Inquiry-based learning and digital libraries in undergraduate science education

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 15, Issue 5-6, 2006, Pages 321-330

  Apedoe, Xornam S ^a   Reeves, Thomas C ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Digital libraries; Inquiry based learning; Post secondary science education

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845312664     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-006-9020-8     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Alexander, P. A. (1998). Positioning conceptual change within a model of domain literacy. In B. Guzzetti, & C. Hynd (Eds.), Perspectives on conceptual change: Multiple ways to understand knowing and learning in a complex world (pp. 55-76). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2. Apcdoe, X. S., Walker, S. E., and Reeves, T. C. (2006). Integrating inquiry-based learning into undergraduate geology. Journal of Geoscience Education 54: 414-421.
3. Arms, W. Y. (2000). Digital libraries, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
4. Barstow, D., and Geary, E. (Eds.), (2002). Blueprint for change: Report from the national conference on the revolution in earth and space science education, Technical Education Research Center (TERC), Cambridge, MA.
5. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., and Cocking, R. R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
6. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18: 32-42.
7. Cavallo, A. M. L., Potter, W. H., and Rozman, M. (2004). Gender differences in learning constructs, shifts in learning constructs, and their relationship to course achievement in a structured inquiry, yearlong college physics course for life science majors. School Science and Mathematics 104: 288-300.
8. Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Commonsensc conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. Journal of the Learning Sciences 14: 161-199.
9. Cobb, P., and Yackel, E. (1996). Constructivist, emergent, and sociocultural perspectives in the context of developmental research. Educational Psychologist 31: 175-190.
10. Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and pedagogy, Routledge-Falmer, New York.
11. Derry, S. J. (1996). Cognitive schema theory in the constructivist debate. Educational Psychologist 31: 163-174.
12. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., and Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher 23: 5-12.
13. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., and Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science, Open University Press, Bristol, PA.
14. Edelson, D. C. (2001). Learning-for-Use: A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 38: 355-385.
15. Edelson, D. C., and Gordin, D. N. (1996). Adapting digital libraries for learners: Accessibility vs. Availability. D-Lib Magazine, 2 (September). Retrieved June 16, 2005, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september96/nwu/ 09edelson.html.
16. Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., and Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 8: 391-450.
17. Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism; Theory, perspectives, and practice. Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.
18. Fraser, S. P., and Deane, E. M. (1999). Educating tomorrow's scientists: IT as a tool, not an educator. Teaching in Higher Education 4: 91-107.
19. Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
20. Hargis, J. (2001). Can students learn science using the internet?. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 33: 475-487.
21. Haury, D. L. (1993). Teaching science through inquiry. Retrieved March 28, 2005, from http://www.ericdigests.org/1993/inquiry.htm.
22. Hersh, R. H., and Merrow, J., (Eds.) (2005). Declining by degrees: Higher education at risk, Palgravc Macmillan, New York.
23. Jenkins, E. W. (2004). Science education: Research, practice and policy. In E. Scanlon, P. Murphy, J. Thomas, & E. Whitelegg (Eds.), Reconsidering science learning (pp. 235-249). New York: Routledge.
24. Keller, C. K., Allen-King, R. M., and O'Brien, R. (2000). A framework for integrating quantitative geologic problem solving into courses across the undergraduate geology curriculum. Journal of Geoscience Education 48: 459-463.
25. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist 41: 75-86.
26. Krajcik, J. S. (2002). The value and challenges of using learning technologies to support students in learning science. Research in Science Education 32: 411-415.
27. Kuh, G. D. (2003). What we're learning about student engagement from NSSE. Change 35: 24-32.
28. Lawson, A. E. (1999). What should students learn about the nature of science and how should we teach it? Journal of College Science Teaching 28: 401-411.
29. Lim, B.-R. (2004). Challenges and issues in designing inquiry on the Web. British Journal of Educational Technology 35: 627-643.
30. Marchionini, G., and Maurer, H. (1995). The roles of digital libraries in teaching and learning. Communications of the ACM 38: 67-75.
31. Maria, K. (2000). Conceptual change instruction: A social constructivist perspective. Reading & Writing Quarterly 16: 5-22.
32. Matthews, M. R. (2002). Constructivism and science education: A further appraisal. Journal of Science Education and Technology 11: 121-134.
33. McIntosh, W. J. (2000). Beyond 2000 - The changing face of undergraduate science education. Journal of College Science Teaching 29: 379-380.
34. National Research Council. (1996a). National science education standards, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
35. National Research Council (1996b). Report of a convocation: From analysis to action, undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering and technology, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
36. National Research Council. (1997). Science teaching reconsidered: A handbook, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
37. National Research Council. (1999). Transforming undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
38. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
39. National Science Teachers Association. (2000, January). NSTA Position Statement: K-16 Coordination. Retrieved March 27, 2005, from http://www.nsta.org/positionstatement&psid=15.
40. Oblinger D., and Oblinger J. (2005). Educating the Net Gen, EDUCAUSE, Washington, DC.
41. Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher 24: 5-12.
42. Prawat, R. S. (1996). Constructivisms, modern and postmodern. Educational Psychologist 31: 215-225.
43. Prawat, R. S., and Floden, R. E. (1994). Philosophical perspectives on constructivist views of learning. Educational Psychology 29: 37-48.
44. Qian, G., and Alvermann, D. E. (2000). Relationship between epistemological beliefs and conceptual change learning. Reading & Writing Quarterly 16: 59-74.
45. Reeves, T. C. (1994). Evaluating what really matters in computer-based education. In M. Wild, & D. Kirkpatrick (Eds.), Computer education: New perspectives (pp. 219-246). Perth, Australia: Mathematics, Science and Technology Education Centre (MASTEC).
46. Rutherford, J. F. (2005). The 2005 Paul F-Brandwcin Lecture: Is our past our future? Thoughts on the next 50 years of science education reform in the light of judgments on the past 50 years, Journal of Science Education and Technology 14: 367-386.
47. Sandoval, W. A. (2005). Understanding students' practical cpistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education 89: 634-656.
48. Sandoval, W. A., and Daniszewski, K. (2004). Mapping trade-offs in teachers' integration of technology-supported inquiry in high school science classes. Journal of Science Education and Technology 13: 161-178.
49. Shipman, D., Aloi, S. L., and Jones, E. A. (2003). Addressing key challenges in higher education assessment. Journal of General Education 52: 335-346.
50. Snow, R. E., Corno, L., and Jackson, D. (1996). Individual differences in affective and conative functions. In D. C. Berliner, & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 243-310). New York: Macmillan.
51. Wallace, R., Krajcik, J., and Soloway, E. (1996). Digital libraries in the science classroom. D-Lib Magazine, 2 (September). Retrieved June 16, 2005, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september96/umdl/09wallace.html.
52. Wang, F., and Reeves, T. C (2003). Why do teachers need to use technology in their classrooms? Issues, problems and solutions. Computers in the Schools 20: 49-65.
53. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the wind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
54. Yore, L. D., Florence, M. K., Pearson, T. W., and Weaver, A. J. (2002). Written discourse in scientific communities: A conversation with two scientists about their views of science, use of language, role of writing in doing science, and compatibility between their epistemic views and language. Paper presented at the International Conference on the Ontological, Epistemological, Linguistic and Pedagogical Considerations of Language and Science Literacy: Empowering Research and Informing Instruction, University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada.