Referencias bibliográficas

Abd-El-Khalick, F. y Lederman, N. G. (2000). “Improving science teachers’ conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature”, International Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-702. [ Links ]

Abell, S.K. y Lederman, N.G. (2006a). Handbook of research on science education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (en prensa). [ Links ]

Anderson, R. D. y Helms, J. V. (2001). “The ideal standards and reality of school: Needed research”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 3-16. [ Links ]

Abell, S.K. y Lederman, N.G. (2006b). “Chapter 1. Introduction”, en S.K. Abell y N.G. Lederman (eds.), Handbook of research on science education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum (en prensa). [ Links ]

Baumert, J. et al. (eds). (2002). PISA 2000: Die Länder der Bundesrepublik Deutschland im Vergleich [PISA 2000: Comparing the German federal states], Opladen: Leske & Budrich, pp. 11-38. [ Links ]

Beaton, A. E. et al. (1996). Science achievement in the middle school years. IEA’s Third International Mathematics and Science Study, Chestnut Hill, MA: Boston College. [ Links ]

Beeth, M. et al. (2003). “Quality development projects in science education”, en D. Psillos et al. (eds.), Science education research in the knowledge based society, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 447-457. [ Links ]

Bliss, J. (1995). “Piaget and after: The case of learning science”, Studies in Science Education, 25, 139-172. [ Links ]

Bybee, R.W. (1997). “Towards an understanding of scientific literacy”, en W. Gräber y K. Bolte (eds.), Scientific literacy, Kiel: IPN-Leibniz-Institute for Science Education, pp. 37-68. [ Links ]

Cobb, P. et al. (2003). “Design experiments in education research”, Educational Researcher, 32, 1, 9-13. [ Links ]

Dahncke, H. et al. (2001). “Science education versus science in the academy: Questions-discussions-perspectives”, en H. Behrendt, et al. (eds.), Research in science education. Past, present, and future, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 43-48. [ Links ]

Driver, R. y Easley, J. A. (1978). “Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students”, Studies in Science Education, 5, 61-84. [ Links ]

Driver, R. y Erickson, G. L. (1983). “Theories-in-action: Some theoretical and empirical issues in the study of students’ conceptual frameworks in science”, Studies in Science Education, 10, 37-60. [ Links ]

Duit, R. (2006). Bibliography STCSE-Teachers’ and Students’ Conceptions and Science Education, Kiel: IPN-Leibniz Institute for Science Education (http://www.ipn.uni-kiel.de/aktuell/stcse/stcse.html). [ Links ]

Duit, R. y Tibergien, A. (2005). “Proposal for a series: ESERA - Science Education Research Letters, occasional paper, presentado en la Biannual Meeting of European Science Education Research Association (ESERA), Barcelona, agosto. [ Links ]

Duit, R., Gropengießer, H. y Kattmann, U. (2005). “Towards science education research that is relevant for improving practice: The model of educational reconstruction”, en H.E. Fischer (ed.), Developing standards in research on science education, Londres: Taylor & Francis, pp. 1-9. [ Links ]

Duit, R. et al. (2005). “Potential of video studies in research on teaching and learning science”, en R. Pintó y D. Couso (eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International ESERA Conference on Constributions of Research to Enhancing Students’ Interests in Learning Science. Barcelona: UAB, pp. 829-842. [ Links ]

Duit, R.; Komorek, M. y Müller, C. T. (2004). Fachdidaktisches Denken [Subject related educational thinking], occasional paper, Kiel: IPN-Leibniz-Institute for Science Education. [ Links ]

Duit, R. y Treagust, D. F. (2003). “Conceptual change: a powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning”, International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 671-688. [ Links ]

Duit, R. y Treagust, D. (1998). “Learning in science: From behaviourisms towards social constructivism and beyond”, en B. Fraser y K. Tobin (eds.) International Handbook of Science Education, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer, pp. 3-25. [ Links ]

Duit, R.; Komorek, M. y Wilbers, J. (1997). “Studies on educational reconstruction of chaos theory”, Research in Science Education, 27, 1997, 339-357. [ Links ]

Fensham, P. (2000). “Providing suitable content in the ‘science for all’ curriculum”, en R. Millar, J. Leach, y J. Osborne (eds.), Improving science education, Buckinham, UK: Open University Press, pp. 147-164. [ Links ]

Fensham, P. (2001). “Science content as problematic: Issues for research”, en H. Behrendt, et al. (eds.) Research in science education. Past, present, and future, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 27-41. [ Links ]

Fensham, P. (2004). Defining an identity: The evolution of science education as a field of research, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. [ Links ]

Fernsham, P.; Gunstone, R. y White, R. (eds.) (1994). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning, Londres, UK: Falmer. [ Links ]

Fischer, H.E. et al. (2005). “Framework for empirical research on science teaching and learning”, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 309-349. [ Links ]

Fraser, B. y Tobin, K. (eds.) (1998). International handbook of science education, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. [ Links ]

Gabel, D. (ed.) (1994). Handbook of research on science teaching and learning, Nueva York: Macmillan Publishing Company. [ Links ]

Gess-Newsome, J. y Lederman, N. (eds.) (1999). Examining pedagogical content knowledge, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. [ Links ]

Gibbons, M. et al. (1994). The new production of knowledge. The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies, Londres: Sage. [ Links ]

Heimann, P.; Otto, G. y Schulz, W. (1969). Unterricht, Analyse und Planung [Instruction-analysis and planning], 4^a ed., Hannover: Schroedel. [ Links ]

Hopman, S. y Riquarts, K. (eds). (1995). Didaktik and/or curriculum, Kiel: IPN-Leibniz-Institute for Science Education. [ Links ]

Jenkins, E. (2001). “Research in science education in Europe: Retrospect and prospect”, en H. Behrendt et al. (eds.) Research in science education. Past, present, and future, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 17-26. [ Links ]

Kaestle, C.F. (1993). “The awful reputation of educational research”, Educational Researcher, 22(1), 23-31. [ Links ]

Kattmann, U. (2001). “Aquatics, flyers, creepers and terrestrials-students’ conceptions of animal classification”, Journal of Biological Education, 35, 3, 141-147. [ Links ]

Kattmann, U. (2004). “Unterrichtsreflexion im Rahmen der Didaktischen Rekonstruktion” [“Thinking about instruction within the framework of Educational Reconstruction”], Das Seminar, 10 (3), 40-51. [ Links ]

Kattmann, U. et al. (1995). “A model of educational reconstruction”, trabajo presentado en Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST), San Francisco, abril. [ Links ]

Klafki, W. (1969). “Didaktische Analyse als Kern der Unterrichtsvorbereitung” [“Educational analysis as the kernel of planning instruction”], en H. Roth y A. Blumental (eds.), Auswahl, Didaktische Analyse, 10^a ed., Hannover: Schroedel. [ Links ]

Komorek, M.; Wendorff y Duit, R. (2002). “Expertenbefragung zum Bildungswert der nichtlinearen Physik” [“Experts’ views of the educational significance of non-linear physics”], Zeitschrift für Didaktik der Naturwissenschaften, 8, 33-51. [ Links ]

Komorek, M. y Duit, R. (2004). “The teaching experiment as a powerful method to develop and evaluate teaching and learning sequences in the domain of non-linear systems”, International Journal of Science Education, 26, 619-633. [ Links ]

KVFF (1998). Fachdidaktik in Forschung und Lehre [Domain specific Didaktik” in research and teaching], Kiel: IPN-Leibniz-Institute for Science Education. [ Links ]

Leach, J. y Scott, P. (2002). “Designing and evaluation science teaching sequences: An approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social constructivist perspective on learning”, Studies in Science Education, 38: 115-142. [ Links ]

Lijnse, P. (1995). “‘Developmental research’ as a way to an empirically based ‘didactical structure’ of science”, Science Education, 79, 189-199. [ Links ]

McComas, W. F. (ed.) (1998). The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. [ Links ]

Millar, R. (2003). “What can we reasonably expect of research in science education?”, en D. Psillos et al. (eds.) Science education research in the knowledge based society, Dordrecht: Kluwer, pp. 3-8. [ Links ]

OECD-PISA (2005). Learning for tomorrow’s world. First results from PISA 2003, París: OCDE (http://www.pisa.oecd.org). [ Links ]

Osborne, J. C. et al. (2003). “What ‘ideas-about-science’ should be taught in school science? A Delphi study of the expert community”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching 40(7), 692-720. [ Links ]

Oser, F.K. y Patry, J.L. (1994). “Sichtstrukturen und Basismodelle des Unterrichts: Über den Zusammenhang von Lehren und Lernen unter dem Gesichtspunkt psychologischer Lernverläufe”, en R. Olechowski y B. Rollet (eds.), Theorie und Praxis-Aspekte empirisch pädagogischer Forschung-qualitative und quantitative Methoden, Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp. 138-146. [ Links ]

Phillips, D.C. (ed.) (2000). Constructivism in education: Opinions and second opinions on controversial issues, Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press. [ Links ]

Psillos, D. (2001). “Science education researchers and research in transition: Issues and policies”, en H. Behrendt et al. (eds.) Research in science education. Past, present, and future, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 11-16. [ Links ]

Roth, K. J. et al. (2001). “Uses of video-based technology and conceptual tools in research: the case of the TIMSS-R Video Study’”, trabajo presentado en Annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), St. Louis, MO. [ Links ]

Roth, W. M. et al. (2002). “Lessons on and from the Dihybrid Cross: An activity - theoretical study of learning in co-teaching”, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3): 253-282. [ Links ]

Schnotz, W.; Vosniadou, S. y Carretero, M. (eds.) (1999). New perspectives on conceptual change, Amsterdam: Pergamon. [ Links ]

Shulman, L. S. (1987). “Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform”, Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-21. [ Links ]

Steffe, L. y Gale, J. (eds.) (1995). Constructivism in education, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. [ Links ]

Stigler, J.W. et al. (1999). The TIMSS Videotape Classroom Study. Methods and findings from an exploratory research project on eighth-grade mathematics instruction in Germany, Japan and the United States, Washington, DC: Department of Education. [ Links ]

Tobin, K. (ed.) (1993). The practice of constructivism in science education, Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science. [ Links ]

Vosniadou, S. (1996). “Towards a revised cognitive psychology for new advances in learning and instruction”, Learning and Instruction, 6, 95-109. [ Links ]

West, L. y Staub, F. C. (2003). Content-focused coaching: Transforming mathematics lessons, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann/Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh. [ Links ]

Westbury, L.; Hopmann, S. y Riquarts, K. (eds.) (2000). Teaching as reflective practice. The German Didaktik tradition, Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum. [ Links ]

White, R. (2001). “The revolution in research on science teaching”, en V. Richardson (ed.) Handbook of research on teaching, 4^a ed., Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association, pp. 457-472. [ Links ]

Widodo, A. (2004). Constructivist oriented lessons: The learning environment and the teaching sequences, Frankfurt: Peter Lang. [ Links ]

Wright, E. (1993). “The irrelevancy of science education research: perception or reality?”, NARST News, 35(1), 1-2. [ Links ]