Learning kinematics in elementary grades using agent-based computational modeling: A visual programming-based approach

ACM International Conference Proceeding Series

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 78-87

  Sengupta, Pratim ^a   Farris, Amy Voss ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

agent based modeling; kinematics; physics; programming languages; science education; VIMAP; visual programming

Indexed keywords

AGENT BASED; AGENT-BASED MODELING; COMPUTATIONAL MODELING; CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING; DESIGN PRINCIPLES; INTEGRATED MODELING; LEARNING ACTIVITY; MODELING PLATFORMS; NON-TRIVIAL; SCIENCE EDUCATION; VIMAP; VISUAL PROGRAMMING;

COMPUTER PROGRAMMING; COMPUTER PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES; EDUCATION; PHYSICS;

KINEMATICS;

EID: 84864313254     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2307096.2307106     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (35)

1. diSessa, A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B., & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Children's meta-representational expertise. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10(2), 117-160.
2. Dyskra, D. I., Jr. & Sweet, D. R. (2009). Conceptual development about motion and force in elementary and middle school students. American Journal of Physics, 77(5), 468-476.
3. Eisenberg, M. & Buechley, L. (2008). Pervasive fabrication: making construction ubiquitous in education. Journal of Software, 3(4), 62-68.
4. Elby, A. (2000). What students' learning of representations tells us about constructivism. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 19, 481-502.
5. Halloun I. A., & Hestenes, D. (1985). The initial knowledge state of college physics students. American Journal of Physics, 53(11), 1043-1056.
6. Hestenes, D. (1993). MODELING is the name of the game. A presentation at the NSF Modeling Conference (Feb. 1993).
7. Hubbell, W. (2011). Learning Physics With Visual Agent-based Programming. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Vanderbilt University, USA.
8. Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. M. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Tasks, Learning and Teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60, 1-64.
9. McCloskey, M. (1983). Naive theories of motion. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental Models (pp. 299-324). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. McDermott, L. C., Rosenquist, M. L., & van Zee, E. H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics. American Journal of Physics, 55, 505-513.
11. Nersessian, N. J. (1992). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. In Giere, R. N. (ed.) Cognitive Models of Science. University of Minnesota Press. Minneapolis, MN. 3-45.
12. Sengupta, P. (2011). Design Principles for a Visual Programming Language to Integrate Agent-based modeling in K-12 Science. In: Sayama, H., Minai, A. A., Braha, D. and Bar-Yam, Y. eds. Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Complex Systems (ICCS 2011), pp 1636-1638. ISBN 978-0-9656328-4-3.
13. Sengupta, P., & Hubbell, W. (in review). Integrating Computational Thinking and Modeling with High School Physics Using Agent-Based Visual Programming.
14. Sengupta, P. & Wright, M. (2010). ViMAP [Computer software]. Mind, Matter & Media Lab, Vanderbilt University, USA.
15. Sherin, B. L. (2000). How students invent representations of motion: A genetic account. Journal of Mathematical Behavior (19) 399-441.
16. Tanimoto, S.L. (1990). VIVA: A visual language for image processing. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, Vol. 1, pp 127-139.
17. Yin, R. (1994). Case study research Design and methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing.
18. Wilensky, U. (1991). Abstract meditations on the concrete and concrete implications for mathematics education. In Constructionism. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex Publishing Corp.
19. Wilensky, U. (1999). NetLogo. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/. Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
20. Hestenes, D., Wells, M. & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30, 141-15.
21. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
22. Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3: 77-101
23. Sherin, B., diSessa, A., & Hammer, D. (1993). Dynaturtle revisited: Learning physics through the collaborative design of a computer model. Interactive Learning Environments, 3(2), 91-118.
24. Guzdial M. (1995) "Software-realized scaffolding to facilitate programming for science learning." Interactive Learning Environments, 4(1). 1-44.
25. Hambrusch, S., Hoffmann, C., Korb, J. T., Haugan, M., and Hosking, A.L.. (2009). A multidisciplinary approach towards computational thinking for science majors. In Proceedings of the 40th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 183-187.
26. diSessa, A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
27. Harel, I., and Papert, S. (1991). "Software design as a learning environment". Constructionism. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation. pp. 51-52. ISBN 0-89391-785-0.
28. Oren T. (1990). Designing a new medium. In: Laurel B, ed. The Art of Human-Computer Interface Design . Addison-Wesley: 467-479.
29. Papert S. (1980) Mindstorms: Children, compters, and powerful ideas .New York, NY: Basic Books.
30. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2000). The development of model-based reasoning. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 21(1), 39-48.
31. Redish, E. F. and Wilson, J. M. (1993). Student programming in the introductory physics course: M.U.P.P.E.T. Am. J. Phys. 61: 222-232.
32. Soloway, E. (1993). Should We Teach Students to Program? Commun. ACM 36(10): 21-24
33. Pea R.D., Kurland D.M. (1986). On the cognitive effects of learning computer programming. In: Pea RD, Sheingold K, ed. Minors of Minds. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
34. Sengupta, P., Farris, A.V., & Wright, M. (Accepted with minor revisions). From Agents to Aggregation via Aesthetics: Learning Mechanics with Visual Agent-based Computational Modeling. Technology, Knowledge & Learning.
35. diSessa, A. (1993). Towards an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10, 105-225.