Patrice Potvin, Lucian Nenciovici, Guillaume Malenfant-Robichaud, Françoise Thibault, Ousmane Sy, Mohamed Amine Mahhou, A. Bernard, Geneviève Allaire-Duquette, J. Sarrasin, Lorie-Marlène Brault Foisy, Nancy Brouillette, Audrey-Anne St-Aubin, Patrick Charland, Steve Masson, Martin Riopel, Chin-Chung Tsai, Michel Bélanger, Pierre Chastenay
{"title":"科学学习中概念变化的模型:在主要期刊上发表的文章支持下建立详尽的清单","authors":"Patrice Potvin, Lucian Nenciovici, Guillaume Malenfant-Robichaud, Françoise Thibault, Ousmane Sy, Mohamed Amine Mahhou, A. Bernard, Geneviève Allaire-Duquette, J. Sarrasin, Lorie-Marlène Brault Foisy, Nancy Brouillette, Audrey-Anne St-Aubin, Patrick Charland, Steve Masson, Martin Riopel, Chin-Chung Tsai, Michel Bélanger, Pierre Chastenay","doi":"10.1080/03057267.2020.1744796","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT In this article, we propose an analysis of the state of, and trends in, the field of conceptual change research in science education through the lens of its models. Using a quantitative approach, we reviewed all conceptual change articles (n = 245) published in five major journals in the field of science education in search of the support that their authors give to conceptual change models (CC models). We looked for support in the form of explicit or implicit mentions, favourable and unfavourable position statements and empirical confirmations and refutations. The results present a thorough description of all types of support, as well as their evolution from the early days of the field to today. We also propose a hierarchical list of the 86 CC models that we have recorded, appearing in decreasing order by the support they received from the literature. General comments are formulated in order to provide an interpretation of the field and its evolution.","PeriodicalId":49262,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Science Education","volume":"56 1","pages":"157 - 211"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2020.1744796","citationCount":"26","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Models of conceptual change in science learning: establishing an exhaustive inventory based on support given by articles published in major journals\",\"authors\":\"Patrice Potvin, Lucian Nenciovici, Guillaume Malenfant-Robichaud, Françoise Thibault, Ousmane Sy, Mohamed Amine Mahhou, A. Bernard, Geneviève Allaire-Duquette, J. Sarrasin, Lorie-Marlène Brault Foisy, Nancy Brouillette, Audrey-Anne St-Aubin, Patrick Charland, Steve Masson, Martin Riopel, Chin-Chung Tsai, Michel Bélanger, Pierre Chastenay\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03057267.2020.1744796\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT In this article, we propose an analysis of the state of, and trends in, the field of conceptual change research in science education through the lens of its models. Using a quantitative approach, we reviewed all conceptual change articles (n = 245) published in five major journals in the field of science education in search of the support that their authors give to conceptual change models (CC models). We looked for support in the form of explicit or implicit mentions, favourable and unfavourable position statements and empirical confirmations and refutations. The results present a thorough description of all types of support, as well as their evolution from the early days of the field to today. We also propose a hierarchical list of the 86 CC models that we have recorded, appearing in decreasing order by the support they received from the literature. General comments are formulated in order to provide an interpretation of the field and its evolution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":49262,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Science Education\",\"volume\":\"56 1\",\"pages\":\"157 - 211\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-04-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/03057267.2020.1744796\",\"citationCount\":\"26\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Science Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1744796\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Science Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1744796","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Models of conceptual change in science learning: establishing an exhaustive inventory based on support given by articles published in major journals
ABSTRACT In this article, we propose an analysis of the state of, and trends in, the field of conceptual change research in science education through the lens of its models. Using a quantitative approach, we reviewed all conceptual change articles (n = 245) published in five major journals in the field of science education in search of the support that their authors give to conceptual change models (CC models). We looked for support in the form of explicit or implicit mentions, favourable and unfavourable position statements and empirical confirmations and refutations. The results present a thorough description of all types of support, as well as their evolution from the early days of the field to today. We also propose a hierarchical list of the 86 CC models that we have recorded, appearing in decreasing order by the support they received from the literature. General comments are formulated in order to provide an interpretation of the field and its evolution.
期刊介绍:
The central aim of Studies in Science Education is to publish review articles of the highest quality which provide analytical syntheses of research into key topics and issues in science education. In addressing this aim, the Editor and Editorial Advisory Board, are guided by a commitment to:
maintaining and developing the highest standards of scholarship associated with the journal;
publishing articles from as wide a range of authors as possible, in relation both to professional background and country of origin;
publishing articles which serve both to consolidate and reflect upon existing fields of study and to promote new areas for research activity.
Studies in Science Education will be of interest to all those involved in science education including: science education researchers, doctoral and masters students; science teachers at elementary, high school and university levels; science education policy makers; science education curriculum developers and text book writers.
Articles featured in Studies in Science Education have been made available either following invitation from the Editor or through potential contributors offering pieces. Given the substantial nature of the review articles, the Editor is willing to give informal feedback on the suitability of proposals though all contributions, whether invited or not, are subject to full peer review. A limited number of books of special interest and concern to those involved in science education are normally reviewed in each volume.