___

• Abd-El Khalick, F., Bell, R. L. & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417-436.
• Abd-El Khalick, F. & Lederman, N. G. (2000). The influence of history of science courses on students' views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(10), 1057-1095.
• Akerson, V. L., Abd-El Khalick, F. & Lederman, N. G. (2000). Influence of a reflective explicit activity-based approach on elementary teachers' conceptions of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(4), 295-317.
• Brickhouse, N. W. (1990). Teachers' beliefs about the nature of science and their relationship to classroom practice. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 53-62.
• Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
• de Berg, K. (2006). What happens when salt dissolves in water? An introduction to scientific argument and counter argument drawn from the history of science. Teaching Science, 52(1), 24-27.
• Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R. & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Open University Press, Bristol, PA.
• Driver, R., Newton, P. & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
• Duschl, R. A. & Wright, E. (1989). A case study of high school teachers’ decision- making models for planning and teaching science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 26(6), 467-501.
• Erduran, S. & Jiménez-Aleixandre, M. P. (2007). Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research. Springer.
• Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Khishfe, R. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2002). Influence of explicit and reflective versus implicit inquiry-oriented instruction on sixth graders’ views of nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(7), 551-578.
• Köseoğlu, F, Tümay, H. ve Budak, E. (2008). Bilimin doğası hakkında paradigma değişimleri ve öğretimi ile ilgili yeni anlayışlar. GÜ, Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(2), 221-237.
• Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Lakatos, I. (1974). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. (eds. I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave) Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91-196). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• 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(4), 331- 359.
• Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.
• McComas, W. F. & Olson, J. K. (2000). International science education standards documents. (ed. W. McComas) The nature of science in science education rationales and strategies (pp. 41-52). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers
• Niaz, M. (1998). From cathode rays to alpha particles to quantum of action: A rational reconstruction of structure of the atom and its implications for chemistry textbooks. Science Education, 82(5), 527-552.
• Osborne, J., Collins, S., Ratcliffe, M., Millar, R. & Duschl, R. A. (2003). What "ideas- about-science" should be taught in school science? A delphi study of the expert community. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(7), 692-720.
• Osborne, J., Erduran, S., Simon, S. & Monk, M. (2001). Enhancing the quality of argument in school science. School Science Review, 82(301), 63-70.
• Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
• Strike, K. A. & Posner, G. J. (1992). A Revisionist Theory of Conceptual Change. (eds. R. A. Duschl & R. J. Hamilton), Philosophy of science, cognitive psychology and educational theory and practice. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
• Taşar, M. F. (2003). Teaching history and the nature of science in science teacher education programs. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), 30-42.
• Tsai, C. C. (1998). An analysis of scientific epistemological beliefs and learning orientations of Taiwanese eighth graders. Science Education, 82(4), 473-489.
• Tümay, H. (2008). Argümantasyon odaklı kimya öğretimi. Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Gazi Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Yakmaci, B. (1998). Science (biology, chemistry and physics) teachers’ views on the nature of science as a dimension of scientific literacy. Yayınlanmamış Yükseklisans Tezi, Boğaziçi Üniversitesi, İstanbul.
• Yalvac, B. & Crawford, B. (2002). Eliciting prospective science teachers' conceptions of the nature of science in Middle East Technical University (METU), in Ankara. Paper presented at 2002 AETS Annual International Conference.
• Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (1999). Nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayınevi.