Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education

• Belland, B. R., Glazewski, K. D., & Richardson, J. C. (2008). A scaffolding framework to support the construction of evidence-based arguments among middle school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(4), 401-422. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9074-1.
• Belland, B. R., Kim, C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2013). A framework for designing scaffolds that improve motivation and cognition. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 243-270. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.838920.
• Bennett, J. (2017). Bringing science to life. In R. Taconis, P. den Brok, & A. Pilot (Eds.), Teachers Creating Context-Based Learning Environments in Science (pp. 21-39). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-684-2_2.
• Britner, S. L., & Pajares, F. (2006). Sources of science self‐efficacy beliefs of middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(5), 485-499. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20131.
• Childs, P. E., Hayes, S. M., & O’Dwyer, A. (2015). Chemistry and everyday life: Relating secondary school chemistry to the current and future lives of students. In I. Eilks & A. Hofstein (Eds.), Relevant Chemistry Education (pp. 33-54). Rotterdam: Sense Publisher. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-175-5_3.
• Cole, J. S., Bergin, D. A., & Whittaker, T. A. (2008). Predicting student achievement for low stakes tests with effort and task value. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(4), 609-624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2007.10.002.
• Cunningham, K. (2016). Variables that impact the implementation of project-based learning in high school science. Detroit: Wayne State University.
• De Jong, O., & Treagust, D. (2003). The Teaching and Learning of Electrochemistry. In J. K. Gilbert, O. De Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, & J. H. Van Driel (Eds.), Chemical Education: Towards Research-based Practice (pp. 317-337). Dordrecht: Springer The Netherlands.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The” what” and” why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.
• Delhij, A., van Solingen, R., & Wijnands, W. (2015). The EduScrum Guide. Retrieved from http://eduscrum.nl/en/file/CKFiles/The_eduScrum_Guide_EN_1.2.pdf.
• Gilbert, J. K. (2006). On the nature of “context” in chemical education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 957-976. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600702470.
• Harackiewicz, J. M., Smith, J. L., & Priniski, S. J. (2016). Interest Matters. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 220-227. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732216655542.
• Harris, C. J., & Rooks, D. L. (2010). Managing inquiry-based science: Challenges in enacting complex science instruction in elementary and middle school classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(2), 227-240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9172-5.
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3.
• Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368.
• Hulleman, C. S., Schrager, S. M., Bodmann, S. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). A meta-analytic review of achievement goal measures: Different labels for the same constructs or different constructs with similar labels? Psychological Bulletin, 136(3), 422. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018947.
• Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2008). Social Interdependence Theory and Cooperative Learning: The Teacher’s Role. In R. M. Gillies, A. F. Ashman, & J. Terwel (Eds.), The Teacher’s Role in Implementing Cooperative Learning in the Classroom (pp. 9-37). Boston, MA: Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-70892-8_1.
• King, D., & Ritchie, S. M. (2012). Learning science through real-world contexts. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin, & C. McRobbie (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 69-79). Dordrecht: Springer The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9041-7_6.
• Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Vermeulen, M. (2013). Social aspects of CSCL environments: A research framework. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 229-242. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.750225.
• Land, S. M., Hannafin, M. J., & Oliver, K. (2012). Student-centered learning environments. In D. Jonassen & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments. Second Edition (pp. 3-21). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203813799.
• Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016). Meta-analysis of inquiry-based learning. Review of Educational Research, 86(3), 681-718. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315627366.
• Malik, S. A. (2017). Revisiting and re-representing scaffolding: The two gradient model. Cogent Education, 4(1), 1331533. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2017.1331533.
• Mason, A. J., & Singh, C. (2016). Impact of guided reflection with peers on the development of effective problem solving strategies and physics learning. The Physics Teacher, 54(5), 295-299. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4947159.
• Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14.
• Mergendoller, J. R., Markham, T., Ravitz, J., & Larmer, J. (2006). Pervasive Management of Project Based Learning: Teachers as Guides and Facilitators. In Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues. (pp. 583-615). Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Nentwig, P. M., Demuth, R., Parchmann, I., Ralle, B., & Gräsel, C. (2007). Chemie im Kontext: Situating learning in relevant contexts while systematically developing basic chemical concepts. Journal of Chemical Education, 84(9), 1439. https://doi.org/10.1021/ed084p1439.
• Nisbet, J., & Shucksmith, J. (2017). Learning strategies. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315188652.
• Parchmann, I., Broman, K., Busker, M., & Rudnik, J. (2015). Context-Based Teaching and Learning on School and University Level. In J. Garcia-Martinez & E. Serrano-Torregrosa (Eds.), Chemistry Education: Best Practices, Innovative Strategies and New Technologies (pp. 259-278). Weinheim: Wiley-VCH. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527679300.ch10.
• Pilot, A., & Bulte, A. M. W. (2006). Why Do You “Need to Know”? Context‐based education. International Journal of Science Education, 28(9), 953-956. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690600702462.
• Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., . . . Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design Framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337-386. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_4.
• Reeve, J. (2009). Why teachers adopt a controlling motivating style toward students and how they can become more autonomy supportive. Educational Psychologist, 44(3), 159-175. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903028990.
• Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2.
• Rubin, K. S. (2012). Essential Scrum: A practical guide to the most popular Agile process. New York: Addison-Wesley.
• Savelsbergh, E. R., Prins, G. T., Rietbergen, C., Fechner, S., Vaessen, B. E., Draijer, J. M., & Bakker, A. (2016). Effects of innovative science and mathematics teaching on student attitudes and achievement: A meta-analytic study. Educational Research Review, 19, 158-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.07.003.
• Sawyer, R. K. (2014). Introduction: The new science of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 27-55). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139519526.
• Schwaber, K., & Sutherland, J. (2017). The Scrum Guide. The Definitive Guide to Scrum: The Rules of the Game. Retrieved from https://www.scrumguides.org/scrum-guide.html.
• Scott, E., Rodríguez, G., Soria, Á., & Campo, M. (2016). Towards better Scrum learning using learning styles. Journal of Systems and Software, 111, 242-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.10.022.
• Sevian, H., Dori, Y. J., & Parchmann, I. (2018). How does STEM context-based learning work: what we know and what we still do not know. International Journal of Science Education, 40(10), 1095-1107. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1470346.
• Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1), 153-189. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307313795.
• Tempelaar, D. T., Wosnitza, M., Volet, S., Rienties, B., Giesbers, B., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2013). The role of self-and social directed goals in a problem-based, collaborative learning context. Higher Education, 66(2), 253-267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9602-8.
• Thoman, D. B., Smith, J. L., Brown, E. R., Chase, J., & Lee, J. Y. K. (2013). Beyond performance: A motivational experiences model of stereotype threat. Educational Psychology Review, 25(2), 211-243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9219-1.
• Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005). In search of the uniquely human. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(5), 721-727. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X05540123.
• Usher, E. L., & Pajares, F. (2008). Sources of self-efficacy in school: Critical review of the literature and future directions. Review of Educational Research, 78(4), 751-796. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308321456.
• Vos, M. A. J., Taconis, R., Jochems, W. M. G., & Pilot, A. (2016). Interaction between Teachers and Teaching Materials. In Teachers Creating Context-Based Learning Environments in Science (pp. 125-143). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-684-2_8.
• Weiner, B. (2010). The development of an attribution-based theory of motivation: A history of ideas. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 28-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433596.
• Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68-81. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015.
• Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x.
• Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2012). Mindsets that promote resilience: When students believe that personal characteristics can be developed. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 302-314. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2012.722805.

APA

Vogelzang, J., Admiraal, W. F., & van Driel, J. H. (2019). Scrum Methodology as an Effective Scaffold to Promote Students’ Learning and Motivation in Context-based Secondary Chemistry Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(12), em1783. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/109941

Vancouver

Vogelzang J, Admiraal WF, van Driel JH. Scrum Methodology as an Effective Scaffold to Promote Students’ Learning and Motivation in Context-based Secondary Chemistry Education. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2019;15(12):em1783. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/109941

AMA

Vogelzang J, Admiraal WF, van Driel JH. Scrum Methodology as an Effective Scaffold to Promote Students’ Learning and Motivation in Context-based Secondary Chemistry Education. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2019;15(12), em1783. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/109941

Chicago

Vogelzang, Johannes, Wilfried F. Admiraal, and Jan H. van Driel. "Scrum Methodology as an Effective Scaffold to Promote Students’ Learning and Motivation in Context-based Secondary Chemistry Education". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2019 15 no. 12 (2019): em1783. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/109941

Harvard

Vogelzang, J., Admiraal, W. F., and van Driel, J. H. (2019). Scrum Methodology as an Effective Scaffold to Promote Students’ Learning and Motivation in Context-based Secondary Chemistry Education. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 15(12), em1783. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/109941

MLA

Vogelzang, Johannes et al. "Scrum Methodology as an Effective Scaffold to Promote Students’ Learning and Motivation in Context-based Secondary Chemistry Education". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 15, no. 12, 2019, em1783. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/109941