Biomedical Engineering and Cognitive Science as the Basis for Secondary Science Curriculum Development: A Three Year Study

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 105, Issue 8, 2005, Pages 384-401

  Klein, Stacy S ^a   Sherwood, Robert D ^a  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85167423570     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2005.tb18059.x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993) Benchmarks for Science Literacy [Online]. Retrieved November 18, 2004, from http://www.project2061.org/tools/benchol/bolintro.htm.
2. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1985). Cognitive coping strategies and the problem of “inert” knowledge. In S. Chipman, J. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Current research and open questions. (Vol. 2, pp. 65–80). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cockings, R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
4. Bransford, J., Hasselbring, T., Barron, B., Kulewicz, S., Littlefield, J., & Goin, L. (1988). Uses of macro-contexts to facilitate mathematical thinking. In R. Charles & E. Silver (Eds.), The teaching and assessment of mathematical problem solving (pp. 125-147). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Bransford, J., & Schwartz, D. (2002). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24.(6), 61-100.
6. Bransford, J., Sherwood, D., Hasselbring, T., Kinzer, C., & Williams, S. (1990). Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia (pp. 115-141). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
7. Bransford, J., Sherwood, R., Vye, N., & Rieser, J. (1986). Teaching thinking and problem solving: Suggestions from research. American Psychologist, 41, 1078-1089.
8. Brophy, S. (2003). Constructing shareable learning materials in bioengineering education. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 22.(4), 39-46.
9. Cena, M., & Mitchell, J. (1988). Anchored instruction: A model for integrating the language arts through content area study. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 41, 559-561.
10. Chase, W., & Simon, H. (1973). The mind's eye in chess. In W. Chase (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 215-281). New York: Academic Press.
11. Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
12. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19.(6), 2-10.
13. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33.(3), 52-70.
14. Donovan, M.S., & Bransford, J.D., Eds. (2005). How students learn: History, mathematics and science in the classroom. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
15. Engineering & Technology Enrollments: Fall 1999, 2000, 2001 and 2002. (2002). Washington, DC: Engineering Workforce Commission of the American Association of Engineering Societies, Inc.
16. Gabrys, G., Weiner, A., & Lesgold, A. (1993). Learning problem solving in a coached apprenticeship system. In M. Rabinowitz (Ed.), Cognitive science foundations of instruction (pp. 199-147). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. Gick, M., & Holyoak, K. (1980). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306–365.
18. Greenberg, J., Delgutte, B., & Gray, M. (2003). Hands-on learning in biomedical signal processing. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 22.(4), 71-9.
19. Greenberg, J.E., Smith, N.T., & Newman, J.H. (2003). Instructional module in fourier spectral analysis: Based on principles of “How People Learn.” Journal of Engineering Education, 92, 155-165.
20. Larkin, J., McDermott, J., Simon, D., & Simon, H. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208, 1335-1342.
21. McLarty, K., Goodman, J., Risko, V. J., Kinzer, C. K., Vye, N., Rowe, D. W., & Carson, J. (1990). Implementing anchored instruction: Guiding principles for curriculum development. In J. Zutell & S. McCormick (Eds.), Literacy theory and research: Analysis from multiple perspectives (39th National Reading Conference Yearbook, pp. 109–120). Chicago: National Reading Conference.
22. National Center for Educational Statistics. (2000, August) Entry and persistence of women and minorities in college science and engineering education. (NCES 2000–061). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
23. National Research Council.(1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
24. National Science Board. (2004) Science and engineering indicators. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
25. Pandy, M., Petrosino, A., Austin, B., & Barr, R. (2004). Assessing adaptive expertise in undergraduate biomechanics. Journal of Engineering Education, 93, 211-222.
26. Perfetto, G., Bransford, J., & Franks, J. (1983). Constraints on access in a problem solving context, Memory and Cognition, 11, 24-31.
27. Rieth, H., Bryant, D., Kinzer, C., Colburn, L., Hur, S., Hartman, P., & Choi, H. (2003). An analysis of the impact of anchored instruction on teaching and learning activities in two ninth-grade language arts classes. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 173-185.
28. Roselli, R., & Brophy, SP. (2003). Redesigning a biomechanics course using challenge-based instruction. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 22(4), 66–70.
29. Schwartz, D., Lin, X., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J. (1999). Toward the development of flexibly adaptive instructional designs. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models (Vol. 2; pp. 183–213). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. Serafino, K., & Cicchelli, T. (2003). Cognitive theories, prior knowledge, and anchored instruction on mathematical problem solving and transfer. Education and Urban Society, 36.(1), 79-93.
31. Sherwood, R. (2002). Problem-based multimedia software for middle grades science: Development issues and an initial field study. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21.(2), 147-165.
32. Sherwood, R., Kinzer, C., Bransford, J., & Franks, J. (1987). Some benefits of creating macro-contexts for science instruction: Initial findings. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 417-435.
33. Troy, J.B., & Linsenmeier, R.A. (2003). Optimizing the delivery of content in physiology instruction. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine, 22, 80–87.
34. Whitehead, A. (1929). The aims of education. New York: Macmillan.