Chapter 8 References

Bergman, L. R., & Magnusson, D. (1997). A person-oriented approach in research on developmental psychopathology. Development and psychopathology, 9(2), 291-319.

Bergman, L. R., Magnusson, D., & El Khouri, B. M. (2003). Studying individual development in an interindividual context: A person-oriented approach. London, England: Psychology Press.

Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., & Reiser, B. J. (2016). Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082-1112.

Beymer, P. N., Rosenberg, J. M., Schmidt, J. A., & Naftzger, N. (2018). Examining relationships between choice, affect, and engagement in out-of-school time STEM programs. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(6), 1178-1191.

Bielik, T., & Yarden, A. (2016). Promoting the asking of research questions in a high-school biotechnology inquiry-oriented program. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(1), 15.

Bystydzienski, J. M., Eisenhart, M., & Bruning, M. (2015). High school is not too late: Developing girls’ interest and engagement in engineering careers. Career Development Quarterly, 63(1), 88–95.

National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal performance. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York, NY: Basic Books.

English, L. D. (2012). Data modelling with first-grade students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 81(1), 15-30.

Finzer, W. (2013). The data science education dilemma. Technology Innovations in Statistics Education, 7(2), p. 1-9.

Forum for Youth Investment. (2012). Youth Program Quality Assessment. Washington, DC: The Forum for Youth Investment

Franklin, C., Kader, G., Mewborn, D., Moreno, J., Peck, R., Perry, M., & Scheaffer, R. (2007). Guidelines for assessment and instruction in statistics education (GAISE) report. Alexandria, VA: American Statistical Association.

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59-109.

Gelman, S. A., & Markman, E. M. (1987). Young children’s inductions from natural kinds: The role of categories and appearances. Child Development, 58(6), 1532-1541.

Gopnik, A., & Sobel, D. M. (2000). Detecting blickets: How young children use information about novel causal powers in categorization and induction. Child Development, 71(5), 1205-1222.

Gopnik, A., Sobel, D. M., Schulz, L. E., & Glymour, C. (2001). Causal learning mechanisms in very young children: two-, three-, and four-year-olds infer causal relations from patterns of variation and covariation. Developmental Psychology, 37(5), 620.

Greene, B. A. (2015). Measuring cognitive engagement with self-report scales: Reflections from over 20 years of research. lEducational Psychologist, 50(1), 14-30.

Greene, K. M., Lee, B., Constance, N., & Hynes, K. (2013). Examining youth and program predictors of engagement in out-of-school time programs. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42(10), 1557-1572.

Hancock, C., Kaput, J. J., & Goldsmith, L. T. (1992). Authentic inquiry with data: Critical barriers to classroom implementation. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 337-364.

Harring, J. R., & Hodis, F. A. (2016). Mixture modeling: Applications in educational psychology. Educational Psychologist, 51(3-4), 354-367.

Hasson, E., & Yarden, A. (2012). Separating the research question from the laboratory techniques: Advancing high‐school biology teachers’ ability to ask research questions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(10), 1296-1320.

Hektner, J. M., Schmidt, J. A., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2007). Experience sampling method: Measuring the quality of everyday life. Sage.

Konold, C., & Pollatsek, A. (2002). Data analysis as the search for signals in noisy processes. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(4), 259-289.

Lauer, P. A., Akiba, M., Wilkerson, S. B., Apthorp, H. S., Snow, D., & Martin-Glenn, M. L. (2006). Out-of-school-time programs: A meta-analysis of effects for at-risk students. Review of Educational Research, 76(2), 275-313.

Lee, H. S., Angotti, R. L., & Tarr, J. E. (2010). Making comparisons between observed data and expected outcomes: students’ informal hypothesis testing with probability simulation tools. Statistics Education Research Journal, 9(1), 68-96.

Lee, H., & Hollebrands, K. (2008). Preparing to teach mathematics with technology: An integrated approach to developing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(4), 326-341.

Lee, V. R., & Wilkerson, M. (2018). Data use by middle and secondary students in the digital age: A status report and future prospects. Commissioned Paper for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Board on Science Education, Committee on Science Investigations and Engineering Design for Grades 6-12. Washington, D.C.

Lehrer, R., & Romberg, T. (1996). Exploring children’s data modeling. Cognition and Instruction, 14(1), 69-108.

Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2004). Modeling natural variation through distribution. American Educational Research Journal, 41(3), 635-679.

Lehrer, R. & Schauble, L. (2015). Developing scientific thinking. In L. S. Liben & U. Müller (Eds.), Cognitive processes. Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (Vol. 2, 7th ed., pp. 671-174). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Lehrer, R., Kim, M. J., & Jones, R. S. (2011). Developing conceptions of statistics by designing measures of distribution. ZDM, 43(5), 723-736.

Lehrer, R., Kim, M. J., & Schauble, L. (2007). Supporting the development of conceptions of statistics by engaging students in measuring and modeling variability. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 12(3), 195-216.

Lesh, R., Middleton, J. A., Caylor, E., & Gupta, S. (2008). A science need: Designing tasks to engage students in modeling complex data. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(2), 113-130.

Linnansaari, J., Viljaranta, J., Lavonen, J., Schneider, B., & Salmela-Aro, K. (2015). Finnish Students Engagement in Science Lessons. NorDiNa: Nordic Studies in Science Education, 11(2), 192-206. Retrieved from

Magnusson, D., & Cairns, R. B. (1996). Developmental science: Toward a unified framework. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

McNeill, K. L., & Berland, L. (2017). What is (or should be) scientific evidence use in k‐12 classrooms? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(5), 672-689.

McNeill, K. L. & Krajcik, J. (2007). Middle school students’ use of appropriate and inappropriate evidence in writing scientific explanations. In Lovett, M & Shah, P (Eds.), Thinking with data. (pp. 233-265). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Miller, E., Manz, E., Russ, R., Stroupe, D., & Berland, L. (advance online publication). Addressing the epistemic elephant in the room: Epistemic agency and the next generation science standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.

Muthén, B. (2004). Latent variable analysis. The Sage handbook of quantitative methodology for the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 345-68.

Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (1997-2017). Mplus User’s Guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Pekrun, R., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2012). Academic emotions and student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 259-292). New York, NY: Springer.

Petrosino, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Structuring error and experimental variation as distribution in the fourth grade. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 5(2&3), 131-156.

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Pöysä, S., Vasalampi, K., Muotka, J., Lerkkanen, M. K., Poikkeus, A. M., & Nurmi, J. E. (2017). Variation in situation-specific engagement among lower secondary school students. Learning and Instruction, 53, 64-73.

Rosenberg, J. M., Schmidt, J. A., & Beymer, P. N. (2018). tidyLPA: Easily carry out Latent Profile Analysis.

Rosenberg, J. M., Xu, R., & Frank, K. A. (2018). KonFound-It!: Quantify the robustness of causal inferences.

Salmela-Aro, K., Moeller, J., Schneider, B., Spicer, J., & Lavonen, J. (2016). Integrating the light and dark sides of student engagement using person-oriented and situation-specific approaches. Learning and Instruction, 43, 61-70.

Salmela-Aro, K., Muotka, J., Alho, K., Hakkarainen, K., & Lonka, K. (2016). School burnout and engagement profiles among digital natives in Finland: A person-oriented approach. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 13(6), 704-718.

Schmidt, J. A., Rosenberg, J. M., & Beymer, P. (2018). A person-in-context approach to student engagement in science: Examining learning activities and choice. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 19-43.

Schneider, B., Krajcik, J., Lavonen, J., Salmela‐Aro, K., Broda, M., Spicer, J., … & Viljaranta, J. (2016). Investigating optimal learning moments in US and Finnish science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(3), 400-421.

Schwarz, N., Kahneman, D., & Xu, J. (2009). Global and episodic reports of hedonic experience. In R. Belli, D. Alwen, & F. Stafford (Eds.), Using calendar and diary methods in life events research (pp. 157-174). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Shernoff, D. J., Csikszentmihalyi, M., Schneider, B., & Shernoff, E. S. (2003). Student engagement in high school classrooms from the perspective of flow theory. School Psychology Quarterly, 18(2), 158-176.

Shernoff, D. J., Kelly, S., Tonks, S. M., Anderson, B., Cavanagh, R. F., Sinha, S., & Abdi, B. (2016). Student engagement as a function of environmental complexity in high school classrooms. Learning and Instruction, 43, 52-60.

Shumow, L., & Schmidt, J. A. (2013). STEM interest and engagement (STEM I.E.). National Science Foundation proposal for award number 1421198.

Sinatra, G. M., Heddy, B. C., & Lombardi, D. (2015). The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. Educational Psychologist, 50(1), 1-13. doi:10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924

Singh, K., Granville, M., & Dika, S. (2002). Mathematics and science achievement: Effects of motivation, interest, and academic engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(6), 323-332.

Shernoff, D. J., & Schmidt, J. A. (2008). Further Evidence of an Engagement–Achievement Paradox Among U.S. High School Students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37(5), 564–580.

Shumow, L., Schmidt, J. A., & Zaleski, D. J. (2013). Multiple perspectives on student learning, engagement, and motivation in high school biology labs. The High School Journal, 96(3), 232-252.

Skinner, E. A., & Pitzer, J. (2012). Developmental dynamics of engagement, coping, and everyday resilience. In S. Christenson, A. Reschly, & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Student Engagement (pp. 21-45). New York: Springer Science.

Skinner, E. A., Kindermann, T. A., & Furrer, C. J. (2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493-525.

Skinner, E., Furrer, C., Marchand, G., & Kindermann, T. (2008). Engagement and disaffection in the classroom: Part of a larger motivational dynamic? Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(4), 765.

Smith, C., Akiva, T., Sugar, S., Lo, Y. J., Frank, K. A., Peck, S. C., Cortina, K. S., & Devaney, T. (2012). Continuous quality improvement in afterschool settings: Impact findings from the Youth Program Quality Intervention study. Washington, DC: The Forum for Youth Investment.

Steinley, D., & Brusco, M. J. (2011). Evaluating mixture modeling for clustering: recommendations and cautions. Psychological Methods, 16(1), 63.

Stroupe, D. (2014). Examining classroom science practice communities: How teachers and students negotiate epistemic agency and learn science‐as‐practice. Science Education, 98(3), 487-516.

Strati, A. D., Schmidt, J. A., & Maier, K. S. (2017). Perceived challenge, teacher support, and teacher obstruction as predictors of student engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 109(1), 131-147.

Turner, J. C., & Meyer, D. K. (2000). Studying and understanding the instructional contexts of classrooms: Using our past to forge our future. Educational Psychologist, 35(2), 69-85.

van Rooij, E. C., Jansen, E. P., & van de Grift, W. J. (2017). Secondary school students’ engagement profiles and their relationship with academic adjustment and achievement in university. Learning and Individual Differences, 54, 9-19.

Vandell, D. L., Hall, V., O’Cadiz, P., & Karsh, A. (2012). Piloting outcome measures for summer learning initiative programs. Final report to the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, Children, Families, and Communities Program. Retrieved from

Wang, M. T., & Eccles, J. S. (2012). Social support matters: Longitudinal effects of social support on three dimensions of school engagement from middle to high school. Child Development, 83(3), 877-895.

Wang, M. T., & Holcombe, R. (2010). Adolescents’ perceptions of school environment, engagement, and academic achievement in middle school. American Educational Research Journal, 47(3), 633-662.

Weisberg, M. (2012). Simulation and similarity: Using models to understand the world. Oxford University Press: Oxford, England.

Wild, C. J., & Pfannkuch, M. (1999). Statistical thinking in empirical enquiry. International Statistical Review, 67(3), 223-248.

Wilkerson, M. H., Andrews, C., Shaban, Y., Laina, V., & Gravel, B. E. (2016). What’s the technology for? Teacher attention and pedagogical goals in a modeling-focused professional development workshop. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 27(1), 11-33.

Wilkerson, M. H. & Fenwick, M. (2017). The practice of using mathematics and computational thinking. In C. V. Schwarz, C. Passmore, & B. J. Reiser (Eds.), Helping Students Make Sense of the World Using Next Generation Science and Engineering Practices. Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers’ Association Press. pp. 181-204.

Wormington, S. V., & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (2017). A new look at multiple goal pursuit: The promise of a person-centered approach. Educational Psychology Review, 29(3), 407-445. doi:10.1007/s10648-016-9358-2

Yohalem, N., Wilson-Ahlstrom, A., & Yu, D. (2005). Youth program quality assessment and improvement: Celebrating progress and surfacing challenges. A meeting report.