Learning the Control of Variables Strategy in Higher and Lower Achieving Classrooms: Contributions of Explicit Instruction and Experimentation

Journal of Educational Psychology

Volumn 102, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 90-101

  Lorch Jr , Robert F ^a   Lorch, Elizabeth P ^a   Calderhead, William J ^a   Dunlap, Emily E ^a   Hodell, Emily C ^a   Freer, Benjamin Dunham ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

experimentation; explicit instruction; inquiry in science; scaling up; science education

Indexed keywords

EID: 77249084164     PISSN: 00220663     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0017972     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Ball D.L., and Forzani F.M. What makes education research "educational"?. Educational Researcher 36 (2007) 529-540
2. Bruner J.S. The art of discovery. Harvard Educational Review 31 (1961) 21-32
3. Bullock M., and Ziegler A. Scientific reasoning: Development and individual differences. In: Weinert F.E., and Schneider W. (Eds). Individual development from 3 to 12: Findings from the Munich Longitudinal Study (1999), Max Plank Institute for Psychological Research, Munich, Germany 309-336
4. Chen Z., and Klahr D. All other things being equal: Children's acquisition of the control of variables strategy. Child Development 70 (1999) 1098-1120
5. Cohen J. Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist 45 (1990) 1304-1312
6. Dean Jr. D., and Kuhn D. Direct instruction vs. discovery: The long view. Science Education 91 (2007) 384-397
7. Dunbar K., and Klahr D. Developmental differences in scientific discovery processes. In: Klahr D., and Kotovsky K. (Eds). Complex information processing: The impact of Herbert A. Simon (1989), Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ 109-143
8. Glenberg A.M., Gutierrez T., Levin J.R., Japuntich S., and Kaschak M.P. Activity and imagined activity can enhance young children's reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology 96 (2004) 424-436
9. Glenberg A.M., and Kaschak M.P. Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9 (2002) 558-565
10. Glenberg, A. M., & Levin, J. R. (2006, November). Embodiment in education. Paper presented at the 47th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Long Beach, CA.
11. Kentucky Department of Education. Core Content for Science Assessment (Elementary Version 4.1) [Computer software] (2006, August). http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE/Instructional+Resources/Curriculum+Documents+and+Resources/Core+Content+for+Assessment/Core+Content+for+Assessment+4.1/ Retrieved from http://www.education.ky.gov/KDE/Instructional+Resources/Curriculum+Documents+and+Resources/Core+Content+for+Assessment/Core+Content+for+Assessment+4.1/
12. Kirschner P.A., Sweller J., and Clark R.E. 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 (2006) 75-86
13. Klahr D. Early science instruction: Addressing fundamental issues. Psychological Science 16 (2005) 871-872
14. Klahr D., and Nigam M. The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction. Psychological Science 15 (2004) 661-667
15. Kuhn D. Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psychological Review 96 (1989) 674-689
16. Kuhn D. What needs to be mastered in mastery of scientific method?. Psychological Science 16 (2005) 873-874
17. Kuhn D., and Angelev J. An experimental study of the development of formal operational thought. Child Development 47 (1976) 697-706
18. Kuhn D., Black J., Keselman A., and Kaplan D. The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction 18 (2000) 495-523
19. Kuhn D., and Dean Jr. D. Is developing scientific thinking all about learning to control variables?. Psychological Science 16 (2005) 866-870
20. Kuhn D., Garcia-Mila M., Zohar A., and Andersen C. Strategies of knowledge acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 60 4, Serial No. 245 (1995) 1-128
21. Kuhn D., Schauble L., and Garcia-Mila M. Cross-domain development of scientific reasoning. Cognition and Instruction 9 (1992) 285-327
22. Li J., Klahr D., and Jabbour A. When the rubber meets the road: Putting research-based methods to test in urban classrooms. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the Learning Sciences: Making a difference (2006), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 418-424
23. Mayer R. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist 59 (2004) 14-19
24. McDonald S.-K., Keesler V.A., Kauffman N.J., and Schneider B. Scaling-up exemplary interventions. Educational Researcher 35 (2006) 15-24
25. National Research Council. National science education standards (1996), National Academy Press, Washington, DC
26. Raudenbush S., and Bryk A. Hierarchical linear models. 2nd ed. (2002), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
27. Raudenbush S., Bryk A., Cheong Y.F., Congdon R., and du Toit M. Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. 2nd ed. (2004), Scientific Software International, Lincolnwood, IL
28. Rittle-Johnson B. Promoting transfer: Effects of self-explanation and direct instruction. Child Development 77 (2006) 1-15
29. Ross A.J. Controlling variables: A meta-analysis of training studies. Review of Educational Research 58 (1988) 405-437
30. Schauble L. The development of scientific reasoning in knowledge-rich contexts. Developmental Psychology 32 (1996) 102-109
31. Schauble L., Glaser R., Duschl R., Schulze S., and John J. Students' understanding of the objectives and procedures of experimentation in the science classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 4 (1991) 131-166
32. Singer J.D., and Willett J.B. Applied longitudinal data analysis: Modeling change and event occurrence (2003), Oxford University Press, New York, NY
33. Strand-Cary M., and Klahr D. Developing elementary science skills: Instructional effectiveness and path independence. Cognitive Development 23 (2008) 488-511
34. Toth E.E., Klahr D., and Chen Z. Bridging research and practice: A research-based classroom intervention for teaching experimentation skills to elementary school children. Cognition and Instruction 18 (2000) 423-459
35. Triona L.M., and Klahr D. 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 (2003) 149-173
36. Zohar A., and Aharon-Kravetsky S.A. Exploring the effects of cognitive conflict and direct teaching for students of different academic levels. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 42 (2005) 829-855
37. Zohar A., and David A.B. Explicit teaching of meta-strategic knowledge in authentic classroom situations. Metacognition Learning 3 (2008) 59-82
38. Zohar A., and Peled B. The effects of explicit teaching of metastrategic knowledge on low- and high-achieving students. Learning and Instruction 18 (2008) 337-353