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. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-018-0814-9

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. http://doi.org/10.1002/j.2161-0045.2015.00097.x

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 https://www.journals.uio.no/index.php/nordina/article/view/2047

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. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21459

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. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.07.007

Rosenberg, J. M., Schmidt, J. A., & Beymer, P. N. (2018). tidyLPA: Easily carry out Latent Profile Analysis. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/tidyLPA/index.html

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

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. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tea.21409

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. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-007-9241-z

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 http://faculty.sites.uci.edu/childcare/files/2013/07/SL-Outcomes-2011-Pilot_Edited_8.19.pdf

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. http://forumfyi.org/content/youth-program-quality-