The role of the microcomputer-based laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in kinematics

Research in Science Education

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 217-243

  Russell, David W ^a   Lucas, Keith B ^a   McRobbie, Campbell J ^a  

^a QUEENSLAND UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Constructivism; Kinematics learning; Microcomputer based laboratories; Thermal physics learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 4344639678     PISSN: 0157244X     EISSN: 15731898     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1025073410522     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Appleton, K. (1997). Teaching science. Rockhampton, Queensland: Central Queensland University Press.
2. Beichner, R. J. (1990). The effect of simultaneous motion presentation and graph generation in a kinematics lab. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(8), 803-815.
3. Berger, C. F., Lu, C. R., Belzer, S. J., & Voss, B. E. (1994). Research on the uses of technology in science education. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 466-490). New York: Macmillan.
4. Bigum, C. (1998, November 19). Computers in schools: Mothering necessity. Queensland Teachers' Union Professional Magazine, 16, 2-9.
5. Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2000). Learning in science: A comparison of deep and surface approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 109-138.
6. Clark, S. A., & Jackson, D. F. (1998, April). Laboratory technology and student motivation in a conceptual physics classroom: A year-long case study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA.
7. Dexter, S., & Anderson, R. (1998, April). Teachers' views on the influence of computers on changes in their instructional practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
8. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12.
9. Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., & Scott, P. (1995, April). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom: A theoretical perspective on pedagogy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
10. Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science - from behaviourism towards social constructivism and beyond. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3-25). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
11. Fensham, P., Gunstone, R., & White, R. (Eds.). (1994). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. London, UK: Falmer Press.
12. Geelan, D. (1997). Prior knowledge, prior conceptions, prior constructs: What do constructivists really mean, and are they practising what they preach? The Australian Science Teachers' Journal, 43(3), 26-28.
13. Hogan, K. (1999). Assessing depth of sociocognitive processing in peer groups' science discussions. Research in Science Education, 29(4), 457-477.
14. Kelly, G. J., & Crawford, T. (1996). Students' interaction with computer representations: Analysis of discourse in laboratory groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 693-707.
15. Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179-211.
16. Lee, N., & Brown, S. (1994). Otherness and the actor network: The undiscovered continent. American Behavioral Scientist, 37(6), 772-791.
17. Lidstone, J., & Lucas, K. B. (1998). Teaching and learning research methodology from interactive multimedia programs: Post graduate students' engagement with an innovative program. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(2/3), 237-261.
18. Linn, M. C., Layman, J. W., & Nachmias, R. (1987). Cognitive consequences of microcomputer-based laboratories: Graphing skills development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12, 244-253.
19. Linn, M. C., & Songer, N. B. (1991). Teaching thermodynamics to middle school students: What are appropriate cognitive demands? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 885-918.
20. McLellan, H. (1994). Interactions of student partners in a high school astronomy computer lab. Computers in the Schools, 11(1), 29-41.
21. McRobbie, C. J., & Thomas, G. P. (2000). Epistemological and contextual issues in the use of microcomputer-based laboratories in a year 11 chemistry classroom. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19(2), 137-160.
22. Nachmias, R., & Linn, M. C. (1987). Evaluations of science laboratory data: The role of computer-presented information. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(5), 491-506.
23. Nakhleh, M. B., & Krajcik, J. S. (1991, April). The use of videotape to analyze the correspondence between the verbal commentary of students and their actions when using different levels of instrumentation during laboratory activities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva, WI.
24. Nakhleh, M. B., & Krajcik, J. S. (1994). Influence of levels of information as presented by different technologies on students' understanding of acid, base and pH concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(10), 1077-1096.
25. Newton, L. R., & Rogers, L. (2001). Teaching science with ICT (1st ed.). London, UK: Continuum.
26. Pennington, B. F., Bennetto, L., McAleer, O., & Roberts, J. (1996). Executive functions and working memory: Theoretical and measurement issues. In G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 327-348). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
27. Redish, E. F., Saul, J. M., & Steinberg, R. N. (1997). On the effectiveness of active-engagement microcomputer-based laboratories. American Journal of Physics, 65(1), 45-55.
28. Roth, W.-M. (1996). Knowledge diffusion* in a grade 4-5 classroom during a unit on civil engineering: An analysis of a classroom community in terms of its changing resources and practices. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 179-220.
29. Roth, W.-M., McRobbie, C. J., Lucas, K. B., & Boutonné, S. (1997). Why may students fail to learn from demonstrations? A social practice perspective on learning in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(5), 509-533.
30. Settlage, J., Jr. (1995). Children's conceptions of light in the context of a technology-based curriculum. Science Education, 79(5), 535-553.
31. Smith, E. L., Blakeslee, T. D., & Anderson, C. W. (1993). Teaching strategies associated with conceptual change learning in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(2), 111-126.
32. Sparks, G. (1983). Synthesis of research on staff development for effective teaching. Educational Leadership, 41(3), 65-72.
33. Svec, M. T. (1995, April). Effect of micro-computer based laboratory on graphing interpretation skills and understanding of motion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
34. Tebbutt, M. (2000). ICT in Science: Problems, possibilities...and principles? School Science Review, 81(297), 57-64.
35. Weller, H. G. (1996). Assessing the impact of computer-based learning in science. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28, 461-485.
36. White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. London, UK: Falmer Press.
37. Wilkinson, J. W., & Ward, M. (1997). The purpose and perceived effectiveness of laboratory work in secondary schools. The Australian Science Teachers' Journal, 43(2), 49-55.
38. Williams, D., Coles, L., Wilson, K., Richardson, A., & Tuson, J. (2000). Teachers and ICT: Current use and future needs. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31(4), 307-320.