A Meta-analysis Method to Advance Design of Technology-Based Learning Tool: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Research to Understand Learning in Relation to Different Technology Features

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 145-159

  Zhang, Lin ^a  

^a BOSTON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Meta analysis; Methodology; Technology tool

Indexed keywords

EID: 84895901487     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-013-9460-x     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Allison PD (2008) Convergence failures in logistic regression. In: Paper presented at the SAS Global Forum 2008 Conference, San Antonio, Texas.
2. Anderson T, Shattuck J (2012) Design-based research: a decade of progress in education research? Educ Res 41(1): 16-25.
3. Annetta LA, Cheng M-T, Holmes S (2010) Assessing twenty-first century skills through a teacher created video game for high school biology students. Res Sci Technol Educ 28(2): 101-114.
4. Barab S (2006) Design-based research: a methodological toolkit for the learning scientist. In: Sawyer RK (ed) The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 153-168.
5. Barab S, Squire K (2004) Design-based research: putting a stake in the ground. J Learn Sci 13(1): 1-14.
6. Birchfield D, Megowan-Romanowicz C (2009) Earth science learning in SMALLab: a design experiment for mixed reality. Int J Comput Support Collab Learn 4(4): 403-421.
7. Brown AL (1992) Design experiments: theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. J Learn Sci 2(2): 141-178.
8. Butler KA, Lumpe A (2008) Student use of scaffolding software: relationships with motivation and conceptual understanding. J Sci Educ Technol 17(5): 427-436.
9. Caspersona JM, Linn MC (2006) Using visualizations to teach electrostatics. Am J Phys 74(4): 316-323.
10. Clark D, D'Angelo C, Menekse M (2009) Initial structuring of online discussions to improve learning and argumentation: incorporating students' own explanations as seed comments versus an augmented-preset approach to seeding discussions. J Sci Educ Technol 18(4): 321-333.
11. Collins A (1992) Toward a design science of education. In: Scanlon E, O'Shea T (eds) New directions in educational technology. Springer, New York, pp 15-22.
12. Collins A, Joseph D, Bielaczyc K (2004) Design research: theoretical and methodological issues. J Learn Sci 13(1): 15-42.
13. Davis EA (2000) Scaffolding students' knowledge integration: prompts for reflection in KIE. Int J Sci Educ 22(8): 819-837.
14. de Vries E, Lund K, Baker M (2002) Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue: explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. J Learn Sci 11(1): 63-103.
15. Dori YJ, Sasson I (2008) Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case-based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: the value of bidirectional visual and textual representations. J Res Sci Teach 45(2): 219-250.
16. Ebenezer JV (2001) A hypermedia environment to explore and negotiate students' conceptions: animation of the solution process of table salt. J Sci Educ Technol 10(1): 73-92.
17. Ebenezer J, Kaya ON, Ebenezer DL (2011) Engaging students in environmental research projects: perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities. J Res Sci Teach 48(1): 94-116.
18. Edelson DC (2002) Design research: what we learn when we engage in design. J Learn Sci 11(1): 105-121.
19. Edelson DC, Gordin DN, Pea RD (1999) Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. J Learn Sci 8(3/4): 391-450.
20. Geier R, Blumenfeld PC, Marx RW, Krajcik JS, Fishman B, Soloway E et al (2008) Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform. J Res Sci Teach 45(8): 922-939.
21. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (1989) Applied logistic regression. Wiley, New York.
22. Huppert J, Lomask SM, Lazarowitz R (2002) Computer simulations in the high school: students' cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology. Int J Sci Educ 24(8): 803-821.
23. Kim MC, Hannafin MJ, Bryan LA (2007) Technology-enhanced inquiry tools in science education: an emerging pedagogical framework for classroom practice. Sci Educ 91(6): 1010-1030.
24. Linn M (2003) Technology and science education: starting points, research programs, and trends. Int J Sci Educ 25(6): 727-758.
25. Mayer RE (2003) Learning environments: the case for evidence-based practice and issue-driven research. Educ Psychol Rev 15(4): 359-366.
26. Menard S (1995) Applied logistic regression analysis. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
27. Mistler-Jackson M, Songer N (2000) Student motivation and Internet technology: are students empowered to learn science? J Res Sci Teach 37(5): 459-479.
28. Moss DM (2003) A window on science: exploring the JASON project and student conceptions of science. J Sci Educ Technol 12(1): 21-30.
29. National Research Council (2002) Scientific research in education. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
30. National Research Council (2011) A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas, Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.
31. Oliver K (2009) An investigation of concept mapping to improve the reading comprehension of science texts. J Sci Educ Technol 18(5): 402-414.
32. O'Neill DK (2001) Knowing when you've brought them in: scientific genre knowledge and communities of practice. J Learn Sci 10(3): 223-264.
33. Parnafes O (2007) What does "fast" mean? Understanding the physical world through computational representations. J Learn Sci 16(3): 415-450.
34. Parr CS, Jones T, Songer NB (2004) Evaluation of a handheld data collection interface for science learning. J Sci Educ Technol 13(2): 233-242.
35. Pine J, Aschbacher P, Roth E, Jones M, McPhee C, Martin C et al (2006) Fifth graders' science inquiry abilities: a comparative study of students in hands-on and textbook curricula. J Res Sci Teach 43(5): 467-484.
36. Puntambekar S, Stylianou A, Goldstein J (2007) Comparing classroom enactments of an inquiry curriculum: lessons learned from two teachers. J Learn Sci 16(1): 81-130.
37. Quintana C, Reiser BJ, Davis EA, Krajcik J, Fretz E, Duncan RG et al (2004) A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. J Learn Sci 13(3): 337-386.
38. Rogers Y, Price S (2008) The Role of mobile devices in facilitating collaborative inquiry in situ. Res Pract Technol Enhanc Learn 3(3): 209-229.
39. Sandoval WA, Reiser B (2004) Explanation-driven inquiry: integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Sci Educ 88(3): 345-372.
40. Shavelson RJ, Phillips DC, Towne L, Feuer MJ (2003) On the science of education design studies. Educ Res 32(1): 25-28.
41. Shin E (2006) Using Geographic Information System (GIS) to improve fourth graders' geographic content knowledge and map skills. J Geogr 105(3): 109-120.
42. Slavin RE (2002) Evidence-based education policies: transforming educational practice and research. Educ Res 31(7): 15-21.
43. Slotta JD, Linn MC (2009) WISE science: web-based inquiry in classroom. Teachers College Press, New York, NY.
44. Songer NB, Lee H-S, Kam R (2002) Technology-rich inquiry science in urban classrooms: what are the barriers to inquiry pedagogy? J Res Sci Teach 39(2): 128-150.
45. Songer NB, Lee H-S, McDonald S (2003) Research towards an expanded understanding of inquiry science beyond one idealized standard. Sci Educ 87(4): 490-516.
46. Stieff M, Wilensky U (2003) Connected chemistry-incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. J Sci Educ Technol 12(3): 285-302.
47. Tolentino L, Birchfield D, Megowan-Romanowicz C, Johnson-Glenberg MC, Kelliher A, Martinez C (2009) Teaching and learning in the mixed-reality science classroom. J Sci Educ Technol 18(6): 501-517.
48. Waight N, Abd-El-Khalick F (2007) The impact of technology on the enactment of inquiry in a technology enthusiast's sixth grade science classroom. J Res Sci Teach 44(Generic): 154-182.
49. Wallace RM, Kupperman J, Krajcik J, Soloway E (2000) Science on the web: students online in a sixth-grade classroom. J Learn Sci 9(1): 75-104.
50. Williams M, Linn MC (2002) WISE inquiry in fifth grade biology. Res Sci Educ 32: 415-436.