An analysis of the effectiveness of analogy use in college‐level biochemistry textbooks

By M. Orgill, G. Bodner. 2006

93 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education, Physical and Theoretical Chemistry

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/91a7c8f003a53e87537172e7cdd1b36d48617bb9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

1. Trevor R Anderson
2. Konrad J. Schönborn
3. Martin Rusek
4. Karel Vojíř
5. M. Ibrahim
6. L. Yuanita

In Education

1. Trevor R Anderson
2. Konrad J. Schönborn
3. Martin Rusek
4. Karel Vojíř
5. M. Ibrahim
6. L. Yuanita

Citations in the corpus

• Science education textbook research trends: a systematic literature review (2019, background): “Another similarly focused work was carried out in the USA on biochemistry university textbooks (Orgill & Bodner, 2006).”
• A Model of Factors Determining Students’ Ability to Interpret External Representations in Biochemistry (2009, background): “Secondly, our data suggested that some students performed inappropriate analogical reasoning when interpreting the ERs (e.g., Orgill & Bodner, 2006; Sumfleth & Telgenbüscher, 2001).”