Expertise & spatial reasoning in advanced scientific problem solving

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, CSCL

Volumn , Issue PART 2, 2008, Pages 366-373

  Stieff, Mike ^a   Raje, Sonali ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL STRATEGY; ASSESSMENT TASKS; COGNITIVE ACTIVITIES; ORGANIC CHEMISTRY; SPATIAL COGNITION; SPATIAL INFORMATIONS; SPATIAL REASONING;

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS;

PROBLEM SOLVING;

EID: 84880406805     PISSN: 15734552     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (31)

1. Alexander, P., & Judy, J. E. (1992). The interaction of domain-specific and strategic knowledge in academic performance. Review of Educational Research, 58(4), 375-404.
2. Barnea, N., & Dori, Y. J. (1999). High school chemistry students' performance and gender differences in a computerized molecular modeling learning environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 8(4), 257-271.
3. Becvar, L. A., Hollan, J., & Hutchins, E. (2005). Hands as molecules: Representational gestures used for developing theory in a scientific laboratory. Semiotica, 156(1/4), 89-112.
4. Clement, J. (2005). Transfer of imagery and runnability from analogies to models in experts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Quebec.
5. Craig, D. L., Nersessian, N. J., & Catrambone, R. (2002). Perceptual simulation in analogical problem solving. In L. Magnani & N. J. Nersessian (Eds.), Model-Based Reasoning: Science, Technology, & Values (pp. 167-191). New York: Kluwer Academic, pp. 167-191). New York: Kluwer Academic.
6. Ealy, J. B. (2004). Students' understanding is enhanced through molecular modeling. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(4).
7. Ege, S. N. (2003). Organic chemistry: Structure and reactivity (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
8. Ericcson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Verbal reports as data. Psychological Review, 87, 215-251.
9. Ferk, V., Vrtacnik, M., Blejec, A., & Gril, A. (2003). Students' understanding of molecular structure representations. International Journal of Science Education, 25(10), 1227-1245.
10. Feyereisen, P., & Havard, I. (1999). Mental imagery and production of hand gestures while speaking in younger and older adults. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 23(2), 153-171.
11. Fogg, P. (2005, January 28). Harvard's president wonders aloud about women in science and math. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. A12.
12. Habraken, C. L. (1996). Perceptions of chemistry: Why is the common perception of chemistry, the most visual of sciences, so distorted? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 5(3), 193-201.
13. Hadar, U., & Butterworth, B. (1997). Iconic gestures, imagery, and word retrieval in speech. Semiotica, 115, 147-172.
14. Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949-968.
15. Kuhn, D., Garcia-Mila, M., Zohar, A., & Andersen, C. (1995). Strategies of knowledge acquisition. Society for Research in Child Development Monographs, 4(60, Serial No. 245).
16. Mathewson, J. H. (1999). Visual-spatial thinking: An aspect of science overlooked by educators. Science Education, 83, 33-54.
17. Narayanan, N. H., Suwa, M., & Motoda, H. (1995). Behavior hypothesis from schematic diagrams. In J. Glasgow, N. H. Narayanan & B. Chandrasekaran (Eds.), Diagrammatic reasoning: Cognitive and computational perspectives, pp. 501-534). Menlo Park, CA: The AAAI Press.
18. Nathan, M. J., Stephens, A. C., Masarik, K., Alibali, M. W., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). Representational fluency in the middle school: A classroom study. In D. S. Mewborn, P. Sztajn, D. Y. White, H. G. Wiegel, R. L. Bryant & K. Nooney (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-fourth annual meeting of the North American chapter of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education pp. 463-472). Columbus, OH: ERIC.
19. Nersessian, N. J. (2002). The cognitive basis of model-based reasoning in science. In P. Carruthers, S. Stich & M. Siegal (Eds.), The cognitive basis of science, pp. 133-153). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
20. Qin, Y., & Simon, H. A. (1992). Imagery as process representation in problem solving. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 1050-1055.
21. Schunn, C. D., & Reder, L. M. (2001). Another source of individual differences: Strategy adaptivity to changing rates of success. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130, 59-76.
22. Science, A. A. f. t. A. o. (1990). Science for all Americans. New York: Oxford University Press.
23. Siegler, R. S., & Chen, Z. (2002). Development of rules and strategies: Balancing the old and the new. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 81, 446-457.
24. Siegler, R. S., & Croweley, K. (1991). The microgenetic method: A direct means for studying cognitive development. American Psychologist, 46(6), 606-620.
25. Siegler, R. S., & Svetina, M. (2006). What leads children to adopt new strategies? A microgenetic/Cross-sectional study of class inclusion. Child Development, 77(4), 997-1015.
26. Stieff, M. (2004). A localized model of spatial cognition in chemistry. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
27. Stieff, M. (2005). Visualization and diagrammatic reasoning in genuine scientific problem solving. In T. Barkowsky, C. Freksa, M. Hegarty & R. Loew (Eds.), Reasoning with mental and external diagrams: computation modeling and spatial assistance, Vol. AAAI Tech. Rep. SS-05-06, pp. 121-126). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
28. Stieff, M. (2007). Mental rotation and diagrammatic reasoning in science. Learning and Instruction, 17(2), 219-234.
29. Strauss, S., & Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded theory methodology: an overview. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research, pp. 273-285). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
30. Taagepera, M., & Noori, S. (2000). Mapping students' thinking patterns in learning organic chemistry by the use of knowledge space theory. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(9), 1224-1229.
31. Wu, H.-k., & Shah, P. (2004). Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Science Education, 88(3), 465-492.