Sixth Graders' Co-construction of Explanations of a Disturbance in an Ecosystem: Exploring relationships between grouping, reflective scaffolding, and evidence-based explanations

International Journal of Science Education

Volumn 33, Issue 18, 2011, Pages 2489-2525

  Kyza, Eleni A ^a   Constantinou, Costas P ^b   Spanoudis, George ^b  

^a CYPRUS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Cyprus)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CYPRUS   (Cyprus)

Author keywords

Evidence based reasoning; Explanations; Inquiry based learning; Reflective inquiry scaffolding

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858855464     PISSN: 09500693     EISSN: 14645289     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09500693.2010.550951     Document Type: Article

References (94)

1. Anderson, R. D. 2002. Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1): 1-12.
2. Baker, M. and Lund, K. 1997. Promoting reflective interactions in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 13: 175-193.
3. Barron, B. 2000. Problem solving in video-based microworlds: Collaborative and individual outcomes of high achieving sixth grade students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92: 391-398.
4. Bell, P. and Linn, M. C. 2000. Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8): 797-817.
5. Blumenfeld, P., Soloway, E., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M. and Palincsar, A. 1991. Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist, 26: 369-398.
6. Bowers, C. A., Pharmer, J. A. and Salas, E. 2000. When member homogeneity is needed in work teams: A meta-analysis. Small Group Research, 31(3): 305-327. doi:doi:10.1177/104649640003100303
7. Brewer, W. F., Chinn, C. A. and Samarapungavan, A. 2000. "Explanation in scientists and children". In Explanation and cognition, Edited by: Keil, F. C. and Wilson, R. A. 279-298. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8. Cañas, A. J., Coffey, J. W., Carnot, M. J., Feltovich, P., Hoffman, R. R. and Feltovich, J. 2003. A summary of literature pertaining to the use of concept mapping techniques and technologies for education and performance support (Report to The Chief of Naval Education and Training), Pensacola, FL: The Institute for Human and Machine Cognition.
9. Cheng, R. W.-Y., Lam, S. F. and Chan, J. C.Y. 2008. When high achievers and low achievers work in the same group: The roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project-based learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78: 205-221.
10. Chi, M. T.H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P. and Glaser, R. 1989. Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13: 145-182.
11. Chi, M. T.H., Leeuw, N. d., Chiu, M.-H. and LaVancher, C. 1994. Eliciting self explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science, 18(3): 439-477.
12. Chinn, C. A. and Malhotra, B. A. 2002. Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86: 175-218.
13. Clark, D. J., Weinberger, A., Jucks, R., Spitulnik, M. and Wallace, R. 2003. Designing effective science inquiry in text-based computer-supported collaborative learning environments. International Journal of Educational Policy, Research, and Practice, 4(1): 55-82.
14. Cohen, E. G. 1994. Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1): 1-35.
15. Collins, A. and Ferguson, W. 1993. Epistemic forms and epistemic games: Structures and Strategies to guide inquiry. Educational Psychologist, 28(1): 25-42.
16. Davis, E. A. 2003. Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed prompts. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1): 91-142.
17. Deary, I. J., Strand, S., Smith, P. and Fernandes, C. 2007. Intelligence and educational achievement. Intelligence, 35: 13-21.
18. de Jong, T. 2006. "Scaffolds for computer simulation based scientific discovery learning". In Dealing with complexity in learning environments, Edited by: Elen, J. and Clark, R. E. 107-128. London: Elsevier.
19. de Vries, E., Lund, K. and Baker, M. 2002. Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(1): 63-103.
20. Dewey, J. 1910. How we think, New York: Heath.
21. Dillenbourg, P. 2002. "Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design". In Three worlds of CSCL: Can we support CSCL?, Edited by: Kirschner, P. A. 61-91. Heerlen: Open University of the Netherlands.
22. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A. and O'Malley, C. 1996. "The evolution of research on collaborative learning". In Learning in humans and machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science, Edited by: Spada, E. and Reiman, P. 189-211. Oxford: Elsevier.
23. Donovan, M. S. and Bransford, J. D., eds. 2005. How students learn: Science in the classroom, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
24. Duschl, R. A., Schweingruber, H. A. and Shouse, A. W., eds. 2007. Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8, Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
25. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Kazdan, S., Karns, K., Calhoon, M. B. and Hamlett, C. L. 2000. Effects of workgroup structure and size on student productivity during collaborative work on complex tasks. The Elementary School Journal, 100(3): 183-212.
26. Glassner, A., Weinstock, M. and Neuman, Y. 2005. Pupils' evaluation and generation of evidence and explanation in argumentation. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75: 105-118.
27. Hadjichristoforou, M. 2004. Lead shot at Larnaca salt lake-assessment and restoration activities, Nicosia, Cyprus: Department of Fisheries and Marine Research.
28. Harskamp, E., Ding, N. and Suhre, C. 2008. Group composition and its effect on female and male problem-solving in science education. Educational Research, 50(4): 307-318.
29. Hutchins, E. 1995. Cognition in the wild, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30. Jensen, A. R. 1998. The g factor: The science of mental ability, Westport, CT: Praeger.
31. Jermann, P., Soller, A. and Lesgold, A. 2004. "Computer software support for CSCL". In What we know about CSCL, Edited by: Strijbos, J. W., Kirschner, P. A. and Martens, R. L. 141-166. New York: Kluwer Academic.
32. Johnson, D. W. and Johnson, R. T. 1989. Cooperation and competition: Theory and research, Edina, MN: Interaction Book.
33. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T. and Stanne, M. B. 2000. Cooperative learning methods: A meta-analysis Retrieved December 10, 2009, fromhttp://www.tablelearning.com/uploads/File/EXHIBIT-B.pdf
34. Järvelä, S., Häkkinen, P., Arvaja, M. and Leinonen, P. 2004. "Instructional support in CSCL". In What we know about CSCL, Edited by: Strijbos, J. W., Kirschner, P. A. and Martens, R. L. 115-139. New York: Kluwer Academic.
35. Krajcik, J. 2003. The value and challenges of using learning technologies to support students in learning science. Research in Science education, 32: 411-414.
36. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Bass, K. M. and Fredricks, J. 1998. Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4): 313-350.
37. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A. and Jochems, W. 2003. Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3): 335-353.
38. Kuhn, D., Amsel, E. and O'Loughlin, M. 1988. The development of scientific thinking skills, San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
39. Kutnick, P. and Thomas, M. 1990. Dyadic Pairings for the enhancement of cognitive development in the school curriculum: Some preliminary results on science tasks. British Educational Research Journal, 16(4): 399-406.
40. Kyza, E. A. 2004. Understanding reflection-in-action: An investigation into middle-school students' reflective inquiry practices in science and the role that software scaffolding can play. (ProQuest Digital Dissertations, AAT 3156603), Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
41. Kyza, E. A. 2009. Middle-school students' reasoning about alternative hypotheses in a scaffolded, software-based inquiry investigation. Cognition and Instruction, 27(4): 277-311.
42. Kyza, E. A. and Constantinou, C. P. 2007. "STOCHASMOS: A web-based platform for reflective, inquiry-based teaching and learning [Computer software]". Cyprus: Learning in Science Group. Available from http://www.stochasmos.org/
43. Linn, M. C. 2003. Technology and science education: Starting points, research programs, and trends. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6): 727-758.
44. Linn, M. C., Clark, D. and Slotta, J. D. 2003. WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4): 517-538.
45. Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A. and Bell, P., eds. 2004. Internet environments for science education, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
46. Loh, B. 2003. Using articulation and inscription as catalysts for reflection: design principles for reflective inquiry, Evanston, IL): Northwestern University. (PhD dissertation,
47. Loh, B., Radinsky, J., Reiser, B. J., Gomez, L., Edelson, D. C. and Russell, E. The progress portfolio: Promoting reflective inquiry in complex investigation environments. Proceedings of CSCL '97: Computer support for collaborative learning. December10-14, Toronto, Canada. Edited by: Hall, R., Miyake, N. and Enyedy, N. pp.169-178. Toronto
48. Loh, B., Reiser, B. J., Radinsky, J., Edelson, D. C., Gomez, L. M. and Marshall, S. 2001. "Developing reflective inquiry practices: A case study of software, the teacher, and students". In Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings, Edited by: Crowley, S. K., Schunn, C. and Okada, T. 279-323. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
49. Manlove, S., Lazonder, A. W. and de Jong, T. 2006. Regulative support for collaborative scientific inquiry learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22: 87-98.
50. McNeill, K. L. and Krajcik, J. Middle school students' use of appropriate and inappropriate evidence in writing scientific explanations. Thinking with data: The proceedings of the 33rd Carnegie Symposium on Cognition. Edited by: Lovett, M. and Shah, P. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
51. McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J. and Marx, R. W. 2006. Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2): 153-191.
52. Mynatt, C. R., Doherty, M. E. and Tweney, R. D. 1977. "Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: an experimental study of scientific inference". In Thinking: Readings in cognitive science, Edited by: Johnson-Laird, P. N. and Wason, P. C. 315-325. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
53. NRC (National Research Council). 1996. National science education standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
54. O'Donnell, A. M. 2006. "The role of peers and group learning". In Handbook of educational psychology, 2, Edited by: Alexander, P. and Winne, P. 781-802. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
55. Quintana, C., Eng, J., Carra, A., Wu, H. and Soloway, E. Symphony: A case study in extending learner-centered design through process-space analysis. Proceedings of CHI 99 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. pp.473-480. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
56. Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R. G. and Soloway, E. 2004. A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3): 337-386.
57. Raven, J., Raven, J. C. and Court, J. H. 1998. "Manual for Raven's progressive matrices and vocabulary scales". San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.
58. Reiser, B. J. 2004. Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3): 273-304.
59. Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B. K., Steinmuller, F. and Leone, A. J. 2001. "BGuILE: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms". In Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress, Edited by: Klahr, S. M.C.D. 263-305. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
60. Rogoff, B. 2008. "Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship". In Pedagogy and practice: Culture and identities, Edited by: Hall, K., Murphy, P. and Soler, J. 58-74. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
61. Rohde, T. E. and Thompson, L. A. 2007. Predicting academic achievement with cognitive ability. Intelligence, 35: 83-92.
62. Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Schultz, S. E., Li, M. and Shavelson, R. J. 2001. Comparison of the reliability and validity of scores from two concept-mapping techniques. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(2): 260-278.
63. Sadler, T. D. 2004. Informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues: A critical review of research. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(5): 513-536.
64. Saleh, M., Lazonder, A. W. and Jong, T. de. 2007. Structuring collaboration in mixed-ability groups to promote verbal interaction, learning, and motivation of average-ability students. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32(3): 314-331.
65. Salmon, W. C. 1989. Four decades of scientific explanations, Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
66. Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N. and Globerson, T. 1991. Partners in cognition: Extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20(3): 2-9.
67. Sandoval, W. A. 1998. "ExplanationConstructor [Computer software]". Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
68. Sandoval, W. A. 2003. Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students' scientific explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(1): 5-51.
69. Sandoval, W. A. 2005. Understanding students' practical epistemologies and their influence on learning through inquiry. Science Education, 89(4): 634-656.
70. Sandoval, W. A. and Millwood, K. A. 2005. The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23(1): 23-55.
71. Sandoval, W. A. and Reiser, B. J. 2004. Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88: 345-372.
72. Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. 1994. Computer support for knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3: 265-283.
73. Slavin, R. 1990. Cooperative learning: Theory, research and practice, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
74. Soller, A., Martinez, A., Jermann, P. and Muehlenbrock, M. 2005. From mirroring to guiding: A review of state of the art technology for supporting collaborative learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15: 261-290.
75. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T. and Suthers, D. D. 2006. "Computer-Supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective". In The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, Edited by: Sawyer, R. K. 409-425. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
76. Suthers, D. D. 2001. Towards a systematic study of representational guidance for collaborative learning discourse. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 7(3): 254-277.
77. Suthers, D. D. and Jones, D. An architecture for intelligent collaborative educational systems. Paper presented at the AI-Ed 97, the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. Kobe, Japan.
78. Suthers, D. D. and Weiner, A. Groupware for developing critical discussion skills. Paper presented at the CSCL '95 Computer Supported Cooperative Learning. Bloomington, IN.
79. Swing, S. and Peterson, P. 1982. The relationship of student ability and small-group interaction to student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 19: 259-274.
80. Tabak, I. 2004. Synergy: A complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3): 305-355.
81. Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Reiser, B. J. and Steinmuller, F. 2000. "The Galapagos Finches". In Bioquest Library Volume VI, Edited by: Vaughan, J. J.V. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
82. Toth, E. E., Suthers, D. D. and Lesgold, A. M. 2002. 'Mapping to Know': The effects of representational guidance and reflective assessment on scientific inquiry. Science Education, 86(2): 264-286.
83. Toulmin, S. E. 1958. The uses of argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
84. Webb, N. M. 1982. Peer interaction and learning in cooperative small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(5): 642-655.
85. Webb, P. and Treagust, D. F. 2006. Using exploratory talk to enhance problem-solving and reasoning skills in grade-7 science classrooms. Research in science education, 36: 381-401.
86. White, B. and Frederiksen, J. 1998. Inquiry, modeling and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1): 13-117.
87. Wu, H. K. and Hsieh, C. E. 2006. Developing sixth graders' inquiry skills to construct explanations in inquiry-based learning environments. International Journal of Science Education, 28(11): 1289-1313.
88. Yin, Y., Vanides, J., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Ayala, C. C. and Shavelson, R. J. 2005. Comparison of two concept-mapping techniques: Implications for scoring, interpretation, and use. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2): 166-184.
89. Zimmerman, B. J. 1986. Becoming a self-regulated learner: which are the key subprocesses?. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11: 307-313.
90. Zimmerman, B. J. 2002. Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2): 64-70.
91. Zimmerman, C. 2000. The development of scientific reasoning skills. Developmental Review, 20: 99-149.
92. Zimmerman, C. 2005. "The development of scientific reasoning skills: What psychologists contribute to an understanding of elementary science learning". In (Final draft of a report to the National Research Council Committee on Science Learning Kindergarten through Eighth Grade), Washington, DC: National Research Council. Available at http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Corinne_Zimmerman_Final_Paper.pdf
93. Zohar, A. and Dori, Y. J. 2003. Higher order thinking skills and low-achieving students: Are they mutually exclusive?. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2): 145-181.
94. Zuzovsky, R. and Tamir, P. 1999. Growth patterns in students' ability to supply scientific explanations: findings from the Third International Mathematics and Science Study in Israel. International Journal of Science Education, 21(10): 1101-1121.