An investigation of university students’ collaborative inquiry learning behaviors in an augmented reality simulation and a traditional simulation

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 23, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 682-691

  Wang, Hung Yuan ^a   Duh, Henry Been Lirn ^b   Li, Nai ^c   Lin, Tzung Jin ^a   Tsai, Chin Chung ^a  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TASMANIA   (Australia)

^c TENCENT AI LAB   (China)

Author keywords

Augmented reality; Behavioral pattern; Collaborative inquiry learning; Lag sequential analysis; Simulation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84939896962     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-014-9494-8     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Azuma RT (1997) A survey of augmented reality. Presence 6(4):335–385
2. Bakeman R, Gottman JM (1997) Observing interaction: an introduction to sequential analysis. Cambridge University Press, UK
3. Bell T, Urhahne D, Schanze S, Ploetzner R (2010) Collaborative inquiry learning: models, tools, and challenges. Int J Sci Educ 32(3):349–377
4. Bryce TGK, MacMillan K (2009) Momentum and kinetic energy: confusable concepts in secondary school physics. J Res Sci Teach 46(7):739–761
5. Chen SF (2010) The view of scientific inquiry conveyed by simulation-based virtual laboratories. Comput Educ 55(3):1123–1130
6. Chen C-M, Tsai Y-N (2012) Interactive augmented reality system for enhancing library instruction in elementary schools. Comput Educ 59(2):638–652
7. Cheng KH, Tsai CC (2013) Affordance of augmented reality in science learning: suggestions for future research. J Sci Educ Technol 22(4):449–462
8. Dalgarno B, Bishop AG, Adlong W, Bedgood DR (2009) Effectiveness of a virtual laboratory as a preparatory resource for distance education chemistry students. Comput Educ 53(3):853–865
9. de Jong T (2006) Computer simulations—technological advances in inquiry learning. Science 312(5773):532–533
10. de Jong T, van Joolingen WR (1998) Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Rev Educ Res 68(2):179–201
11. Gijlers H, de Jong T (2005) The relation between prior knowledge and students’ collaborative discovery learning processes. J Res Sci Teach 42(3):264–282
12. Gijlers H, Saab N, van Joolingen W, de Jong T, Van Hout Wolters B (2009) Interaction between tool and talk: how instruction and tools support consensus building in collaborative inquiry learning environments. J Comput Assist Learn 25(3):252–267
13. Harskamp E, Ding N (2006) Structured collaboration versus individual learning in solving physics problems. Int J Sci Educ 28(14):1669–1688
14. Henrysson A, Billinghurst M, Ollila M (2005) Face to face collaborative AR on mobile phones. Paper presented at the fourth IEEE and ACM international symposium on mixed and augmented reality, Vienna, Austria
15. Hou HT (2012) Exploring the behavioral patterns of learners in an educational massively multiple online role-playing game (MMORPG). Comput Educ 58(4):1225–1233
16. Hou HT, Sung YT, Chang KE (2009) Exploring the behavioral patterns of an online knowledge-sharing discussion activity among teachers with problem-solving strategy. Teach Teach Educ 25(1):101–108
17. Hou HT, Chang KE, Sung YT (2010) Applying lag sequential analysis to detect visual behavioural patterns of online learning activities. Br J Educ Technol 41(2):E25–E27
18. Hwang GJ, Tsai CC, Yang SJH (2008) Criteria, strategies and research issues of context-aware ubiquitous learning. Edu Tech & Soc 11(2):81–91
19. Jara CA, Candelas FA, Torres F, Dormido S, Esquembre F, Reinoso O (2009) Real-time collaboration of virtual laboratories through the Internet. Comput Educ 52(1):126–140
20. Jeong A, Davidson-Shivers GV (2006) The effects of gender interaction patterns on student participation in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. Educ Technol Res Dev 54(6):543–568
21. Kapur M (2011) Temporality matters: advancing a method for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment. Int J Comput Support Collab Learn 6(1):39–56
22. Klahr D, Nigam M (2004) The equivalence of learning paths in early science instruction: effects of direct instruction and discovery learning. Psychol Sci 15:661–667
23. Klahr D, Fay AL, Dunbar K (1993) Heuristics for scientific experimentation: a developmental study. Cogn Psychol 25:111–146
24. Klopfer E (2008) Augmented learning: research and design of mobile educational games. The MIT Press, Cambridge
25. Kong SC, Yeung YY, Wu XQ (2009) An experience of teaching for learning by observation: remote-controlled experiments on electrical circuits. Comput Educ 52(3):702–717
26. Lee SWY, Tsai C–C (2011) Identifying patterns of collaborative knowledge exploration in online asynchronous discussions. Instr Sci 39:321–347
27. Lin T-J, Duh HB-L, Li N, Wang H-Y, Tsai C–C (2013) An investigation of learners’ collaborative knowledge construction performances and behavior patterns in an augmented reality simulation system. Comput Educ 68:314–321
28. Lou YP, Abrami PC, d’Apollonia S (2001) Small group and individual learning with technology: a meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 71(3):449–521
29. Marshall JA, Young ES (2006) Preservice teachers’ theory development in physical and simulated environment. J Res Sci Teach 43:907–937
30. Martin S, Diaz G, Sancristobal E, Gil R, Castro M, Peire J (2011) New technology trends in education: seven years of forecasts and convergence. Comput Educ 57(3):1893–1906
31. Milgram P, Kishino AF (1994) Taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE Trans Inf Syst E77-D(12):1321–1329
32. Mulder YG, Lazonder AW, de Jong T, Anjewierden A, Bollen L (2012) Validating and optimizing the effects of model progression in simulation-based inquiry learning. J Sci Educ Technol 21(6):722–729
33. Njoo M, de Jong T (1993) Exploratory learning with a computer simulation for control theory: learning processes and instructional support. J Res Sci Teach 30(8):821–844
34. Pyatt K, Sims R (2012) Virtual and physical experimentation in inquiry-based science labs: attitudes, performance and access. J Sci Educ Technol 21(1):133–147
35. Reiner M (1998) Thought experiments and collaborative learning in physics. Int J Sci Educ 20(9):1043–1058
36. Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13:273–304
37. Rutten N, van Joolingen WR, van der Veen JT (2012) The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Comput Educ 58(1):136–153
38. Singh C, Rosegrant D (2003) Multiple-choice test of energy and momentum concepts. Am J Phys 71(6):607–617
39. Smetana LK, Bell RL (2012) Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: a critical review of the literature. Int J Sci Educ 34(9):1337–1370
40. Squire K, Klopfer E (2007) Augmented reality simulations on handheld computers. J Learn Sci 16(3):371–413
41. Stahl G, Koschmann T, Suthers D (2006) Computer-supported collaborative learning: an historical perspective. In: Sawyer RK (ed) Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 409–426
42. Sung YT, Hou HT, Liu CK, Chang KE (2010) Mobile guide system using problem-solving strategy for museum learning: a sequential learning behavioural pattern analysis. J Comput Assist Learn 26(2):106–115
43. van Joolingen WR, de Jong T, Lazonder AW, Savelsbergh ER, Manlove S (2005) Co-Lab: research and development of an online learning environment for collaborative scientific discovery learning. Comput Hum Behav 21(4):671–688
44. Wu HK, Lee SWY, Chang HY, Liang JC (2013) Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Comput Educ 62:41–49
45. Zacharia ZC, Olympiou G (2011) Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learn Instr 21(3):317–331
46. Zurita G, Nussbaum M (2004a) Computer supported collaborative learning using wirelessly interconnected handheld computers. Comput Educ 42(3):289–314
47. Zurita G, Nussbaum M (2004b) A constructivist mobile learning environment supported by a wireless handheld network. J Comput Assist Learn 20(4):235–243