一、中文部分
吳嘉麗(2004):化學、醫藥與社會。台北市:中國化學會, 223-228。
邱美虹(1993):科學教科書與概念改變。科學教育月刊,第163期, 2-8。
邱美虹、陳英嫻(1995)︰月相盈虧之概念改變。師大學報,第40期, 509-548。邱美虹(2000)︰概念改變研究的省思與啟示。科學教育學刊,第8卷,第1期, 1-34。陳英娥(2002):教室中的數學論證之研究。教育研究資訊,第十卷,第六期,111-132。胡瑞萍與林陳涌(2002):寫作與科學學習。科學教育月刊,第253期, 2-18。
第一次全國科學教育會議公聽會提案資料(2002)。
舒煒光、邱仁宗 (1998):當代西方科學哲學述評。台北市:水牛出版社。
路君約、盧欽銘、及歐滄和(1994):多因素性向測驗。台北市:中國行為科學社股份有限公司。
趙文敏(1988):拓樸學導論。台北市:九章出版社。
二、英文部分
American heritage dictionary. (2001).). New York: Random House, Inc.
Anderson, R. C., Chinn, C., Chang, J., Waggoner, M., & Yi, H. (1997). On the logical integrity of children''s arguments. Cognition and Instruction, 15(2), 135-167.
Anderson, R. D., Kahl, S. R., Glass, G. V., & Smith, M. L. (1983). Science education: A meta-analysis of major questions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(5), 379-385.
Angeles, P. A. (1999). The harper collins dictionary of philosophy.New York: Harper Collins.
Angell, R. B. (1964). Reasoning and logic.New York: Appleton Century Crofts.
Applebee, A. N. (1991). Informal reasoning and writing instruction. In J. F. Voss, D. Perkins & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 401-414). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Baron, J. (1988). Thinking and deciding.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Billig, M. (1987). Arguing and thinking: A rhetorical approach to social psychology.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bloom, B. S. (1954). Taxonomy of educational objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive domail.New York: Longmans, Green & Co.
Burgess, T., & Swann, J. (2003). The rejectability of karl popper: Why popper''s ideas have had so little influence on social practice. Higher Education Review, 35(2), 57-65.
Buskes, G., & van, R., Arnoud. (1997). Topological spaces: From distance to neighborhood.New York: Springer-Verlag.
Carey, S. (1985). Cinceptual change in childhood.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Carey, S. (1986). Cognitive science and science education. American Psychologist, 41, 1123-1130.
Chi, M. T. H. (1992). Conceptual change within and across ontological categories: Examples from learning and discovery in science. In R. Giere (Ed.), Models of science: Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (pp. 129-186). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Chi, M. T. H. (1993). Analyzing verbal data to represent knowledge: A practical guide.Unpublished manuscript, Pittsburgh, PA.
Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Creativity: Shifting across ontological categories flexibly. In T. B. Ward, S. M. Smith & J. Vaid (Eds.), Conceptual structures and processes: Emergence, discovery and change (pp. 209-234). Washington, D.C: American Psychological Association.
Chi, M. T. H., Slotta, J. D., & de Leeuw, N. (1994). From things to processes: A theory of conceptual change for learning science concepts. Learning and Instruction, 4, 27-43.
Clement, J. (1991). Nonformal reasoning in experts and in science students: The use of analogies, extreme cases, and physical intuition. In J. F. Voss, D. Perkins & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 345-362). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Eralbaum Associates.
Coles, M. J., & Robinson, W. D. (1989). Teaching thinking: A survey of programmes in education.Bristol: The Bristol Press.
Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes'' error: Emotion, reason and the human brain.New York: G. P. Putnam''s Sons.
Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
Duschal, A. R., & Hamilton, J. R. (1992). Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology, and educational theory and practice.New York: State University of New York.
Emeren, F. H. V. (1995). A world of difference: The rich state of argumentation theory. Informal Logic, 17(2), 144-158.
Engle, A. R., & Conant, R. C. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20(4), 399-483.
Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational researcher, 18(3), 4-10.
Fellows, N. J. (1994). A window into thinking: Using student writing to understand conceptual change in science learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 985-1001.
Fimenez-Aleixandre, M.-P. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1171-1190.
Fisher, A. (1988). The logic of real arguments.Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
Gagne, R. M. (1974). The conditions of learning (2nd ed. ed.). New York: Holt, Rinerhart & Winston.
Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
Gentner, D., & Grudin, J. (1985). The evolution of mental metaphors in psychology: A ninety-year retrospective. American Psychologist, 40, 181-192.
Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93-104.
Glynn, S. M., Yeany, R. H., & Britton, B. K. (1991). A constructive view of learning science. In S. M. Glynn, R. H. Yeany & B. K. Britton (Eds.), The psychology of learning science.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V., & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28(2), 117-159.
Halpern, D. F. (1996). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of natural science:Prentice Hall.
Herrenkohl, L. R., Palincsar, A. S., DeWater, L. S., & Kawasaki, K. (1999). Developing scientific communities in classroom: A sociocognitive approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3/4), 451-494.
Hewson, P. W. (1981). A conceptual change approach to learn science. European Journal of Science Education, 3, 383-396.
Hewson, P. W. (1982). A case study of conceptual change in special relativity: The influence of prior knowledge in learning. European Journal of Science Education, 4, 61-78.
Hewson, P. W., Beeth, M. E., & Thorley, N. R. (1998). Teaching for conceptual change. In K. G. Tobin & B. J. Fraser (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 199-218). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
Hogam, K. (1999). Sociocognitiveroles in science group discourse. International Journal of Science Education, 21(8), 855-882.
Holliday, W. G., Yore, L. D., & Alvermann, D. E. (1994). The reading-science learning-writing connection: Breakthroughs, barriers, and promises. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 877-893.
Keil, F. C. (1979). Semantic and conceptual development: An ontological perspective.Cambridge, MA: Harverd University Press.
Keil, F. C. (1989). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Keil, F. C. (1999). Conceptual change. In R. A. Wilson & F. C. Keil (Eds.), The mit encyclopedia of cognitive sciences.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kelly, G. J., & Chen, C. (1999). The sound of music: Constructing science as sociocultural practice through oral and written discourse. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 883-915.
Kelly, G. J., & Takao, A. (2002). Epistemic levels in argument: An analysis of university oceanography students'' use of evidence in writing. Science Education, 86, 314-342.
Keys, W. C. (1994). The development of scientific reasoning skills in conjunction with collaborative writing assignments: An interpretive study of six ninth-grade students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(9), 1003-1022.
Keys, W. C. (1995). An interpretive study of students'' use of scientific reasoning during a collaborative report writing intervention in ninth grade general science. Science Education, 79(4), 415-435.
Keys, W. C. (1997). A investigation of the relationship between scientific reasoning conceptual knowledge and model formulation in a naturalisitc setting. International Journal of Science Education, 19(8), 957-970.
Keys, W. C. (1999). Using the science writing heuristic as a tool for learning from laboratory investigations in secondary science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 1065-1084.
Keys, W. C. (2000). Investigating the thinking processes of eighth grade writers during the composition of a scientific laboratory report. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(7), 676-690.
Klein, P. D. (1999). Peopening inquiry into cognitive processes in writing-to-learn. Educational Psychology Review, 11(3), 203-270.
Kortland, K. (1996). An sts case study about students'' decision making on the waste issue. Science Education, 80, 673-689.
Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of arguments.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, D. (1992). Thinking as argument. Harverd Educational Review, 62(2), 155-178.
Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77(3), 319-337.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.).Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lacey, A. R. (1996). A dictionary of philosophy-3rd edn.New York: Routledge.
Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmers.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lakatos, I. (1978). The methodology of scientific reserach programmes.Cambridge: Canbridge university press.
Latour, B. W., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Laugksch, R. C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science Education, 84, 71-94.
Lawson, E. A. (2002). Sound and faulty arguments generated by preservice biology teachers when testing hypotheses involving unobservable entities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 237-252.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.
Maxwell, J. A. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach.Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Means, M. L., & Voss, J. F. (1996). Who reasons well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 139-178.
Merriam, S. B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
MOE. (1998). 1-9 grades curriculum guidelines.Taipei: MOE.
Nersessian, N. (1989). Conceptual change in science and in science education. Synthese, 80, 163-183.
Newton, P., Driver, R., & Osborne, J. (1999). The plase of argument in the pedagogy of school science. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 553-576.
Nickerson, R. S. (1991). Modes and models of informal reasoning: A commentary. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 291-309). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Nickles, T. (1980). Scientific discovery, logic, and rationality.Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
Norris, S., & Phillips, L. M. (1994). Interpreting pragmatic meaning when reading popular reports of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(3), 947-967.
Nussbaum, M. E. (2002). Scaffolding argumentation in the social studies classroom. Social Studies, 93(3), 79-85.
Nussbaum, M. E., & Sinatra, G. M. (2003). Argument and conceptual engagement. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 384-395.
Patronis, P. T., Potari, D., & Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999). Students'' argumentation in decision-making on a socio-scientific issue: Implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 745-754.
Perkins, D. N. (1985). Postprimary education has little impact on informal reasoning. Journal of Educational Psycjology, 77, 562-571.
Perkins, D. N., Faraday, M., & Bushey, B. (1991). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 83-105). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational researcher, 18(1), 16-25.
Pilar, M., & Fimenez-Aleixandre. (2002). Knowledge producers or knowledge consumers? Argumentation and decision making about environmental management. International Journal of Science Education, 24(11), 1171-1190.
Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667-687.
Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167-200.
Popper, K. (1968). The logic of scientific discovery.London: Hutchiuson.
Popper, K. (1972). Objective knowledge: An envolutionary approach.Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzong, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 81, 173-192.
Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think.Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Rieke, R. D., & Sillars, M. O. (1997). Argumentation and critical decision making.New York: Addison-Wesley Longman.
Rivard, L. P. (1994). A review of writing to learn science: Implications for practice and research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31, 969-983.
Rumelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. A. (1981). Accretion, tuning and restructuring: Three models of learning. In R. Klatsky & J. W. Cotton (Eds.), Semantic factors in cognition.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Russell, T. L. (1983). Analyzing arguments in science classroom discourse: Can teachers'' questions distort scientific authority? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(1), 27-45.
Sadler, T. D. (2004). Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5), 513-536.
Sadler, T. D., & Zeidler, D. L. (2004). The morality of socioscientific issues: Construal and resolution of genetic engeering dilemmas. Science Education, 88, 4-27.
Siegel, H. (1995). Why should educators care about argumentation. Informal Logic, 17(2), 159-176.
Simonneaux, L. (2001). Role-play or debate to promote students'' argumentation and justification on an issue in animal transgenesis. International Journal of Science Education, 23(9), 903-927.
Solomon, J. (1983). Learning about energy: How pupils think in two domain. European Journal of Science Education, 5(1), 49-59.
Solomon, J. (1985). The pupils'' view of electricity. European Journal of Science Education, 7(3), 281-294.
Solomon, J. (1991). Group discussions in the classroom. School Science Review, 72, 29-34.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1992). A revisionist theory of conceptual change. In R. Duschl & R. Hamilton (Eds.), Philosophy of science, cognitive science and educational theory and practice.Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
Swann, J. (1999). Making better plans: Problem-based versus objectives-based planning. In J. Swann & J. Pratt (Eds.), Improving education: Realist approaches to method and research.Lodon: Cassell.
Swann, J. (2003). A popperian approach to research on learning and method. In J. Swann & J. Pratt (Eds.), Educational research in practice: Making sense of methodology.Lodon: Continuum.
Swann, J. (2003). What inhibits learning in school: A popperian analysis. Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association, Heriot-Watt Univeristy, Edinburgh.
Tao, P.-K., & Gunstone, R. (1999). The process n conceptual change in force and mtion during computer-supported physics instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(7), 859-882.
Taylor, C. (1996). Defining science:Medison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Thorndyke, P. (1977). Cognitive structures in comprehension and memory for narrative discourse. Cognitive Psychology, 9, 77-110.
Tirri, K., & Pehkonen, L. (2002). The moral reasoning and scientific argumentation of gifted adolescents. The Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 8(3), 120-129.
Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Tweney, R. D. (1991). Informal reasoning in science. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education.Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Tyson, L. M., Venville, G. J., Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1997). A multidimensional framework for interpreting conceptual change events in the classroom. Science Education, 81, 387-404.
Tytler, R., Duggan, S., & Gott, R. (2001). Dimensions of evidence, the public understanding of science and science education. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 815-832.
Vosniadou, S. (1994). Capturing and modeling the process of conceptual change. Learning and Instruction, 4, 45-69.
Voss, J. F. (1991b). Informal reasoning and international relationship. In J. F. Voss, D. N. Perkins & J. W. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education.Hillsdale, New jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Voss, J. F., Blais, J., Means, M. L., Greene, T. R., & Ahwesh, E. (1986). Informal reasoning and subject matter knowledge in the solving of ecnomics problems by naive and novice individuals. Cognition and Instruction, 3, 269-302.
Voss, J. F., & Means, M. L. (1991a). Learning to reason via instruction in argumentation. Learning and Instruction, 1, 337-350.
Voss, J. F., Perkins, D., & Segal, J. (1991c). Informal reasoning and education.Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wandersee, J. H., Mintzes, J. J., & Novak, J. D. (1994). Research on alternatives conceptions in science. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning.New York: Macmillan.
Yang, F.-Y., & Anderson, O. R. (2003). Senior high school students'' prefernce and reasoning modes about nuclear energy use. International Journal of Science Education, 25(2), 221-244.
Yerrick, R. K. (2000). Lower track science students'' argumentation and open inquiry instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(8), 807-838.
Zohar, A., & Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students'' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(1), 35-62.