The Effect of Highly Scaffolded Versus General Instruction on Students’ Exploratory Behavior and Arousal

Technology, Knowledge and Learning

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 105-128

  Blikstein, Paulo ^a   Gomes, July Silveira ^a,b   Akiba, Henrique Teruo ^b   Schneider, Bertrand ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SÃO PAULO   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Biosensing; Constructionism; Exploration; Galvanic skin response; Inquiry learning

Indexed keywords

CHEMICAL ACTIVATION; COMPUTER SOFTWARE; ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY; ENGINEERING EDUCATION; NATURAL RESOURCES EXPLORATION;

BIOSENSING; CARRY-OVER EFFECTS; COGNITIVE FLEXIBILITY; COMPUTER-BASED ACTIVITIES; CONSTRUCTIONISM; CONTINUOUS RELAXATION; GALVANIC SKIN RESPONSE; INQUIRY LEARNING;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84988448940     PISSN: 22111662     EISSN: 22111670     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10758-016-9291-y     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Alexander, J. K., Hillier, A., Smith, R. M., Tivarus, M. E., & Beversdorf, D. Q. (2007). Beta-adrenergic modulation of cognitive flexibility during stress. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(3), 468–478.
2. Algoryx Simulation AB. (2013). Algodoo [computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.algodoo.com.
3. Bernstein, A. S. (1979). The orienting response as novelty and significance detector: Reply to O’Gorman. Psychophysiology, 16(3), 263–273.
4. Bernstein, A. S., Taylor, K. W., & Weinstein, E. (1975). The phasic electrodermal response as a differentiated complex reflecting stimulus significance. Psychophysiology, 12(2), 158–169.
5. Biofeedback Federation of Europe. (2013a). Integrative medicine software [computer software]. Retrieved from http://www.bfe.org.
6. Biofeedback Federation of Europe. (2013b). Integrative medicine software manual—ProComp Infiniti encoder. Retrieved from http://www.bfe.org.
7. Bishop, J. L. & Verleger, M. A. (2013). The flipped classroom: A survey of the research. In ASEE national conference proceedings. Atlanta, GA.
8. Blikstein, P. (2011). Using learning analytics to assess students’ behavior in open-ended programming tasks. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 1st international conference on learning analytics and knowledge. Banff, AB.
9. Blikstein, P. (2013). Gears of our childhood: constructionist toolkits, robotics, and physical computing, past and future. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 173–182). New York, NY: ACM.
10. Blikstein, P. & Krannich, D. (2013). The makers’ movement and FabLabs in education: experiences, technologies, and research. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 613–616). New York: ACM.
11. Brophy, S., Klein, S., Portsmore, M., & Rogers, C. (2008). Advancing engineering education in P-12 classrooms. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 369–387.
12. Burkett, S. L., Kotru, S., Lusth, J. C., McCallum, D., & Dunlap, S. (2014). Introducing creativity in a design laboratory for a freshman level electrical and computer engineering course. American Journal of Engineering Education (AJEE), 5(1), 11–26.
13. Burt, K. B., & Obradović, J. (2013). The construct of psychophysiological reactivity: Statistical and psychometric issues. Developmental Review, 33(1), 29–57.
14. Carroll, E. A. (2011). Convergence of self-report and physiological responses for evaluating creativity support tools. In Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on creativity and cognition (pp. 455–456). Atlanta, GA: ACM.
15. Chae, S. W., & Lee, K. C. (2011). Physiological experiment approach to explore the revelation process for individual creativity based on exploitation and exploration. In advanced computer science and information technology (pp. 295–304). Berlin: Springer.
16. Chae, S. W., Lee, K. C., & Hahn, M. H. (2013). Exploring the revelation process for individual creativity based on exploitation and exploration: A physiological experiment approach. In digital creativity (pp. 61–78). New York: Springer.
17. Chin, D. B., Dohmen, I. M., Cheng, B. H., Oppezzo, M. A., Chase, C. C., & Schwartz, D. L. (2010). Preparing students for future learning with teachable agents. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(6), 649–669.
18. Choi, M. H., Lee, S. J., Yang, J. W., Kim, J. H., Choi, J. S., Park, J. Y., et al. (2010). Changes in cognitive performance due to three types of emotional tension. Database theory and application (pp. 258–264). Berlin Heidelberg: Bio-Science and Bio-Technology. Springer.
19. DeCaro, M. S., & Rittle-Johnson, B. (2012). Exploring mathematics problems prepares children to learn from instruction. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113(4), 552–568.
20. Fechir, M., Schlereth, T., Purat, T., Kritzmann, S., Geber, C., Eberle, T., et al. (2008). Patterns of sympathetic responses induced by different stress tasks. The Open Neurology Journal, 2, 25–31.
21. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogia do Oprimido. Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.
22. Gomes, J. S., Yassine, M., Worsley, M., & Blikstein, P. (2013) Analysing engineering expertise of high school students using eye tracking and multimodal learning analytics.
23. Jepma, M., & Nieuwenhuis, S. (2011). Pupil diameter predicts changes in the exploration–exploitation trade-off: Evidence for the adaptive gain theory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(7), 1587–1596.
24. 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(2), 75–86.
25. Kitchen, C. M. (2009). Nonparametric versus parametric tests of location in biomedical research. American Journal of Ophthalmology, 147(4), 571.
26. Laureiro-Martínez, D., Brusoni, S., & Zollo, M. (2010). The neuroscientific foundations of the exploration–exploitation dilemma. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 3(2), 95.
27. Lazonder, A. W., & Egberink, A. (2014). Children’s acquisition and use of the control-of-variables strategy: Effects of explicit and implicit instructional guidance. Instructional Science, 42(2), 291–304.
28. Lorch, R. F., Jr., Lorch, E. P., Calderhead, W. J., Dunlap, E. E., Hodell, E. C., & Freer, B. D. (2010). Learning the control of variables strategy in higher and lower achieving classrooms: Contributions of explicit instruction and experimentation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 90–101.
29. March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organization Science, 2(1), 71–87.
30. Mehta, C. R., & Patel, N. R. (2011). IBM SPSS exact tests. Retrieved from ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/documentation/statistics/20.0/en/client/Manuals/IBM_SPSS_Exact_Tests.pdf.
31. Muldner, K., Burleson, W., & VanLehn, K. (2010). “Yes!”: Using tutor and sensor data to predict moments of delight during instructional activities. User modeling, adaptation and personalization. (pp. 159–170). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.
32. NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington D.C: National academic press.
33. Nieuwenhuis, S., De Geus, E. J., & Aston-Jones, G. (2011). The anatomical and functional relationship between the P3 and autonomic components of the orienting response. Psychophysiology, 48(2), 162–175.
34. Nourbakhsh, N., Wang, Y., Chen, F., & Calvo, R. A. (2012). Using galvanic skin response for cognitive load measurement in arithmetic and reading tasks. In Proceedings of the 24th Australian computer–human interaction conference (pp. 420–423). Melbourne, VIC: ACM.
35. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
36. Papert, S. (1990). A critique of technocentrism in thinking about the school of the future. MIT Media Laboratory: Epistemology and Learning Group.
37. Papert, S. (2000). What’s the big idea? Toward a pedagogy of idea power. IBM Systems Journal. Retrieved from http://llk.media.mit.edu/courses/readings/Papert-Big-Idea.pdf.
38. Piaget, J. (1964). Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. Journal of research in science teaching, 2(3), 176–186.
39. Picciuto, E., & Carruthers, P. (2014). The origins of creativity (p. 199). The Philosophy of Creativity: New Essays.
40. Posch, I., & Fitzpatrick, G. (2012, November). First steps in the FabLab: experiences engaging children. In Proceedings of the 24th Australian computer–human interaction conference (pp. 497–500). Melbourne, VIC: ACM.
41. Rietzschel, E. F., Nijstad, B. A., & Stroebe, W. (2010). The selection of creative ideas after individual idea generation: Choosing between creativity and impact. British Journal of Psychology, 101(1), 47–68.
42. Samuels, E. R., & Szabadi, E. (2008a). Functional neuroanatomy of the noradrenergic locus coeruleus: its roles in the regulation of arousal and autonomic function part I: principles of functional organization. Current Neuropharmacology, 6(3), 235.
43. Samuels, E. R., & Szabadi, E. (2008b). Functional neuroanatomy of the noradrenergic locus coeruleus: Its roles in the regulation of arousal and autonomic function part II: Physiological and pharmacological manipulations and pathological alterations of locus coeruleus activity in humans. Current Neuropharmacology, 6(3), 254.
44. Schneider, B., Wallace, J., Blikstein, P., & Pea, R. (2013). Preparing for future learning with a tangible user interface: the case of neuroscience. Learning Technologies, IEEE Transactions on, 6(2), 117–129.
45. Shi, Y., Ruiz, N., Taib, R., Choi, E., & Chen, F. (2007). Galvanic skin response (GSR) as an index of cognitive load. In CHI’07 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems ACM, pp. 2651–2656.
46. Sipitakiat, A., Blikstein, P., & Cavallo, D. P. (2004, June). GoGo board: augmenting programmable bricks for economically challenged audiences. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on learning sciences (pp. 481–488). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
47. Sorkin, S., ReVelle, P., Beiderman, A., & Tingling, T. (2007). Interventions to promote degree completion in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. In Proceedings of the 10th international conference on engineering education (ICEE).
48. Staal, M. A. (2004). Stress, cognition, and human performance: A literature review and conceptual framework. Nasa Technical Memorandum. http://humanfactors.arc.nasa.gov/web/library/publications/publications.php.
49. Stacey, M. (2014). The FAB LAB network: A global platform for digital invention, education and entrepreneurship. Innovations, 9(1–2), 221–238.
50. Sternberg, R. J., & Lubart, T. I. (1999). The concept of creativity: Prospects and paradigms. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of creativity (pp. 3–15). New York: Cambridge University Press.
51. Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning a second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4–28.
52. Ultanir, E. (2012). An epistemological glance at the constructivist approach: Constructivist learning in Dewey, Piaget, and Montessori. Online Submission, 5(2), 195–212.
53. VaezMousavi, S. M., Barry, R. J., Rushby, J. A., & Clarke, A. R. (2007a). Evidence for differentiation of arousal and activation in normal adults. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 67(2), 179–186.
54. VaezMousavi, S. M., Barry, R. J., Rushby, J. A., & Clarke, A. R. (2007b). Arousal and activation effects on physiological and behavioral responding during a continuous performance task. Acta Neurobiologiae Experimentalis, 67(4), 461–470.
55. Worsley, M., & Blikstein, P. (2013). Toward the development of multimodal action based assessment. In Proceedings for the 2013 learning analytics and knowledge (LAK 2013) conference, Leuven, Belgium.