Technology supports for acquiring inquiry skills

International Encyclopedia of Education

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 167-171

  De Jong, T ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Cognitive scaffolds; Collaborative learning; Experiment design; Hints; Hypothesis generation; Inquiry cycle; Inquiry learning; Inquiry skills; Modeling; Monitoring; Planning; Scientific literacy; Technology enhanced learning

Indexed keywords

EID: 84874003685     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00734-X     Document Type: Chapter

References (52)

1. Science for All Americans 1989, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Oxford University Press, New York.
2. Azevedo R., Guthrie J.T., Seibert D. The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students' conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research 2004, 30:87-111.
3. Beishuizen J., Wilhelm P., Schimmel M. Computer-supported inquiry learning: Effects of training and practice. Computers and Education 2003, 42:389-402.
4. Blake C., Scanlon E. Reconsidering simulations in science education at a distance: Features of effective use. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2007, 23(6):491-502.
5. Bruner J.S. The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review 1961, 31:21-32.
6. Chen Z., Klahr D. All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy. Child Development 1999, 70:1098-1120.
7. Chinn C.A., Brewer W.F. Models of data: A theory of how people evaluate data. Cognition and Instruction 2001, 19:323-393.
8. The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program, description, and assessment data. Educational Psychologist 1992, 27:291-315. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt.
9. de Jong T. Computer simulations - technological advances in inquiry learning. Science 2006, 312:532-533.
10. de Jong T. Scaffolds for computer simulation based scientific discovery learning. Dealing with Complexity in Learning Environments 2006, 107-128. Elsevier Science Publishers, London. J. Elen, R.E. Clark (Eds.).
11. de Jong T., van Joolingen W.R. Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research 1998, 68:179-202.
12. Dewey J. Logic: The Theory of Inquiry 1938, Holt, New York.
13. Gijlers H., de Jong T. The relation between prior knowledge and students' collaborative discovery learning processes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2005, 42:264-282.
14. Gijlers H., de Jong T. Sharing and confronting propositions in collaborative inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction 2009, 27:239-268.
15. Hulshof C.D., de Jong T. Using just-in-time information to support scientific discovery learning about geometrical optics in a computer-based simulation. Interactive Learning Environments 2006, 14:79-94.
16. Hulshof C.D., Wilhelm P., Beishuizen J.J., van Rijn H. FILE: A tool for the study of inquiry learning. Computers in Human Behavior 2005, 21:945-956.
17. Keselman A. Supporting inquiry learning by promoting normative understanding of multivariable causality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 2003, 40:898-921.
18. Klahr D. Early science instruction. Addressing fundamental issues. Psychological Science 2005, 16:871-872.
19. Klahr D., Dunbar K. Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science 1988, 12:1-48.
20. Klahr D., Fay A.L., Dunbar K. Heuristics for scientific experimentation: A developmental study. Cognitive Psychology 1993, 25:11-146.
21. Klahr D., Nigam M. The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science 2004, 15:661-668.
22. Kuhn D. What needs to be mastered in mastery of scientific method?. Psychological Science 2005, 16:873-874.
23. Kuhn D., Amsel E., O'Loughlin M. The Development of Scientific Thinking Skills 1988, Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
24. Kuhn D., Black J., Keselman A., Kaplan D. The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction 2000, 18:495-523.
25. Kuhn D., Dean D. Is developing scientific thinking all about learning to control variables?. Psychological Science 2005, 16:866-870.
26. Kuhn D., Garcia-Mila M., Zohar A., Andersen C. Strategies of Knowledge Acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 1995, 60(4):1-157. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
27. Lavoie D.R., Good R. The nature and use of predictions skills in a biological computer simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 1988, 25:335-360.
28. Linn M.C., Bell P., Davis E.A. Specific design principles: Elaborating the scaffolded knowledge integration framework. Internet Environments for Science Education 2004, 315-341. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. M. Linn, E.A. Davis, P. Bell (Eds.).
29. Internet Environments for Science Education 2004, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ. M.C. Linn, E.A. Davis, P. Bell (Eds.).
30. Linn M.C., Lee H.-S., Tinker R., Husic F., Chiu J.L. Teaching and assessing knowledge integration in science. Science 2006, 313:1049-1050.
31. Manlove S., Lazonder A. Self-regulation and collaboration in a discovery learning environment. Paper Presented at the First Meeting of the EARLI-SIG on Metacognition 2004, Amsterdam: The Netherlands.
32. Manlove S., Lazonder A.W., de Jong T. Software scaffolds to promote regulation during scientific inquiry learning. Metacognition and Learning 2007, 2:141-155.
33. Mayer R.E. Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning?. American Psychologist 2004, 59:14-19.
34. Millar R. Twenty first century science: Insights from the design and implementation of a scientific literacy approach in school science. International Journal of Science Education 2006, 28:1499-1521.
35. Minstrell J., Kraus P. Guided inquiry in the science classroom. How Students Learn 2005, 475-513. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. M.S. Donovan, J.D. Bransford (Eds.).
36. National Science Education Standards 1996, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
37. Njoo M., de Jong T. Exploratory learning with a computer simulation for control theory: Learning processes and instructional support. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 1993, 30:821-844.
38. Quintana C., Reiser B.J., Davis E.A., et al. A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences 2004, 13:337-387.
39. Schauble L. The development of scientific reasoning in knowledge-rich contexts. Developmental Psychology 1996, 32:102-119.
40. Schauble L., Glaser R., Raghavan K., Reiner M. Causal models and experimentation strategies in scientific reasoning. Journal of the Learning Sciences 1991, 1:201-238.
41. Schunn C.D., Anderson J.R. The generality/specificity of expertise in scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science 1999, 23:337-370.
42. Shute V.J., Glaser R. A large-scale evaluation of an intelligent discovery world: Smithtown. Interactive Learning Environments 1990, 1:51-77.
43. van Joolingen W.R., de Jong T. SimQuest: Authoring educational simulations. Authoring Tools for Advanced Technology Educational Software: Toward Cost-Effective Production of Adaptive, Interactive, and Intelligent Educational Software 2003, 1-31. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht. T. Murray, S. Blessing, S. Ainsworth (Eds.).
44. van Joolingen W.R., de Jong T., Lazonder A.W., Savelsbergh E., Manlove S. Co-Lab: Research and development of an on-line learning environment for collaborative scientific discovery learning. Computers in Human Behavior 2005, 21:671-688.
45. Veenman M.V.J., Prins F.J., Elshout J.J. Initial inductive learning in a complex computer simulated environment: The role of metacognitive skills and intellectual ability. Computers in Human Behavior 2002, 18:327-341.
46. Veermans K.H., van Joolingen W.R., de Jong T. Using heuristics to facilitate scientific discovery learning in a simulation learning environment in a physics domain. International Journal of Science Education 2006, 28:341-361.
47. White B.Y., Frederiksen J. A theoretical framework and approach for fostering metacognitive development. Educational Psychologist 2005, 40:211-223.
48. White B.Y., Frederiksen J., Frederiksen T., et al. Inquiry Island: Affordances of a multi-agent environment for scientific inquiry and reflective learning 2002.
49. Wilhelm P., Beishuizen J.J., Van Rijn H. Studying inquiry learning with FILE. Computers in Human Behavior 2005, 21:933-943.
50. Zacharia Z.C. Comparing and combining real and virtual experimentation: An effort to enhance students' conceptual understanding of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2007, 23(2):120-132.
51. Zacharia, Z. C. and de Jong, T. (in preparation). Should physical and virtual manipulatives be combined or used alone when understanding of physics concepts is the target goal?
52. Zimmerman C. The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review 2007, 27:172-223.