Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work

Journal of the Learning Sciences

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 273-304

  Reiser, Brian J ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 4043178469     PISSN: 10508406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (91)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1990). Science for all Americans: Project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207.
3. Bannon, L. J., & Bødker, S. (1987). Beyond the interface: Encountering artifacts in use. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Interfacing thought: Cognitive aspects of human-computer interaction (pp. 227-253). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 307-359.
5. Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 797-817.
6. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palincsar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26, 369-398.
7. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229-270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press/Harvard University Press.
9. Cavalli-Sforza, V., Weiner, A., & Lesgold, A. M. (1994). Software support for students engaging in scientific activity and scientific controversy. Science Education, 78, 577-599.
10. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
11. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
12. Cohen, D. K. (1988). Teaching practice: Plus que ca change. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Contributing to educational change: Perspectives on research and practice (pp. 27-84). Berkeley: McCutchan.
13. Coleman, E. B. (1998). Using explanatory knowledge during collaborative problem solving in science. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 387-427.
14. Collins, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology. In L. Idol & B. F. Jones (Eds.), Educational values and cognitive instruction: Implications for reform (pp. 121-138). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
15. Collins, A., & Brown, J. S. (1988). The computer as a tool for learning through reflection. In H. Mandl & A. Lesgold (Eds.), Learning issues for intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 1-18). New York: Springer-Verlag.
16. 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: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
17. Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 91-142.
18. Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students' knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 819-837.
19. de Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 63-103.
20. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
21. 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.
22. Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & 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.
23. Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399-483.
24. Golan, R., Kyza, E. A., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. C. (2001, March). Structuring the task of behavioral analysis with software scaffolds. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, St. Louis, MO.
25. Guzdial, M. (1994). Software-realized scaffolding to facilitate programming for science learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 4, 1-44.
26. Hiebert, J., Carpenter, T. P., Fennema, E., Fuson, K., Human, P., Murray, H., et al. (1996). Problem solving as a basis for reform in curriculum and instruction: The case of mathematics. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 12-21.
27. Hmelo, C. E., Holton, D. L., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 247-298.
28. Hogan, K., Nastasi, B. K., & Pressley, M. (1999). Discourse patterns and collaborative scientific reasoning in peer and teacher-guided discussions. Cognition and Instruction, 17, 379-432.
29. Hogan, K., & Pressley, M. (1997). Scaffolding scientific competencies within classroom communities of inquiry. In K. Hogan & M. Pressley (Eds.), Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues (pp. 74-107). Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
30. Hollan, J. D., Bederson, B. B., & Helfman, J. (1997). Information visualization. In M. G. Helander, T. K. Landauer, & V. Prabhu (Eds.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (pp. 33-48). Essex, England: Elsevier Science.
31. Hollan, J. D., Hutchins, E., & Kirsh, D. (2000). Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 7, 174-196.
32. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Hutchins, E., Hollan, J. D., & Norman, D. A. (1986). Direct manipulation interfaces. In D. A. Norman & S. Draper (Eds.), User centered system design: New perspectives in human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Inc.
34. Jackson, S. L., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). The design of guided learning-adaptable scaffolding in interactive learning environments. In C.-M. Karat, A. Lund, J. Coutaz, & J. Karat (Eds.), Proceedings of CHI 98: Human factors in computing systems (pp. 187-194). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
35. Jimenenez-Aleixandre, M. P., Rodriguez, A. B., & Duschl, R. A. (2000). "Doing the lesson" or "doing science": Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792.
36. Kemp, E. K., Tzou, C. T., Reiser, B. J., & Spillane, J. P. (2002). Managing dilemmas in inquiry science teaching. In P. Bell, R. Stevens, & T. Satwicz (Eds.), Keeping learning complex: The Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) (pp. 206-213). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
37. Klahr, D. (2000). Exploring science: The cognition and development of discovery processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1-48.
39. Klahr, D., Fay, A. L., & Dunbar, K. (1993). Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 111-146.
40. Koedinger, K. R., & Anderson, J. R. (1993). Reifying implicit planning in geometry: Guidelines for model-based intelligent tutoring system design. In S. P. Lajoie & S. J. Deny (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 15-45). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
41. Kolodner, J. L., Owensby, J. N., & Guzdial, M. (2004). Case-based learning aids. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 829-862). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
42. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313-350.
43. Kuhn, D. (1993). Science as argument: Implications for teaching and learning scientific thinking. Science Education, 77, 319-337.
44. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E., & O'Loughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. San Diego, CA: Academic.
45. Kurth, L. A., Anderson, C. W., & Palincsar, A. S. (2002). The case of Carla: Dilemmas of helping all students to understand science. Science Education, 86, 287-313.
46. Kyza, E. A., Golan, R., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. C. (2002). Reflective inquiry: Enabling group self-regulation in inquiry-based science using the progress portfolio tool. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative Learning: Proceedings of CSCL 2002 (pp. 227-236). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
47. Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
48. Lepper, M. R., Woolverton, M., Mumme, D. L., & Gurtner, J. (1993). Motivational techniques of expert human tutors: Lessons for the design of computer-based tutors. In S. P. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 75-105). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
49. Linn, M. C. (2000). Designing the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 781-796.
50. Linn, M. C., Bell, B., & Davis, E. A. (2004). Internet environments for science education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
51. Loh, B. (2003). Using articulation and inscription as catalysts for reflection: Design principles for reflective inquiry. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
52. 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. D. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), De signing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 279-323). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
53. Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Merrill, S. K., & Landes, S. (1995). Tutoring: Guided learning by doing. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 315-372.
54. Moje, E. B., Collazo, T., Carrillo, R., & Marx, R. W. (2001). "Maestro, what is 'quality'?": Language, literacy, and discourse in project-based science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38, 469-498.
55. Norman, D. A. (1988). Psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
56. Norman, D. A. (1991). Cognitive artifacts. In J. M. Carroll (Ed.), Designing interaction: Psychology at the human-computer interface (pp. 17-38). New York: Cambridge University Press.
57. Norman, D. A. (1993). Things that make us smart: Defending human attributes in the age of the machine. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
58. Olson, S., & Loucks-Horsley, S. (Eds.). (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
59. Passmore, C., & Stewart, J. (2002). A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39, 185-204.
60. Pea, R. D. (1992). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 47-87). New York: Cambridge University Press.
61. Pea, R. D., & Gomez, L. M. (1992). Distributed multimedia learning environments: Why and how? Interactive Learning Environments, 2, 73-109.
62. Perkins, D. (1998). What is understanding? In M. S. Wiske (Ed.), Teaching for understanding: Linking research with practice (pp. 39-58). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
63. Phelps, E., & Damon, W. (1989). Problem solving with equals: Peer collaboration as a context for learning mathematics and spatial concepts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 639-646.
64. Quintana, C., Eng, J., Carra, A., Wu, H.-K., & Soloway, E. (1999). Symphony: A case study in extending learner-centered design through process space analysis. In M. G. Williams, M. W. Altom, K. Ehrlich, & W. Newman (Eds.), Proceedings of CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 473-480). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
65. Reif, F., & Larkin, J. H. (1991). Cognition in scientific and everyday domains: Comparison and learning implications. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28, 733-760.
66. Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. J. (2001). BGuILE: Strategic 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: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
67. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
68. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaboration: Convergent conceptual change. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 235-276.
69. Rosebery, A. S., Warren, B., & Conant, F. R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 61-94.
70. Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2-9.
71. Sandoval, W. A. (1998). Inquire to explain: Structuring inquiry around explanation construction in a technology-supported biology curriculum. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
72. Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Students' understanding of causal explanation and natural selection in a technology-supported inquiry curriculum. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 5-51.
73. Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 345-372.
74. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 265-283.
75. Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Duschl, R. A., Schulze, S., & John, J. (1995). Students' understanding of the objectives and procedures of experimentation in the science classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 131-166.
76. Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Raghavan, K., & Reiner, M. (1991). Causal models and experimentation strategies in scientific reasoning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 201-238.
77. Sherin, B. L. (2001). How students understand physics equations. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 479-541.
78. 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 (pp. 424-431). New York: ACM Press.
79. Soloway, E., Guzdial, M., & Hay, K. E. (1994). Learner-centered design: The challenge for HCI in the 21st century. Interactions, 1(1), 36-48.
80. Tabak, I. (2002). Teacher as monitor, mentor or partner: Uncovering participant structures involved in supporting student-directed inquiry. In P. Bell, R. Stevens, & T. Satwicz (Eds.), Keeping learning complex: The Proceedings of the fifth international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS) (pp. 466-472). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
81. Tabak, I., & Reiser, B. J. (1997). Complementary roles of software-based scaffolding and teacher-student interactions in inquiry learning. In R. Hall, N. Miyake, & N. Enyedy (Eds.), Proceedings of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning '97 (pp. 289-298). Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
82. Tabak, I., Smith, B. K., Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (1996). Combining general and domain-specific strategic support for biological inquiry. In C. Frasson, G. Gauthier, & A. Lesgold (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: Third international conference, ITS '96 (pp. 288-296). Montreal, Quebec, Canada: Springer-Verlag.
83. Teasley, S. D., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Constructing a joint problem space: The computer as a tool for sharing knowledge. In S. P. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 229-258). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
84. 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, 264-286.
85. Tzou, C. T., Reiser, B. J., Spillane, J. P., & Kemp, E. K. (2002). Characterizing the multiple dimensions of teachers' inquiry practices. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
86. van Zee, E. H., & Minstrell, J. (1997). Reflective discourse: Developing shared understandings in a physics classroom. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 209-228.
87. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of the higher psychological processes (A. Kozulin, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
88. Webb, N. M., & Palincsar, A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 841-873). New York: Macmillan.
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. Williams, S. M. (1992). Putting case-based instruction into context: Examples from legal and medical education. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 367-427.
91. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17, 89-100.