Learning at the nanoscale: Research questions that the rapidly evolving interdisciplinarity of science poses for the learning sciences

ICLS 2006 - International Conference of the Learning Sciences, Proceedings

Volumn 2, Issue , 2006, Pages 1066-1072

  His, Sherry ^a   Sabelli, Nora ^b   Krajcik, Joseph ^c   Tinker, Robert ^d   Ellenbogen, Kirsten ^e  

^a Exploratorium and NISE Network   (United States)

^b SRI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^d Concord Consortium ^*  (United States)

^e ST CROIX WATERSHED RESEARCH STATION   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INFORMAL SCIENCE EDUCATION; INTERDISCIPLINARITY; LEARNING AND TEACHINGS; LEARNING SCIENCE; NANOSCALE PHENOMENON; NATIONAL NANOTECHNOLOGY INITIATIVES; RESEARCH QUESTIONS; TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT;

RESEARCH; TEACHING;

NANOTECHNOLOGY;

EID: 76849099084     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (37)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (2001). Atlas of science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Science for all Americans. Washington, DC, American Association for the Advancement of Science.
3. Ardac, D. & Akaygun, S. (2004). Effectiveness of Multimedia-Based institution that emphasizes molecular representations on students: Understanding of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41, 317-337
4. Bainbridge, W. S. (2002). Public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 4, 561-570.
5. Cobb, M. D., & Macoubrie, J. (2004). Public perceptions about nanotechnology: Risks, benefits and trust. Journal of Nanoparticle Research, 6, 395-405.
6. DeWos, W. & Verdonk, A. H. (1996). The particulate nature of matter in science education and in science. Journal of Research on Science Teaching. 33, 657-664
7. Flagg, B. (in press). Nanotechnology and the Public. Informal Learning Review for 2006 issue.
8. Johnstone, A. H. (1993) The development of chemistry teaching: a changing response to a changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education. 70, 701-705
9. Harrison, A. J, & Treagust, D. F. (1996). Secondary students' models of atoms and molecules: implications for teaching chemistry. Science education. 80, 509-534
10. Holland, J. (1998). Emergence: From Chaos to Order, Addison-Wesley.
11. Jones, D. G. C. (1991). Teaching modern physics - Misconceptions of the photon that can damage understanding, Physics Education, 26 (2) 92-98.
12. Jones, M. G, Bokinsky, A., Andre, T., Kubasko, D., Negish, A., Taylor, R., & Superfine, R., (2002) NanoManipulator Applications in Education: The Impact of Haptic Experiences on Students' Attitudes and Concepts. Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Science Haptics 2002 Symposium, pp. 295-298. Orlando, Florida: IEEE Computer Society.
13. Kaput, J., Bar-Yam, Y., Jacobson, M., Jakobsson, E., Lemke, J., Wilensky, U. et al. (1999). Planning documents for a National Initiative on Complex Systems in K-16 Education. Retrieved August 2005, from http://necsi.org/events/ cxedk16/cxedk16.html
14. Korn, R. & Associates (1999). A front-end evaluation of Materials MicroWorld. Prepared for the Materials Research Society.
15. Korn, R. & Associates (2004). Strange Matter Summative Evaluation. Prepared for the Materials Research Society.
16. Lederman, L. (2001) Revolution in Science Education: Put Physics First! Physics Today, September issue.
17. Lee, C., Scheufele, D., & Lewenstein, B. (in press) Public attitudes toward emerging technologies: Examining the interactive effects of cognitions and affect on public attitudes toward nanotechnology. Science Communication.
18. Macoubrie, J. (2005). Informed public perceptions of nanotechnology and trust in government. Project on emerging technologies at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Retrieved from http://www.wilsoncenter.org/ index.cfm?fuseaction=events.event-summary&event-id=143410
19. NISE Network, The Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network. http://www.nisenet.org
20. NNI, National Nanotechnology Initiative, http://nano.gov.
21. See also http://www.nano.gov/html/edu/home-edu.html
22. NNIN, National Nanotechnology Initiative Network, http://www.nnin.org/
23. Pallant, A., & Tinker, R. (2004). Reasoning with atomic-scale molecular dynamic models. Journal of Science Education and Technology: 13 (1), 51-66.
24. Roco, M.C. (2003). Converging science and technology at the nanoscale: opportunities for education and training. Nature Biotechnology, 21 (10) 1247.
25. Roco, M.C., (2004). Nanoscale Science and Engineering: Unifying and Transforming Tools. American Institute of Chemical Enguneers Journal, 50 (5) 890.
26. Roco, M.C. & Bainbridge, W.S. (Eds.) (2002). Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance: Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology and Cognitive Science. Retrieved from http://www.wtec.org/ ConvergingTechnologies
27. Sabelli, N., Schank, P., Rosenquist, A., Stanford, T., Patton, C., Cormia, R., & Hurst, K. (2005). Report of the Workshop on Science and Technology Education at the Nanoscale. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from http://nanosense.org/documents/reports/NanoWorkshopReportDraft. pdf
28. Sabelli, N. (in press). Complexity, Technology, Science and Education, International Journal of the Learning Sciences.
29. Serrell and Associates. (2001). Marvelous Molecules: The Secret Life. Summative Evaluation. Retrieved from www.informalscience.org/tools/summative. html
30. Stafford, C. L., Molinaro, M., & Nanozone Leader Team. (2005) Lessons learned from Nanozone. Retrieved from nanozone.org/museum.htm
31. Scheufele, D. A., & Lewenstein, B. (forthcoming). The public and nanotechnology: How citizens make sense of emerging technologies. Journal of Nanoparticle Research.
32. Schummer, J. (2005). Reading nano: The public interest in nanotechnology as reflected in purchase patterns of books. Public Understanding of Science, 14 (2), 163-183.
33. Tinker, R. (2005a). Molecular Dynamics in Education. Berkeley, CA: The University of California, Berkeley.
34. Tinker, R. (2005b). Nano-engineering with the Molecular Workbench. Berkeley, CA: The University of California, Berkeley.
35. Waldrop, M (1992). Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Chaos and Order, Touchstone Press
36. Waldron, A., Spencer, D., & Batt, C. (forthcoming). Too Small to See: The Current State of Public Understanding of Nanotechnology. Nanobiotechnology Center. Cornell University
37. Xie, Q., & Tinker, R. (in press). Molecular dynamics simulation of chemical reactions for use in education. Journal of Chemical Education.