Bibliography
Course required readings and other critical resources referenced during the course by myself or other students.
* required
Bates, A.W., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, pp. 75-105.
Bleecker, J. (2007). An Analysis of Smartboards: Catalysts for Pedagogical Change? [student assignment] Technology in the Mathematics and Science Classroom. Retrieved from: http://www.chss.sd57.bc.ca/~jbleecker/ETEC533/Papers/Unit_A/bleecker_framing_issues.rtf.
*Bottge, BA, Heinrichs M, Mehta, ZD, Hung, Y. (2002). Weighing the benefits of anchored math instruction for students with disabilities in general education classes. Journal of Special Education, 35, 186-200. (Required but choice from a list.)
*Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992a). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 40(1), 65-80. (I read this one.)
*Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992b). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program, description, and assessment data. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 291-315.
*Confrey, J. (1990). A review of the research on student conceptions in mathematics, science, and programming. Review of research in education, 16, pp. 3-56. Retrieved January 8, 2014, from http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?url=http://www.jstor.org/stable/1167350.
Coulter, B. V., & Bozeman, M. (2013). The Effects of the Integration of Interactive Technology, Specifically the SmartBoard and CPS Clickers on Student Understanding of Scientific processes [masters thesis]. Retrieved from: http://scholarworks.montana.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1/2769/CoulterB0813.pdf?sequence=1.
*Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas and the learning of science. Children’s ideas in science. Retrieved January 8, 2014, from http://staff.science.uva.nl/~joling/vakdidactiek/documenten/driver.pdf.
*Furtak, E. M. (2006). The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching. Science Education, 90(3), 453-467. (required choice; read)
*Hattie, H. & Timperly, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. (required choice; didn’t read)
*Gobert, J., Snyder, J., & Houghton, C. (2002, April). The influence of students’ understanding of models on model-based reasoning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), New Orleans, Louisiana. This is a conference paper.
Gonen, S. (2008). A Study on Student Teachers’ Misconceptions and Scientifically Acceptable Conceptions About Mass and Gravity. J. Sci. Educ. Technol, 17, pp. 70-80. doi: 10.1007/s10956-007-9083-1. Retrieved January 9, 2014, from Academic Search Complete, UBC Library.
*Linn, M., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.
*Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W. & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Sci. Ed., 66, pp. 211–227. doi: 10.1002/sce.373066020.
*Prado, M. M., & Gravoso, R. S. (2011). Improving high school students’ statistical reasoning skills: A case of applying anchored instruction. Asia-Pacific Education Researcher (De La Salle University Manila), 20(1). (Required but choice from list.)
*Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. (1987). A Private Universe [film]. Retrieved January 7, 2014, from http://learner.org/resources/series28.html?pop=yes&pid=9.
*Williams, M. Linn, M.C. Ammon, P. & Gearhart, M. (2004). Learning to teach inquiry science in a technology-based environment: A case study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2), 189-206.
Media Credit:
Gualberto107. (2013). Pencil And Notepad Stock Photo [image]. Freedigitalphotos.net. Retrieved January 18, 2014, from http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/pencil-and-notepad-photo-p181933.