Examining the effects of text-only and text-and-visual instructional materials on the achievement of field-dependent and field-independent learners during problem-solving with modeling software

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 23-36

  Angeli, Charoula ^a   Valanides, Nicos ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS   (Cyprus)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 12744273695     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF02504715     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (2001). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press.
2. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-41.
3. Bruer, J. T. (1993). Schools for thought: A science of learning in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
4. Canelos, J., Taylor, W. D., & Gates, R. B. (1980). The effects of three levels of visual stimulus complexity on the information processing of field-dependents and field-independents when acquiring information for performance on three types of instructional objectives, Journal of Instructional Psychology, 7, 65-70.
5. Chinien, C. A., & Boutin, F. (1992/1993). Cognitive style FD/I: An important learner characteristic for educational technologies, journal of Educational Technology Systems, 22(4), 303-311.
6. Clark, J. M., & Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory and education. Educational Psychology Review, 3, 149-210.
7. Cronbach, L. J., & Snow, R. E. (1981). Aptitudes and instructional methods (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Irvington.
8. Dalal, K. P., & Kasper, G. M. (1994). The design of joint cognitive systems: effect of cognitive coupling on performance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40, 677-702.
9. Davis, J K. (1991). Educational implications of field dependence-independence. In S. Wapner & J. Demick (Eds.), Field dependence-independence: cognitive styles across the lifespan (pp. 149-175). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Dillon, A., & Gabbard, R. (1998). Hypermedia as an educational technology: A review of the quantitative research literature on learner comprehension, control, and style. Review of Educational Research, 68(3), 322-349.
11. Feingold, A. (1992). Sex differences in variability in intellectual abilities: A new look at an old controversy. Review of Educational Research, 62, 61-84.
12. Fitter, M. J., & Sime, M. E. (1980). Responsibility and shared decision making. In A. T. Smith and T. R. G. Green (Eds.), Human Interaction with Computers (pp. 32-60). London: Academic Press.
13. French, J. W., Ekstrom, R. B., & Price, L. A. (1963). Kit of reference tests for cognitive skills. Princeton: Educational Testing Services.
14. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine Publications.
15. Glass, L., & Mackey, M. (1988). From clocks to chaos. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
16. Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1984). Meta-analysis in social research. London: Sage Publications.
17. Goodenough, D. R., & Karp, S. A. (1961). Field dependence and intellectual functioning. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 241-246.
18. Greco, A. A., & McClung, C. (1979). Interaction between attention directing and cognitive style. Educational Communication and Technology Journal, 27(2), 97-102.
19. Haken, H. (1981). Chaos and order in nature. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
20. Jackson, S., Stratford, S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1996). Making dynamic modeling accessible to precollege science students. Interactive Learning Environments, 4, 233-257.
21. Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowski, B. L. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22. Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (2000). Theoretical foundations of learning environments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Jonassen, D. H., & Reeves, T. C. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 693-719). New York, NY: Simon & Schuster Macmillan.
24. Kali, Y. (2002). CILT2002: Visualization and modeling. Journal of Science and Technology Education, 13, 305-310.
25. Kulhavy, R.W., Stock, W. A., & Kealy, W. A. (1993). How geographic maps increase recall of instructional text. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(4), 47-62.
26. Lambert, T. (1981). Effects of structure in preinstructional strategies on memory for sentences in field-dependent individuals (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California), Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 1063.
27. Land, S. M., & Hannafin, M. J. (1997). Patterns of understanding with open-ended learning environments: A qualitative study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(2), 47-73.
28. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 23, 65-99.
29. Liu, M., & Reed, W. M. (1994). The relationship between the learning strategies and learning styles in a hypermedia environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4), 419-434.
30. Lyons-Lawrence, C. L. (1994). Effect of learning style on performance in using computer-based instruction in office systems. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, XXXVI(3), 166-175.
31. Messick, S. (Ed.). (1976). Individuality in learning: Implications of cognitive styles and creativity for human development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
32. Metcalf, J. S., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A design retrospective. In M. J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Innovations in science and mathematics education (pp. 77-115), Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Moffat, S. D., Hampson, E., & Hatzipantelis, M. (1998). Navigation in a "virtual" maze: Sex differences and correlation with psychometric measures of spatial ability in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19, 73-78.
34. Morgan, H. (1997). Cognitive styles and classroom learning. Wesrport, CT: Praeger.
35. National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education. (2000). The condition of education 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
36. Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2000). Knowledge and skills for life: First results from PISA 2000. Available at: http://www.oecd.org.
37. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
38. Penner, D. E. (2000/2001). Cognition, computers, and synthetic science: Building knowledge and meaning through modeling. Review of Research in Education, 25, 1-36.
39. Reiff, J. (1996). At-risk middle level students or field dependent learners. Clearing House, 69(4), 231-234.
40. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
41. Salomon, G. (1994). Interaction of media, cognition, and learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
42. Schmidt, W. H., McKnight, C. C., Cogan, L.S., Jakwerth, P. M., & Houang, R. T. (1999). Facing the consequences: Using TIMMS for a closer look at U.S. mathematics and science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
43. Schnotz, W. (2002). Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 24(1), 101-120.
44. Sjoberg, S. (2002). Science for the children? Report from the Science and Scientists project. Oslo, Norway: Acta Didactica.
45. Snow, R. E. (1976). Aptitude-treatment interactions and individualized alternatives in higher education. In S. Messick (Ed.), Individuality in learning: Implications of cognitive styles and creativity for human development. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
46. Snowman, J., & Biehler, R. (2003). Psychology applied to teaching (10th ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
47. Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Secondary students' dynamic modeling processes: Analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 7(3), 215-234.
48. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
49. Tannenbaum, R. K. (1982). An investigation of the relationship(s) between selected instructional strategies and identified field dependent and field independent cognitive styles as evidence among high school students enrolled in studies of nutrition (Doctoral dissertation, St. John's University), Dissertation Abstracts International, 43, 68.
50. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51. Weller, H. G., Repman, J., & Rooze, G. E. (1994). The relationship of learning, behavior, and cognitive style in hypermedia based instruction: Implications for the design of HBI. Computers in the Schools, 10(3/4), 401-420.
52. Wilcox, R. R. (1995). ANOVA: A paradigm for lower and misleading measures of effect sizes? Review of Educational Research, 65, 51-77.
53. Witkin, H., Oltman, P., Raskin, E., & Karp, S. (1971). A manual for the Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
54. Witkin, H. A., Moore, C. A., Goodenough, D. R., & Cox, P. W. (1977). Field dependent and field independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research, 47, 1-64.
55. Zehavi, N. (1995). Integrating software development with research and teacher education. Computers in the Schools, 11(3), 11-24.