Benzer, E. (2010) Proje Tabanlı Öğrenme Yaklaşımıyla Hazırlanan Çevre Eğitimi Dersinin Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Çevre Okuryazarlığına Etkisi. İstanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü  İlköğretim Ana Bilim Dalı Fen Bilgisi Öğretmenliği Bilim Dalı Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi.

Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, D. P., Bravo, M. A., &Barber, J. (2006). Reading and writing in the service of inquiry-based science. In R. Douglas, M. P. Klentschy,K. Worth,& W. Binder (Eds).Linking science & literacy in the K-8 classroom, (pp. 221-244). Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association Press.

Dorn, L. J., &Soffos, C. (2005). Teaching for deep comprehension: A reading workshop approach. Portland: Stenhouse Publishers.

Erdoğan, M., Coşkun, E., &Uşak, M. (2011). Developing children’s environmental literacy through literature: An analysis of 100 basic literary works. Egitim Arastirmalari-Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 42, 45-62.

Erdoğan, M., Kostova, Z., &Marcinkowski (2009).Components of environmental literacy in elementary science education curriculum in Bulgaria and Turkey. Eurasia Journal Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(1), 15-26.

Gates, V. P., Duke N. K.,&Martineau, J A. (2007). Learning to read and write genre-specific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading ResearchQuarterly, 42 (1), 8-45.

Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., &Klauda, S. L. (2007). Contributions of Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42, 237 - 250.

Hsu, S. J. (1997). An assessment of environmental literacy and analysis of predictors of responsible environmental behavior held by secondary teachers in Hualien country of Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. (Ohio State University) (UMI Number: 9731641).

Hunt, P. (1994).An introduction to children’sliterature. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.

MoNE (2006).İlköğretim Türkçe dersi öğretim program ve kılavuzu (6-8. Sınıflar)[Elementary Turkish language curriculum and its guide (6th-8th grades)]. Ankara:MoNE)

MoNE (2009). İlköğretim Türkçe dersi öğretim program ve kılavuzu (1-5. Sınıflar)[Elementary Turkish language curriculum and its guide (1st-5th grades)]. Ankara:MoNE.

MoNE (2015).Türkçedersi(1-8. sınıflar) öğretim program [Turkish language (1st-8th grades)].curriculum Ankara:MoNE.

Napoli, M. (2011). Going green: Empowering readers to change the environment. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 47(2), 76-79.

O’Brien, S.R.M. (2007). Indications of environmental literacy: Using a new survey instrument to measure awareness, knowledge, and attitudes of universityaged students. Iowa State University, Master Thesis, Ames, Iowa.

Özbay, M. (2002).Kültür aktarımı açısından Türkçeöğretimi, Türk Dili, (602), 112-120.

Popp, M. S. (2005).Teaching language and literature in elementary classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ramos, A. M., & Ramos, R. (2011). Ecoliteracy through imagery: A close reading of two wordless Picture books. Children’s Literature in Education42(4), 325–339

Roth, C.E. (1992). Environmental literacy: Its roots, evolution and directions in the 1990s. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED348235).

Sallabaş, E. (2013).Analysis of narrative texts in secondary school textbooks in terms of values education. Educational Research and Reviews, 8(8), 361-366.

Uyar, Y. (2007) Türkçe öğretiminde kültür aktarımı ve kültürel kimlik geliştirme. Unpublished M Ed. Thesis, Ankara: Gazi University.

Wigfield, A., Guthrie, J. T., Tonks, S., &Perencevich, K. C. (2004). Children’s motivation for reading: Domain specificity and instructional influences. The Journal of Educational Research.97 (6), 299-309

Adams, W. K., & Wieman, C. E. (2011). Development and validation of instruments to measure learning of expert-like thinking. International Journal of Science Education 33(9), 1289-1312.

Airasian, P. W., & Miranda, H. (2002). The role of assessment in the revised taxonomy. Theory Into Practice, 4, 249-254.

Anderson, L. W. (2003). Classroom assessment: Enhancing the quality of teacher decision making. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Artdej, R., Ratanaroutai, T., Coll, R. K., & Thongpanchang, T. (2010). Thai Grade 11 students’ alternative conceptions for acid–base chemistry. Research in Science and Technological Education, 28(2), 167-183.

Bell, B., & Cowie, B. (2001). The characteristics of formative assessment in science education. Science Education, 85(5), 536-553.

Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-cultural research. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 185-216.

Burns, J. R. (1982). An evaluation of 6th. and 7th. form chemistry in terms of the needs of the students and the community. Report to the Department of Education, Wellington, New Zealand.

Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2007). The development of a two-tier multiple-choice diagnostic instrument for evaluating secondary school students’ ability to describe and explain chemical reactions using multiple levels of representation. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 8(3), 293-307.

Chandrasegaran, A. L., Treagust, D. F., & Mocerino, M. (2008). An evaluation of a teaching intervention to promote students’ ability to use multiple levels of representation when describing and explaining chemical reactions. Research in Science Education, 38(2), 237-248.

Chairam, S., Somsook, E., & Coll, R. K. (2009). Enhancing Thai students' learning of chemical kinetics. Research in Science & Technological Education 27(1), 95-115.

Chiu, M-H. (2004). An investigation of exploring mental models and causes of secondary school students' misconceptions in acids-bases, particle theory, and chemical equilibrium. Annual report to the National Science Council in Taiwan. Taiwan: National Science Council.

Chiu, M-H. (2007). A national survey of students’ conceptions of chemistry in Taiwan. International Journal of Science Education, 29(4), 421-454.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioural sciences (2nd. ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Cohen, L.,  Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London: Routledge.

Cros, D., Maurin, M., Amouroux, R., Chastrette, M., Leber, J. & Fayol, M. (1986). Conceptions of first-year university students of the constituents of matter and the notions of acids and bases. European Journal of Science Education, 8, 305-313.

Demircioğlu, G., Ayas, A., & Demircioğlu, H. (2005). Conceptual change achieved through a new teaching program on acids and bases. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 6(1), 36-51.

Drechsler, M. & Van Driel, J. (2008). Experienced teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge

of teaching acid–base chemistry. Research in Science Education, 38(5), 611-635.

Drechsler, M. & Van Driel, J. (2009). Teachers’ perceptions of the teaching of acids and bases in Swedish upper secondary schools. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 10, 86-96.

Hand, B., & Treagust, D. F. (1991). Student achievement and science curriculum development using a constructivist framework. School Science and Mathematics, 91, 172-176.

Haslam F. and Treagust D. F. (1987) Diagnosing secondary students’ misconceptions of photosynthesis and respiration in plants using a two-tier multiple choice instrument, Journal of Biological Education. 21, 203-211.

Huang, W. C. (2004). The types and causes of misconceptions of elementary students on acids–bases. Annual Report to the National Science Council in Taiwan (in Chinese). Taiwan: National Science Council.

Kala, N., Yaman, F., & Ayas, A. (2013). The effectiveness of Predict-Observe-Explain technique in probing students’ understanding about acid-base chemistry: A case for the concepts of pH, pOH and strength. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(1), 555-574.

Krathwohl, D. R. (2010). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice 41(4), 212-218.

Nakhleh, M. B., & Krajcik, J. S. (1993). A protocol analysis of the influence of technology on

students’ actions, verbal commentary, and thought processes during the performance of acid-base titrations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 1149-1168.

Popham, W. J. (1995). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Rahayu, S., Treagust, D. F., Chandrasegaran, A. L., Kita, M, & Ibnu, S. (2011). Assessment of electrochemical concepts: A comparative study involving senior-high school students in Indonesia and Japan. Research in Science &Technological Education, 29(2), 169-188.

Sheppard, K. (2006). High school students’ understanding of titrations and related acid-base phenomena. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7(1), 32-45.

Tamir, P. 1990. Justifying the selection of answers in multiple choice items. International Journal of Science Education 12(5), 563-573.

Tan, D. K-C. & Treagust, D. F. (1999). Evaluating students’ understanding of chemical bonding. School Science Review, 81, 75–83.

Tan, D. K-C, Treagust, D. F., Chandrasegaran, A. L., & Mocerino, M. (2010). Kinetics of acid reactions: making sense of associated concepts. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 11(4), 267–280.

Taylor, C. S., & Nolen, S. B. (2005). Classroom assessment. Uper Saddler River, NJ: Pearson.

Treagust, D. F. (1988). Development and use of diagnostic tests to evaluate students' misconceptions in science, International Journal of Science Education, 10, 159-169.

Treagust, D. F. (1995). Diagnostic assessment of students’ science knowledge. In S. M. Glynn and R. Duit (Eds.), Learning in science in the schools: Research reforming practice (Vol. 1) (pp. 327-346), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Treagust, D. F. (2006). Diagnostic assessment in science as a means to improving teaching, learning and retention. In UniServe science – symposium proceedings:Assessment in science teaching and learning (pp. 1–9). Sydney, NSW: Uniserve Science.

Treagust, D. F. & Chandrasegaran, A. L. (2007). The Taiwan national science concept learning study in an international perspective. International Journal of ScienceEducation, 29(4), 391–403.

Tyson, L., Treagust, D. F. & Bucat, R. B. (1999). The complexity of teaching and learning chemical equilibrium. Journal of Chemical Education, 35, 1031–1055

Alpaslan, M. M., Yalvac, B., & Loving, C. C. (2015). Curriculum Reform Movements and Science Textbooks: A Retrospective Examination of 6th Grade Science Textbooks. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(2), 207-216.

Atkinson, D. (1999). Scientific discourse in sociohistorical context: The philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination. (C. Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. (V.W. McGee, Trans.). Austin: University of Texas Press.

Berman, Ruth A. & Nir-sagiv, B. (2007). Comparing narrative and expository text construction across adolescence: A developmental paradox. Discourse Processes, 43 (2), 79-120.

Britton, B.K. & Black, J. B. (1985). Understanding expository text: From structure to process and world knowledge. In B.K. Britton & J.B. Black (Eds.). Understanding expository text: A theoretical and practical handbook for analyzing explanatory text. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Britton, B. K., Glynn, S. M., Meyer, B. J. F. & Penland, M. J. (1982). Effects of text structure on use of cognitive capacity during reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 51-61.

Engert, K., & Krey, B. (2013). Reading Writing/Writing Reading on Epistemic Work with Scientific Texts. Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie, 42(5), 366-384

Eren, M., Bulut, M., & Bulut, N. (2015). A content analysis study about the usage of history of mathematics in textbooks in Turkey. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 53-62.

Gajria, M., Jitendra, A. K., Sood, S. & Sacks, G. (2007). Improving Comprehension of Expository Text in Students With LD: A Research Synthesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, (3), 210–225.

Gates, V. P., Duke N. K. & Martineau, J A. (2007). Learning to read and write genre-specific text: Roles of authentic experience and explicit teaching. Reading Research Quarterly, 42 (1), 8-45.

Goodwin, C. (1995). Seeing in depth. Social Studies of Science, 25, 237–274

Hahn, P., Dullweber, F., Unglaub, F., & Spies, C. K. (2014). Text mining, a method for computer-assisted analysis of scientific texts, demonstrated by an analysis of author networks. Handchirurgie Mikrochirurgie Plastische Chirurgie. 46(3), 186-191.

Hasni, A., & Potvin, P. (2015). Student’s Interest in Science and Technology and its Relationships with Teaching Methods, Family Context and Self-Efficacy. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 10(3), 337-366.

Kazempour, M. (2014). I Can't Teach Science! A Case Study of an Elementary Pre-Service Teacher's Intersection of Science Experiences, Beliefs, Attitude, and Self-Efficacy. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 9(1), 77-96.

Kelly, G. J. & Bazerman, C. (2003). How students argue scientific claims: A rhetorical semantic analysis. Applied Linguistics, 24 (1), 28-55.

 Kelly, G. J., & Green, J. (1998). The social nature of knowing: Toward a sociocultural perspective on conceptual change and knowledge construction. In B. Guzzetti, & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change: Multiple ways to understand knowing and learning in a complex world (pp. 145–181). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Keys, C. W. (1999). Revitalizing instruction in scientific genres: Connecting knowledge production with writing to learn in science. Science Education, 83, 115–130

Linderholm, T., Everson, M. G., van den Broek P., Mischinski, M., Crittenden, A., & Samuels, J. (2000). Effects of causal text revisions on more and less-skilled readers’ comprehension of easy and difficult texts. Cognition and Instruction, 18(4), 525-556.

McNamara, D. S. Kintsch, E, Songer, N. B. & Kintsch, W. (1996). Are good text always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction, 14.

Meyer, B. J. F., & Rice, G. E. (1984). The structure of text. In P. D. Pearson, R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.),Handbook of reading research (Vol. 1, pp. 319-351). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Morgado, J., Otero, J., Vaz-Rebelo, P., Sanjosé, V., & Caldeira, H. (2014). Detection of explanation obstacles in scientific texts: the effect of an understanding task vs. an experiment task. Educational Studies, 40(2), 164-173.

Oliveira, A. W. (2015). Reading Engagement in Science: Elementary Students’ Read-Aloud Experiences. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 10(3), 429-451.

Pearson, P. D., & Fielding, L. (1991). Comprehension instruction. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.),Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 815-860). White Plains, NY: Longman.

Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1990). Current approaches to science education: Implications for mainstream education of students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 15-24.

Seidenberg, P. L. (1989). Relating text-processing research to reading and writing instruction for learning disabled students.Learning Disabilities Focus, 5 (1), 4-12.

Sjøberg, S. (2015). PISA and Global Educational Governance–A Critique of the Project, its Uses and Implications. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 11(1), 111-127.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. (A. Kozalin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. (Original work published in 1934).

Weaver, C. A. & Kintsch, W. (1991). Expository text. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 230-244). White Plains, NY: Longman.