The impact of students’ exploration strategies on discovery learning using computer-based simulations

Educational Media International

Volumn 51, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 310-329

  Dalgarno, Barney ^a   Kennedy, Gregor ^b   Bennett, Sue ^c  

^a CHARLES STURT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG   (Australia)

Author keywords

computer based simulations; discovery learning; inquiry learning; instructional guidance

Indexed keywords

EID: 84914690973     PISSN: 09523987     EISSN: 14695790     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09523987.2014.977009     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1–18.10.1037/a0021017
2. Anthony, W. (1973). Learning to discover rules by discovery. Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 325–328.10.1037/h0034585
3. Barab, S., Zuiker, S., Warren, S., Hickey, D., Ingram-Goble, A., Kwon, E.-J., … Herring, S. (2007). Situationally embodied curriculum: Relating formalisms and contexts. Science & Education, 91, 750–782.
4. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education (Vol. 1). New York, NY, Springer.
5. Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31, 21–32.
6. Bruner, J. S. (1962). On knowing: Essays for the left hand. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University. (1992). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40, 66–80.
8. Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 715–730.10.1037/0022-0663.88.4.715
9. De Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2006). How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated? Computers & Education, 46, 249–264.
10. De Jong, T., Martin, E., Zamarro, J. M., Esquembre, F., Swaak, J., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1999). The integration of computer simulation and learning support: An example from the physics domain of collisions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36, 597–615.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
11. De Jong, T., & Van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68, 179–201.10.3102/00346543068002179
12. Duffy, T. M., & Cunningham, D. J. (1996). Constructivism: Implications for the design and delivery of instruction. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 170–198). New York, NY: Macmillan Library Reference.
13. Glaser, R. (1991). Scientific reasoning across different domains. In E. de Corte, M. Linn, H. Mandl, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Computer-based learning environments and problem solving (pp. 345–373). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
14. Hannafin, R. D., & Sullivan, H. J. (1995). Learner control in full and lean CAI programs. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43, 19–30.10.1007/BF02300479
15. Harper, B., Hedberg, J., & Brown, C. (1995). Investigating Lake Iluka [Computer software]. Wollongong: University of Wollongong NSW/Interactive Multimedia Unit.
16. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42, 99–107.10.1080/00461520701263368
17. Kennedy, G. E., & Judd, T. S. (2004). Making sense of audit trail data. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 20, 18–32.
18. Kersh, B. Y., & Wittrock, M. C. (1962). Learning by discovery: An interpretation of recent research. Journal of Teacher Education, 13, 461–468.10.1177/002248716201300417
19. Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B. C., Clarke, J., & Dede, C. (2010). A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41, 56–68.10.1111/bjet.2010.41.issue-1
20. Kettanurak, V. N., Ramamurthy, K., & Haseman, W. D. (2001). User attitude as a mediator of learning performance improvement in an interactive multimedia environment: An empirical investigation of the degree of interactivity and learning styles. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54, 541–583.10.1006/ijhc.2001.0457
21. Kinzie, M. B., Sullivan, H. J., & Berdel, R. L. (1988). Learner control and achievement in science computer-assisted instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 299–303.10.1037/0022-0663.80.3.299
22. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41, 75–86.10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
23. Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004). The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: Effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychological Science, 15, 661–667.10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00737.x
24. Kuhn, D., Black, J., Keselman, A., & Kaplan, D. (2000). The development of cognitive skills to support inquiry learning. Cognition and Instruction, 18, 495–523.10.1207/S1532690XCI1804_3
25. Kuhn, D., Schauble, L., & Garcia-Mila, M. (1992). Cross-domain development of scientific reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 9, 285–327.10.1207/s1532690xci0904_1
26. Künsting, J., Wirth, J., & Paas, F. (2011). The goal specificity effect on strategy use and instructional efficiency during computer-based scientific discovery learning. Computers & Education, 56, 668–679.
27. Lawless, K. A., & Brown, S. W. (1997). Multimedia learning environments: Issues of learner control and navigation. Instructional Science, 25, 117–131.10.1023/A:1002919531780
28. Lee, M. J. W., & Dalgarno, B. (2011). Scaffolding discovery learning in 3D virtual environments: Challenges and considerations for instructional design. In S. Hai-Jew (Ed.), Virtual Immersive and 3D Learning Spaces: Emerging Technologies and Trends (pp. 138–169). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
29. Leutner, D. (1993). Guided discovery learning with computer-based simulation games: Effects of adaptive and non-adaptive instructional support. Learning and Instruction, 3, 113–132.10.1016/0959-4752(93)90011-N
30. Levy, S. T., & Wilensky, U. (2005). An analysis of student’ patterns of exploration with NetLogo models embedded in the connected chemistry environment: Center for connected learning and computer-based modelling. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.
31. Lindström, B., Marton, F., Ottosson, T., & Laurillard, D. (1993). Computer simulation as a tool for developing intuitive and conceptual understanding in mechanics. Computers in Human Behavior, 9, 263–281.10.1016/0747-5632(93)90011-G
32. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59, 14–19.10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14
33. Milheim, W. D., & Martin, B. L. (1991). Theoretical bases for the use of learner control: Three different perspectives. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 18, 99–105.
34. Monaghan, J. M., & Clement, J. (1999). Use of a computer simulation to develop mental simulations for understanding relative motion concepts. International Journal of Science Education, 21, 921–944.10.1080/095006999290237
35. Njoo, M., & De Jong, T. (1993). Exploratory learning with a computer simulation for control theory: Learning processes and instructional support. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 821–844.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
36. Phillips, D. C. (1995). The good, the bad, and the ugly: The many faces of constructivism. Educational Researcher, 24, 5–12.10.3102/0013189X024007005
37. Piaget, J. (1973). To understand is to invent: The future of education. New York, NY: Grossman.
38. Piaget, J. (1977). Science of education and the psychology of the child (D. Coltman, Trans.). In H. E. Gruber & J. J. Voneche (Eds.), The essential Piaget (pp. 695–725). New York, NY: Basic Books.
39. Reilly, M. (1974). Play as exploratory learning: Studies of curiosity behavior. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
40. Reimann, P. (1991). Detecting functional relations in a computerized discovery environment. Learning and Instruction, 1, 45–65.10.1016/0959-4752(91)90018-4
41. Rieber, L. P., Tzeng, S.-C., & Tribble, K. (2004). Discovery learning, representation, and explanation within a computer-based simulation: Finding the right mix. Learning and Instruction, 14, 307–323.10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.008
42. Rivers, R. H., & Vockell, E. (1987). Computer simulations to stimulate scientific problem solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 403–415.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
43. Rutherford, F. J. (1964). The role of inquiry in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2, 80–84.10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
44. Schauble, L., Glaser, R., Raghavan, K., & Reiner, M. (1991). Causal models and experimentation strategies in scientific reasoning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 201–238.10.1207/s15327809jls0102_3
45. Steuter, E., & Doyle, J. (2010). Re-vitalizing the first year class through student engagement and discovery learning. The Journal of Effective Teaching, 10, 66–78.
46. Thompson, K., & Reimann, P. (2010). Patterns of use of an agent-based model and a system dynamics model: The application of patterns of use and the impacts on learning outcomes. Computers & Education, 54, 392–403.
47. von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In P. W. Watzlawick (Ed.), The invented reality: How do we know what we believe we know? (pp. 17–40). New York, NY Norton.
48. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
49. White, R. T., & Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. Basingstoke: Falmer Press.