Fenomenografik Düşünmek ve Araştırmak: Teorik ve Yöntembilimsel Bir Perspektif

*Åkerlind, G. S. (2018). What future for phenomenographic research? On continuity and development in the phenomenography and variation theory research tradition. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(6), 949-958. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2017.1324899

*Åkerlind, Bowden & Green (2005). Learning to do Phenomenography: A reflective discussion. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing phenomenography (pp. 74-100). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

*Ashworth, P., & Lucas, U. (2000). Achieving empathy and engagement: A practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 295-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/713696153

*Barattucci, M., & Bocciolesi, E. (2018). Phenomenography in the student learning perspective: A review of studies in academic contexts. Encyclopaideia, 22(50), 21-34. https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.1825-8670/7900

Barnard, A., McCosker, H., & Gerber, R. (1999). Phenomenography: a qualitative research approach for exploring understanding in health care. Qualitative Health Research, 9(2), 212-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/104973299129121794

*Bowden, J. A. (2000a). The nature of phenomenographic research. In J. Bowden & E. Wlash (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 1–18). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

*Bowden, J. A. (2000b). Experience of phenomenographic research:A personal account. In J. Bowden & E. Wlash (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 47–61). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

*Bowden, J. A. (2005). Reflections on the phenomenographic team research process. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing phenomenography. Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

*Bowden, J. A., & Walsh, E. (Eds.). (2000). Phenomenography. RMIT University Press.

Chan, Z. C., Fung, Y. L., & Chien, W. T. (2013). Bracketing in phenomenology: Only undertaken in the data collection and analysis process. The Qualitative Report, 18(30), 1-9.

Chan, K. K. H., Xu, L., Cooper, R., Berry, A., & van Driel, J. H. (2021). Teacher noticing in science education: do you see what I see?. Studies in Science Education, 57(1), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057267.2020.1755803

*Collier-Reed, B. I., Ingerman, Å., & Berglund, A. (2009). Reflections on trustworthiness in phenomenographic research: Recognising purpose, context and change in the process of research. Education as Change, 13(2), 339-355. https://doi.org/10.1080/16823200903234901

*Cope, C. (2004). Ensuring validity and reliability in phenomenographic research using the analytical framework of a structure of awareness. Qualitative Research Journal, 4(2), 5-18.

*Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

*Entwistle, N. (1997). Introduction: Phenomenography in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 127-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436970160202

*Feldon, D. F., & Tofel-Grehl, C. (2018). Phenomenography as a foundation for mixed models research. American Behavioral Scientist, 62(7), 887-899. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764218772640

Giorgi, A. (2008). Difficulties encountered in the application of the phenomenological method in the social sciences. Indo-Pacific Journal of Phenomenology, 8(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/20797222.2008.11433956

*Green, P. (2005). A rigorous journey into phenomenography: From a naturalistic inquirer viewpoint. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing phenomenography. Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

*Green, P., & Bowden, J. A. (2009). Principles of developmental phenomenography. Malaysian Journal of Qualitative Research, 2(2), 55-74.

Guba, E. (1981). Criteria for assessing the trustworthiness of naturalistic inquiries. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 29, 75–91.

*Hajar, A. (2021). Theoretical foundations of phenomenography: a critical review. Higher Education Research & Development, 40(7), 1421-1436. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2020.1833844

Hançerlioglu, O. (1993). Felsefe Sözlüğü. Remzi Kitabevi.

Hart, M. (1990). Critical theory and beyond: Further perspectives on emancipatory education. Adult Education Quarterly, 40(3), 125-138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0001848190040003001

*Hasselgren, B., & Beach, D. (1997). Phenomenography: A good-for-nothing brother of phenomenology? Outline of an analysis. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436970160206

Josephs, I. E. (1998) Do you know Ragnar Rommetveit? On dialogue and silence, poetry and pedantry, and cleverness and wisdom in psychology (an interview with Ragnar Rommetveit), Culture and Psychology, 4(2), 189–212. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X9800400203

Kozulin, A. (1990). Vygotsky’s psychology: A biography of ideas. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.

*Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews: An introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Lamb, P., Sandberg, J., & Liesch, P. (2011). Small firm internationalisation unveiled through phenomenography. Journal of International Business Studies, 54(2), 1–22.

Larsson, J., & Holmström, I. (2007). Phenomenographic or phenomenological analysis: Does it matter? Examples from a study on anaesthesiologists’ work. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 2(1), 55-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482620601068105

Limnatis, N. G. (Ed.). (2010). The dimensions of Hegel's dialectic. Bloomsbury Publishing.

*Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography: A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21(3), 28-49.

*Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography – describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10(2), 177–200.

*Marton, F. (1994). Phenomenography. The International Encyclopedia of Education, 8(2), 4424-4429.

*Marton, F. (1995). On non-verbal learning 1. Level of processing and level of outcome. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 16, 273-279. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.1975.tb00193.x

*Marton, F. (2000). The structure of awareness. In J. Bowden & E. Wlash (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 102-116). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

*Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Marton, F., Dall’alba, G., & Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(3), 277-300.

*Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning. 1- outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02980.x

McCarthy, T. A. (1984). Reflections on rationalization in the theory of communicative action. Praxis International, 4(2), 177-191.

McKerrow, R. E. (1989). Critical rhetoric: Theory and praxis. Communications Monographs, 56(2), 91-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637758909390253

Morse, J. M. (1997). " Perfectly healthy, but dead": the myth of inter-rater reliability. Qualitative Health Research, 7(4), 445-447.

Morse, J. M., Barrett, M., Mayan, M., Olson, K., & Spiers, J. (2002). Verification strategies for establishing reliability and validity in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 1(2), 13-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/160940690200100202

*Orgill M. (2012) Phenomenography. In Seel N.M. (Eds.) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_271

Özen, V. O. (2020). The Ambiguity in Schopenhauer's Doctrine of the Thing-in-Itself. The Review of Metaphysics, 74(2), 251-288.

Pellegrino, J. W., & Glaser, R. (2021). Components of inductive reasoning. In Aptitude, learning, and instruction (pp. 177-218). Routledge.

*Pherali, T. (2011). Phenomenography as a research strategy: Researching environmental conceptions. Lambert Academic Publishing.

Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective knowledge: An evolutionary approach. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

Popper, K. R. (1978). Three worlds. In The Tanner lectures on human values (pp. 143–167). Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah.

*Richardson, J. T. (1999). The concepts and methods of phenomenographic research. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 53-82. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543069001053

*Sandbergh, J. (1997). Are phenomenographic results reliable?. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 203-212. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436970160207

*Säljö, R. (1997). Talk as data and practice—a critical look at phenomenographic inquiry and the appeal to experience. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 173-190. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436970160205

Sjöström, B., & Dahlgren, L. O. (2002). Applying phenomenography in nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 40(3), 339-345. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.2002.02375.x

*Souleles, N. (2012). Phenomenography and e-learning in art and design. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Networked Learning (pp. 466–473).

*Stolz, S. A. (2020). Phenomenology and phenomenography in educational research: A critique. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 52(10), 1077-1096. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1724088

*Svensson, L. (1997). Theoretical foundations of phenomenography. Higher Education Research & Development, 16(2), 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1080/0729436970160204

*Trigwell, K. (2000). A phenomenograpic interview on phenomenography. In J. Bowden & E. Wlash (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 62–82). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

Tufford, L., & Newman, P. (2012). Bracketing in Qualitative Research. Qualitative Social Work, 11(1), 80–96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473325010368316

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (pp. 39–285). New York: Plenum Press.

*Walsh, E. (2000). Phenomenographic analysis of interview transcripts. In J. Bowden & E. Wlash (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 19-33). Melbourne: RMIT University Press.

Wegerif, R. (2008). Dialogic or dialectic? The significance of ontological assumptions in research on educational dialogue. British Educational Research Journal, 34(3), 347-361. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920701532228

Wells, G. (2008). Learning to use scientifi c concepts. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3, 329–350.

Wells, R., Barker, S., Boydell, K., Buus, N., Rhodes, P., & River, J. (2021). Dialogical inquiry: Multivocality and the interpretation of text. Qualitative Research, 21(4), 498-514. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794120934409