The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Appropriating Scientific Discourse: Findings From Language Minority Classrooms
Abstract
We report a study of the effects of a collaborative inquiry approach to science on language minority students' (middle and high school) learning. The emphasis in this approach is on involving the students, most of whom have never studied science before and some of whom have had very little schooling of any kind, in "doing science" in ways that practicing scientists do. The question addressed in this study is, To what extent do students appropriate scientific ways of knowing and reasoning as a result of their participation in collaborative scientific inquiry? The focus of our analysis was on changes in students' conceptual knowledge and use of hypotheses, experiments, and explanations to organize their reasoning in the context of two think aloud problems. In September the students' reasoning was nonanalytic and bound to personal experience. They responded as if they were being asked to answer questions in a reading comprehension task. In contrast, by June they reasoned in terms of a larger explanatory system, used hypotheses to organize and give direction to their reasoning, and demonstrated an awareness of the function of experimentation in producing evidence to evaluate hypotheses.
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
Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815355 · Cited by 35,324
The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change
Kuhn, T. S. (1977) · doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226217239.001.0001 · Cited by 3,861
Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry
Longino, H. E. (1990) · doi:10.1515/9780691209753 · Cited by 3,092
Cited by
SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVIST PERSPECTIVES ON TEACHING AND LEARNING
Palincsar, A. S. (1998) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.345 · Cited by 1,565
Supporting and Promoting Argumentation Discourse in Science Education
Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/03057260208560187 · Cited by 1,161
Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2004_1 · Cited by 1,161
Self-citationScaffolding Complex Learning: The Mechanisms of Structuring and Problematizing Student Work
Reiser, B. J. (2004) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2 · Cited by 1,054
Handbook of Research on Learning and Instruction
(2011) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203839089 · Cited by 916
Metadata
- Authors
- Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Conant, F. R.
- Venue
- Journal of the Learning Sciences
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1992-01
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 61-94
- ISSN
- 1050-8406 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7809
- OpenAlex
- W1965621045
- Cited by
- 500
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 46.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Appropriating Scientific Discourse: Findings From Language Minority Classrooms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327809jls0201_2
- The paper
- Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Conant, F. R. (1992). Appropriating Scientific Discourse: Findings From Language Minority Classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0201_2
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.