Portraits of middle school students constructing evidence-based arguments during problem-based learning: The impact of computer-based scaffolds

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 58, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 285-309

  Belland, Brian R ^a  

^a UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer based scaffolds; Evidence based arguments; Middle school; Problem based learning; Science education

Indexed keywords

EID: 79952072028     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-009-9139-4     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. ACT. (2008). The forgotten middle: Ensuring that all students are on target for college and career readiness before high school. Iowa City, IA: Author. http://www. act. org/research/policymakers/pdf/ForgottenMiddle. pdf. Accessed 10 December 2008.
2. Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68(1), 52-81.
3. Barab, S. A., & Dodge, T. (2008). Strategies for designing embodied curriculum. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. van Merrienboër, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 97-110). New York: Routledge.
4. Barrows, H. S. (1985). How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years. New York: Springer Publishing.
5. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York: Springer Publishing.
6. Bell, P. (1997). Using argument representations to make thinking visible for individuals and groups. In R. Hall, N. Miyake, & N. Enyedy (Eds.), Proceedings of CSCL '97: The second international conference on computer support for collaborative learning (pp. 10-19). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
7. Belland, B. R. (2008). Supporting middle school students' construction of evidence-based arguments: Impact of and student interactions with computer-based argumentation scaffolds (Dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN). Dissertation Abstracts International 69/09 Publication No. AAT 3330215.
8. Belland, B. R., Glazewski, K. D., & Richardson, J. C. (2008). A scaffolding framework to support the construction of evidence-based arguments among middle school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, 401-422.
9. Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2008). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26-55.
10. Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
11. Bricker, L. A., & Bell, P. (2008). Conceptualizations of argumentation from science studies and the learning sciences and their implications for the practices of science education. Science Education, 92(3), 473-498.
12. Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2001). The use of embedded scaffolds with hypermedia-supported student-centered learning. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(4), 333-356.
13. Cho, K., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem-solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 5-22.
14. Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2007). Personally-seeded discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 29(3), 253-277.
15. Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic Press.
16. Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist, 45(12), 1304-1312.
17. Crockett, L. J., Schulenberg, J. E., & Petersen, A. C. (1987). Congruence between objective and self-report data in a sample of young adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 2(4), 383-392.
18. Dods, R. F. (1997). An action research study of the effectiveness of problem-based learning in promoting the acquisition and retention of knowledge. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(4), 423-437.
19. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (1998). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287-312.
20. Finch, P. M. (1999). The effect of problem-based learning on the academic performance of students studying podiatric medicine in Ontario. Medical Education, 33, 411-417.
21. Gallagher, S. A. (1997). Problem-based learning: Where did it come from, what does it do, and where is it going? Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 20(4), 332-362.
22. Gallagher, S. A., & Stepien, W. J. (1996). Content acquisition in problem-based learning: Depth versus breadth in American studies. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 19(3), 257-275.
23. Gallagher, S. A., Stepien, W. J., & Rosenthal, H. (1992). The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(4), 195-200.
24. Giesbrecht, F. G., & Gumpertz, M. L. (2004). Planning, construction, and statistical analysis of comparative experiments. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
25. Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75(1), 27-61.
26. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine.
27. Glassner, A., Weinstock, M., & Neuman, Y. (2005). Pupils' evaluation and generation of evidence and explanation in argumentation. The British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 105-118.
28. Hannafin, M. J., & Land, S. M. (1997). The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science, 25, 167-202.
29. Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open-ended learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: Volume II: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 115-140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
30. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.
31. Kalyuga, S. (2007). Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 509-539.
32. Keppel, G. (1982). Design and analysis: A researcher's handbook (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
33. Kim, M. C., Hannafin, M. J., & Bryan, L. A. (2007). Technology-enhanced inquiry tools in science education: An emerging pedagogical framework for classroom practice. Science Education, 91, 1010-1030.
34. Knudson, R. E. (1991). Effects of instructional strategies, grade, and sex on students' persuasive writing. Journal of Experimental Education, 59(2), 141-152.
35. Kolodner, J. L., Camp, P. J., Crismond, D., Fasse, B., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., et al. (2003). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning in the middle school science classroom: Putting learning by design into practice. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 495-547.
36. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313-350.
37. Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38. Kuhn, D., Shaw, V., & Felton, M. (1997). Effects of dyadic interaction of argumentive reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15(3), 287-315.
39. Lepper, M. R., Drake, M. F., & O'Donnell-Johnson, T. (1997). Scaffolding techniques of expert human tutors. In K. Hogan & M. Pressley (Eds.), Scaffolding student learning: Instructional approaches and issues (pp. 108-144). Cambridge, MA: Brookline.
40. Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87, 517-538.
41. Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in education. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
42. Lohman, M. C., & Finkelstein, M. (2000). Designing groups in problem-based learning to promote problem-solving skill and self-directedness. Instructional Science, 28, 291-307.
43. Marttunen, M., & Laurinen, L. (2001). Learning of argumentation skills in networked and face-to-face environments. Instructional Science, 29, 127-153.
44. Mehalik, M. M., Doppett, Y., & Schuun, C. D. (2008). Middle-school science through design-based learning versus scripted inquiry: Better overall science concept learning and equity gap reduction. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(1), 71-85.
45. National Middle School Association. (1995). This we believe: Developmentally responsive middle schools. Columbus, OH: Author.
46. National Science Teachers Association. (2003). Science education for middle level students. Retrieved November 26, 2008 from http://www. nsta. org/pdfs/PositionStatement_MiddleLevel. pdf.
47. Oliver, K., & Hannafin, M. J. (2000). Student management of web-based hypermedia resources during open-ended problem solving. Journal of Educational Research, 94(2), 75-92.
48. Onwuegbuzie, A. J., Jiao, Q. G., & Bostick, S. L. (2004). Library anxiety: Theory, research, and applications. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
49. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
50. Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2002-2003). The transfer of problem-solving skills from a problem-based learning environment: The effect of modeling an expert's cognitive processes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(2), 303-320.
51. Perelman, C., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1958). La nouvelle rhétorique: Traité de l'argumentation [The new rhetoric: Treatise on argumentation] (Vol. 1-2). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
52. Quintana, C., Reiser, J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G., et al. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The 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, 273-304.
54. Sandoval, W. A., & Reiser, B. J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 345-372.
55. Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 77-96.
56. Segers, M. S. R. (1997). An alternative for assessing problem-solving skills: The overall test. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(4), 373-398.
57. Webb, N. M. (1997). Assessing students in small collaborative groups. Theory into Practice, 36(4), 205-213.
58. Wood, D., Bruner, J., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem-solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.