___

• Alfrod, K. (1997). The development of children's ideas in science. Investigating: Australian Primary & Junior Science Journal, 13(1).
• Bahar, M., Cihangir, S. & Gözün, Ö. (2002). Okul öncesi ve ilköretim çaındaki örencilerin canlı ve cansız nesneler ile ilgili alternatif düünce kalıpları. V. Ulusal Fen Bilimleri ve Matematik E
  itimi Kongresi, Odtü,16-18 Eylül, Ankara.
• Barker, M. (1995). A plant is an animal standing on its head. Journal of Biological Education, 29(3),201–208.
• Bell, B. and Freyberg, P. (1985). Language in the science classroom. In R. OSBORNE, and P. FREYBERG (Eds.) Learning in science: theiımplications of children’s science (pp.29–40). Hong Kong: Heinemann.
• Bilgin,
  . ve Geban, Ö. (2001). Benzeim (analoji) yöntemi kullanarak lise 2. sınıf örencilerinin kimyasal denge konusundaki kavram yanılgılarının giderilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi E
  itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 20, 26–32.
• Bloom, J. W. (1992). The development of scientific knowledge in elemantary school children: a context of meaning perspective. Science Education, 76(4), 399–413.
• Brooks, M. G. and Brooks, J. G. (1999). The courage to be constructivist. Educational Leadership, November, 18–24.
• Campanario, J. M. (2002). The parallelism between scientists’ and students’ resistance to new scientific ideas. International Journal of Science Education, 24(10), 1095–1110.
• Driver, R., Guesne, E. & Tiberghien, A. (1985). Childres’s ideas in science. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
• Driver, R. (1989). Students’ conceptions and the learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 11, Special Issue, 481–490.
• Duit, R. (1995). The constructivist view: a fashionable and fruitful paradigm for science education research and practice. In L. P. Steffe and J. Gale (Eds) Constructivism in education (pp.271– 285). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Gilbert, J. K. and Osborne, R. J. (1980). ‘I understand, but I don’t get it”: Some problems of learning science. School Science Review, 61(218), 664–674.
• Gilbert, J. K. and Zylbersztajn, A. (1985). A conceptual framework for science education: the case study of force and movement. European Journal of Science Education, 7(2), 107–120.
• Gilbert, J. K., Watts, M. D. & Osborne, R. J. (1982). Students’ conceptions of ideas in mechanics. Physics Education, 17, 62–66.
• Hançer, A. H., ensoy, Ö. & Yıldırım, H.
  . (2003).
  lköretimde çada fen bilgisi öretiminin önemi ve nasıl olması gerektii üzerine bir deerlendirme. Pamukkale Üniversitesi E
  itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 1(13), 80–88.
• Harlen, W. (1985). Primary science. taking the plunge. London: Heinnemann Educational.
• Harlen, W. (1993). Teaching and learning primary science. London: Paul Chapman Publishing Ltd.
• Hashweh, M. (1998). Descriptive studies of students’ conceptions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(2), 121–134.
• Hewson, P. W. (1996). Teaching for conceptual change. In D. F. Treagust, R. Duit & B. J. Fraser. (Eds.). Improving Teaching and Learning in Science and Mathematics. (131–140). New York: Teachers College Press.
• Holt, B.-G. (1991). Science with young children. Washington: National Association For The Education Of Young Children.
• Kikas, E. (2004). Teachers’ conceptions and misconceptions concerning three natural phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (5), 432–448.
• Kruger, C. and Summers, M. (1988). Primary school teachers’ understanding of science concepts. Journal of Education for Teaching, 14 (3), 259–265.
• Kruger, C., Palacıo, D. and Summers, M. (1992). Surveys of english primary teachers’ conceptions of force, energy and materials. Science Education, 76(4), 339–351.
• Küçükahmet, L. (Editör) (2001). Konu Alanı Ders Kitabı nceleme Klavuzu. Fen Bilgisi. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Daıtım.
• Laçin imek, C. (2007). lkö
  retim Ö
  rencilerinin Temel Fen Kavramlarıyla lgili Düünceleri. Yayımlanmamı Doktora Tezi. Ankara: Gazi Üniversitesi Eitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü.
• Lawson, A. E. (1994). Research on the acquisition of science knowledge: epistemological foundations of cognition. In D. L. GABEL, Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. New York: MacMillan.
• Marek, E. A. (1986). They misunderstand, but they’ll pass. The Science Teacher, 53(9), 32–35.
• Micklo, S. J. (1995). Developing young children’s classification and logical thinking. Childhood Education, 72(1), 24–28.
• Osborne, R. J. and Wittrock, M. C.. (1983). Learning science: A generative process. Science Education, 67(4), 489–508.
• Osborne, R.and Freyberg, P. (1985). Children’s Science. In R. OSBORNE and P. FREYBERG (Eds.) Learning in Science: The implications of children’s science, (pp.5–14). Hong Kong: Heinemann.
• Perkins, D. (1999). The many faces of constructivism. Educational Leadership, November, 6–11.
• Pittman, K. M. (1999). Student-generated analogies: another way of knowing?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(1), 1–22.
• Sequeira, M. and Leite, L. (1991). Alternative conceptions and history of science in physics teacher education. Science Education, 75(1), 45–56.
• Stavy, R. (1990). Children’s concepiton of changes in the state of matter: from liquid (or solid) to gas. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(3), 247–266.
• Taber, K. S. (2001). When the analogy breaks down: modelling the atom on the solar system. Physics Education, 36(3), 222–226.
• Tekkaya, C. ve Balcı, S. (2003). Örencilerin fotosentez ve bitkilerde solunum konularındaki kavram yanılgılarının saptanması. Hacettepe Üniversitesi E
  itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 24, 101–107.
• Treagust, D. F., Duit, R. & Fraser, B. J. (1996). (Eds.). Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Tynjälä, P. (1999). Towards expert knowledge? A comparison between a constructivist and a traditional learning environment in the university. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 357–442.
• Tytler, R. (2002). A comparison of year 1 and year 6 students’ conceptions of evaporation and condensation: dimensions of conceptual progression. International Journal of Science Education, 22(5), 447- 467.
• Üstün, E., Akman, B. & ET
  KAN,
  . (2004). Farklı sosyo-ekonomik düzeydeki çocukların bilisel geliimlerinin deerlendirilmesi. Hacettepe Üniversitesi E
  itim Fakültesi Dergisi, 26, 205–210.
• Von Glasersfeld. (1995). A constructivist approach to teaching. In . L. P. Steffe and J. Gale (Eds) Constructivism in education (3–15). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Wandersee, J. H. (1985). Can the history of science help science educators anticipate students’ misconceptions?. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(7), 581–597.
• Watts, M. D. and Zylbersztajn, A. (1981). A survey of some children’s ideas about force. Physics Education,16, 360–365.
• Watts, M. (1994). Constructivism, re-constructivism and task-orientated problem solving. In F. Peter, R. Gunstone and R. White (Eds). The Content of Science: A Constructivist Approach to Its Teaching and Learning, (pp.39–58). London: The Falmer Press.
• Webb, M. J. (1985). Analogies and their limitations. School Science and Mathematics, 85(8), 645–650.
• White, R. T. (1994). Dimensions of content. In F., Peter, R. Gunstone and R. White (Eds). The Content of Science: A Constructivist Approach to Its Teaching and Learning, (pp.255–262). London: The Falmer Press.