References:

[1] Abd-El-Khalick, F., & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Improving Science Teachers’ Conceptions of Nature of Science: A Critical Review of the Literature. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 665-701. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044

[2] Aikenhead, G. S. (1987). High-School Graduates’ Beliefs about Science-Technology-Society. III. Characteristics and Limitations of Scientific Knowledge. Science Education, 71, 459-487. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730710402

[3] Akcay, B., & Akcay, H. (2015). Effectiveness of Science-Technology-Society (STS) Instruction on Student Understanding of the Nature of Science and Attitudes toward Science. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3, 37-45. https://doi.org/10.18404/ijemst.50889

[4] American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1990). Science for All Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.

[5] Backhus, D. A., & Thompson, K. W. (2006). Addressing the Nature of Science in Preservice Science Teacher Preparation Programs: Science Educator Perceptions. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 65-81.

[6] Bacon, F. (1863) The New Organon, in The Works (Vol. 8). Translated by of James Spedding.

[7] Bransford, J. D., Zech, L., Schwartz, D., Barron, B., Vye, N., & CTGV. (1999). Designs for Environments that Invite and Sustain Mathematical Thinking. In Cobb, P. (Ed.), Symbolizing, Communicating, and Mathematizing: Perspectives on Discourse, Tools, and Instructional Design (pp. 275-324). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[8] Bromme, R., & Goldman, S. R. (2014). The Public’s Bounded Understanding of Science. Educational Psychology, 49, 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.921572

[9] Cakici, Y., & Bayir, E. (2012). Developing Children’s Views of the Nature of Science through Role Play. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 1075-1091. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.647109

[10] Carnes, M. C. (2014). Minds on Fire: How Role-Immersion Games Transform College. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674735606

[11] Clough, M. P., & Olson, J. K. (2008). Teaching and Assessing the Nature of Science: An Introduction. Science & Education, 17, 143-145.

[12] Connally, P., & Vilardi, T. (1989). Writing to Learn Mathematics and Science, Teachers. New York: College Press.

[13] Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. L. (2015). Basics of Qualitative Research (4th Ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

[14] Cornelius-White, J. (2007). Learner-Centered Teacher-Student Relationships Are Effective: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 77, 113-143. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298563

[15] Creswell, J. W., Hanson, W. E., Clark Plano, V. L., & Morales, A. (2007). Qualitative Research Designs: Selection and Implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 236-264.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006287390

[16] de Carvalho, A. M. P., & Vannucchi, A. I. (2000). History, Philosophy and Science Teaching: Some Answers to “How?”. Science & Education, 9, 427-448. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008709929524

[17] Denzin, N. K. (1978). Triangulation: A Case for Methodological Evaluation and Combination. Sociological Methods, 339-357.

[18] Duschl, R. (2000). Making the Nature of Science Explicit. Improving Science Education: The Contribution of Research (pp. 187-206).

[19] Erstad, O., & Sefton-Green, J. (2012). Identity, Community, and Learning Lives in the Digital Age. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139026239

[20] Fullan, M. G. (1991). The New Meaning of Educational Change (pp. 30-46). New York: Teachers College Press.

[21] Gadamer, H. G. (1975/2004). Truth and Method. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.

[22] Galili, I., & Hazan, A. (2000). Learners’ Knowledge in Optics: Interpretation, Structure and Analysis. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 57-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/095006900290000

[23] Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11, 255-274.
https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737011003255

[24] Huang, X., & Kalman, C. S. (2012). A Case Study on Reflective Writing. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42, 92-99.

[25] Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2006). Concentration of the Most-Cited Papers in the Scientific Literature: Analysis of Journal Ecosystems. PLoS ONE, 1, e5.

[26] Kalman, C. S. (2002). Developing Critical Thinking in Undergraduate Courses: A Philosophical Approach. Science & Education, 11, 83-94. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013071130538

[27] Kalman, C. S. (2010). Enabling Students to Develop a Scientific Mindset. Science & Education, 19, 147-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-009-9186-6

[28] Kalman, C. S. (2011). Enhancing Students’ Conceptual Understanding by Engaging Science Text with Reflective Writing as a Hermeneutical Circle. Science & Education, 20, 159-172.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-010-9298-z

[29] Kalman, C. S. (2018). Successful Science and Engineering Teaching: Theoretical and Learning Perspectives (2nd ed.). Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66140-7

[30] Kalman, C. S., Aulls, M. W., Rohar, S., & Godley, J. (2008). Students’ Perceptions of Reflective Writing as a Tool for Exploring an Introductory Textbook. Journal of College Science Teaching, 37, 74.

[31] Kennedy, M. M., & Barnes, H. (1994). Implications of Cognitive Science for Teacher Education. In J. N. Mangieri, & C. C. Block (Eds.), Creating Powerful Thinking in Teachers and Students: Diverse Perspectives (pp. 195-212). New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.

[32] Khanam, W. N. (2014). Helping Students to Get a Better Understanding of Physics Concepts Using the Learning Tool “Course Dossier Method”. Diss. Concordia University.

[33] Khanam, W. N., & Kalman, C. S. (2017). Implementation and Evaluation of the Course Dossier Methodology. Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8, Article 7.
http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cjsotl_rcacea/vol8/iss1/7 https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2017.1.7

[34] Kuhn, T. S. (1963). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

[35] Lederman, N. G. (1992). Students’ and Teachers’ Conceptions of the Nature of Science: A Review of the Research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 29, 331-359. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660290404

[36] Lederman, N. G. (2007). Nature of Science: Past, Present, and Future. In S. K. Abell, & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Science Education (pp. 831-879). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[37] Lederman, N. G., Abd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Schwartz, R. S. (2002). Views of Nature of Science Questionnaire: Toward Valid and Meaningful Assessment of Learners’ Conceptions of Nature of Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 497-521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10034

[38] Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.

[39] Littleton, K., & Mercer, N. (2013). Interthinking: Putting Talk to Work. London: Routledge.

[40] Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education. Revised and Expanded from Case Study Research in Education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

[41] Millar, R., & Osborne, J. F. (1998). Beyond 2000: Science Education for the Future: The Report of a Seminar Series Funded by the Nuffield Foundation. London: King’s College London, School of Education.

[42] Minnaert, A., Boekaerts, M., & de Brabander, C. (2007) Autonomy, Competence, and Social Relatedness in Task Interest within Project-Based Education. Psychological Reports, 101, 574-586.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.101.2.574-586

[43] Müller, F. H., & Louw, J. (2004). Learning Environment, Motivation and Interest: Perspectives on Self-Determination Theory. South African Journal of Psychology, 34, 169-190. https://doi.org/10.1177/008124630403400201

[44] National Science Board (US). (2002). Science & Engineering Indicators. National Science Board.

[45] Osborne, J., Simon, S., & Collins, S. (2003). Science & Engineering Indicators: Attitudes towards Science: A Review of the Literature and Its Implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 1049-1079. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000032199

[46] Packer, S. (2010). Statistics Prepared for Commonwealth Research on Education in Small States. UK: University of Bristol.

[47] Parkinson, J. (2004). Improving Secondary Science Teaching. London: Routledge Falmer.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203464328

[48] Patton, M. Q. (1999). Enhancing the Quality and Credibility of Qualitative Analysis. Health Services Research, 34, 1189-1208.

[49] Popper, K. R. (1992). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Routledge.

[50] Porter, S. E., & Robinson, J. C. (2011). Hermeneutics: An Introduction to Interpretive Theory. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.

[51] Priest, H., Roberts, P., & Woods, L. (2002). An Overview of Three Different Approaches to the Interpretation of Qualitative Data. Part 1: Theoretical Issues. Nurse Researcher, 10, 43.

[52] Rudge, D. W., & Howe, E. M. (2009). An Explicit and Reflective Approach to the Use of History to Promote Understanding of the Nature of Science. Science & Education, 18, 561-580.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-007-9088-4

[53] Sinatra, G. M., Kienhues, D., & Hofer, B. K. (2014). Addressing Challenges to Public Understanding of Science: Epistemic Cognition, Motivated Reasoning, and Conceptual Change. Educational Psychologist, 49, 123-138. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.916216

[54] Smit, K., de Brabander, C. J., & Martens, R. L. (2014). Student-Centred and Teacher-Centred Learning Environment in Pre-Vocational Secondary Education: Psychological Needs, and Motivation. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 58, 695-712.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2013.821090

[55] Supovitz, J. A., & Turner, H. M. (2000). The Effects of Professional Development on Science Teaching Practices and Classroom Culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 963-980.
https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-2736(200011)37:9<963::AID-TEA6>3.0.CO;2-0

[56] Trochim, W. M. K. (1989). Outcome Pattern Matching and Program Theory. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12, 355-366. https://doi.org/10.1016/0149-7189(89)90052-9

[57] Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[58] Wahbeh, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2014). Revisiting the Translation of Nature of Science Understandings into Instructional Practice: Teachers’ Nature of Science Pedagogical Content Knowledge. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 425-466. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.786852

[59] Wink, J., & Putney, L. (2002). A Vision of Vygotsky (pp. 60-63). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

[60] Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research Design and Methods (6th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.