本研究旨在探討社會建構主義在國小語文教學上的應用情形，以及學童的語文知識建構歷程。研究者特別關注的焦點有二：首先，教師如何從對話中釐清社會建構主義的內涵，同時從知識與經驗的分享過程中，促進教師採取有利於建構學習的教學措施。其次，學童在社會互動教學環境下，其在閱讀理解與知識建構上的歷程與特質。
本研究採用質性研究設計，分為兩個實施階段。在階段一，研究者籌組語文科教學研究小組，有四位教師參與討論，期望能將社會建構學習的理念應用於他們的語文科教學。階段二以教室觀察為主，目的在蒐集學童語文學習的歷程與特質，觀察對象為小組成員之一邱老師的任教班級。同時，為了能建立理想的社會互動學習情境，研究者與教學者是以共同合作探究的方式，進行彼此的教學觀摩以及觀察後的討論反思。最後，透過言談分析的方法展現學童在語文知識上的心智建構歷程。
整體而言，本研究可從兩大層面來歸納研究發現：其一是參與教師們在孕育社會建構取向教學的歷程與心境轉變。參與教師透過語文教學小組的討論，逐漸體會出學童的主體性是學習的關鍵角色，對於建構學習的精神感到認同，並願意在教學上嘗試改變。其二則是學童的語文能力的發展，包括閱讀理解歷程與特質、語文知識的建構與人際互動脈絡的功能角色等。本研究的結論為：
一、教師參與社會互動教學的探討有益於教學觀的轉變
二、教師嘗試社會互動教學的各種具體措施改善了學童的語文學習與能力
三、結合情境脈絡與生活經驗的言談環境有助於學童閱讀理解能力的提升
四、學童語文知識建構的途徑包括模仿、推論與重組
五、社會互動有益於增進學童的語言表達功能與創作表現
六、人際互動的社會脈絡有助於學童的學習與認知思維
七、教師積極投入社會互動教學促進了教學專業的成長
八、社會互動教學能改善傳統教學的缺失但並不能取代之

The main purpose of this study was to explore the practice of social constructivist perspectives in an elementary Language Art classroom and the process of knowledge construction of children. The following two aspects are the major concerns of this study: firstly, how teachers grasp the social constructivist approach and how they adjust their way of language teaching; secondly, in a social interaction learning contexts how students construct their understanding and knowledge of Chinese language.
This study was a qualitative research design. In stage Ⅰ: The researcher organized a teaching team for pedagogical dialogues which aimed at clarifying and applying the social constructist pedagogic approach through dialogues. In stage Ⅱ: Classroom observation and co-operative inquiry were conducted to collect data for the understanding of students’ knowledge construction. In addition, the research applied discourses analysis to show the process of knowledge construction.
The findings of this study are as follows:
1.It is useful for teachers to change their pedagogic perspective through team efforts and group discussions.
2.Teachers who took efforts to advance social interaction based teaching would promote students’ learning in Language Art.
3.Linking learning contexts with life experiences for classroom discourses could improve students’ reading comprehension.
4.The ways students used to construct their language knowledge include modeling, reasoning, and reconstructing.
5.Social interactions are helpful to students’ creative language expressions.
6.Social interaction based learning context is beneficial for students’ learning and cognitive development.
7.Teachers’ involvement in social interaction based teaching would advance their professional development.
8.Social interaction based teaching improve the flows of traditional teaching approach but it could not replace all other teaching methods.

參考文獻
一、中文部分
于漪（2004）。課堂教學三個維度的落實與交融。中學語文教學，295，10-12。
王瑞賢（2003）。教育改革下教室言談模式變化與日常言談關係之研究。載於齊力、蘇峰山主編，市場、國家與教育：教育社會學的分析（頁99-133）。嘉義：南華大學教社所。
古國順（1989）。當前國語文教育的檢討和改進。載於教育部人文及社會學科指導委員會主編，國語文教學研究，107-118。台北：幼獅。
任友群（2004）。建構主義教育思想研究中需要注意的問題。全球教育展望，33（7），44-46，27。
朱則剛（1996）。建構主義知識論對教學與教學研究的意義。教育研究，49，39-45。
朱湘吉（1992）。新觀念、新挑戰─建構主義的教學系統。教學科技與媒體，2，15-20。
何三本（1999 ）。九年一貫語文教材之編選與教學之設計。載於國立新竹師範學院語文教育學系主編，民國以來國民小學語文課程教材教法學術研討會論文集（頁23-38）。新竹：新竹師範學院。
余震球譯（1994）。維果茨基教育論著選。北京：人民教育出版社。
余應源主編（1996）。語文教育學。江西：江西教育出版社。
吳英長（1998）：國民小學國語故事體課文摘寫大意的教學過程之分析。台東師院學報，9，149-184。
吳敏而（1990）。兒童語意與語法的發展。華文世界，56，2-14。
吳敏而（1991）。語言的發展。載於蘇建文、林美珍、程小危、林惠雅、幸曼玲、陳李綢、吳敏而、柯華葳、陳淑美著，發展心理學（頁221-266）。台北：心理。
吳敏而（1994a）。幼兒閱讀的輔導。臺灣省國民學校教師研習會編印，國民小學國語科教材教法研究第三輯，1-9。
吳敏而（1994b）。由中英文閱讀策略的比較看中文閱讀教學。臺灣省國民學校教師研習會編印，國民小學國語科教材教法研究第三輯（頁11-27）。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
吳敏而（1998）。語文學習百分百。台北：天衛。
吳敏而、徐雪貞（1994）。國民小學學生文章理解層次分析。臺灣省國民學校教師研習會編印，國民小學國語科教材教法研究第三輯（頁79-91）。台北：台灣省國民學校教師研習會。
吳敏而、黃琪芬（1994）。幼兒對文字用途的認識。臺灣省國民學校教師研習會編印，國民小學國語科教材教法研究第三輯，37-46。
宋文里（譯）（2001）。J. Bruner 著。教育的文化─文化心理學的觀點。台北：遠流。
李永吟（1998）。認知教學：理論與策略。台北：心理出版社。
李連珠（譯）（1998）。K. Goodman 著。 全語言的「全」全在哪裡？台北：信誼。
李暉（1993）。國中理化教師試行建構主義教學之個案研究。國立彰化師範大學科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，彰化。
沈桂枝（1995）。老師怎樣跟學生說話─從社會語言學的觀點談教師溝通知能。人文及社會學科教學通訊，6（3），128-135。
沈添鉦（1996）。試從行為主義、建構主義與社會建構主義三個觀點評析全語教學。教師之友，37（5），24-32。
沈添鉦（1996）。試從行為主義、建構主義與社會建構主義三個觀點評析全語教學。教師之友，37（5），24-32。
沈添鉦（1997）。鷹架在語言發展中的角色：母語學習及第二語教學之實況分析與比較。國民教育研究學報，3，1-24。
沈添鉦（2000）。從傳播科技的發展看語文教育的內涵與趨勢。國民教育研究學報，6，61-78。
沈添鉦、黃秀文（1998）。全語教學在小學實施的難題與策略。國民教育研究學報，4，35-67。
沈添鉦、黃秀文、黃繼仁（2001）。國小高年級學童在全語取向語文課程中的寫作表現。國民教育研究學報，7，242-271。
谷瑞勉（譯）（1999）。L. E. Berk & A. Winsler 著。鷹架兒童的學習─維高斯基與幼兒教育。台北：心理出版社。
谷瑞勉（譯）（2001）。L. Dixon-Krauss 著。教室中的維高斯基：仲介的讀寫教學與評量。台北：心理出版社。
周立勳（1994）。國小班級分組合作學習之研究。國立政治大學教育研究所博士論文，未出版，台北。
周淑卿（2002）。誰在乎課程理論？─課程改革中的理論與實務問題。國立台北師範學院學報，15，1-16。
周慧茹（1998）。建構教室中數學知識形成歷程之詮釋分析。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
幸曼玲（2003）。語文教學的困境與省思。教師天地，126，57-64。
林玉体譯（1996）。民主與教育。台北：師大書苑。
林姿君（2000）。同儕互動中閱讀策略使用歷程之探討─以國小四年級國語科小組討論為例。台北市立師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
林慧芬（2003）。幼兒園教室的言談分析─誰主導了教室的發言？實踐學報，34，1-42。
邱馨儀（2002）。國民中學語文學習領域教師對九年一貫課程認知與態度之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系碩士論文，未出版。
信世昌（2001）。華語文閱讀策略之教程發展與研究。台北：師大書苑。
姜文閩(譯)（1992）。J. Dewey著。經驗與教育。台北：五南。
施良方（1996）。學習理論。高雄：麗文文化公司。
柯華葳、幸曼玲（1996）。討論過程中的互動─年齡與推理能力的影響。發表於「皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話」，台北市立師範學院主辦（1996, 1, 25-26）。
洪月女（譯）（1998）。Goodman, K.著。談閱讀。台北：心理。
洪惠娟（2000）。國民小學普通班語文課教室言談分析。國立高雄師範大學特殊教育學系碩士論文，未出版，高雄。
洪鎮濤（2004）。積累、語感、語感訓練。中學語文教學，295，13-16。
胡幼慧（1997）。轉型中的質性研究：演變、批判和女性主義研究觀點。載於胡幼慧主編，質性研究─理論、方法及本土女性研究實例（頁7-26）。台北：巨流。
夏林清（譯）（1997）。H. Altrichter, P. Posch & B. Somekh著。行動研究方法導論。台北：遠流。
夏林清（譯）（2000）。C. Argyris, R. Putnam & D. M. Smith 著。行動科學。台北：遠流。
徐照麗（1996）。以建構主義為基礎的教學設計。載於國立台中師範學院初等教育系「建構主義的教學」研討會手冊，6-17。
張世忠（2003）。建構取向教學─數學與科學。台北：五南。
張春興（1988）。知之歷程與教之歷程：認知心理學的發展及其在教育上的應用。教育心理學報，21，17-38頁。
張春興（1995）。教育心理學─三化取向的理論與實踐。台北：東華書局。
張靜嚳（1995）。何謂建構主義？建構與教學，3。2003年6月5日，取自http://163.23.220.18/ct/v3-1.htm.
教育部（2003）。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。台北：教育部。
郭重吉（1996）。建構論：科學哲學的省思。教育研究，49，16-24。
陳弘昌（1999）。國小語文科教學研究。台北：五南。
陳正乾（1996）。發展與學習之間的關係─皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話。文章發表於台北市立師範學院主辦，皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話研討會。台北：台北市立師範學院。
陳向明（2000）。質的研究方法與社會科學研究。北京：教育科學出版社。
陳伯璋（1990）。教育研究方法的新取向─質的研究方法。台北：南宏。
陳伯璋（2001）。新世紀課程改革的省思與挑戰。台北：師大書苑。
陳明和（1997）。「合作學習法」在國語科教學的可行性。中國語文，481，8-11。
陳昇飛（2002）。自傳文本的課程論述與批判。教育研究集刊，48（3），211-236。
陳昇飛（2004a）。理論與實務的對話─建構主義在數學教育上的再思。台中師院學報，18（2），71-87。
陳昇飛（2004b）。社會建構主義在國小語文教學上的實踐與省思。教育研究資訊，12（6），3-32。
陳啟明（1988）。斯金納的教學理論。載於黃光雄主編：教學原理。台北：師大書苑。
陳淑敏（1994）。Vygotsky的心理發展理論和教育。屏東師學院報，7，121-143。
陳淑敏（1996）。從社會互動看皮亞傑與維高斯基的理論及其對幼教之啟示。文章發表於台北市立師範學院主辦，皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話研討會。台北：台北市立師範學院。
陳惠邦（1998）。教育行動研究。台北：師大書苑。
陳達武（2001）。過程導向的語文教育在美國的發展及其理論背景。國立空中大學共同科學報，3，1-16。
陳瓊森、汪益（譯）（1995）。H. Gardner 著。超越教化的心靈。台北：遠流。
傅明俐（2001）。國民小學數學科合作學習之研究。國立彰化師範大學教育研究所碩士碖文，未出版，彰化。
單文經（1993）。鷹架支持的譬喻在大班教學上的應用。視聽教育雙月刊，39（6），1-22。
單文經（1998）。教學的本義與引申義。台灣教育，512，10-15。
彭淮棟（譯）（1984）。M. Polanyi ＆ H. Prosch 著。意義。台北：聯經。秦麗花、邱上真（2003）。Vygotsky的中介讀寫教學模式在國小資源班實施之行動研究。國立台北師範學院學報，16（1），89-110。
斐新寧（2001）。社會建構論及其教育意義。全球教育展望，10，20-24。
曾志華（1997）。社會互動與數學知識之建構：一個國小三年級數學教室之俗民誌研究。國立嘉義師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。
游自達（1997）。知識遷移的可能與限制。國民教育研究集刊，5，23-37。
游麗卿（1999）。Vygotsky社會文化歷史理論：搜集和分析教室社會溝通活動的對話及其脈絡探究概念發展。國教學報，11，230-258。
湯廷池（1989a）。從現代語言教學的觀點談小學國語教學與外籍學生華語教學（之二）。華文世界，51，52-57。
湯廷池（1989b）。從現代語言教學的觀點談小學國語教學與外籍學生華語教學（之三）。華文世界，52，9-15。
湯豐林、申繼亮（2004）。情境認知的理論基礎與教學條件。全球教育展望，33（4），53-57。
黃光雄主編（1991）。教學理論。高雄：復文。
黃秀文（1997）。小學一年級學童書寫型式與概念之研究。國民教育研究學報，3，121-154。
黃秀霜（2003）。國中小九年一貫課程語文領域之評量研發與驗證（II）。國科會專案報告。計畫編號：NSC 91-2413-H-024-004。
黃政傑（1996）。質化研究的原理與方法。載於黃政傑主編，質的教育研究：方法與實例，1-48。台北：漢文。
黃政傑（1997）。教學的意義與模式。載於黃政傑主編，教學原理（pp. 1-26）。台北：師大書苑。
黃政傑、林佩璇（1996）。合作學習。台北：五南。
黃秋娟（1995）。魏考斯基理論之探究─潛在發展區域。淡江大學教育資料科學研究所碩士論文，未出版，台北。
黃瑞琴（1993）。幼兒的語文經驗。台北：五南。
黃瑞祺（1996）。批判社會學─批判理論與現代社會學。台北：三民。
黃繼仁（1997）。美國小學全語言教學之研究。國立台灣師範大學教育學系碩士碖文，未出版，台北。
黃繼仁（2003）。課程慎思應用於教室層級課程實施之研究--以小學低年級教師的語文課程實踐為例。國立台灣師範大學教育學系博士碖文，未出版，台北。
黃繼仁、周立勳、甄曉蘭（2001）。國小教師國語教學信念及相關因素之調查研究。教育研究集刊，47，107-132。
甯自強（1996）。淺談建構教學的幾個概念。教育研究，49，4-6。
楊深坑（1998）。理論、詮釋與實踐。台北：師大書苑。
詹志禹（1996）。認識與知識：建構論VS.接受觀。教育研究，49，25-38。
鄒理民（譯）（1991）。P. L. Berger & T. Luckmann著。知識社會學─社會實體的建構。台北：巨流。
甄曉蘭（1996）。從典範轉移的再思論質的研究崛起的意義。嘉義師院學報，10，120-146。
甄曉蘭（1997a）。應用建構教學理念於教育專業發展課程之初探。發表於國立花蓮師範學院主辦，八十六學年度教育學術研討會。
甄曉蘭（1997b）。教學理論。載於黃政傑主編，教學原理（頁27-66）。台北：師大書苑。
甄曉蘭（2002）：從學科觀點探究建構教學理念於國小各科教學之應用－研究經驗分享與省思。教育改革的未來－國科會人文及社會科學發展處教育學門成果發表會。台北：國立台灣師範大學教育研究中心。
甄曉蘭（2003）。課程行動研究：實例與方法解析。台北：師大書苑。
甄曉蘭、曾志華（1997）。建構教學理念的興起與應用。國民教育學報，3，179-208。
趙健（2004）。基於學習創新的課程與教學設計。全球教育展望，33（7），37-41。
趙景瑞（1996）。談小學語文教學改革動向。康橋教研學會雜誌，24，33-36。
趙鏡中（2000a）。以語文能力為中心的教與學。載於九年一貫課程的教與學，12-20。台北：國立國民學校教師研習會。
趙鏡中（2000b）。教材「編製」與「研究」之探討。載於九年一貫課程的教與學，3-11。台北：國立國民學校教師研習會。
趙鏡中、范姜翠玉（2002）。國語文創新教學的思與行。研習資訊，19（1），17-27。
劉玉燕譯（1996）。Piaget訪談錄。台北：書泉。
劉書鋒、劉學惠、郝靖（2003）。建構主義課堂解讀。全球教育展望，187，51-55。
歐陽素鶯（1999）。從兩個教學模式看低年級的國語科教學。載於國立新竹師範學院語文教育學系主編，民國以來國民小學語文課程教材教法學術研討會論文集（頁218-228），新竹：新竹師範學院。
潘世尊（1997）。Rogers人本教育理論與建構主義的整合教學模式在國小一年級數學科應用之研究。國立台中師範學院國民教育研究所碩士論文，未出版。
潘世尊（2002）。教學上的鷹架要怎麼搭。屏東師院學報，16，263-293。
潘世尊（2003）。建構主義學習理論與教學應用。載於張新仁主編，學習與教學新趨勢（頁307-343）。台北：心理出版社。
蔡敏玲（1996）。豈只是自言自語而已：維高斯基和皮亞傑關於「自語」的對話。發表於「皮亞傑與維高斯基的對話」，台北市立師範學院主辦（1996, 1, 25-26）。
蔡敏玲（1998）。「內」「外」之間與之外的模糊地帶：再思建構論之爭議。課程與教學季刊，1（3），81-96。
蔡敏玲（2001）。教育質性研究歷程的展現：尋找教室團體互動的節奏與變奏。台北：心理出版社。
蔡敏玲（2004）。我看教育質性研究創塑意義的問題與難題：經歷、剖析與再脈絡化。國立台北師範學院學報，17（1），493-518。
蔡敏玲、陳正乾（譯）（2001）。L. S. Vygotsky 著。社會中的心智─高層次心理過程的發展。台北：心理出版社。
蔡敏玲、彭海燕（譯）（1998）。C. B. Cazden著。教室言談：教與學的語言。台北：心理出版社。
鄭明長（2002）。當問題不再是問題：從教室言談看課程改革的實踐。教育研究月刊，93，68-75。
鄭昭明（1982）。漢字認知歷程。載於高尚仁、鄭昭明合編，中國語文的心理學研究（頁135-172）。台北：文鶴。
鄭昭明（1993）。認知心理學：理論與實踐。台北：桂冠。
鄭婉敏（1999）。認知的學習理論的教學意涵及其對教學的啟示。台中師院學報，13，57-72。
鄭麗玉（1993）。認知心理學─理論與應用。台北：五南。
賴淑媛（2003）。維高斯基符號中介與心智社會建構理論之研究。南華大學教育社會學研究所碩士論文，未出版，嘉義。
錡寶香（1999）：國小學童閱讀理解能力之分析。國教學報，11，100-133。
閻苹、魏洁（2003）。銜接、延伸、發展─從語文課程標準看閱讀能力的培養。中學語文教學，291，8-11。
簡淑真（1998）。建構論及其在幼兒教育上的應用。課程與教學季刊，1（3），61-80。
簡楚瑛（2005）。從課室言談與課程結構看教育改革的契機。教育與心理研究，28（1），49-74。
顏弘志（2001）。建構主義取向教學的實踐─一位國小自然科教師教學信念和學科教學知識的改變。國立花蓮師範學院國小科學教育研究所碩士論文，未出版，花蓮。
嚴祥鸞（1997）。參與觀察法。載於胡幼慧主編，質性研究─理論、方法及本土女性研究實例，195-222。台北：巨流。
蘇育任（1997）。建構主義式教育的迷思與省思。國民教育研究集刊，5，121-139頁。

二、外文部分
Almasi, J. (1995). The nature of 4th graders’ sociocognitive conflicts in peer-led and teacher-led discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 314-351.
Applebee, A. N. (1996). Curriculum as conversation: transforming traditions of teaching and learning. Chicago: The University of Chicago.
Au, K. H. (1998). Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of Literacy Research, 30(2), 297-319.
Barr, R. (2001). Research on the teaching of reading. In V. Richardson (Ed.). Handbook of research on teaching 4th (pp.390-415). Washington, D. C.: American Educational Research Association.
Bean, T. W. (2000). Reading in the content areas: Social constructivist dimensions. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.). Handbook of reading research (Vol.3) (pp.629-644). Mahwah, N. J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Bennett, N. & Dunne, E. (1991). The nature and quality of talk in co-operative classroom groups. Learning and Instruction, 1, 103-118.
Berger, P. L. & Luckmann, T. (1966). The social construction of reality: a treatise in the sociology of knowledge. NY: Doubleday.
Bliss, J., Askew, M. & Macrae, S. (1996). Effective teaching and learning: scaffolding revisited. Oxford review of education, 22(1), 37-61.
Bloome, D. & Theodorou, E. (1998). Analyzing teacher-student and student-student discourse. In J. L. Green & O. Harker (Ed.), Multiple perspective analyses of classroom discourse (pp.217-248). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Brown, R. A. J. & Renshaw, P. D. (2000). Collective argumentation: a sociocultural approach to reframing classroom teaching and learning. In H. Cowie & G. Van der Aalsvoort (Eds.). Social interaction in learning and instruction: the meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp.52-66). New York: Pergamon.
Bruner, J. S. (1960). The process of education. New York: Vintage Books.
Bruner, J. S. (1985). Vygotsky: a historical and conceptual perspective. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.). Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp.21-34). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: education, knowledge and action research. London and Philadelphia: The Falmer Press.
Cazden, C. B. (1986). Classroom discourse. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (Vol.3) (pp.342-463). NY: Macmillan Publishing Company.
Cazden, C. B. (1996). Selective traditions: readings of Vygotsky in writing pedagogy. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning, and schooling (pp.165-185). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Chaiklin, S. (2003). The zone of proximal development in Vygotsky’s analysis of learning and instruction. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp.39-64). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Chang, G. L. & Wells, G. (1993). Dynamics of discourse: Literacy and the construction of knowledge. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: sociocultural dynamics in children’s development. (pp.58-90). NY: Oxford University Press.
Cobb, P., Wood, T. & Yackel, E. (1993). Discourse, mathematical thinking, and classroom practice. In E. A. Fouman, N. Minick & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: sociocultural dynamics in children’s development. (pp.91-119). NY: Oxford University Press.
Cole, M. (1985). The zone of proximal development: where culture and cognition create each other. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp.146-161). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Collins, E. & Green, J. L. (1992). Learning in classroom settings: making or breaking a culture. In H. H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining student learning: roots of educational change (pp.59-85). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Collins, J., Harkin, J. & Nind, M. (2002). Manifesto for learning. New York: Continuum.
Corden, R. (2000). Literacy and learning through talk: strategies for the primary classroom. Buckingham Philadelphia : Open University Press.
Dahl, K. L. & Freppon, P. A. (1995). A comparison of inner-city children’s interpretations of reading and whole language classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 50-74.
Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and pedagogy. London New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Davydov, V. V. (1995). The influence of L. S. Vygotsky on education theory, research, and practice. Educational Researcher, 24(3), 12-21.
Davydov, V. V. & Radzikhovskii, L. A. (1985). Vygotsky’s theory and the activity-oriented approach in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp.35-65). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Introduction: Entering the field of qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. (pp.1-18). Thousand Oaks, CA:SAGE.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York : The Macmillan company
Dickinson, D. & Smith, M. W. (1994). Long-term effects of preschool teachers’ book reading on low-income children’s vocabulary and story comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 104-122.
Dixon-Krauss, L. (1996). Vygotsky in the classroom : mediated literacy instruction and assessment. White Plains, N.Y. : Longman.
Driscoll, M. P. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Durkin, D. (1966). Children who read early. New York: Teachers College Press.
Edwards, A. D. & Furlong, J. J. (1978). The language of teaching: Meaning in classroom interaction. London: Heinemann.
Edwards, D. & Mercer, N. (1987). Common knowledge: The development of understanding in the classroom. London: Methuen.
Eeds, M. & Wells, D. (1989). Grand conversations: An explanation of meaning construction in literature study groups. Research in the Teaching of English, 23, 4-29.
Egan, K. & Gajdamaschko, N. (2003). Some cognitive tools of literacy. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context. (pp.83-98). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Elbers, E. & Streefland, L. (2000). “Shall we be researchers again?” Identity and social interaction in a community of inquiry. In H. Cowie & G. Van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: the meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp.35-51). New York: Pergamon.
Evans, K. S. (2002). Fifth-grade students’ perceptions of how they experience literature discussion groups. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(1), 46-69.
Fall, R. ,Webb, N. M. & Chudowsky, N. (2000). Group discussion and large-scale language arts assessment: effects on students’ comprehension. American Educational Research Journal, 37(4), 911-941.
Floden, R. E. (2001). Research on effects of teaching: a continuing model for research on teaching. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching 4th (pp.3-16). Washington, D. C.: American Educational Research Association.
Florio-Ruane, S. & McVee, M. (2000). Ethnographic approaches to literacy research. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.3) (pp.153-162). Mahwah, N. J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Forman, E. A. & McPhail, J. (1993). Vygotskian perspective on children’s collaborative problem-solving activities. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp.213-229). NY: Oxford University Press.
Forman, E. A. (1987). Learning through peer interaction: A Vygotskyian perspective. The Genetic Epistemologist, 15, 6-15.
Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism: A psychological theory of learning. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp.8-33). NY: Teachers College Press.
Gaffney, J. S. & Anderson, R. C. (2000). Trends in reading research in the United States: Changing intellectual currents over three decades. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.3) (pp.53-74). Mahwah, N. J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Galda, L., Ash, G. E. & Cullinan, B. E. (2000). Children’s literature. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.3) (pp.361-379). Mahwah, N. J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Gallimore, R. & Tharp, R. (1990). Teaching mind in society: teaching, schooling, and literate discourse. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp.175-201). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gee, J. P. (2000). Discourse and sociocultural studies in reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.3) (pp.195-207). Mahwah, N. J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Gee, J. P. (2002). A sociocultural perspective on early literacy development. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp.30-42). NY: The Guilford Press.
Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: selected essays. New York: Basic Books.
Geertz, C. (1983). Local knowledge. New York: Basic Books.
Gergen, K. J. (1995). Social construction and the educational process. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp.17-40). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Gergen, K. J. (1999). An invitation to social construction. London: SAGE.
Gergen, K. J. (2001). Social construction in context. London: SAGE.
Golden, J. M. (1986). Reader-text interaction. Theory into Practice, 25, 92-96.
Goodman, K. S. (1982). Language and literacy: Process, theory, research. Boston: Rout ledge & Kegan Paul.
Goodman, K. (1986). What’s whole in whole language? Portsmouth: Heinemann.
Goodman, L. (1989). Roots of the whole-language movement. The Elementary School Journal, 90 (2), 112-127.
Goodman, Y. M. & Goodman, K. S. (1990). Vygotsky in a whole-language perspective. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp.223-250). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Goodman, Y. (1986). Children coming to know literacy. In W. H. Teale & E. Sulzby (Eds.), Emergent literacy: writing and reading (pp.1-14). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Gould, J. S. (1996). A constructivist perspective on teaching and learning in the language arts. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp.92-102). NY: Teachers College Press
Graves, M. F., Connie, J. & Graves, B. B. (1998). Teaching reading in the 21st century. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Gredler, M. E. (1997). Learning and instruction: Theory into practice (3rd). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Green, J. L. Weade, R. & Graham, K. (1988). Lesson construction and student participation: a sociolinguistic analysis. In J. L. Green & O. Harker (Ed.), Multiple perspective analyses of classroom discourse (pp.11-48). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Grossman, P. L. (2001). Research on the teaching of literature: finding a place. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching 4th (pp.416-432). Washington, D. C.: American Educational Research Association.
Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
Gumperz, J. J. (1986). Interactional sociolinguistics in the study of schooling. In J. Cook-Gumperz (Ed.), The social construction of literacy (pp.45-68). Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press.
Guzzetti, B. J., Snyder, T. E., Glass, G. V. & Gamas, W. S. (1993). Promoting conceptual change in science: A comparative meta-analysis of instructional interventions from reading education and science education. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 116-159.
Heritage, J. (2001). Goffman, Garfinkel and conversation analysis. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: a reader (pp.47-56). London: Sage Publications.
Hicks, D. (1995). Discourse, learning, and teaching. Review of Research in Education, 21, 49-95.
Hicks, D. (1996). Contextual inquiries: a discourse-oriented study of classroom learning. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning, and schooling (pp.104-141). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Howe, K. R. & Berv, F. (2000). Constructing constructivism, epistemological and pedagogical. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education: opinions and second opinions of controversial issues (pp.19-40). Chicago, Illinois: NSSE.
Huberman, A. M. & Miles, M. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. (pp.428-444). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Ivinson, G. (2000). The development of children’s social representations of the primary school curriculum. In H. Cowie & G. Van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: the meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp.67-92). New York: Pergamon.
Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1992). Implementing cooperative learning. Contemporary Education, 63(3), 173-180.
John-Steiner, V. & Meehan, T. M. (1998). Creativity and collaboration in knowledge construction. In C. D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry (pp. 31-48). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kantor, R., Miller, S. M. & Fernie, D. E. (1992). Diverse paths to literacy in a preschool classroom: A sociocultural perspective. Reading Research Quarterly, 27(3), 185-201.
Karpov, Y. V. (2003). Development through the lifespan: a neo-Vygotskian approach. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp.138-155). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Kelly, A. V. (1999). Knowledge and the curriculum. In A. V. Kelly, The curriculum: theory and practice. London: Harper & Row.
Kozulin, A. (1986). The concept of activity in Soviet psychology. American Psychologist, 41(3), 264-274.
Kozulin, A. (1996). A literary model for psychology. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning, and schooling (pp.145-164). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Kozulin, A. (2003). Psychological tools and mediated learning. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp.15-38). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Kumpulainen, K. & Mutanen, M. (2000). Mapping the dynamics of peer group interaction: a method of analysis of socially shared learning processes. In H. Cowie & G. Van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: the meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp.144-160). New York: Pergamon.
Kumpulainen, K. & Wray, D. (2002a). Classroom interaction, learning and teaching. In K. Kumpulainen & D. Wray (Eds.), Classroom interaction and social learning: from theory to practice (pp.9-16). NY: Routledge Falmer.
Kumpulainen, K. & Wray, D. (2002b). Perspectives on social interaction and learning. In K. Kumpulainen & D. Wray (Eds.), Classroom interaction and social learning: from theory to practice (pp.17-30). NY: Routledge Falmer.
Lantolf, J. P. (2003). Intrapersonal communication and internalization in the second language classroom. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context. (pp.349-370). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Lee, C. D. & Smagorinsky, P. (2000). Introduction: Constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry. In C. D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian perspectives on literacy research: constructing meaning through collaborative inquiry (pp.1-18). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Leontev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concepy of activity in soviet psychology (pp.37-71). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
Lewis, C. (1997). The social drama of literature discussions in a fifth/sixth grade classroom. Research in the Teaching of English, 31, 163-204.
Lincoln , Y. S. & Denzin, N. K. (1994). The fifth moment. In N.K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. (pp.575-586). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Maloch, B. (2002). Scaffolding student talk: One teacher’s role in literature discussion groups. Reading Research Quarterly, 37 (1), 94-112.
Marshall, H. H. (1992). Seeing, redefining, and supporting student learning. In H. H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining student learning: roots of educational change (pp.1-32). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Maybin, J. & Moss, G. (1993). Talk about texts: reading as a social event. Journal of Research in Reading, 16(2), 138-147.
Maybin, J., Mercer, N. & Stierer, B. (1992). ‘Scaffolding’ learning in the classroom. In K. Norman (Ed.), Thinking voices : the work of the national oracy project (pp.186-195). London : Hodder & Stoughton.
Mayer, R. E. (1992). Cognition and instruction: Their historic meeting within educational psychology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 405-412.
McGee, L. M. (1992). Exploring the literature-based reading revolution. Language Arts, 69, 529-537.
Mehan, H. (1981). Social constructivism in psychology and sociology. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 3(4), 71-77.
Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Mexwell, J. (1992). Understanding and validity in Qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review, 62(3), 279-300.
Mexwell, J. (1996). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.
Miller, S. M. (2003). How literature discussion shapes thinking: ZPD for teaching/learning habits of the heart and mind. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp.289-316). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Moll, L. C. (1990). Introduction. In C. L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education : Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp.1-27). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moll, L. C. (2001). Through the mediation of others: Vygotsky research on teaching. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (4th ed.) (pp.111-132). Washington, DC: AERA.
Moll, L. C. & Whitmore, K. F. (1993). Vygotsky in classroom practice: Moving from individual transmission to social transaction. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp.19-42). NY: Oxford University Press.
Morrow, L. M. & Gambell, L. B. (2002). Literature-based instruction in the early years. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp.348-360). NY: The Guilford Press.
Newman, J. (1985). Whole language: Theory in use. Portsmouth. NH: Heinemann.
Nystrand, M. & Gamoran, A. (1991). Instructional discourse, student engagement, and literature achievement. Research in the Teaching of English, 25(3), 261-290.
O’Connor, M. C. & Michaels, S. (1996). Shifting participant frameworks: orchestrating thinking practices in group discussion. In D. Hicks (Ed.), Discourse, learning, and schooling (pp.63-103). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Palincsar, A. S., Brown, A. L. & Campione, J. C. (1993). First-Grade dialogues for knowledge acquisition and use. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp.43-57). NY: Oxford University Press.
Pearson, P. D. & Fielding, L. (1991). Comprehension instruction. n R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp. 815-860). New York: Longman.
Perret-Clermont, A. –N., Perret, J. –F. & Bell, N. (1991). The social constuction of meaning and cognitive activity in elementary school children. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition. (pp.41-62). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Phillips, D. C. (2000). An opinionated account of the constructivist landscape. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education: opinions and second opinions of controversial issues (pp.1-16). Chicago, Illinois: NSSE.
Pomerantz, A. & Fehr, B. J. (1997). Conversation analysis: an approach to the study of social action as sense making practices. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (pp.64-91). London: Sage Publications.
Popkewitz, T. S. (1998). Dewey, Vegotsky, and the social administration of the idividual: constructivist pedagogy as systems of ideas in historical spaces. American Educational Research Journal, 35(4), 535-570.
Prevost, F. J. (1996). A new way of teaching. Journal of Education, 179(1), 49-60.
Resnick, L. B. (1991). Shared cognition: thinking as social practice. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine & S. D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp.1-21). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Rogoff, B. (1994). Developing understanding of the idea of communities of learners. Mind, Culture and Activity, 1, 209-229.
Rojas-Drummond, S., Hernndez, G., Vlez, M. & Villagrn, G. (1998). Cooperative learning and the appropriation of procedural knowledge by primary school children. Learning and Instruction, 8 , 37-61.
Santa Barbara Classroom Discourse Group (1992). Constructing literacy in classrooms: literate action as social accomplishment. In H. H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining student learning: roots of educational change (pp.119-150). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Schn, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. London: Temple Smith.
Schwandt, T. A. (1998). Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues (pp.221-259). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
Searle, D. (1984). Scaffolding : Who’s building whose building? Language Arts, 61 (5), 480-483
Simons, H. D. & Murphy, S. (1986). Spoken language strategies and reading acquisition. In J. Cook-Gumperz (Ed.), The social construction of literacy (pp. 185-206). Cambridge ; New York : Cambridge University Press.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Smith, F. (1983). Essays into literacy: selected papers and some afterthoughts. Portsmouth, N. H.: Heinemann.
Spivey, N. N. (1997). The metaphor of constructivism: reading, writing, and making of meaning. California: Academic press.
Steffe L. P. & Gale J. (Eds.) (1995). Constructivism in education. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Stenhouse, L. (1975). An introduction curriculum research and development. London: Heinmann.
Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park: SAGE.
Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse analysis: the sociolinguisic analysis of natural language. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Sulzby, E. & Teale, W. (1991). Emergent literacy. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp.727-757). New York: Longman.
Teale, W. H. & Sulzby, E. (1986). Emergent literacy: writing and reading. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Teale, W. H. & Sulzby, E. (1989). Emergent literacy: New perspectives. In D. Strickland & L. Morrow (Eds.), Emergent literacy: Young children learn to read and write (pp.1-15). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Tepper, N. C. (1998). Literacy development: teacher/student interaction in a whole language classroom. Ann Arbor, MI.:A Bell and Howell Information Co.
Tierney, R. J. & Shanahan, T. (1991). Research on the reading –writing relationship: Interactions, transactions, and outcomes. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (pp.246-280). New York: Longman.
Tompkins, Gail. E. (2003). Literacy for the 21st century: teaching reading and writing in pre-kindergarten through grade 4. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Tudge, J. R. H. (1990). Vygotsky, the zone of proximal development, and peer collaboration: Implications for classroom practice. In C. L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education : Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp.155-172). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van der Aalsvoort, G. M. & Harinck, F. J. H. (2000). Studying social interaction in instruction and learning: methodological approaches and problems. In H. Cowie & G. Van der Aalsvoort (Eds.), Social interaction in learning and instruction: the meaning of discourse for the construction of knowledge (pp. 3-20). New York: Pergamon.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1997). Discourse as interaction in society. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.). Discourse as social interaction (pp.1-37). London: Sage Publications.
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1995a). A constructivist approach to teaching. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education（pp.3-15）. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associate.
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1995b). Radical constructivism: A way of knowing and learning. Washington, D. C.: The Falmer Press.
Von Glasersfeld, E. (1996). Introduction: aspects of constructivism. In C. T. Fosnot (Ed.), Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice (pp.3-7). NY: Teachers College Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The genesis of higher mental functions. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concepy of activity in soviet psychology (pp.147-188). Armonk, NY: Sharpe.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The development of thinking and concept formation in adolescence. In R. Van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp.185-265). Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.
Vygotsky, L. (1987). Thinking and speech. New York: Plenum.
Vygotsky, L. (1997). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Vol.4. The history of the development of higher mental functions. New York: Plenum Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. & Luria, A.（1994）. Tool and symbol in child development. In R. Van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp.99-174). Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.
Watson, R. (2002). Literacy and oral language: implications for early literacy acquisition. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp.43-53). NY: The Guilford Press.
Weade, G. (1992). Locating learning in the times and spaces of teaching. In H. H. Marshall (Ed.), Redefining student learning: roots of educational change (pp.87-118). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Weaver, C. (1990). Understanding whole language: from principles to practice. Portsouth, NH: Heinemann.
Webb, N. M. & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp.841-876). NY: Macmillan.
Webb, N. M., Troper, J. D. & Fall, R. (1995). Constructive activity and learning in collaborative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 406-423.
Wells, G. & Chang-Wells, G. L. (1992). Constructing knowledge together: classrooms as centers of inquiry and literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wertsch, J. V. (1979). From social interaction to higher psychological processes: A clarification and application of Vygotsky’s theory. Human Development, 22, 1-22.
Wertsch, J. V. (1984). The zone of proximal development: some conceptual issues. In B. Rogoff & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), Children’s learning in the “zone of proximal development” (pp.7-18). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Wertsch, J. V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. & Stone, C. A. (1985). The concept of internalization in Vygotsky’s account of the genesis of higher mental functions. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives (pp.35-65). NY: Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. & Toma, C. (1995). Discourse and learning in the classroom: A sociocultural approach. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp.159-174). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wertsch, J. V., del Rίo, P. & Alvarez, A. (1995). Socioculural studies: history, action, and mediation. In J. V. Wertsch, P. del Rίo & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (1-36). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Wetherell, M. (2001). Themes in discourse research: the case of Diana. In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S. J. Yates (Eds.), Discourse theory and practice: a reader (pp.14-28). London: Sage Publications.
Wilkinson, L. C. & Silliman, E. R. (2000). Classroom language and literacy learning. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol.3) (pp.337-360). Mahwah, N. J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Wood, M. (1994). Essentials of classroom teaching: elementary language arts. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Wood, L. A. & Kroger, R. O. (2000). Doing discourse analysis: methods for studying in talk and text. London: Sage Publications.
Wood, T. (1995). From alternative epistemologies to practice in education: rethinking what it means to teach and learn. In L. P. Steffe & J. Gale (Eds.), Constructivism in education (pp.331-339). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Wood, T., Cobb, P. & Yackel, E. (1992). Change in learning mathematics: change in teaching mathematics. In H. H. Marshall (Ed.). Redefining student learning: roots of educational change (pp.177-206). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Zuckerman, G. (2003). The learning activity in the first years of schooling: the developmental path toward reflection. In A. Kozulin, B. Gindis, V. S. Ageyev & S. M. Miller (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context. (pp.177-199). New York : Cambridge University Press.
Zuckerman, G., Chudinova, E. & Khavkin, E. (1998). Inquiry as a pivotal element of knowledge acquisition within Vygotskian paradigm: Building a science curriculum for elementary school. Cognition and instruction, 16, 201-233.