Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 59-82

  Barab, Sasha A ^a   Sadler, Troy D ^b   Heiselt, Conan ^a   Hickey, Daniel ^a   Zuiker, Steven ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

Consequential play; Educational games; Inscriptions; Simulations; Socio scientific inquiry

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247191590     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-006-9033-3     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy, Oxford University Press, New York.
2. Barab, S. A., Arici, A., and Jackson, C. (2005). Eat your vegetables and do your homework: A design-based investigation of enjoyment and meaning in learning. Educational Technology 65(1): 15-21.
3. Barab, S., Thomas, A., Dodge, M., Carteaux, R., and Tuzun, H. (2005). Making learning fun: Quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educational Technology Research and Development 53 (1): 86-108.
4. Barab, S. A., and Squire, K. D. (2004). Design-based research: Putting our stake in the ground. Journal of the Learning Sciences 13(1): 1-14.
5. Barab, S. A., and Hay, K. (2001). Doing science at the elbows of scientists: Issues related to the scientist apprentice camp. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 38: 70-102.
6. Barab, S. A., and Luehmann, A. L. (2003). Building sustainable science curriculum: Acknowledging and accommodating local adaptation. Science Education 87(4): 454-467.
7. Barab, S. A., and Plucker, J. A. (2002). Smart people or smart contexts? Cognition, ability, and talent development in an age of situated approaches to knowing and learning. Educational Psychologist 37(3): 165-182.
8. Bereiter, C. (1997). Situated cognition and how to overcome it. In D. Kirshner, & J. A. Whitson (Eds.Situated Cognition: Social, Semiotic, and Psychological Perspectives (pp. 281-300). NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., and Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (2002). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
10. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of Learning Sciences 2: 141-178.
11. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18: 34-41.
12. Bruner, J. (2002). Making Stories: Law, Literature, Life, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York.
13. Chinn, C. A., and Brewer, W. F. (1993). The role of anomalous data in knowledge acquisition: A theoretical framework and implications for science instruction. Review of Educational Research 63: 1-49.
14. Cognition, Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored Instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology 33: 52-70.
15. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1993). The Evolving Self: A Psychology for the Third Millennium, Harper Collins, New York.
16. Csikszentmihalyi, M., and LeFevre, J. (1989). Optimal experience in work and leisure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 56: 815-822.
17. Dede, C., Ketelhut, D., and Ruess, K. (2004, April). Designing for Motivation and Usability in a Museum-based Multi-user Virtual Environment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
18. Dewey, J. (1963). Experience & Education, Collier MacMillan, New York(Original work published in 1938).
19. Driver, R., Newton, P., and Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education 84: 287-312.
20. Gee, J. P. (2003). What Videogames Have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy, Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
21. Geertz, C. (1983). From the native's point of view: One the nature of anthropological understanding. In Geertz (Ed.Local Knowledge (pp. 55-70). New York, NY: Basic Books.
22. Goodrum, D., Hackling, M., and Rennie, L. (2001). The Status and Quality of Teaching and Learning of Science in Australian Schools: A Research Report Prepared for the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. DETYA, Commonwealth Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs. Available at http://www.detya.gov.au/schools/Publications/2001/science/index. htm.
23. Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist 53: 5-17.
24. Guba, E. G., and Lincoln, Y. S. (1983). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In G. F. Madaus, M. S. Scriven, & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Evaluation (pp. 195-220). Boston, MA: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.
25. Mickey, D. T., and Pellegrino, J. W. (2005). Theory, level, and function: Three dimensions for understanding the connections between transfer and student assessment. In Mestre (EA.Transfer of Learning from a Modern Multidisciplinary Perspective (pp. 251-253). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishers.
26. Hickey, D. T., and Zuiker, S. J. (2003). A new perspective for evaluation of innovative science environments. Science Education 87(3): 539-563.
27. Hodson, D. (1998). Teaching and Learning Science: Towards a Personalized Approach, Open University Press, Buckingham.
28. Kolstø, S. D. (2000). Consensus projects: Teaching science for citizenship. International Journal of Science Education 6: 645-664.
29. Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge University Press, New York.
30. Lincoln, Y. S., and Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry, SAGE, Beverly Hills, CA.
31. Linn, M. C., Shear, L., Bell, P., and Slotta, J. D. (1999). Organizing principles for science education partnerships: Case studies of students' learning about ,rats in space' and ,deformed frogs'. Educational Technology Research and Development 47: 61-85.
32. Mateas, M., and Sengers, P. (2003). Narrative intelligence. In M. Mateas, & P. Sengers (Eds.Narrative Intelligence (pp. 1-25). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
33. Millar, R., and Osborne, J. F. (Eds.) (1998). Beyond 2000: Science Education for the Future. King's College London, London.
34. Mislevy, R. J., Wilson, M. R., Ercikan, K., and Chudowsky, N. (2003). Psychometric principles in student assessment, in T. Kellaghan, & D. Stufflcbeam (Eds.International Handbook of Educational Evaluation (pp. 489-531). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
35. Murray, J. (1997). Hamlet on the Holodeck: The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace, The Free Press, New York.
36. NRC. (1996). National Science Education Standards, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
37. Patronis, T., Potari, D., and Spiliotopoulou, V. (1999). Students' argumentation in decision-making on a sodo-scientific issue: Implications for teaching. International Journal of Science Education 21: 745-754.
38. Pedretti, E. (1999). Decision making and STS education: Exploring scientific knowledge and social responsibility in schools and science centers through an issues-based approach. School Science and Mathematics 99: 174-181.
39. Roth, W.-M. (1996a). Where is the context in contextual word problems?: Mathematical practices and products in grade 8 students' answers to story problems. Cognition and Instruction 14(4): 487-527.
40. Roth, W.-M. (1996b). Knowledge diffusion in a grade 4-5 classroom during a unit of civil engineering: An analysis of a classroom community in terms of its changing resources and practices. Cognition and Instruction 14: 170-220.
41. Roth, W.-M., and McGinn, M. K. (1998). Inscriptions: A social practice approach to representations. Review of Educational Research 68: 35-59.
42. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Shavelson, R. J., Hamilton, L., and Klein, S. (2002). On the evaluation of systemic science education reform: Searching for instructional sensitivity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39: 369-393.
43. Ryan, M.-L. (2001). Narrative as virtual reality: Immersion and interactivity in literature and electronic media. In S. G. Nichols, G. Prince, & W. Steiner (Eds.Parallax: Re-visions of Culture and Society Series Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
44. Ryder, J. (2001). Identifying science understanding for functional scientific literacy. Studies in Science Education 36: 1-44.
45. Squire, K. D. (in press). From content to context: Videogames as designed experiences. To appear in Educational Researcher.
46. Stake, R. E. (1995). The Art of Case Study Research, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
47. Steinkuchler, C. A. (2006). Massively multiplayer online videogaming as participation in a Discourse. Mind, Culture, & Activity 13(1): 38-52.
48. Strauss, A., and Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
49. Traenkner, N. (1998). Interactive Fiction as a Guide to Writing Hyperfiction. Retrieved November 26, 2001, from http://kentinfoworks.com/ people/nick/diglit/ifhf.html.
50. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
51. Yager R. E. (Ed.). (1996). Science/Teclmohgy/Society as Reform in Science Education, State University of New York press, Albany, NY.
52. Zeidler, D. L., Sadler, T. D., Simmons, M. L., and Howes, E. V. (2005). Beyond STS: A research-based framework for socioscicntific issues education. Science Education 89: 357-377.
53. Zohar, A., and Nemet, F. (2002). Fostering students' knowledge and argumentation skills through dilemmas in human genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 39: 35-62.