In this article we assert a potential research agenda for the teaching and learning of science as inquiry as part of the JRST series on reform in science education. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks of cognitive and sociocultural constructivism, cultural models of meaning, the dialogic function of language, and transformational models of teacher education, we propose that more research is needed in the areas of teachers' beliefs, knowledge, and practices of inquiry-based science, as well as, student learning. Because the ef®cacy of reform efforts rest largely with teachers, their voices need to be included in the design and implementation of inquiry-based curriculum. As we review the literature and pose future research questions, we propose that particular attention be paid to research on inquiry in diverse classrooms, and to modes of inquiry-based instruction that are designed by teachers. ß

This article presents and discusses preliminary research on a new heuristic tool for learning from laboratory activities in secondary science. The tool, called the science writing heuristic, can be used by teachers as a framework from which to design classroom activities. Theoretically, the science writing heuristic represents a bridge between traditional laboratory reports and types of writing that promote personal construction of meaning. Two eighth-grade classes participated in using the science writing heuristic during an 8-week stream study. The teacher and one of the researchers collaboratively developed activities based on the science writing heuristic that the teacher implemented. Nineteen target students were studied in depth. Characteristics of report writing and students' understanding of the nature of science were investigated, using interpretive techniques. There is evidence that use of the science writing heuristic facilitated students to generate meaning from data, make connections among procedures, data, evidence, and claims, and engage in metacognition. Students' vague understandings of the nature of science at the beginning of the study were modified to more complex, rich, and specific understandings. The implications of the study for writing in science classrooms is discussed.

This article explores the history and theoretical paradigms associated with writing to learn in science, including the debate surrounding the teaching of traditional scientific genres that has received attention in Australia and the United Kingdom. It is asserted that unique features of writing in traditional scientific genres, such as experiment, explanation, and report, promote reflection and the production of new knowledge, especially through the formation of meaningful inferences for data. The author presents sample data illustrating the potential for meaningful learning associated with writing in communicative genres, considers the limited potential of creative writing for developing scientific understandings, and recasts a description of scientific genres in light of contemporary classroom practices.

This article explores the history and theoretical paradigms associated with writing to learn in science, including the debate surrounding the teaching of traditional scientific genres that has received attention in Australia and the United Kingdom. It is asserted that unique features of writing in traditional scientific genres, such as experiment, explanation, and report, promote reflection and the production of new knowledge, especially through the formation of meaningful inferences for data. The author presents sample data illustrating the potential for meaningful learning associated with writing in communicative genres, considers the limited potential of creative writing for developing scientific understandings, and recasts a description of scientific genres in light of contemporary classroom practices.

The purposes of this study were to (a) investigate how one group of middle school students generated meanings for scientific data and expressed them in writing, and (b) develop a methodology for assessing the relationship between students' written text and their scientific thinking. Previous research on writing to learn has focused on the reformulation of content material supplied by the teacher, rather than authentic inquiry data that provide opportunities for meaningful interpretation. The research design was a content analysis of documents produced in a naturalistic setting. Data analysis focused on the frequency, placement, and purpose of meaningful inferences embedded in the reports, as well as coding for the elaboration, extension, and enhancement of science ideas. Results indicated that many student reports included a minimal number of written inferences, expressing only vague meanings for the data. However, some students integrated inference and data, using inference to (a) explain specific meanings for data points in context, and (b) pose new hypotheses to explain data. An analysis of expansion characteristics revealed that some students were able to elaborate richly upon their initial ideas through the use of language, thereby generating new meaning for the investigations. © 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 36: 1044-1061, 1999 This study describes the scientific writing, including the expression of data and its meaning, of middle school students involved in a summer science camp and presents a method of data analysis to interpret children's science writing. The generative learning theory, formulated for science education by Osborne and Wittrock (1983), asserts that knowledge is constructed when learners selectively attend to new sensory information, compare it to knowledge stored in long term memory, and then generate new meanings for the information in light of what already is known. Writing has the potential to foster the generation of knowledge by actively translating new meanings into verbal symbols. Previous research studies on writing to learn in science have primarily focused on writing as a means for comprehension and retention of science concepts determined by the teacher (Rivard, 1994). Few studies to date have dealt with writing to learn during more authentic science experiences, such as inquiry projects where students may be collecting and interpreting original data. When students have the opportunity to interpret their data based on contextualized knowledge of the investigation, they may be able to construct written expressions that link data with potential explanations.Scardamalia and Bereiter posed the following important question about development of JOURNAL

No abstract

No abstract

In this investigation, three classes of ninth‐grade general science students participated in a collaborative report‐writing intervention. The purpose of this portion of the study was to evaluate students' collaboratively written laboratory reports for evidence of the use of scientific reasoning skills and to document qualitative changes in reasoning skill use over time. The participants in the study were 6 ninth‐grade students, representing three collaborative writing pairs. During the intervention, students wrote 10 laboratory reports over a 4.5‐month period. The author and classroom teacher designed report guideline prompts to scaffold students in the use of relevant scientific reasoning skills. The results indicated that students used reasoning skills to assess their current models of scientific understanding, make observations, interpret the meaning of results, and generate new models based on their data and relevant information. Participants showed the most improvement in writing that reflected the reasoning skills of (a) selecting and processing textbook passages, (b) drawing conclusions and formulating models, and (c) comparing/contrasting. Over time, participants improved their ability to compose explanations that represented a synthesis of prior knowledge, activity observations, and other sources of information. Collaborative writing encouraged students to construct their own understandings of science concepts by creating an environment in which thinking, reasoning, and discussion were valued.