben-David, J. (1971). The scientist’s role in society. Prentice-Hall.
   Google Scholar
• Boaler, J. (2002). Exploring the nature of mathematical activity: Using theory, research and working hypotheses to broaden conceptions of mathematics knowing. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 51(1–2), 3–21.‏. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022468022549
   Google Scholar
• Boix Mansilla, V., & Duraising, E. D. (2007). Targeted assessment of students’ interdisciplinary work: An empirically grounded framework proposed. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(2), 215–237. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2007.0008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brewer, D. (2011). The Encyclopédie: Innovation and legacy. In J. Fowler (Ed.), New essays on Diderot (pp. 47–58). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.2307/1176008
   Google Scholar
• Burbules, N. C., & Bruce, B. C. (2001). Theory and research on teaching as dialogue. In V. Richardson & A. E. R. Association (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (4th ed., Vol. 4). American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• Burbules, N., & Rice. (1991). Dialogue across differences: Continuing the conversation. Harvard Educational Review, 61(4), 393–416.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burkhardt, H., & Schoenfeld, A. (2021). Not just “implementation”: The synergy of research and practice in an engineering research approach to educational design and development. ZDM – Mathematics Education, 53(5), 991–1005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-020-01208-z
   Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Supporting argumentation through students’ questions: Case studies in science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(2), 230–284. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903530036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175–218. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Condorcet, J.-A.-N. (1795/1955, June). Sketch for a historical picture of the progress of the human mind ( Barraclough Trans.). Noonday Press.
   Google Scholar
• Copleston, F. (1950). A history of philosophy, vol. II: Medieval philosophy. Bantam Doubleday Dell.
   Google Scholar
• Cuoco, A., Goldenberg, E. P., & Mark, J. (1996). Habits of mind: An organizing principle for mathematics curricula. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15(4), 375–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0732-3123(96)90023-1
   Google Scholar
• Daniel, M. F. (2007). Epistemological and educational presuppositions of P4C: From critical dialogue to dialogical critical thinking. Gifted Educational International, 22(2–3), 135–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/026142940702200305
   Google Scholar
• Derrida, J. (1982). Difference. In J. Derrida (Ed.), Margins of philosophy (pp. 1–17). University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Derry, S. J., Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R., Koschmann, T., Lemke, J. L., Sherin, M. G., & Sherin, B. L. (2010). Conducting video research in the learning sciences: Guidance on selection, analysis, technology, and ethics. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 3–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903452884
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy in education. Southern Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:3<287:AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-A
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ernest, P. (2020). Policy debates in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 658–663). Springer International Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Felbrich, A., Kaiser, G., & Schmotz, C. (2012). The cultural dimension of beliefs: An investigation of future primary teachers’ epistemological beliefs concerning the nature of mathematics in 15 countries. International Journal on Mathematics Education, 44(3), 355–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-012-0418-x
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1966). The disappearance of man.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison.
   Google Scholar
• Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. China lectures. Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman, S. R., Britt, M. A., Brown, W., Cribb, G., George, M. A., Greenleaf, C., Lee, C. D., Shanahan, C., Project, R. (2016). Disciplinary literacies and learning to read for understanding: A conceptual framework for disciplinary literacy. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 219–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1168741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2020). Acting with epistemic agency: Characterizing student critique during argumentation discussions. Science Education, 104(6), 953–982. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21592
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gravemeijer, K., & Doorman, M. (1999). Context problems in realistic mathematics education: A calculus course as an example. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39(1–3), 111–129.‏. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003749919816
   Google Scholar
• Grinath, A. S., & Southerland, S. A. (2019). Applying the ambitious science teaching framework in undergraduate biology: Responsive talk moves that support explanatory rigor. Science Education, 103(1), 92–122. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21484
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanna. (2000). Proof, explanation and exploration: An overview. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 44, 5–23.
   Google Scholar
• Hardman, M., & Delafield, B. (2010). Philosophy for children as Dialogic teaching. In K. Littleton & C. Howe (Eds.), Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 149–164). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (1998). Students’ Proof Schemes: Results from Exploratory Studies, In A. H. Schoenfeld, J. Kaput, & E. Dubinsky (Eds.), Research in Collegiate Mathematics Education III (Vol. 7, pp. 234–283). AMS, CBMS: Issues in Mathematics Education.
   Google Scholar
• Harel, G., & Sowder, L. (2007). Toward a comprehensive perspective on proof. In F. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 805–842). National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
   Google Scholar
• Hennessy, S., Rojas-Drummond, S., Higham, R., Marquez, A. M., Maine, F., Rios, R. M., García-Carrión, R., Torreblanca, O., Barrera, M. J. (2016). Developing a coding scheme for analysing classroom dialogue across educational contexts. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 9, 16–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hufferd-Ackles, K., Fuson, K. C., & Sherin, M. G. (2004). Describing levels and components of a math-talk learning community. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 35(2), 81–116.‏. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034933
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ivanitskaya, L., Clark, D., Montgomery, G., & Primeau, R. (2002). Interdisciplinary learning: Process and outcomes. Innovative Higher Education, 27(2), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021105309984
   Google Scholar
• James, J. (1995). The music of the spheres: Music, science and the natural order of the universe. Springer Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Jaworski, B. (2020). Communities of inquiry in mathematics education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of mathematics education (pp. 102–104). Springer Dordrecht.
   Google Scholar
• Kali, Y. (2021). Guiding frameworks for the design of inquiry learning environments. In C. Chinn, R. G. Duncan, & S. R. Goldman (Eds.), International handbook on inquiry and learning (pp. 39–59). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kidron, A., & Kali, Y. (2015). Boundary breaking for interdisciplinary learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23(1063519), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.26496
   Google Scholar
• Kidron, A., & Kali, Y. (2024). Promoting interdisciplinary understanding in asynchronous online higher education courses: A learning communities approach. Instructional Science, 52(1), 139–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09635-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kizel, A. (2016). From laboratory to praxis: Communities of philosophical inquiry as a Model of (and for) Social Activism. Childhood & Philosophy, 12(25), 497–517.
   Google Scholar
• Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory and practice. Wayne State University.
   Google Scholar
• Koichu, B., Schwarz, B. B., Heyd-Metsuyanim, E., Tabach, M., & Yarden, A. (2022). Interdisciplinary processes in school discussions. Learning, Culture & Social Interaction, 37, 100657. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2022.100657
   Google Scholar
• Krabbe, E. C. W. (2006). Dialogue Logic. In D. M. Gabbay & J. Woods (Eds.), Handbook of the History of Logic), Handbook of the History of Logic (Vol. 7, pp. 665–704). Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lattuca, L. R., Voight, L. J., & Fath, K. Q. (2004). Does interdisciplinarity promote learning? Theoretical support and researchable questions. Review of Higher Education, 28(1), 23–48. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2004.0028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laursen, S. L., & Rasmussen, C. (2019). I on the prize: Inquiry approaches in undergraduate mathematics. International Journal of Research in Undergraduate Mathematics Education, 5(1), 129–146.‏. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40753-019-00085-6
   Google Scholar
• Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, H.-S., Linn, M. C., Varma, K., & Liu, O. L. (2010). How do technology-enhanced inquiry science units impact classroom learning? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(1), 71–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20304
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning and values. Ablex.
   Google Scholar
• Lester, F. K., & Cai, J. (2016). Can mathematical problem solving be taught? Preliminary answers from 30 years of research. In P. Felmer, E. Pehkonen, & J. Kilpatrick (Eds.), Posing and solving mathematical problems: Advances and new perspectives (pp. 117–135). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28023-3_8.
   Google Scholar
• Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• MacIntosh, J. J., & Anstey, P. (2022). Robert Boyle. In E. N. Zalta & U. Nodelman (Eds.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Library of Congress Catalog.
   Google Scholar
• Marco, N., Palatnik, A., & Schwarz, B. B. (2021). Mind the gaps: Gap-filling in proving activities. For the Learning of Mathematics, 41(2), 21–25.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the Development of Children’s thinking: A sociocultural approach. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mercer, N., Wegerif, R., & Dawes, L. (1999). Children’s talk and the development of reasoning in the classroom. British Educational Research Journal, 25(1), 95–111.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer, M. (2010). Abduction—A logical view for investigating and initiating processes of discovering mathematical coherences. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 74(2), 185–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9233-x
   Web of Science ®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 Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for teaching mathematics. Author.
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas.
   Google Scholar
• Nikitina, S. (2005). Pathways of interdisciplinary cognition. Cognition and Instruction, 23(3), 389–425. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2303_3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nishiyama, K. (2019). Rethinking consensus in the community of philosophical inquiry: A research agenda. Childhood & Philosophy, 15, 83–97.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224–240. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Connor, C., Michaels, S., & Chapin, S. (2015). “Scaling down” to explore the role of talk in learning: From district intervention to controlled classroom study. In L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan and S. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing Intelligence Through Academic Talk and Dialogue (111–126.‏). AREA Books publications.
   Google Scholar
• O’Halloran, K. L. (1998). Classroom discourse in mathematics: A multisemiotic analysis. Linguistics and Education, 10(3), 359–388. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0898-5898(99)00013-3
   Google Scholar
• Ochs, E., & Jacoby, S. (1997). Down to the wire: The cultural clock of physicists and the discourse of consensus. Language in Society, 26(4), 479–506. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500021023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., Rafanelli, S., & Kind, P. (2018). Toward a more coherent model for science education than the crosscutting concepts of the next generation science standards: The affordances of styles of reasoning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(7), 962–981. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21460
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Österholm, M., & Bergqvist, E. (2013). What is so special about mathematical texts? Analyses of common claims in research literature and of properties of textbooks. International Journal on Mathematics Education, 45(5), 751–763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-013-0522-6
   Google Scholar
• Peters, M. A. & Besley, T. (Eds.). (2021). Biopolitics, conspiracy and the immuno-state: An evolving global politico-genetic complex. In Pandemic education and viral politics (pp. 97–111). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pluta, W. J., Chinn, C. A., & Duncan, R. (2011). Learners’ epistemic criteria for good scientific models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(5), 486–511. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20415
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ringer, F. K. (1967). Higher education in Germany in the Nineteenth Century. Journal of Contemporary History, 2(3), 123–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/002200946700200307
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittle-Johnson, B., & Star, J. R. (2011). The power of comparison in learning and instruction: Learning outcomes supported by different types of comparisons. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 55, 199–225.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students’ scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5–51. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327809JLS1201_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandoval, W. A., & Morrison, K. (2003). High school students’ ideas about theories and theory change after a biological inquiry unit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 369–392. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10081
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Academic Press, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook for research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334–370). MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, B. B., & Baker, M. J. (2016). Dialogue, argumentation and education: History, theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, B. B., & Slakmon, B. (2015). Becoming a questioner in a philosophy class. In R. Wegerif, L. Li, & J. C. Kaufman (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Research on Teaching Thinking (pp. 457–466). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schwarz, B. B., Hershkowitz, R., & Prusak, N. (2010). Argumentation and Mathematics. In C. Howe & K. Littleton (Eds.), Educational Dialogues: Understanding and Promoting Productive Interaction (pp. 115–141). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, P., Ametler, J., Mortimer, E., Gerais, M., & Emberton, J. (2010). Teaching and learning disciplinary knowledge. In C. Howe & K. Littleton (Eds.), Educational dialogues: Understanding and promoting productive interaction (pp. 289–303). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sfard, A. (2008). Thinking as communicating: Human development, the growth of discourses, and mathematizing. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Slakmon, B., & Schwarz, B. B. (2018). An Outline of Assessment in Humanistic Conversations: Definitions, Aims and Design. In R. Wegerif & L. Kerslake (Eds.), Theory on Teaching Thinking: International Perspectives (pp. 134–150). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Spelt, E. J. H., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Luning, P. A., & Mulder, M. (2009). Teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 21(4), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9113-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, A. (1985). Teachers’ conceptions of mathematics and the teaching of problem solving. In E. A. Silver (Ed.), Teaching and learning mathematical problem solving: Multiple research perspectives (pp. 281–294). Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Tsemach, E., Schwarz, B., Israeli, M., & Keinan, O. (2023). Advancing group epistemic practices in the resolution of interdisciplinary societal dilemmas. Dialogic Pedagogy, A119–A148. https://dpj.pitt.edu/ojs/dpj1/article/view/551/274
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Turner, B. (2006). Discipline. Theory, Culture & Society, 23(2–3), 183–197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tytler, R., Prain, V., & Hobbs, L. (2019). Rethinking disciplinary links in interdisciplinary STEM learning: A temporal Model. Research in Science Education, 51(S1), 269–287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-09872-2
   Google Scholar
• Van den Beemt, A., MacLeod, M., Van der Veen, J., Van de Ven, A., van Baalen, S., Klaassen, R., & Boon, M. (2020). Interdisciplinary engineering education: Are view of vision, teaching, and support. Journal of Engineering Education, 109, 508–555.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, M., & Drijvers, P. (2014). Realistic mathematics education. Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education. In S. Lerman (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Mathematics Education (pp. 521–525). Springer Dordrecht.
   Google Scholar
• van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2003). A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wagh, A., Cook-Whitt, K., & Wilensky, U. (2017). Bridging inquiry-based science and constructionism: Exploring the alignment between students tinkering with code of computational models and goals of inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(5), 615–641. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21379
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weber, K. (2004). Traditional instruction in advanced mathematics courses: A case study of one professor’s lectures and proofs in an introductory real analysis course. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 23(2), 115–133.‏. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmathb.2004.03.001
   Google Scholar
• Wegerif, R. B. (2007). Dialogic, education and technology: Expanding the space of learning. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2011). Fostering ambitious pedagogy in novice teachers: The new role of tool supported analyses of student work. Teachers College Record, 113(7), 1311–1360. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811111300702
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarden, A., Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2015). Primary literature. The use of authentic scientific texts in secondary schools. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Zafrani, E., & Yarden, A. (2022). Dialog-constraining institutional logics and their interactional manifestation in the science classroom. Science Education, 106(1), 142–171.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar