Fostering elementary school students' understanding of simple electricity by combining simulation and laboratory activities: Original article

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 271-283

  Jaakkola, T ^a   Nurmi, S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TURKU   (Finland)

Author keywords

Computer simulation; Conceptual change; Electricity; Experimental study; Inquiry learning; Laboratory

Indexed keywords

EID: 47149090564     PISSN: 02664909     EISSN: 13652729     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00259.x     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Blake C. Scanlon E. (2007) Reconsidering simulations in science education at a distance: features of effective use. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00239.x.
2. Chambers S. Andre T. (1997) Gender, prior knowledge, interest, and experience in electricity and conceptual change text manipulations in learning about direct current. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 34, 107 123.
3. Cohen R., Eylon B. Ganiel U. (1983) Potential difference and current in simple electric circuits: a study of students' concepts. American Journal of Physics 51, 407 412.
4. Couture M. (2004) Realism in the design process and credibility of a simulation-based virtual laboratory. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 20, 40 49.
5. Crook C. (1994) Computers and the Collaborative Experience of Learning. Routledge, London.
6. Driver R. Easley J. (1978) Pupil and paradigms: a review of the literature related to concept development in adolescent science students. Studies in Science Education 5, 61 84.
7. Frederiksen J.R., White B.Y. Gutwill J. (1999) Dynamic mental models in learning science: the importance of constructing derivational linkages among models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36, 806 836.
8. Fredette N. Lochhead J. (1980) Student conceptions of simple circuits. The Physics Teacher 18, 194 198.
9. Fund Z. (2007) The effects of scaffolded computerized science problem-solving on achievement outcomes: a comparative study of support programs. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 23, 410 424.
10. Hedges L.V. (1981) Distribution theory for Glass's estimator of effect sizes and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics 6, 107 128.
11. Hennessy S., Deaney R. Ruthven K. (2006) Situated expertise in integrating use of multimedia simulation into secondary science teaching. International Journal of Science Education 28, 701 732.
12. Hodson D. (1996) Laboratory work as scientific method: three decades of confusion and distortion. Journal of Curriculum Studies 28, 115 135.
13. Hofstein A. Lunetta V. (1982) The role of laboratory in science teaching: neglected aspects of research. Review of Educational Research 52, 201 217.
14. Hofstein A. Lunetta V. (2004) The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education 88, 24 54.
15. Hsu Y. Thomas R.A. (2002) The impacts of a web-aided instructional simulation on science learning. International Journal of Science Education 24, 955 979.
16. de Jong T. (2006) Computer simulations: technological advances in inquiry learning. Science 312, 532 533.
17. de Jong T. van Joolingen W.R. (1998) Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research 68, 179 201.
18. Kirschner P. Huisman W. (1998) Dry laboratories in science education: computer-based practical work. International Journal of Science Education 20, 665 682.
19. Kärrqvist C. (1985) The development of concepts by means of dialogues centred on experiments. In Aspects of Understanding Electricity (eds R. Duit, W. Jung C. von Rhöneck pp. 215 226. IPN, Kiel, Germany.
20. Lee Y. Law N. (2001) Explorations in promoting conceptual change in electrical concepts via ontological category shift. International Journal of Science Education 23, 111 149.
21. Light P. Glachan M. (1985) Facilitation of problem solving through peer interaction. Educational Psychology 5, 217 225.
22. Limon M. Mason L. (2002) Reconsidering Conceptual Change: Issues in Theory and Practice. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
23. Lou Y., Abrami P.C. Apollonia S. (2001) Small group and individual learning with technology: a meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 71, 449 521.
24. McDermott L.C. Shaffer P.S. (1992) Research as a guide for curriculum development: an example from introductory electricity. Part I: investigation of student understanding. American Journal of Physics 60, 994 1013.
25. Merenluoto K. Lehtinen E. (2004) Number concept and conceptual change: towards a systemic model of the processes of change. Learning and Instruction 14, 519 534.
26. Osborne R. (1983) Towards modifying children's ideas about electric current. Research in Science and Technology Education 1, 73 82.
27. Planinic M., Boone W.J., Krsnik R. Beilfuss M. (2006) Exploring alternative conceptions from Newtonian dynamics and simple DC circuits: links between item difficulty and item confidence. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 43, 150 171.
28. Raven J.C. (1958) Standard Progressive Matrices. Sets A, B, C, D and E. H.K. Lewis & Co. Ltd., Cambridge, UK.
29. Reiner M., Slotta J.D., Chi M.T.H. Resnick L.B. (2000) Naïve physics reasoning: a commitment to substance-based conceptions. Cognition and Instruction 18, 1 34.
30. Resnick M. (1998) Technologies for lifelong kindergarten. Educational Technology Research and Development 46, 43 55.
31. von Rhöneck C. Grob K. (1990) Psychological aspects of learning about basic electricity. In Learning and Instruction. European Research in an International Context, Vol. 2.2 (eds H. Mandl, E. De Corte, N. Bennett H.F. Friedrich pp. 589 603. Pergamon, Oxford, UK.
32. Ronen M. Eliahu M. (2000) Simulation - a bridge between theory and reality: the case of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 16, 14 26.
33. Shepardson D.P. Moje E.B. (1999) The role of anomalous data in restructuring fourth graders' frameworks for understanding electric circuits. International Journal of Science Education 21, 77 94.
34. Shipstone D.M. (1984) A study of children's understanding of electricity in simple DC circuits. European Journal of Science Education 6, 185 198.
35. Sinatra G.M. Mason L. (in press) Beyond knowledge: learner characteristics influencing conceptual change. In Handbook on Conceptual Change (ed. S. Vosniadou). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
36. Srinivasan S., Perez L.C., Palmer R.D., Brooks D.W., Wilson K. Fowler D. (2006) Reality versus simulation. Journal of Science Education and Technology 15, 137 141.
37. Steinberg R.N. (2000) Computers in teaching science: to simulate or not to simulate? American Journal of Physics 68, 37 41.
38. Tao P. Gunstone R. (1999) The process of conceptual change in force and motion during computer-supported physics instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 36, 859 882.
39. Triona L.M. Klahr D. (2003) Point and click or grab and heft: comparing the influence of physical and virtual instructional materials on elementary school students' ability to design experiments. Cognition and Instruction 21, 149 173.
40. White B.Y. Frederiksen J.R. (1990) Causal model progression as a foundation for intelligent learning environments. Artificial Intelligence 42, 99 157.
41. Wiser M. Amin T.G. (2002) Computer-based interactions for conceptual change in science. In Reconsidering Conceptual Change: Issues in Theory and Practice (eds M. Limon L. Mason pp. 357 387. Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
42. Zacharia Z.C. (2007) Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: an effort to enhance students' conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 23, 120 132.
43. Zacharia Z.C. Anderson O.R. (2003) The effects of an interactive computer-based simulation prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiment on students' conceptual understanding of physics. American Journal of Physics 71, 618 629.