The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inquiry in science education: International perspectives
Open accessAbstract
This paper set emerged from an international symposium that aimed to shed light on issues associated with the enactment of inquiry both as means (i.e., inquiry as an instructional approach) and as ends (i.e., inquiry as a learning outcome) in precollege science classrooms. The symposium contributors were charged with providing perspectives from their countries on the following major themes: (a) philosophical and practical conceptions of inquiry in the science curriculum; (b) images of the enactment of inquiry in the curriculum, curricular materials, classroom instruction, and assessment practices; and (c) factors and conditions, internal and external to the educational setting, which facilitate or impede inquiry‐based science education. Another major theme that emerged from the symposium was related to the very conceptions of inquiry teaching. The individual contributions and synthesizing commentaries demonstrate that despite their situatedness and diversity, many themes and issues cut across the represented locales, and serve to show the significance and potential fruitfulness of any discourse regarding inquiry in science education that this paper set might, and we hope will, trigger in the near future. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 88:397–419, 2003; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/sce.10118
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes
Lakatos, I. (1970) · Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139171434.009 · Cited by 4,649
Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: making science accessible to all students
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1601_2 · Cited by 1,394 · cited 1×
“The hallmark of the newer problem-posing (Kortland, 1996), project-based (Duschl & Gitomer, 1997; Krajcik, Czerniak, & Berger, 1998), and technology-supported (di Sessa, 2000; Linn & Hsi, 2000; White & Frederickson, 1998 ) science programs is a commitment to have students track through inquiries and investigations beg…”
BackgroundReforming Science Teaching: What Research Says About Inquiry
Anderson, R. D. (2002) · Journal of Science Teacher Education · doi:10.1023/a:1015171124982 · Cited by 1,140
Cited by
Meta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning: Effects of Guidance
Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654315627366 · Cited by 967
Student-question-based inquiry in science education
Herranen, J., & Aksela, M. (2019) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/03057267.2019.1658059 · Cited by 91
A Proposed Taxonomy of Teaching Models in STEM Education: Robotics as an Example
Zhong, B., Liu, X., Xia, L., & Sun, W. (2022) · Sage Open · doi:10.1177/21582440221099525 · Cited by 44
Instructional Scaffolding: Foundations and Evolving Definition
Belland, B. R. (2017) · Instructional Scaffolding in STEM Education · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02565-0_2 · Cited by 40
Metadata
- Authors
- Abd‐El‐Khalick, F., BouJaoude, S., Duschl, R., Lederman, N. G., Mamlok‐Naaman, R., Hofstein, A., Niaz, M., Treagust, D., & Tuan, H.
- Venue
- Science Education
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-04-06
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 397-419
- ISSN
- 0036-8326 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-237X
- OpenAlex
- W2069440765
- Cited by
- 779
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 54.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.