The value of multiple representations for learning about complex systems

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, CSCL

Volumn , Issue PART 2, 2008, Pages 398-406

  Thompson, Kate ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGENT-BASED MODEL; ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION; EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES; MULTIPLE EXTERNAL REPRESENTATIONS; MULTIPLE REPRESENTATION; SYSTEM DYNAMICS MODEL; SYSTEM LEVELS; TOPDOWN;

ANIMATION; SYSTEM THEORY;

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS;

EID: 79952321254     PISSN: 15734552     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. Ainsworth, S. (1999a). Designing effective multi-representational learning environments: University of Nottingham, ESRC Tech report No. 58.
2. Ainsworth, S. (1999b). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33, 131-152.
3. Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A Conceptual Framework For Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. Learning and Instruction, 16, 183-198.
4. Ainsworth, S., & Van Labeke, N. (2002). Using a multi- representational design framework to develop and evaluate a dynamic simulation environment. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Dynamic Visualizations and Learning, Tübingen.
5. Ainsworth, S., Wood, D., & O'Malley, C. (1998a). There is more than one way to solve a problem: Evlauating a learning environment that supports the development of children's multiplication skills. Learning and Instruction, 8(2), 141-157.
6. Ainsworth, S. E., Bibby, P. A., & Wood, D. J. (1998b). Analysing the Costs and Benefits of Multi-Representational Learning Environments. In M. W. van Someren, P. Reimann, H. P. A. Boshuizen & T. de Jong (Eds.), Learning with Multiple Representations (pp. 120-134). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.
7. Alessi, S. (2000). The application of system dynamics in elementary and secondary school curricular. Retrieved 29 October 2003, from http://www.c5.cl/ieinvestiga/actas/ribie2000/charlas/alessi.htm
8. Bodemer, D., & Faust, U. (2006). External and mental referencing of multiple representations. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 27-42.
9. Bousquet, F., & Le Page, C. (2004). Mulit-agent simulations and ecosystem management: a review. Ecological Modelling, 176, 313-332.
10. Costanza, R., Duplisea, D., & Kautsky, U. (1998). Intoduction to special issue: Ecological Modelling on modelling ecological and economic systems with STELLA. Ecological Modelling, 110, 1-4.
11. Davison, K. (2000). A Discrete Event Simulation Model of Visitor Usage at Botany Bay National Park, Kurnell., The University of New South Wales, Sydney.
12. de Jong, T., Ainsworth, S., Dobson, M., van der Hulst, A., Levonen, J., Reimann, P., et al. (1998). Acquiring knowledge in science and mathematics: The use of multiple representations in technology-based learning environments. In M. W. van Someren, P. Reimann, H. P. A. Boshuizen & T. de Jong (Eds.), Learning with Multiple Representations (pp. 9-40). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.
13. Doyle, J. K., Radzicki, M. J., & Trees, W. S. (1998). Measuring change in mental models of dynamic systems: An exploratory study.
14. Field, A. (2005). Discovering Statistics Using SPSS (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
15. Ginot, V., Le Page, C., & Souissi, S. (2002). A multi-agents architecture to enhance end-user individual-based modelling. Ecological Modelling, 157(1), 23-41.
16. isee Systems. (2007). Chapter 1: Systems Thinking and the STELLA software: Thinking, communicating, learning and acting more effectively in the new millenium. Retrieved 08/11/07, from http://www.iseesystems.com/Resources/ Whitepapers.aspx
17. Jacobson, M. J., & Wilensky, U. (2006). Complex systems in education: Scientific and educational importance and implications for the learning sciences. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(1), 11-34.
18. Kainz, D., & Ossimitz, G. (2002). Can students learn stock-flow-thinking? An empirical investigation. Paper presented at the The 2002 System Dynamics Conference, Palermo, Italy.
19. Kozma, R. (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13, 205-226.
20. Levy, S. T., & Wilensky, U. (2005). An analysis of student' patterns of exploration with NetLogo models embedded in the Connected Chemistry environment: Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
21. Lowe, R. (1993). Constructing a mental representation from an abstract technical diagram. Learning and Instruction, 3, 157-179.
22. Maryland Virtual High School. (2001). CoreModels Final Report (9707702) Findings. Retrieved 08/11/07, from http://mvhs.shodor.org/coremodels/cmindex. html
23. Milrad, M., Spector, M., & Davidsen, P. I. (2003). Model facilitated learning. In S. Naidu (Ed.), Learning & teaching with technology: principles and practices (pp. 13-27). London: Kogan Page Ltd.
24. Moxnes, E. (1998). Overexploitation of renewable resources: The role of misperceptions. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 37, 107-127.
25. Reimann, P., & Thompson, K. (in press). Ecosystem modelling for environmental education: From stocks and flows to behavior and interactions. In P. Blumschein, J. Stroebel, W. Hung & D. Jonassen (Eds.), Model-based approaches to learning: Using systems models and simulations to improve understanding and problem solving in complex domains. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers (Accepted 14-06-07).
26. Savelsbergh, E. R., de Jong, T., & Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M. (1998). Competence-Related Differences in Problem Representations: A Study in Physics Problem Solving. In M. W. van Someren, P. Reimann, H. P. A. Boshuizen & T. de Jong (Eds.), Learning with Multiple Representations (pp. 263-282). Oxford: Elsevier Science Ltd.
27. Schieritz, N., & Milling, P. M. (2003). Modeling the forest or modeling the trees. A comparison of system dynamics and agent-based simulation. Paper presented at the The 21st International System Dynamics Society Conference, New York City, USA.
28. Sengupta, P., & Wilensky, U. (1999). N.I.E.L.S 1: An Emergent Multi-Agent Based Modeling Environment for learning Physics Retrieved 31/5/06, 2006, from https://ccl.northwestern.edu/papers/AAMAS-Pratim.pdf
29. Seufert, T., Janen, I., & Brunken, R. (2007). The impact of intrinsic cognitive load on the effectiveness of graphical help for coherence formation. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1055-1071.
30. Sterman, J. D. (2000). Business Dynamics. Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World.: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
31. Stieff, M., & Wilensky, U. (2003). Connected chemisty - Incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(5), 285-302.
32. Sweller, J., & Chandler, P. (1994). Why some material is difficult to learn. Cognition and Instruction, 12(3), 185-233.
33. Tabachneck-Schijf, H. J. M., Leonardo, A. M., & Simon, H. A. (1997). CaMeRa: A computational model of multiple representations. Cognitive Science, 21(3), 305-350.
34. Thompson, K., & Reimann, P. (2007). Do school students learn more about the environment from a system dynamics model by themselves or with a partner? Paper presented at the The 2007 International Conference of the System Dynamics Society and 50th Anniversary Celebration, Boston, Massachusetts.
35. Tisue, S., & Wilensky, U. (2004). NetLogo: Design and Implementation of a Multi-Agent Modeling Environment Paper presented at the SwarmFest, Ann Arbor.
36. 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, 199-212.
37. Verona, M. E., Ragan, S., Shaffer, D., & Trout, C. (2001). Working paper: A case study of materials development fostered by the MVHS CoreModels Project. Retrieved 18/4/05, from mvhs1.mbhs.edu/mvhsproj/workmatdev.pdf
38. Wakeland, W. W., Macovsky, L. M., Gallaher, E. J., & Aktipis, C. A. (2004). A comparison of system dynamics and agent-based simulation applied to the study of cellular receptor dynamics. Paper presented at the The 37th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.
39. Wilensky, U. (2007). NetLogo User Manual. Version 4.0. Evanston, IL: Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University.
40. Wilensky, U., & Reisman, K. (2006). Thinking like a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Firefly: Learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories - an embodied modeling approach. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 171-209.