The effects of representational format on learning combinatorics from an interactive computer simulation

Instructional Science

Volumn 37, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 503-517

  Kolloffel, Bas ^a   Eysink, Tessa H S ^a   de Jong, Ton ^a   Wilhelm, Pascal ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b SAXION UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCES   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cognitive load; External representations; Inquiry learning; Interactive representations; Mathematics; Multiple representations; Simulation based learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 77949772880     PISSN: 00204277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11251-008-9056-7     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2-3), 131-152. doi: 10. 1016/S0360-1315(99)00029-9.
2. Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183-198. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2006. 03. 001.
3. Ainsworth, S., & Loizou, A. T. (2003). The effects of self-explaining when learning with text or diagrams. Cognitive Science, 27(4), 669-681.
4. Atkinson, R. K., Catrambone, R., & Merrill, M. M. (2003). Aiding transfer in statistics: Examining the use of conceptually oriented equations and elaboration's during subgoal learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 762-773. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 95. 4. 762.
5. Ayres, P. (2006). Using subjective measures to detect variations of intrinsic cognitive load within problems. Learning and Instruction, 16(5), 389-400. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2006. 09. 001.
6. Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 53-61. doi: 10. 1207/S15326985EP3801_7.
7. Brünken, R., Plass, J. L., & Leutner, D. (2004). Assessment of cognitive load in multimedia learning with dual-task methodology: Auditory load and modality effects. Instructional Science, 32(1-2), 115-132. doi: 10. 1023/B: TRUC. 0000021812. 96911. c5.
8. Carlson, R., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). Learning and understanding science instructional material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(3), 629-640. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 95. 3. 629.
9. Cheng, P. C. H. (1999). Unlocking conceptual learning in mathematics and science with effective representational systems. Computers & Education, 33(2-3), 109-130. doi: 10. 1016/S0360-1315(99)00028-7.
10. Cobb, P. (1989). A double-edged sword. [Review of the book Intuition in science and mathematics: an educational approach.]. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 20(2), 213-218. doi: 10. 2307/749284.
11. Dee-Lucas, D., & Larkin, J. H. (1991). Equations in scientific proofs: Effects on comprehension. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 661-682.
12. de Jong, T. (2005). The guided discovery principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 215-229). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. de Jong, T. (2006). Technological advances in inquiry learning. Science, 312(5773), 532-533. doi: 10. 1126/science. 1127750.
14. de Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M. (1996). Types and qualities of knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 105-113. doi: 10. 1207/s15326985ep3102_2.
15. de Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179-202.
16. DeLeeuw, K. E., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). A comparison of three measures of cognitive load: Evidence for separable measures of intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(1), 223-234. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 100. 1. 223.
17. Fischbein, E. (1987). Intuition in science and mathematics: An educational approach. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
18. Glenberg, A. M., & Langston, W. E. (1992). Comprehension of illustrated text: Pictures help to build mental models. Journal of Memory and Language, 31(2), 129-151. doi: 10. 1016/0749-596X(92)90008-L.
19. Glenberg, A. M., Meyer, M., & Lindem, K. (1987). Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 26(1), 66-83. doi: 10. 1016/0749-596X(87)90063-5.
20. Goolkasian, P. (2000). Pictures, words, and sounds: From which format are we best able to reason? Journal of General Psychology, 127(4), 439-459.
21. Greenes, C. (1995). Mathematics learning and knowing: A cognitive process. Journal of Education, 177(1), 85-106.
22. Greer, B. (2001). Understanding probabilistic thinking: The legacy of Efraim Fischbein. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 45(1-3), 15-33. doi: 10. 1023/A: 1013801623755.
23. Halpern, D. F. (1989). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Klein, P. D. (2003). Rethinking the multiplicity of cognitive resources and curricular representations: Alternatives to 'learning styles' and 'multiple intelligences'. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(1), 45-81. doi: 10. 1080/00220270210141891.
25. Koedinger, K. R., & Anderson, J. R. (1990). Abstract planning and perceptual chunks: Elements of expertise in geometry. Cognitive Science, 14(4), 511-550.
26. Koedinger, K. R., & Nathan, M. J. (2004). The real story behind story problems: Effects of representations on quantitative reasoning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(2), 129-164. doi: 10. 1207/s15327809jls1302_1.
27. Larkin, J. H., & Simon, H. A. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11(1), 65-99. doi: 10. 1016/S0364-0213(87)80026-5.
28. Leung, M., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1997). Learning from equations or words. Instructional Science, 25(1), 37-70. doi: 10. 1023/A: 1002969618881.
29. Levin, J. R. (1981). On functions of pictures in prose. In F. J. Pirozzolo & M. C. Wittrock (Eds.), Neuropsychological and cognitive processes in reading (pp. 203-228). London: Academic Press.
30. Levin, J. R., Anglin, G. J., & Carney, R. N. (1987). On empirically validating functions of pictures in prose. In D. M. Willows & H. A. Houghton (Eds.), The psychology of illustration: Basic research (pp. 51-85). New York: Springer-Verlag.
31. Levin, J. R., & Mayer, R. E. (1993). Understanding illustrations in text. In B. K. Britton, A. Woodward, & M. R. Binkley (Eds.), Learning from textbooks: Theory and practice (pp. 95-113). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Lewis, A. B., & Mayer, R. E. (1987). Students' miscomprehension of relational statements in arithmetic word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 363-371. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 79. 4. 363.
33. Marcus, N., Cooper, M., & Sweller, J. (1996). Understanding instructions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88(1), 49-63. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 88. 1. 49.
34. Mayer, R. E. (2003). The promise of multimedia learning: using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 125-139. doi: 10. 1016/S0959-4752(02)00016-6.
35. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. American Psychologist, 59(1), 14-19. doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 59. 1. 14.
36. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81-97. doi: 10. 1037/h0043158.
37. Nathan, M. J., Kintsch, W., & Young, E. (1992). A theory of algebra-word-problem comprehension and its implications for the design of learning environments. Cognition and Instruction, 9(4), 329-389. doi: 10. 1207/s1532690xci0904_2.
38. Niemi, D. (1996). Assessing conceptual understanding in mathematics: Representations, problem solutions, justifications, and explanations. Journal of Educational Research, 89(6), 351-363.
39. Ohlsson, S., & Rees, E. (1991). The function of conceptual understanding in the learning of arithmetic procedures. Cognition and Instruction, 8(2), 103-179. doi: 10. 1207/s1532690xci0802_1.
40. Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 429-434. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 84. 4. 429.
41. Paas, F., Renkl, A., & Sweller, J. (2004). Cognitive load theory: Instructional implications of the interaction between information structures and cognitive architecture. Instructional Science, 32(1-2), 1-8. doi: 10. 1023/B: TRUC. 0000021806. 17516. d0.
42. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63-71. doi: 10. 1207/S15326985EP3801_8.
43. Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
44. Rittle-Johnson, B., Siegler, R. S., & Alibali, M. W. (2001). Developing conceptual understanding and procedural skill in mathematics: An iterative process. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 346-362. doi: 10. 1037/0022-0663. 93. 2. 346.
45. Rogers, Y. (1999). What is different about interactive graphical representations? Commentary. Learning and Instruction, 9(4), 419-425. doi: 10. 1016/S0959-4752(98)00055-3.
46. Scaife, M., & Rogers, Y. (1996). External cognition: How do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45(2), 185-213. doi: 10. 1006/ijhc. 1996. 0048.
47. Seufert, T. (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 227-237. doi: 10. 1016/S0959-4752(02)00022-1.
48. Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational Research, 56(4), 411-436.
49. Shuell, T. J. (1988). The role of the student in learning from instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 13(3), 276-295. doi: 10. 1016/0361-476X(88)90027-6.
50. Sternberg, R. J. (1984). A theory of knowledge acquisition in the development of verbal concepts. Developmental Review, 4(2), 113-138. doi: 10. 1016/0273-2297(84)90001-7.
51. Swaak, J., & de Jong, T. (2001). Learner vs. system control in using online support for simulation-based discovery learning. Learning Environments Research, 4(3), 217-241. doi: 10. 1023/A: 1014434804876.
52. Sweller, J. (1989). Cognitive technology: Some procedures for facilitating learning and problem solving in mathematics and science. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(4), 457-466.
53. Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296. doi: 10. 1023/A: 1022193728205.
54. Tabachneck-Schijf, H. J. M., Leonardo, A. M., & Simon, H. A. (1997). CaMeRa: A computational model of multiple representations. Cognitive Science, 21(4), 305-350.
55. van der Meij, J., & de Jong, T. (2006). Supporting students' learning with multiple representations in a dynamic simulation-based learning environment. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 199-212. doi: 10. 1016/j. learninstruc. 2006. 03. 007.
56. van Joolingen, W. R., & de Jong, T. (2003). SimQuest: Authoring educational simulations. In T. Murray, S. Blessing, & S. Ainsworth (Eds.), Authoring tools for advanced technology educational software: Toward cost-effective production of adaptive, interactive, and intelligent educational software (pp. 1-31). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
57. van Someren, M. W., Reimann, P., Boshuizen, H. P. A., & de Jong, T. (1998). Learning with multiple representations. Oxford: Elsevier.
58. Zhang, J. J. (1997). The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cognitive Science, 21(2), 179-217.