Scaffolding middle school students' content knowledge and ill-structured problem solving in a problem-based hypermedia learning environment

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 58, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 507-529

  Bulu, Saniye Tugba ^a   Pedersen, Susan ^b  

^a MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b TEXAS A AND M UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Hypermedia; Ill structured problem solving; Prompt scaffolds; Science

Indexed keywords

EID: 77957102817     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-010-9150-9     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., Winters, F. I., Moos, D. C., & Greene, J. A. (2005). Adaptive human scaffolding facilitates adolescents' self-regulated learning with hypermedia. Instructional Science, 33, 381-412.
2. Azevedo, R., & Jacobson, M. J. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: A summary and critical analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 93-100.
3. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. G. (2008). Why is externally-regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(1), 45-72.
4. Bell, P., & Davis, E. A. (2000). Designing mildred: Scaffolding students' reflection and argumentation using a cognitive software guide. In B. Fishman & S. O'Connor-Divelbiss (Eds.), Fourth international conference of the learning sciences (pp. 142-149). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Blum, R. E., & Arter, J. A. (1996). Student performance assessment. Alexandria, VG: Associations for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
6. Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington DC: National Academy Press.
7. Bransford, J. D., & Stein, B. S. (1993). The IDEAL problem solver: A guide for improving thinking, learning, and creativity (2nd ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
8. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1981). Inducing flexible thinking: A problem of access. In M. Friedman, J. P. Das, & N. O'Connor (Eds.), Intelligence and learning (pp. 515-529). New York: Plenum.
9. Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2001). The use of embedded scaffolds in with hypermedia-supported student-centered learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(4), 333-356.
10. Chi, M. T. H. (2006a). Laboratory methods for assessing experts' and novices' knowledge. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 167-184). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Chi, M. T. H. (2006b). Two approaches to the study of experts' characteristics. In K. Ericsson, N. A. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 21-30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
13. Chi, M. T. H., & Glaser, R. (1985). Problem solving ability. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Human abilities: An information processing approach (pp. 227-257). San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
14. Chi, M. T. H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 7-76). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
15. Davis, E. A. (2003). Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12, 91-142.
16. Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. (2000). Scaffolding students' knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 819-837.
17. Feltovich, P. J., Prietula, M. J., & Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Studies of expertise from psychological perspectives. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 41-67). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18. Fretz, E. B., Wu, H., Zhang, B., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2002, April). A further investigation of scaffolding design and use in a dynamic modeling tool. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
19. Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students' problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 21-38.
20. Gick, M. L. (1986). Problem solving strategies. Educational Psychologist, 21(1& 2), 99-120.
21. Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., & VanLehn, K. (2005). Scaffolding deep comprehension strategies through Point& Query, AutoTutor, and iSTART. Educational Psychologist, 40, 225-234.
22. Greene, B. A., & Land, S. M. (2000). A qualitative analysis of scaffolding use in a resource-based learning environment involving the World Wide Web. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(2), 151-180.
23. Holt Science and Technology Assessment Item Listing. (1988). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
24. Hong, N. S. (1998). The relationship between well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in multimedia simulation. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(08), 2850 (UMI No. 9901039).
25. Hong, N. S., Jonassen, D. H., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 6-33.
26. Jacobs, J. E., & Paris, S. G. (1987). Children's metacognition about reading: Issues in definition, measurement, and instruction. Educational Psychologist, 22, 255-278.
27. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65-94.
28. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward the design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63-85.
29. Jonassen, D. H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M. (1993). Structural knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generated questioning. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 111-126.
31. King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368.
32. King, A., & Rosenshine, B. (1993). Effects of guided cooperative questioning on children's knowledge construction. The Journal of Experimental Education, 61(2), 127-148.
33. Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development, 26(4), 222-232.
34. Kluwe, R. H., & Friedrichsen, G. (1985). Mechanism of control and regulation in problem solving. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 183-218). New York: Springer-Verlag.
35. Kyza, E. A., & Edelson, D. C. (2003, April). Reflective inquiry: What it is and how can software scaffolds help. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
36. Land, S. M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 61-78.
37. Land, S. M., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2003). Scaffolding reflection and articulation of scientific explanations in a data-rich, project-based learning environment: An investigation of Progress Portfolio. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(4), 65-84.
38. Lee, H. S., & Songer, N. B. (2004) Expanding an understanding of scaffolding theory using an inquiry-fostering science program. Retrieved January 01, 2006, from www. biokids. umich. edu/about/papers/56LeeSongerScaffolding. pdf.
39. Lin, X., Hmelo, C., Kinzer, C. K., & Secules, T. J. (1999). Designing technology to support reflection. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(3), 43-62.
40. Lin, X., & Lehman, J. D. (1999). Supporting learning of variable control in a computer-based biology environment: Effects of prompting college students to reflect on their own thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 3(7), 837-858.
41. McNeill, K. L. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanation through curricular scaffolds and teacher instructional practices. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(10) (UMI No. 3238032).
42. McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2006, April). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanation through generic versus context-specific written scaffolds. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
43. McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
44. National Commission on Mathematics, Science Teaching for the 21st Century. (2000). Before it's too late. Washington, DC: U. S. Department of Education.
45. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
46. Palincsar, A., & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
47. Pea, R. D. (2004). The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education and human activity. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 423-451.
48. Pedersen, S. J. (2000). Cognitive modeling during problem-based learning: The effects of a hypermedia expert tool. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(08), 3133 (UMI No. 9983316).
49. Pedersen, S., Liu, M., & Williams, D. (2002). Alien rescue: Designing for student-centered learning. Educational.
50. Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18(1), 16-25.
51. Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185-217.
52. Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337-386.
53. Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273-304.
54. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher-level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 26-33.
55. Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., & Globerson, T. (1991). Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3), 2-9.
56. Sandoval, W. A. (2003). Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1), 5-51.
57. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1992). An architecture for collaborative knowledge building. In E. de Corte, M. C. Linn, H. Mandl, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Computer-based learning environments and problem solving. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
58. Sinnott, J. D. (1989). A model for solution of ill-structured problems: Implications for everyday and abstract problem solving. In J. D. Sinott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and application (pp. 72-99). New York: Praeger.
59. Smith, B. K. & Reiser, B. J. (1998). National Geographic unplugged: Classroom-centered design of interactive nature films. In C. Karat, A. Lund, J. Coutaz, & J. Karat (Eds.), Proceedings of the CHI 98 conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 424-431), Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
60. Stevens, J. P. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
61. Stone, C. A. (1998). Should we salvage the scaffolding metaphor? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 409-413.
62. Tabak, I. E. (1999). Unraveling the development of scientific literacy: Domain-specific inquiry support in a system of cognitive and social interactions. Dissertation Abstracts International, 60(12), 4323 (UMI No. 9953385).
63. Voss, J. F. (1988). Learning and transfer in subject-matter learning: A problem-solving model. International Journal of Educational Research, 11, 607-622.
64. Voss, J. F., & Post, T. A. (1988). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 261-285). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
65. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. London, England: Cambridge University Press.
66. Webb, N. M. (1989). Peer interaction and learning in small groups. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 21-39.
67. White, B., & Frederiksen, J. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3-118.
68. Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
69. Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D., Crawford, B., Friedrichsen, P., & Land, S. (2002). Scaffolding preservice science teachers' evidence-based arguments during an investigation of natural selection. Research in Science Education, 32(4), 437-465.