Situated expertise in integrating use of multimedia simulation into secondary science teaching

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 28, Issue 7, 2006, Pages 701-732

  Hennessy, Sara ^a   Deaney, Rosemary ^a   Ruthven, Kenneth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33744918076     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500690500404656     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Baggott, L. and Nichol, J.(1998) Multimedia simulation. A threat to or enhancement of practical work in science education?. In Practical work in school science. (pp. 252-270). London & New York: Routledge.
2. Baggott la Velle, L. and McFarlane, A. and John, P. D. and Brawn, R. (2004) According to the promises: The sub-culture of school science, teachers' pedagogic identity and the challenge of ICT Education, Communication & Information, 4((1)), pp. 109-129.
3. Barton, R. and Still, C.(2004) Planning, teaching and assessment using computer-aided practical work. In Teaching secondary science with ICT. (pp. 52-68). Cambridge: Open University Press.
4. Becker, H. (2000) Findings from the teaching, learning and computing survey. Is Larry Cuban night? Education Policy Analysis Archives, 8((51)). Retrieved November 25, 2005 from
5. Boyle, T.(2004) Designing multimedia e-learning for science education. In Mediating science learning through information and communications technology. (pp. 103-119). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
6. Brown, J. S. and Collins, A. and Duguid, P. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning Educational Researcher, 18((1)), pp. 32-42.
7. Brown, S. and McIntyre, D.(1993) Making sense of teaching. Buckingham: Open University Press.
8. Cole, M. (1988) Cross-cultural research in the sociohistorical tradition Human Development, 31((3)), pp. 137-152.
9. Cox, M. J.(2000) Information and communications technologies: Their role and value for science education. In Good practice in science teaching: What research has to say. Buckingham England: Open University Press.
10. Cuban, L. (1989) Neoprogressive visions and organizational realities Harvard Educational Review, 59((2)), pp. 217-222.
11. de Jong, T. and van Joolingen, W. R. (1998) Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains Review of Educational Research, 68((2)), pp. 179-201.
12. DfES.(2004) ICT across the curriculum: ICT in science. Key stage 3 national strategy. London: DfES.
13. Donnelly, J. F. (2000) Secondary science teaching under the National Curriculum School Science Review, 81((296)), pp. 27-35.
14. Donnelly, J. F. and Jenkins, E. W.(1999) Science teaching in secondary schools under the National Curriculum. Centre for Studies in Science and Mathematics Education, Centre for Policy Studies, University of Leeds.
15. (1985) Children's ideas in science. Buckingham: Open University Press.
16. Edelson, D. C. (2001) Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38((3)), pp. 355-385.
17. Enyedy, N. and Goldberg, J. (2004) Inquiry in interaction: How local adaptations of curricula shape classroom communities Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41((9)), pp. 905-935.
18. Finlayson, H. and Rogers, L. (2003) Does ICT in science really work in the classroom? Part 1. The individual teacher experience School Science Review (June), pp. 105-112.
19. (2005) Visualization in science education. Dordrecht: Springer.
20. Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, L. L.(1967) The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
21. Gray, B. V. (1999) Science education in the developing world: Issues and considerations Journal of Research in Teaching, 36((3)), pp. 261-268.
22. Hacker, R. G. and Rowe, M. J. (1997) The impact of a National Curriculum development on teaching and learning behaviours International Journal of Science Education, 19, pp. 997-1004.
23. Hennessy, S. and Deaney, R. and Ruthven, K.(2005a). Keynote symposium paper presented at the BERA Conference 2005. GlamorganUK. In Developing pedagogical expertise for integrating use of the interactive whiteboard in secondary science [pp.].
24. Hennessy, S. and Deaney, R. and Ruthven, K. (2005b) Emerging teacher strategies for mediating "Technology-integrated Instructional Conversations": A socio-cultural perspective Curriculum Journal, 16(3), pp. 265-292.
25. Hennessy, S. and O'Shea, T. (1993) Learner perceptions of realism and "magic" in computer simulation British Journal of Educational Technology, 24((2)), pp. 125-138.
26. Hennessy, S. and Ruthven, K. and Brindley, S. (2005) Teacher perspectives on integrating ICT into subject teaching: Commitment, constraints, caution and change Journal of Curriculum Studies, 37((2)), pp. 155-192. Retrieved November 25, 2005 from
27. Hennessy, S. and Twigger, D. and Byard, M. and Driver, R. and Draper, S. and Hartley, R. and Mohamed, R. and O'Malley, C. and O'Shea, T. and Scanlon, E. (1995) A classroom intervention using a computer-augmented curriculum for mechanics International Journal of Science Education, 17((2)), pp. 189-206.
28. Hennessy, S. and Wishart, J. and Whitelock, D. and Deaney, R. and Brawn, R. and La Velle, L. and McFarlane, A. and Ruthven, K. and Winterbottom, M.Pedagogical approaches for technology-integrated science teaching Computers and Education.
29. House of Commons Science and Technology Committee.(2002) Science education from 14 to 19. London: Stationery Office.
30. Laurillard, D.(1993) Teaching as mediating learning. In Rethinking university teaching. A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge.
31. Lave, J.(1988) Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Leach, J. and Scott, P.(2004) Designing and evaluating science teaching sequences: An approach drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social constructivist perspective on learning. In Mediating science learning through information and communications technology. (pp. 81-102). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
33. Linn, M.(2004) Using ICT to teach and learn science. In Mediating science learning through information and communications technology. (pp. 9-26). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
34. McFarlane, A. and Sakellariou, S. (2002) The role of ICT in science education Cambridge Journal of Education, 32((2)), pp. 219-232.
35. Mellar, H. and Bliss, J.(1994) Introduction: Modelling and education. In Learning with artificial worlds: Computer-based modelling in the curriculum. London: Falmer.
36. Mercer, N.(1995) The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Clevedon & Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters.
37. Monaghan, J. M. and Clement, J. (1999) Use of a computer simulation to develop mental simulations for understanding relative motion concepts International Journal of Science Education, 21((9)), pp. 921-944.
38. Mortimer, E. F. and Scott, P. H.(2003) Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Buckingham: Open University Press.
39. Newton, L. R. and Rogers, L.(2001) Teaching science with ICT. London: Continuum.
40. NRC.(1996) National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
41. Ofsted. (2002) ICT in schools: Effect of government initiatives: Progress report, April 2002: A report from the Office of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Schools. London: Office for Standards in Education.
42. Ogborn, J. and Kress, G. and Martins, I. and McGillicuddy, K.(1996) Explaining science in the classroom. Buckingham: Open University Press.
43. Osborne, J. and Hennessy, S.(2003) Literature review in science education and the role of ICT: Promise, problems and future directions. Bristol: Nesta FutureLab. directions
44. Osborne, R. J.(1985) Building on children's intuitive ideas. In Learning in science: The implications of children's science. Auckland New Zealand: Heinemann.
45. Parker, J. (2004) The synthesis of subject ad pedagogy for effective learning and teaching in primary science education British Educational Research Journal, 30((6)), pp. 819-839.
46. Rogers, L.(2004) Integrating ICT into science education and the future. In Teaching secondary science with ICT. (pp. 139-154). Cambridge: Open University Press.
47. Ruthven, K. and Hennessy, S. and Brindley, S. (2004) Teacher representations of the successful use of computer-based tools and resources in teaching and learning secondary English, Mathematics and Science Teaching and Teacher Education, 20((3)), pp. 259-275. Retrieved November 25, 2005 from
48. Schofield, J. W.(1995) Computers and classroom culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49. Segall, A. (2004) Revisiting pedagogical content knowledge: The pedagogy of content/the content of pedagogy Teaching and Teacher Education, 20((5)), pp. 489-504.
50. Shulman, L. S. (1986) Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching Educational Researcher, 15((2)), pp. 4-14.
51. Shulman, L. S. (1987) Knowledge and teaching: The foundations of the new reforms Harvard Educational Review, 57((1)), pp. 1-22.
52. Soderberg, P. and Price, F. (2003) An examination of problem-based teaching and learning in population genetics and evolution using EVOLVE, a computer simulation International Journal of Science Education, 25((1)), pp. 35-55.
53. Sutherland, R. (2004) Designs for learning: ICT and knowledge in the classroom Computers and Education, 43((1-2)), pp. 5-16.
54. Thomas, R. C. and Milligan, C. D. (2004) Putting teachers in the loop: Tools for creating and customising simulations Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 15. Retrieved November 25, 2005 from
55. Walker, D.(2002) No crossed wires. TES Teacher,
56. Wellington, J.(2004) Multimedia in science teaching. In Teaching secondary science with ICT. Cambridge: Open University Press.
57. Wertsch, J.(1998) Mediated action. In A companion to cognitive science. (pp. 518-525). Oxford: Blackwell.
58. Wynne, B. (1991) Knowledges in context Science, Technology and Human Values, 16((1)), pp. 111-121.
59. Yin, R. K.(1998) The abridged version of case study research: Design and method. In Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods. (pp. 229-259). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.