Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006)

Educational Psychologist

Volumn 42, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 99-107

  Hmelo Silver, Cindy E ^a,b   Duncan, Ravit Golan ^a   Chinn, Clark A ^a  

^a The State University of New Jersey   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34347331274     PISSN: 00461520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00461520701263368     Document Type: Review

References (91)

1. Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 65,52-81.
2. Amati, K., Singer, J., & Carrillo, R. (1999, April). What affects the quality of air in my community? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
3. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
4. Barrows, H. S. (2000). Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
5. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York: Springer.
6. Bell, P. (2002). Using argument representations to make thinking visible for individuals and groups. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL II: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 449-455). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2006). Education for the knowledge age: Design-centered models of teaching and instruction. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 695-713). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Berkson, L. (1993). Problem-based learning: Have the expectations been met? Academic Medicine, 68, S79-S88.
9. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
10. Capon, N., & Kuhn, D. (2004). What's so good about problem-based learning? Cognition and Instruction, 22, 61-79.
11. Chinn, C. A. (2006). Learning to argue. In A. M. O'Donnell, C. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 355-383). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Chinn, C. A., & Hung, C.-C. (2007, April). Learning to reason about the methodology of scientific studies: A classroom experiment in the middle school. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
13. Chinn, C. A., O'Donnell, A. M., & Jinks, T. S. (2000). The structure of discourse in collaborative learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 69, 77-97.
14. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1992). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program description and assessment data. Educational Psychologist, 27, 291-315.
15. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
16. Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 91-142.
17. Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students' knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 819-837.
18. DeBoer, G. E. (1991). A history of ideas in science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
19. Department for Education /Welsh Office (DFE/WO). (1995). Science in the national curriculum (1995). London: HMSO.
20. Derry, S. J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Nagarajan, A., Chernobilsky, E., & Beitzel, B. (2006). Cognitive transfer revisited: Can we exploit new media to solve old problems on a large scale? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35, 145-162.
21. Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13, 533-568.
22. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., & Scott, P. (1996). Young people's images of science. Buckingham, England: Open University Press.
23. Duncan, R. G. (2006). The role of domain-specific knowledge in promoting generative reasoning in genetics. In S. A. Barab, K.E. Hay, & D. T. Hickey (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh international conference for the learning sciences: Making a difference (pp. 147-154). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Duschl, R. (1990). Restructuring science education: The importance of theories and their development. New York: Teachers College Press.
25. Edelson, D. C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for integrating content and process learning in the design of inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 355-385.
26. Gallagher, S. A., Stepien, W. J., & Rosenthal, H. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36, 195-200.
27. Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Krajcik, J., Fishman, B., & Soloway, E. (in press). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curriculum in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.
28. Golan, R., Kyza, E. A., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. C. (April, 2002). Scaffolding the task of analyzing animal behavior with the Animal Landlord software. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
29. Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79-96). New York: Cambridge.
30. Guthrie, J. T., Wigfield, A., Barbosa, P., Perencevich, K. C., Taboada, A., Davis, M. H., et al. (2004). Increasing reading comprehension and engagement through concept-oriented reading instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 403-423.
31. Guzdial, M. ( 1994). Software-realized scaffolding to facilitate programming for science learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 4, 1-44.
32. Hickey, D. T., Kindfeld, A. C. H., Horwitz, P., & Christie, M. A. (1999). Advancing educational theory by enhancing practice in a technology-supported genetics learning environment. Journal of Education, 181, 25-55.
33. Hickey, D. T., Wolfe, E. W., & Kindfield, A. C. H. (2000). Assessing learning in a technology-supported genetics environment: Evidential and consequential validity issues. Educational Assessment, 6, 155-196.
34. Hmelo, C. E. (1998). Problem-based learning: Effects on the early acquisition of cognitive skill in medicine. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 173-208.
35. Hmelo, C. E., & Guzdial, M. (1996). Of black and glass boxes: Scaffolding for learning and doing. In D. C. Edelson & E. A. Domeshek (Eds.), Proceedings of ICLS 96 (pp. 128-134). Charlottesville, VA: AACE.
36. Hmelo, C. E., & Lin, X. (2000). Becoming self-directed learners: Strategy development in problem-based learning. In D. Evensen & C. E. Hmelo (Eds.), Problem-based learning: A research perspective on learning interactions (pp. 227-250). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2003). Analyzing collaborative knowledge construction: Multiple methods for integrated understanding. Computers and Education, 41, 397-420.
38. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16, 235-266.
39. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2006). Design principles for scaffolding technology-based inquiry. In A. M. O'Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative reasoning, learning and technology (pp. 147-170). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2006). Goals and strategies of a problem-based learning facilitator. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problembased Learning, 1, 21-39.
41. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Derry, S. J., Woods, D., DelMarcelle, M., & Chernobilsky, E. (2005). From parallel play to meshed interaction: The evolution of the EStep system. In D. Suthers & T. Koschmann (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL 2005. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
42. Horwitz, P., Neumann, E., & Schwartz, J. (1996). Teaching science at multiple levels: The GenScope program. Communications of the ACM, 39, 100-102.
43. Jackson, S., Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1996). Making system dynamics modeling accessible to pre-college science students. Interactive Learning Environments, 4, 233-257.
44. Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2006). Cognitive tools and mindtools for collaborative learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35, 199-209.
45. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & 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.
46. Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
47. Krajcik, J. S., & Blumenfeld, P. (2006). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 317-334). New York: Cambridge.
48. Krajcik, J. S., Czerniak, C., & Berger, C. (1999). Teaching children science: A project-based approach. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.
49. Kuhn, D., Black, J., Keselman, A., & Kaplan, D. (2000). The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 495-523.
50. Langer, J. A. (2001). Beating the odds: Teaching middle and high school students to read and write well. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 837-880.
51. Lederman, N. G. (1998). The state of science education: Subject matter without context. Electronic Journal of Science Education, 41.
52. Leinhardt, G., & Steele, M. D. (2005). Seeing the complexity of standing to the side: Instructional dialogues. Cognition and Instruction, 23, 87-163.
53. Linn, M. C., Bell, P., & Hsi, S. (1999). Lifelong science learning on the Internet: The knowledge integration environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 6, 4-38.
54. Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (2004). Internet environments for science education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
55. Linn, M. C., & Slotta, J. D. (2006). Enabling participants in online forums to learn from each other. In A. M. O'Donnell, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & G. Erkens (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology (pp. 61-98). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
56. Loh, B., Reiser, B. J., Radinsky, J., Edelson, D. C., Gomez, L. M., & Marshall, S. (2001). Developing reflective inquiry practices: A case study of software, the teacher, and students. In K. Crowley, C. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 279-324). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
57. Lynch, S., Kuipers, J., Pyke, C., & Szesze, M. (2005). Examining the effects of a highly rated science curriculum unit on diverse students: Results from a planning grant. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 921-946.
58. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59, 14-19.
59. McComas, W. F., Clough, M. P., & Almazroa, H. (1998). The role and character of the nature of science in science education. Science and Education, 7, 511-532.
60. Mergendoller, J. R., Maxwell, N. L., & Bellisimo, Y. (2006). The effective-ness of problem-based instruction: A comparative study of instructional method and student characteristics. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning. 7, 49-69.
61. Ministry of Education (2001). Standards for nine-year continuous curriculum at elementary and junior high level in Taiwan. Taipei: Ministry of Education, R.O.C.
62. Minstrell, J., & Stimpson, V. (1996). A classroom environment for learning: Guiding students' reconstruction of understanding and reasoning. In L. Schauble & R. Glaser (Eds.), Innovations in learning: New environments for education (pp. 175-202). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
63. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: NCTM.
64. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
65. Norman, G. R., Brooks, L. R., Colle, C. L., & Hatala, R. M. (2000). The benefit of diagnostic hypotheses in clinical reasoning: Experimental study of an instructional intervention for forward and backward reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 433-448.
66. Norman, G. R., Trott, A. D., Brooks, L. R., & Smith, E. K. (1994). Cognitive differences in clinical reasoning related to postgraduate training. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 6, 114-120.
67. Palincsar, A. S. (1998). Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annual Review of Psychology, 45, 345-375.
68. Patel, V. L., Groen, G. J., & Norman, G. R. (1993). Reasoning and instruction in medical curricula. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 335-378.
69. Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 185-217.
70. Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 337-386.
71. Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. J. (2001). BGuILE: Strategie and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 263-305). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
72. Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 273-304.
73. Rogoff, B. ( 1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
74. Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligences with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20, 2-9.
75. Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic supports for science inquiry. Science Education, 88, 345-372.
76. Schank, R.C. (1982). Dynamic Memory: A theory of reminding and learning in computers and people. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
77. Schank, R., & Cleary, C. (1995). Engines for education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
78. Schmidt, H. G. (1983). Problem-based learning: rationale and description. Medical Education, 17, 11-16.
79. Schneider, R. M., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 221-245.
80. Schwartz, D. L., & Bransford, J. D. ( 1998). A time for telling. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 475-522.
81. Schwartz, D. L., & Martin, T. (2004). Inventing to prepare for future learning: The hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22, 129-184.
82. Shymansky, J.A. ( 1984). BSCS programs: Just how effective were they? The American Biology Teacher, 46, 54-57.
83. Singer, J., Rivet, A., Schneider, R. M., Krajcik, J. S., Amati, K., & Marx, R. W. (2000, April). Setting the stage: Engaging students in water quality. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
84. Smith, B. K., & Reiser, B. J. (1998). National Geographic unplugged: Designing interactive nature films for classrooms. In C.-M. Karat, A. Lund, J. Coutaz, & J. Karat (Eds.), Proceedings of CHI 98: Human factors in computing systems (pp. 424-431). New York: ACM Press.
85. Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D., & Lesgold, A. M. (2002). "Mapping to know": The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86, 244-263.
86. Vernon, D. T., & Blake, R. L. (1993). Does problem-based learning work? A meta-analysis of evaluative research. Academic Medicine, 68, 550-563.
87. Von Seeker, C., & Lissitz, R. W. (1999). Estimating the impact of instructional practices on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 110-1126.
88. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
89. White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 3-118.
90. Wise, K., C., & Okey, J. R. (1983). A meta-analysis of the effects of various science teaching strategies on achievement. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20, 419-435.
91. Wu, Y.-T., & Tsai, C.-C. (2005). Effects of constructivist-oriented instruction on elementary school students' cognitive structures. Journal of Biological Education, 39, 113-119.