Can generating representations enhance learning with dynamic visualizations

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

Volumn 48, Issue 10, 2011, Pages 1177-1198

  Zhang, Zhihui Helen ^a   Linn, Marcia C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

curriculum development; inquiry; science education

Indexed keywords

ATOMIC INTERACTIONS; CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT; DYNAMIC VISUALIZATION; EMBEDDED ASSESSMENT; ENHANCE LEARNING; HYDROGEN COMBUSTION; INQUIRY; MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS; MOLECULAR LEVELS; SCIENCE EDUCATION;

CHEMICAL REACTIONS; CURRICULA; HYDROGEN; STUDENTS;

VISUALIZATION;

EID: 81055155828     PISSN: 00224308     EISSN: 10982736     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/tea.20443     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Adadan, E., Trundle, K. C., &, Irving, K. E., (2010). Exploring Grade 11 students' conceptual pathways of the particulate nature of matter in the context of multirepresentational instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47 (8), 1004-1035.
2. Ainsworth, S., (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers and Education, 33, 131-152. (Pubitemid 129620116)
3. Ainsworth, S., (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16 (3), 183-198. (Pubitemid 43717601)
4. Ardac, D., &, Akaygun, S., (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that emphasizes representations on students' understanding of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (4), 317-337.
5. Barak, M., &, Dori, Y. J., (2005). Enhancing undergraduate students' chemistry understanding through project-based learning in an IT environment. Science Education, 89 (1), 117-139. (Pubitemid 40132031)
6. Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B.-S., &, Silberstein, J., (1986). Is an atom of copper malleable Journal of Chemical Education, 63, 64-66.
7. Ben-Zvi, R., Eylon, B.-S., &, Silberstein, J., (1987). Students' visualization of a chemical reaction: Research work pinpoints student difficulties in understanding chemical reactions. Education in Chemistry, 24, 117-120.
8. Bjork, R. A., (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beingsn. In, J. Metcalfe, &, A. Shimamura, (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Bjork, R. A., &, Linn, M. C., (2006). The science of learning and the learning of science: Introducing desirable difficulties. The APS Observer, 19 (3), Available online at:.
10. Boo, H.-K., &, Watson, J. R., (2001). Progression in high school students' (aged 16-18) conceptualizations about chemical reactions in solution. Science Education, 85 (5), 568-585.
11. Buckley, B., (2000). Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology. International Journal of Science Education, 22 (9), 895-935.
12. California State Board of Education. (2003). Science framework for California public schools. Sacramento, CA: The California Department of Education.
13. Chang, H.-Y., &, Quintana, C., (2006). Student-generated animations: Supporting middle school students' visualization, interpretation, and reasoning of chemical phenomena. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Bloomington, IN: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Chi, M. T. H., (2009). Active-constructive-interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 73-105.
15. Chiu, J., &, Linn, M. C., (in press). Supporting self-monitoring with dynamic visualizations. In, J. L. Dori, &, M. C. Linn, (Eds.), Metacognition and Science Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16. Clark, D., &, Doris, J., (2004). Helping students revise disruptive experimentally supported ideas about thermodynamics. International Journal of Science Education, 41 (1), 1-23.
17. Cook, M., Wiebe, E. N., &, Carter, G., (2008). The influence of prior knowledge on viewing and interpreting graphics with macroscopic and molecular representations. Science Education, 92 (5), 848-867.
18. Corliss, S., &, Spitulnik, M., (2008). Student and teacher regulation of learning in technology-enhanced science instruction. In International Perspectives in the Learning Sciences: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (Vol. 1, pp. 167-174). Utrecht, The Netherlands: International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.
19. diSessa, A. A., (2004). Meta-representation: Native competence and targets for instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 22 (3), 293-331.
20. diSessa, A. A., Hammer, D. M., Sherin, B., &, Kolpakowski, T., (1991). Inventing graphing: Metarepresentational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117-160.
21. Frailich, M., Kesner, M., &, Hofstein, A., (2009). Enhancing students' understanding of the concept of chemical bonding by using activities provided on an interactive website. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46 (3), 289-310.
22. Gabel, D., (1998). The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. In, B. J. Fraser, &, K. G. Tobin, (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 233-248). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
23. Gilbert, J. K., (Ed.). (2007). Visualization in science education. Models and modeling in science education (Vol. 1). London: Springer-Verlag.
24. Gilbert, J. K., &, Treagust, D. F., (2009). Introduction: Macro, submicro and symbolic representations and the relationship between them: Key models in chemical education. In, J. K. Gilbert, &, D. F. Treagust, (Eds.), Multiple representations in chemical education (pp. 1-8). London: Springer-Verlag.
25. Johnstone, A. H., (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: A changing response to changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70 (9), 701-704.
26. Kali, Y., Fortus, D., &, Ronen-Fuhrmann, T., (2008). Synthesizing design knowledge. In, Y. Kali, M. C. Linn, &, J. E. Roseman, (Eds.), Designing coherent science education. New York: Teachers College Press.
27. Keig, P. F., &, Rubba, P. A., (1993). Translation of representations of the structure of matter and its relationship to reasoning, gender, spatial reasoning, and specific prior knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 883-903.
28. Kozma, R., (2003). The material features of multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding. Learning and Instruction, 13 (2), 205-226. (Pubitemid 36280163)
29. Kozma, R. B., &, Russell, J., (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34 (9), 946-968.
30. Krajcik, J., (1991). Developing students' understanding of chemical concepts. In, S. M. Glynn, R. H. Yeany, &, B. K. Britton, (Eds.), The psychology of learning science (pp. 117-147). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., &, Bell, P., (Eds.). (2004). Internet environments for science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Linn, M. C., &, Eylon, B.-S., (2006). Science education: Integrating views of learning and instruction. In, P. A. Alexander, &, P. H. Winne, (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 511-544). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Linn, M. C., &, Hsi, S., (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Linn, M. C., Lee, H.-S., Tinker, R., Husic, F., &, Chiu, J. L., (2006). Teaching and assessing knowledge integration in science. Science, 313, 1049-1050. (Pubitemid 44300215)
35. Liu, X., &, Lesniak, K., (2005). Students' progression of understanding the matter concept from elementary to high school. Science Education, 89, 433-450. (Pubitemid 41360028)
36. Lowe, R., (1999). Exacting information from an animation during complex visual learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 225-244.
37. Marbach-Ad, G., Rotbain, Y., &, Stavy, R., (2008). Using computer animation and illustration activities to improve high school students' achievement in molecular genetics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45 (3), 273-292. (Pubitemid 351456610)
38. Margel, H., Eylon, B.-S., &, Scherz, Z., (2008). A longitudinal study of junior high school students' conceptions of the structure of materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45 (1), 132-152. (Pubitemid 351189814)
39. Nakhleh, M. B., Samarapungavan, A., &, Saglam, Y., (2005). Middle school students' beliefs about matter. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42, 581-612. (Pubitemid 40750383)
40. Park, O.-C., &, Hopkins, R., (1993). Instructional conditions for using dynamic visual displays: A review. Instructional Science, 21, 427-449.
41. Ramadas, J., (2009). Visual and spatial modes in science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 31 (3), 301-318.
42. Rich, R. Z., &, Blake, S., (1994). Using pictures to assist in comprehension and recall. Intervention in School and Clinic, 29 (5), 271-275.
43. Richland, L. E., Bjork, R. A., Finley, J. R., &, Linn, M. C., (2005). Linking cognitive science to education: generation and interleaving effects. In, B. G. Bara, L. Barsalou, &, M. Bucciarelli, (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-seventh annual conference of the cognitive science society. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
44. Sanger, M. J., Brecheisen, D. M., &, Hynek, B. M., (2001). Can computer animations affect college biology students' conceptions about diffusion and osmosis American Biology Teacher, 63 (2), 104-109. (Pubitemid 33388101)
45. Seufert, T., (2003). Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 13, 227-237. (Pubitemid 36280164)
46. Tversky, B., Morrison, J. B., &, Betrancourt, M., (2002). Animation: Can it facilitate International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 57, 247-262.
47. Van Meter, P., &, Garner, J., (2005). The promise and practice of learner-generated drawing: Literature review and synthesis. Educational Psychology Review, 17 (4), 285-325. (Pubitemid 43037071)
48. Varma, K., Husic, F., &, Linn, M., (2008). Targeted support for using technology-enhanced science inquiry modules. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17 (4), 341-356.
49. Williamson, V. M., &, Abraham, M. R., (1995). The effects of computer animation on the particulate mental models of college chemistry students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32 (5), 521-534.
50. Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J. S., &, Soloway, E., (2001). Promoting understanding of chemical representations: Students' use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38 (7), 821-842. (Pubitemid 33655592)
51. Xie, Q., &, Tinker, R., (2006). Molecular dynamics simulations of chemical reactions for use in education. Journal of Chemical Education, 83 (1), 77-83. (Pubitemid 43056192)