Classroom use of multimedia-supported predict-observe-explain tasks in a social constructivist learning environment

Research in Science Education

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 427-453

  Kearney, Matthew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Interactive multimedia; Peer learning; Physics learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 14544284077     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11165-004-8795-y     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Soloway, E., & Krajcik, J. (1996). Learning with peers. From small group cooperation to collaborative communities. Educational Researcher, 25 (8), 37-40.
2. R. Bogdan & S. Biklen 1998 Qualitative research for education. An introduction to theory and methods Allyn and Bacon Boston
3. M. Carr 1991 Methods for studying personal construction In B. Fraser (Ed.) Key centre monograph No. 3 Key Centre for School Science and Mathematics Perth, Western Australia 16-22
4. Champagne, A., Klopfer, L., & Anderson, J. (1980). Factors influencing the learning of classical mechanics. American Journal of Physic, 48 (12), 1074-1079.
5. C. Crooks 1999 Computers in the community of classrooms In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.) Learning with computers. Analysing productive interaction Routledge London and New York 102-117
6. Driver, R., & Easley, J. (1978). Pupils and paradigms: A review of literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education, 5, 61-84.
7. R. Driver & P. Scott 1996 Curriculum development as research: A constructivism approach to science curriculum development and teaching In D. F. Treagust R. Duit & B. J. Fraser (Eds.) Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics Teachers College Press New York and London 94-108
8. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23 (7), 5-12.
9. R. Duit & J. Confrey 1996 Reorganising the curriculum and teaching to improve learning in science and mathematics In D. F. Treagust R. Duit & B. J. Fraser (Eds.) Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics Teachers College Press New York and London 79-93
10. R. Duit D. Treagust & H. Mansfield 1996 Investigating student understanding as a prerequisite to improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics In D. F. Treagust R. Duit & B. J. Fraser (Eds.) Improving teaching and learning in science and mathematics Teachers College Press New York and London 17-31
11. Escalada, L., & Zollman, D. (1997). An investigation on the effects of using interactive digital video in a physics classroom on student learning and attitudes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34 (5), 467-489.
12. E. Guba & Y. Lincoln 1981 Effective evaluation Jossey-Bass London
13. E. Guba & Y. Lincoln 1989 Fourth generation evaluation Sage Publications London
14. Harper, B., & Hedberg, J. (1997, December). Creating motivating interactive learning environments: A constructivist view. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education, Perth, Australia.
15. D. Jonassen & T. Reeves 1996 Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools In D. Jonassen (Ed.) Handbook of research for educational communications and technology Macmillan New York 693-719
16. M. Kearney 2002 Classroom use of multimedia-supported predict-observe-explain tasks to elicit and promote discussion about students' physics conceptions Curtin University of Technology Perth, Australia
17. Kearney, M., & Treagust, D. F. (2001). Constructivism as a referent in the design and development of a computer program which uses interactive digital video to enhance learning in physics. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17 (1), 64-79.
18. Kearney, M., & Wright, R. (2002). Predict-Observe-Explain eShell. Retrieved September 17, 2003, from http://www.learningdesigns.uow.edu.au/
19. Kearney, M., Treagust, D. F., Yeo, S., & Zadnik, M. (2001). Student and teacher perceptions of the use of multimedia supported predict-observe-explain tasks to probe understanding. Research in Science Education, 31 (4), 589-615.
20. Koschmann, T. (1994). Toward a theory of computer support for collaborative learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 30 (3-4), 219-221.
21. R. Kozma 2000 The use of multiple representations and the social construction of understanding in chemistry In M. Jacobson & R. Kozma (Eds.) Innovations in science and mathematics education. Advanced designs for technologies of learning. A constructivism perspective Lawrence Erlbaum Mahwah, NJ 11-46
22. M. Linn 1998 The impact of technology on science instruction: Historical trends and current opportunities In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.) International handbook of science education Kluwer Dordrecht, The Netherlands 265-294
23. Lin, X., Hmelo, C., Kinzer, C., & Secules, T. (1999). Designing technology to support reflection. Educational Technology Research & Development, 47 (3), 43-62.
24. M. Linn & S. Hsi 2000 Computers, teachers, peers. Science learning partners Lawrence Erlbaum Mahwah, NJ
25. McRobbie, C., & Tobin, K. (1997). A social constructivism perspective on learning environments. International Journal of Science Education, 19 (2), 193-208.
26. S. Merriam 1988 Case study research in education. A qualitative approach Jossey-Bass Publishers London
27. Pea, R. (1993). Learning scientific concepts through material and social activities: Conversational analysis meets conceptual change. Educational Psychologist, 28 (3), 265-277.
28. Prawat, R. (1993). The value of ideas: Problems versus possibilities in learning. Educational Researcher, 22 (6), 5-12.
29. Roth, W., Woszczyna, C., & Smith, G. (1996). Affordances and constraints of computers in science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33 (9), 995-1017.
30. Russell, D., Lucas, K., & McRobbie, C. (1999, November). Microprocessor based laboratory activities as catalysts for student construction of understanding in physics. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Melbourne, Australia.
31. Salomon, G., & Almog, T. (1998). Educational psychology and technology: A matter of reciprocal relations. Teachers College Record, 100 (1), 222-241.
32. Salomon, G., Perkins, D., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20 (3), 2-9.
33. Solomon, J. (1987). Social influences on the construction of pupils' understanding of science. Studies in Science Education, 14, 63-82.
34. R. Stake 1995. The art of case study research. Sage Publications London
35. Taber, K. (1999). Ideas about ionisation energy: A diagnostic instrument. School Science Review, 81 (295), 97-104.
36. Tao, P. K. (2000, April). Computer supported collaborative learning: Developing understanding of image formation by lenses. Paper presented at the annual general meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA.
37. Tao, P. K., & Gunstone, R. (1999a). Conceptual change in science through collaborative learning at the computer. International Journal of Science Education, 21 (1), 39-57.
38. Tao, P. K., & Gunstone, R. (1999b). The process of conceptual change in force and motion during computer-supported physics instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36 (7), 859-882.
39. Taylor, P. Fraser, B., & White, L. (1994, April). A classroom questionnaire for science educators interested in the constructivism reform of school science. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Anaheim, USA.
40. Weller, H. (1996). Assessing the impact of computer-based learning in science. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28 (4), 461-485.
41. R. White 1988. Learning science. Basil Blackwell Oxford, UK
42. R. White & R. Gunstone 1992. Probing understanding. The Falmer Press London and New York