Exploring Ecosystems from the Inside: How Immersive Multi-user Virtual Environments Can Support Development of Epistemologically Grounded Modeling Practices in Ecosystem Science Instruction

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 24, Issue 2-3, 2015, Pages 148-167

  Kamarainen, Amy M ^a   Metcalf, Shari ^a   Grotzer, Tina ^a   Dede, Chris ^a  

^a HARVARD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION   (United States)

Author keywords

Ecosystem; Epistemology; Immersion; Inquiry; Model

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925536232     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-014-9531-7     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Barab SA, Hay KE, Barnett M, Keating T (2000) Virtual solar system project: building understanding through model building. J Res Sci Teach 37(7):719–756
2. Barnett M, Yamagata-Lynch L, Keating T, Barab SA, Hay KE (2005) Using virtual reality computer models to support student understanding of astronomical concepts. J Comput Math Sci Teach 24(4):812–856
3. Berland LK, McNeill KL (2009). Using a learning progression to inform scientific argumentation in talk and writing. Learning Progressions in Science Conference, Iowa City, IA
4. Berland LK, Reiser BJ (2010) Classroom communities’ adaptations of the practice of scientific argumentation. Sci Educ 95(2):191–216
5. Brizuela BM, Gravel BE (2013) Introduction. In: Brizuela BM, Gravel BE (eds) Show me what you know: exploring student representations across stem disciplines. Teachers College Press
6. Canham CDW, Cole J, Lauenroth WK (eds) (2003) Models in ecosystem science. Princeton University Press, Princeton
7. Capon N, Kuhn D (2004) What’s so good about problem-based learning? Cognit Instr 22(1):61–79
8. Chaiklin S, Lave (eds) (1993) Understanding practice: perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
9. Chinn C, Hmelo-Silver C (2002) Authentic inquiry: introduction to the special section. Sci Educ 86(2):171–174
10. Chinn C, Malhotra B (2002) Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: a theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Sci Educ 86(2):175–218. doi:10.1002/sce.10001
11. Clement J (2000) Model based learning as a key research area for science education. Int J Sci Educ 22(9):1041–1053. doi:10.1080/095006900416901
12. Coll RK, France B, Taylor I (2005) The role of models/and analogies in science education: implications from research. Int J Sci Educ 27(2):183–198. doi:10.1080/0950069042000276712
13. Dede C (1999) The multiple-media difference. Technos 8(1):16–18
14. Duschl R (2008) Science education in three-part harmony: balancing conceptual, epistemic, and social learning goals. Rev Res Educ 32(1):268–291. doi:10.3102/0091732X07309371
15. Fishman B, Dede C, Means B (in press) Teaching and technology: new tools for new times. In: Handbook of research on teaching, 5th ed. American Educational Research Association, Washington
16. Gilbert JK (2004) Models and modelling: routes to more authentic science education. Int J Sci Math Educ 2(2):115–130. doi:10.1007/s10763-004-3186-4
17. Goldin GA (2013) Forward. In: Brizuela BM, Gravel BE (eds) Show me what you know: exploring student representations across stem disciplines. Teachers College Press
18. Goodwin C (1994) Professional vision. Am Anthropol 96(3):606–633
19. Greca IM, Moreira MA (2001) Mental, physical, and mathematical models in the teaching and learning of physics. Sci Educ 86(1):106–121. doi:10.1002/sce.10013
20. Greeno JG (1998) The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. Am Psychol 53(1):5–26. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.53.1.5
21. Griesemer JR (1990, January). Material models in biology. In PSA: proceedings of the biennial meeting of the philosophy of science association. Philosophy of Science Association, pp 79–93
22. Grosslight L, Unger C, Jay E, Smith CL (1991) Understanding models and their use in science: conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. J Res Sci Teach 28(9):799–822. doi:10.1002/tea.3660280907
23. Grotzer TA, Tutwiler MS, Dede C, Kamarainen A, Metcalf S (2011, April). Helping students learn more expert framing of complex causal dynamics in ecosystems using EcoMUVE. Presented at the national association of research in science teaching (NARST) conference, Orlando, April 4, 2011
24. Grotzer TA, Kamarainen AM, Tutwiler MS, Metcalf S, Dede C (2013) Learning to reason about ecosystems dynamics over time: the challenges of an event-based causal focus. Bioscience 63(4):288–296
25. Harrison AG, Treagust DF (2000) A typology of school science models. Int J Sci 37–41. doi:10.1080/095006900416884
26. Hmelo CE, Holton DL, Kolodner JL (2000) Designing to learn about complex systems. J Learn Sci 9(3):247–298
27. Hofstein A, Lunetta VN (2004) The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Sci Educ 88(1):28–54
28. Kelly RA, Jakeman AJ, Barreteau O, Borsuk ME, Elsawah S, Hamilton SH, Voinov AA (2013) Environmental modelling & software selecting among five common modelling approaches for integrated environmental assessment and management. Environ Model Softw 47:159–181. doi:10.1016/j.envsoft.2013.05.005
29. Kuhn D, Pearsall S (2000) Developmental origins of scientific thinking. J Cognit Dev 1(1):113–129. doi:10.1207/S15327647JCD0101N_11
30. Lauenroth WK, Burke IC, Berry JK (2003) The status of dynamic quantitative modeling in ecology. In: Canham CDW, Cole J, Lauenroth WK (eds) Models in ecosystem science. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 32–48
31. Lehrer R, Schauble L (2000) Developing model-based reasoning in mathematics and science. J Appl Dev Psychol 21(1):39–48
32. Lehrer R, Horvath J, Schauble L (1994) Developing model-based reasoning. Interact Learn Environ 4(3):218–232. doi:10.1080/1049482940040304
33. Lehrer R, Schauble L, Lucas D (2008) Supporting development of the epistemology of inquiry. Cognit Dev 23(4):512–529. doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2008.09.001
34. Lesh R, Lehrer R (2003) Models and modeling perspectives on the development of students and teachers. Math Think Learn 5(2–3):109–129. doi:10.1080/10986065.2003.9679996
35. Manz EVE (2012) Understanding the codevelopment of modeling practice and ecological. Sci Educ 96(6):1071–1105. doi:10.1002/sce.21030
36. NGSS Lead States (2013) Next generation science standards: for states, by states. The National Academies Press, Washington
37. Pace ML, Groffman PM (1998) Successes, limitations, and frontiers in ecosystem science: reflections on the seventh cary conference OR. Ecosystems 1:137–142
38. Palincsar AS (1998) Keeping the metaphor of scaffolding fresh—a response to C. Addison Stone’s “The metaphor of scaffolding its utility for the field of learning disabilities”. J Lear Disabil 31(4):370–373
39. Passmore C, Stewart J (2002) A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. J Res Sci Teach 39(3):185–204. doi:10.1002/tea.10020
40. Passmore CM, Svoboda J (2012) Exploring opportunities for argumentation in modeling classrooms. Int J Sci Educ 34(10):1535–1554. doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.577842
41. Passmore C, Stewart J, Cartier J (2009) Model-based inquiry and school science: creating connections. Sch Sci Math 109(7):394–402. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.tb17870.x
42. Penner DE, Giles ND, Lehrer R, Schauble L (1997) Building functional models: designing an elbow. J Res Sci Teach 34(2):125–143. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199702)34:2<125:AID-TEA3>3.0.CO;2-V
43. Quintana C, Reiser BJ, Davis EA, Krajcik J, Fretz E, Duncan RG, Soloway E (2004) A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. J Learn Sci 13(3):337–386
44. Reiser B, Tabak I, Sandoval WA, Smith BK, Steinmuller F, Leone AJ (2001) BGuILE: strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology classrooms. In: Carver SM, Klahr D (eds) Cognition and instruction: twenty-five years of progress. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ
45. Salzman M, Dede C, Loftin B (1999) Virtual reality’s frames of reference: a visualization technique for mastering abstract information spaces. In: Proceedings of CHI’99, pp 489–495
46. Sandoval W (2014) Science education’s need for a theory of epistemological development. Sci Educ 98(3):383–387. doi:10.1002/sce.21107
47. Sandoval WA, Reiser BJ (2004) Explanation-driven inquiry: integrating conceptual and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Sci Educ 88(3):345–372
48. Schwarz CV, Meyer J, Sharma A (2007) Technology, pedagogy, and epistemology: opportunities and challenges of using computer modeling and simulation tools in elementary science methods. 243–269. doi:10.1007/s10972-007-9039-6
49. Singer SR, Hilton ML, Schweingruber HA (eds) (2005) America’s lab report: investigations in high school science. National Academies Press, Washington, DC
50. Squire K (2010) From information to experience: place-based augmented reality games as a model for learning in a globally networked society. Teach Coll Rec 112(10):2565–2602
51. Stratford SJ (1997) A review of computer-based model research in precollege science classrooms. J Comput Math Sci Teach 16:3–23
52. Tairab HH, Khalaf Al-Naqbi AK (2004) How do secondary school science students interpret and construct scientific graphs? J Biol Educ 38(3):127–132. doi:10.1080/00219266.2004.9655920
53. Wenger E (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge university press, Cambridge
54. Windschitl M, Thompson J, Braaten M (2008) Beyond the scientific method: model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Sci Educ 92(5):941–967