References
[1]. Ausubel, D. (2000). The acquisition and retention of
knowledge a cognitive view. Norwell, MA: Kluwer
Academic Publishers
[2]. Chiapetta, E. L., & Koballa, T. R. (2005). Science
instruction in the middle and secondary schools. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall.
[3]. Gardner, H. (1991). The unschooled mind: How
children think and how schools should teach. New York:
Basic Books.
[4]. Gunstone, R. F. & Mitchell, I. J. (1998). Metacognition
and conceptual change. In Mintzes, J.J., Wandersee, J.H.
& Novak, J.D. (Eds.). Teaching science for understanding:
A human constructivist view. San Diego, CA: Academic
Press.
[5]. Koballa, Jr., T. R., Crawley, F. E., & Shrigley, R. L. (1990).
A summary of science education-1988. Science
Education, 74 (3), 369-381.
[6]. Lederman, N. (1992). Students' and teachers'
conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29,
331-359.
[7]. Linn, M.C. (1992). Science education reform: Building
the research base. Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 29, 821-840.
[8]. Martin, M.O., Mullis, I.V.S., Gonzalez, E.J., &
Chrostowski, S.J. (2004), Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS
International Study Center, Boston College.
[9]. Mintzes J., Wandersee, J., & Novak, J. (2000).
Assessing science understanding: A human constructivist
view (Rev. ed.). San Diego: Academic Press.
[10]. Nakhleh, M. B. (1993). Are our students conceptual
thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers? Proceedings of
Symposium: Lecture and Learning: Are they compatible?
Journal of Chemical Education, 70 (1), 52-55.
[11]. Novak, J.D. (2002). Meaningful learning: The
essential factor for conceptual change in limited or
inappropriate propositional hierarchies leading to
empowerment of learners. Science Education, 86(4),
548-571.
[12]. Pushkin, D.B. (1998). Post-formal thinking and
science education: How and why do we understand
concepts and solve problems? In J. Kinchella (Ed.), Postformal
thinking: Questioning educational psychology
and the education it supports. New York: Garland
Publishers.
[13]. Roehler, L. & Cantlan, D. (1997). Scaffolding: A
powerful tool in social constructivist classrooms. In Hogan,
K. & Pressley, M. (Eds.,. Scaffolding student learning.
Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
[14]. Schreiner C (2006) Exploring a ROSE-garden.
Norwegian Youth's Orientations Towards Science - Seen
as Signs of Late Modern Identities. Doctoral thesis,
University of Oslo, Norway.
[15]. Schreiner C, Sjøberg S (2004) Sowing the seeds of
ROSE. Background, rationale, questionnaire development
and data collection for ROSE (Relevance of Science
Education) - a comparative study of students' views of
science and science education. Acta Didactica, 4. Oslo,
Norway: University of Oslo Department of Teacher
Education and School Development.
[16]. Trowbridge, L. W., Bybee, R.W., & Powell, J.C. (2004).
Teaching secondary school science; Strategies for developing scientific literacy, Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall, Inc.
