In partnership with the Society of Biology, Royal Society of Chemistry, and Institute of Physics

Model-based inquiry references

Key references in bold.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A. and Duguid, P. (1989). ‘Situated cognition and the culture of learning’. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42. Available online at ifi/ resources/ museumeducation/ situated.html

Bruner, J. S. (1999). The Processes of Education (12th ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cartier, J. L. (2000). Using a modeling approach to explore scientific epistemology with high school biology students. Research report 99-1 for the National Center for Improving Student Learning & Achievement in Mathematics & Science. Available online at

Donnelly, J.F., Buchan, A.S., Jenkins, E.W., Laws, P.M. and Welford, A.G. (1996). Investigations by Order: Policy, curriculum and science teachers’ work under the Education Reform Act. pp.260. Nafferton: Studies in Education

Driver, R., Newton, P. and Osborne, J. (2000). ‘Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms’. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.

Driver, R., Guesne, E., and Tiberghien, A. (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press.

Gilbert, J.K. (1998). Explaining with models. In M.Ratcliffe (Ed.), ASE Guide to Secondary Science Education(pp.159–174). Hatfield: The Association for Science Education.

Gilbert, J.K. (2004). ‘Models and Modelling: Routes to More Authentic Science Education’. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 2(2), 115–130.

Giere, R. N. (1991). Understanding Scientific Reasoning (3rd ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1982). The simulation heuristic. In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. (Eds.), Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp.201-208). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Leach, J. and Scott, P. (2002). 'Designing and evaluating 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.

Millar, R. and Abrahams, I. (2009). 'Practical work: making it more effective'. School Science Review, 91(334), 59-64.

Osborne, J. F. and Patterson, A. (2011). ‘Scientific argument and explanation: A necessary distinction?’ Science Education, 95(4), 627–638

Quintana, C., Reiser, B., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., Kyza, E., Edelson, D. and Soloway, E. (2004). 'A Scaffolding Design Framework for Software to Support Science Inquiry'. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337-386.

Reiser, B., J. (2004). 'Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work'. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304.

Schwartz, D. L. and Bransford, J. D. (1998). 'A Time for Telling'. Cognition and Instruction, 16(4), 475-522.

Solomon, J. (1999). Envisionment in practical work: Helping pupils to imagine concepts while carrying out experiments. In Leach, J. and Paulsen, A. (Eds.), Practical work in science education: Recent research studies(pp.60–74). Roskilde/Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Roskilde University Press/Kluwer.

Windschitl, M., Thompson, J. and Braaten, M. (2008). 'Beyond the scientific method: Model based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations.’ Science Education, 92(5), 941-967.

Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S. and Ross, G. (1976). 'The role of tutoring in problem solving.’  Journal of Child Psychiatry and Psychology, 17(2), 89-100.