Cognitive comparisons of students' systems modeling in ecology

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 319-345

  Hogan, Kathleen ^a   Thomas, David ^a  

^a CARY INSTITUTE OF ECOSYSTEM STUDIES   (United States)

Author keywords

Ecology education; Quantitative modeling; Student cognition; Systems thinking

Indexed keywords

EID: 0348005227     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1012243102249     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
2. Bell-Basca, B., and Grotzer, T. (2000, April). Using Domino and Relational Causality to Analyze Ecosystems. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans.
3. Bliss, J. (1994). Reasoning with a semi-quantitative tool. In Mellar, H., Bliss, J., Boohan, R., Ogborn, J., and Tompsett, C. (Eds.), Learning With Artificial Worlds: Computer Based Modelling in the Curriculum, Falmer Press, Washington, DC, pp. 128-141.
4. Boohan, R., and Brosnan, T. (1994). Reasoning with a quantitative modelling tool. In Mellar, H., Bliss, J. Boohan, R., Ogborn, J., and Tompsett, C. (Eds.), Learning With Artificial Worlds: Computer Based Modelling in the Curriculum, Falmer Press, Washington, DC, pp. 59-67.
5. Corno, L. (1993). The best-laid plans: Modern conceptions of volition and educational research. Educational Researcher 22: 14-22.
6. Doerr, H. M. (1996). Stella ten years later: A review of the literature. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning 1: 201-224.
7. Erickson, F. (1992). Ethnographic microanalysis of interaction. In LeCompte, M. D., Millroy, W. L., and Preissle, J. (Eds.), The Handbook of Qualitative Research in Education, Academic Press, New York, pp. 201-225.
8. Ericsson, K. A., and Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol Analysis, MIT/Bradford, Cambridge, MA.
9. Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
10. Gilbert, J. K., and Rutherford, M. (1998). Models in explanations, Part 1: Horses for courses? International Journal of Science Education 20: 83-97.
11. Gobert, J., and Discenna, J. (1997, March). The Relationship Between Students' Epistemologies and Model-Based Reasoning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
12. Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., and Smith, C. L. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science: Conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2: 799-822.
13. High Performance Systems. (1997). STELLA Technical Documentation. Author, Hanover, NH.
14. Hogan, K. (1999). Relating students' personal frameworks for science learning to their cognition in collaborative contexts. Science Education 83: 1-32.
15. Hogan, K. (2000). Exploring a process view of students' knowledge about the nature of science. Science Education 84: 51-70.
16. Hogan, K., and Fisherkeller, J. (2000). Dialogue as data: Assessing students' scientific reasoning with interactive protocols. In Mintzes, J. J., Wandersee, J. H., and Novak, J. D. (Eds.), Assessing Science Understanding: A Human Constructivist View, Academic Press, New York.
17. Hogan, K., and Weathers, K. C. (in press). Psychological and ecological perspectives on the development of systems thinking. In Berkowitz, A. R., Hollweg, K. S., and Nilon, C. H. (Eds.), Understanding Urban Ecosystems: A New Frontier for Science and Education, Springer-Verlag, New York.
18. Jacobson, M. J. (2000, April). Butterflies, Traffic Jams, and Cheetahs: Problem Solving and Complex Systems. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
19. Johnson-Laird, P. (1983). Mental Models, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
20. Kurtz dos Santos, A. C., and Ogborn, J. (1994). Sixth form students' ability to engage in computational modelling. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 10: 182-200.
21. Lidz, C. S. (Ed.). (1987). Dynamic Assessment: An Interactional Approach to Evaluating Learning Potential, Guilford, New York.
22. Mandinach, E. B., and Cline, H. F. (1996). Classroom dynamics: The impact of a technology-based curriculum innovation on teaching and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research 14: 83-102.
23. Markus, H., and Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist 41: 954-969.
24. Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learners as information processors: Legacies and limitations of educational psychology's second metaphor. Educational Psychologist 3: 151-161.
25. Metcalfe, J., and Shimamura, A. (Eds.). (1994). MetaCognition: Knowing about Knowing, Bradford Books, Cambridge, MA.
26. Miles, M. B., and Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
27. Ogborn, J. (1999). Modeling clay for thinking and learning. In Feurzeig, W., and Roberts, N. (Eds.), Modeling and Simulation in Science and Mathematics Education, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 5-37.
28. Peck, S. L. (2000). A tutorial for understanding ecological modeling papers for the nonmodeler. American Entomologist 46: 40-49.
29. Pickett, S. T. A., Jones, C. G., and Kolasa, J. (1994). Ecological Understanding: The Nature of Theory and the Theory of Nature, Academic Press, New York.
30. Pintrich P. R., Marx, R. W., and Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research 63: 167-199.
31. Resnick, M. (1996). Beyond the centralized mindset. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 5: 1-22.
32. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1983). Beyond the purely cognitive: Belief systems, social cognitions, and metacognitions as driving forces in intellectual performance. Cognitive Science 7: 329-363.
33. Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist 26: 207-231.
34. Shapiro, B. L. (1994). What Children Bring to Light: A Constructivist Perspective on Children's Learning in Science, Teachers College Press, New York.
35. Shrader, G., Lindgren, R., and Sherin, B. (2000, April). A Pedagogically-Oriented Analysis of the Modeling Process. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
36. Smith, C. L., Houghton, C., and Maclin, D. (1997, March). Understanding 6th Graders' Epistemologies of Science: Teasing Apart the Effects of Schooling and Development. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago.
37. Spitulnik, M. W., Krajcik, J., and Soloway, E. (1999). Construction of models to promote scientific understanding. In Feurzeig, W., and Roberts, N. (Eds.), Modeling and Simulation in Science and Mathematics Education, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 70-94.
38. Stratford, S. J. (1997). A review of computer-based model research in precollege classrooms. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching 16: 3-23.
39. Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., and Soloway, E. (1997). Secondary students' dynamic modeling processes: Analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems. Journal of Science Education and Technology 7: 215-234.
40. Ulanowicz, R. E. (1997). Ecology, the Ascendent Perspective, Columbia University Press, New York.
41. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
42. White, B. Y., and Schwarz, C. V. (1999). Alternative approaches to using modeling and simulation tools for teaching science. In Feurzeig, W., and Roberts, N. (Eds.), Modeling and simulation in Science and Mathematics Education, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 226-256.
43. Wilensky, U., and Reisman, K. (in press). Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: Learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories - an embodied modeling approach. Cognition and Instruction.
44. Winbourne, P (1994). Learning about mathematical modelling: A case study using Model Builder. In Mellar, H., Bliss, J. Boohan, R., Ogborn, J., and Tompsett, C. (Eds.), Learning With Artificial Worlds: Computer Based Modelling in the Curriculum, Falmer Press, Washington, DC, pp. 94-103.
45. Zaraza, R., and Fisher, D. (1999). Training system modelers: The NSF CC-STADUS and CC-SUSTAIN Projects. In Feurzeig, W., and Roberts, N. (Eds.), Modeling and Simulation in Science and Mathematics Education, Springer-Verlag, New York, pp. 38-69.