Expert models and modeling processes associated with a computer-modeling tool

Science Education

Volumn 90, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 579-604

  Zhang, Baohui ^a   Liu, Xiufeng ^b   Krajcik, Joseph S ^c  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745947206     PISSN: 00368326     EISSN: 1098237X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/sce.20129     Document Type: Review

References (72)

1. Alexander, P. A. (2003a). Can we get there from here? Educational Researcher, 32(8), 3-4.
2. Alexander, P. A. (2003b). The development of expertise: The journey from acclimation to proficiency. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 10-14.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Anderson, J. R. (1993). Problem solving and learning. American Psychologist, 48(1), 35-57.
5. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia., M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago, IL: Open Court.
6. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., Donovan, M. S., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded ed.). Washington, DC: National academy Press.
7. Brown, A. L., Ash, D., Rutherford, M., Nakagawa, K., Gordon, A., & Campione, J. C. (1993). Distributed expertise in the classroom. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 188-228). New York: Cambridge University Press.
8. Buckley, B. C., Gobert, J. D., Kindfield, A. C. H., Horwitz, P., Tinker, R. F., Gerlits, B., Wilensky, U., Dede, C., & Willett, J. (2004). Model-based teaching and learning with BioLogicaTM: What do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 23-41.
9. Carmichael, P. (2000). Computers and the development of mental models. In J. K. Gilbert and C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
10. Chi, M. T., Glaser, R., & Farr, M. J. (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P., J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categoriztion and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121-152.
12. Clement, J. (2000). Model based learning as a key research area for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1041-1053.
13. Colella, V., Klopfer, E., & Resnick, M. (2001). Adventures in modeling: Exploring complex dynamic systems with StarLogo. New York: Teachers College Press.
14. Costanza, R. (1987). Simulation modeling on the Macintosh using STELLA. BioScience, 37, 129-132.
15. De Jong, T., Martin, E., Zamarro, J. M. Esquembre, F., Swaak, J., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1999). The integration of computer simulation and learning support: An example from the physics domain of collisions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(5), 597-615.
16. Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (2003). Conceptual change: A powerful framework for improving science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6). 671-688.
17. Ebenezer, J. V. (2001). A hypermedia environment to explore and negotiate students' conceptions: Animation of the solution process of table salt. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(1), 73.
18. Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative Methods in Research on Teaching. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 119-161). New York: Macmillan; London: Collier Macmillan.
19. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Roemer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363-406.
20. Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Fischer, K. W. (1980). A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychological Review, 87, 477-531.
22. Fischer, K. W., & Bidell, T. R. (1998). Dynamic development of psychological structures in action and thought. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology. Vol 1: Theoretical models of human development (5th ed., pp. 467-561). New York: Wiley.
23. Fortus, D. (2005, April). Restructuring school physics around real-world problems: A cognitive justification. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec.
24. Fretz, E. B., Wu, H.-K., Zhang, B. H., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2002). An investigation of software scaffolds supporting modeling practices. Research in Science Education, 32(4), 567-589.
25. Gilbert, J. K., & Boutler, C. (1998). Learning science through models and modeling. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 53-66). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
26. Gilbert, J. K., & Boutler, C. (Eds.). (2000). Developing models in science education. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
27. Gobert, J. (2000). A typology of causal models for plate tectonics: Inferential power and barriers to understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 937-977.
28. Gobert, J. D., & Buckley, B. C. (2000). Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 891-895.
29. Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., & 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, 28(9), 799-822.
30. Guthrie, J. T., McGough, K., Bennett, L., & Rice, M. E. (1996). Concept-oriented reading instruction: An integrated curriculum to develop motivations and strategies for reading. In L. Baker, P. Afflerbach, & D. Reinking (Eds.), Developing engaged readers in school and home community (pp. 165-190). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Hatano, G., & Dura, Y. (2003). Commentary: Reconceptualizing school learning using insight from expertise research. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 26-29.
32. Jackson, S. L., Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1996). Making dynamic modeling accessible to precollege science students. Interactive Learning Environments, 4(3), 233-257.
33. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology: Research and Development, 45, 65-94.
34. Jonassen, D. H. (2003). Using cognitive tools to represent problems. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(3), 362-381.
35. Korfiatis, K., Papatheodorou, E., Stamou, G. P., & Paraskevopoulous, S. (1999). An investigation of the effectiveness of computer simulation programs as tutorial tools for teaching population ecology at university. International Journal of Science Education, 21(12), 1269-1280.
36. Krajcik, J. S., Czerniak, C. M., & Berger, C. (1999). Teaching children science: A project-based approach. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
37. Krajcik, J. S., Simmons, P. E., & Lunetta, V. N. (1988). A research strategy for the dynamic study of students' concepts and problem solving strategies using science software. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 25(2), 147-155.
38. Kozma, R. B., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949-968.
39. Lajoie, S. P. (2003). Transition and trajectories for studies of expertise. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 21-25.
40. Linn, M. C. (2003). Technology and science education: Starting points, research programs, and trends. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 727-758.
41. Linn, M. C., & Muilenburg, L. (1996). Creating lifelong science learners: What models form a firm foundation? Educational Researcher, 25, 18-24.
42. Mandinach, E. B. (1989). Model-building and the use of computer simulation of dynamic systems. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 221-243.
43. Metcalf, S. J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A design retrospective. In M. J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Innovations in science and mathematics education: Advanced designs, for technologies of learning (pp. 77- 115). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
44. Monaghan, J. M., & Clement, J. (1999). Use of a computer simulation to develop mental simulation for understanding relative motion concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 921-944.
45. National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
46. Novak, A. M., & Gleason, C. I. (2001). Incorporating portable technology to enhance an inquiry, project-based middle school science classroom. In R. Tinker & J. S. Krajcik (Eds.), Portable technologies: Science learning in context (pp. 29-62). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
47. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
48. Penner, D. E. (2001). Cognition, computers, and synthetic science: Building knowledge and meaning through modeling. Review of Research in Education, 25, 1-36.
49. Penner, D. E., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1998). From physical models to biomechanics: A design-based modeling approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences: Special Issue: Learning through problem solving, 7(3-4), 429-449.
50. Ploetzner, R., & Spada, H. (1993). Multiple mental presentations of information in physics problems. In G. Strube & K. F. Wender (Eds.), The cognitive psychology of knowledge. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
51. Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, termites and traffic jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52. Resnick, M. (1996). Beyond the centralized mindset. Journal of the Learning Science, 5, 1-22.
53. Richards, T. (1999). QSR NU*DIST 4. Australia: QSR International.
54. Royer, J. M., Cisero, C. A., & Carlo, M. S. (1993). Techniques and procedures for assessing cognitive skills. Review of Educational Research, 63(2), 201-243.
55. Schwarz, C. V. (1998). Developing students' understanding of scientific modeling. Unpublished dissertation. University of California, Berkeley, CA.
56. Shin, N., Jonassen, D. H., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problems solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 6-33.
57. Smith, D. C., Cypher, A., & Spohrer, J. (1994). KidSim: Programming agents without a programming language. Communications of the ACM, 37(7), 54-68.
58. Spitulnik, M. W., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1999). Construction of models to promote scientific understanding. In W. Feurzeig & N. Roberts (Eds.), Modeling and Simulation in Science and Mathematics Education. New York: Springer.
59. Spitulnik, M. W., Stratford, S., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1998). Using technology to support students' artifact construction in science. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 363-382). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
60. Steed, M. (1981). Stella. A simulation construction kit: Cognitive process and educational implications. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 11(1), 39-52.
61. Stewart, J., Hafner, R., Johnson, S., & Finkel, E. (1992). Science as model building: Computers and high-school genetics. Educational Psychologist, 27, 317-336.
62. 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.
63. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Trans.). Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
64. White, B. Y. (1984). Designing computer games to help physics students understand Newton's law of motion. Cognition and Instruction, 1(1), 69-108.
65. White, B. Y. (1993). ThinkerTools: Causal models, conceptual change, and science. Cognition & Instruction, 10(1), 1-100.
66. White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition & Instruction, 16(1), 3- 118.
67. Windschitl, M. (2000). Supporting the development of science Inquiry skills with special classes of software. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(2), 81-95.
68. Windschitl, M. (2001). Using simulations in middle school: Does assertiveness of dyad partners influence conceptual change? International Journal of Science Education, 23(1). 17-32.
69. Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30, 173-187.
70. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). Role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89-100.
71. Wu, H.-K. (2002). Middle school students' development of inscriptional practices in inquiry-based science class-rooms. Unpublished dissertation, The University of Michigan. Ann Arbor, MI.
72. Zhang, B. H., Wu, H.-K, Fretz, E. B., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2001, March). Exploring middle school students' modeling process and cognitive strategies when using a computational modeling tool. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO.