References

1. Atar, H.Y. (2002, March). Chemistry pupils’ challenges in using MBL’s in science laboratories. Paper presented at the Association of Educators for Teachers in Science, Charlotte, NC.
2. Baker, T.R. (2002). The effects of geographic information system (GIS) technologies on students' attitudes, self-efficacy,and achievement in middle school science classrooms. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Kansas, Lawrence.
3. Bombaugh, R., Sparrow, E., & Mal, T. (2003). Using GLOBE plant phenology protocols to meet the “National Science Education Standards.” American Biology Teacher, 65(4), 279-285.
4. Bodzin, A. (2005). Implementing web-based scientific inquiry in preservice science methods courses. ContemporaryIssues in Technology and Teacher Education. Retrieved May 12, 2006, from http://www.citejournal.org/vol5/iss1/general/article1.cfm
5. Bodzin, A.M., & Park, J.C. (2000). Dialogue patterns of preservice science teachers using asychronous computermediated communications on the WorldWide Web. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19(2), 161-194.
6. Boxie, P., & Maring, G.H. (2002). Using Web-based activities to enhance writing in science: The dynamic earth project. Teacher Educator, 38(2), 99-111.
7. Brassel, H. (1987). The effect of real-time laboratory graphing on learning graphic representations of distance and velocity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(4), 385-395.
8. Clement, J. (2000). Model-based learning as a key research area for science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1041-1053.
9. Flick, L., & Bell, R. (2000). Preparing tomorrow's science teachers to use technology: Guidelines for science educators. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 1 (1), 39-60.
10. Hagevik, R.A. (2003). The effects of online science instruction using geographic information systems to foster inquiry learning of teachers and middle school science
11. Huppert, J., Lomask, S.M., & Lazarowitz, R. (2002). Computer simulations in the high school: Students’ cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 803-821.
12. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). National educational technology standards for teachers. Eugene OR: Author
13. Linn, M.C. (2003). Technology and science education: Starting points, research programs, and trends. International Journal of Science Education, 25(6), 727-758.
14. Linn, M.C. & Hsi, S. (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners. Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Mokros, J., & Tinker, R. (1987). The impact of microcomputer-based labs on children’s ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(4) 369-383.
16. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards: A guide for teaching and learning. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
17. National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academy Press
18. Park, J.C., & Bell, R.L. (2005). Digital images in the science classroom. In G.L. Bull& L. Bell (Eds.), Teaching with digital images: Acquire, analyze, create, communicate (pp. 65-100). Eugene OR: International Society for Technology in Education.
19. Ramirez, M., & Althouse, P. (1995). Fresh thinking: GIS in environmental education. T.H.E. Journal, 23, 87-91.
20. Royuk, B., & Brooks, D.W. (2003) Cookbook procedures in MBL physics exercises. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(3), 317-324.
21. Russell, D.W., Lucas, K.B., & McRobbie, C.J. (2003). The role of the microcomputerbased laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in kinematics. Research in Science Education, 33(2), 217-243.
22. Sandvoss, L.M., Harwood, W.S., Korkmaz, Alk Bollinger, J.C., Huffman, J.C., & Huffman, J.N. (2003). Common molecules: Bringing research and teaching together through an online collection. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(3), 277-284.
23. Scardmalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1992). A knowledge building architecture for computer supported learning. In E. De Corte, M.C. Linn, H. Mandl, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.),
24. Stieff, M., & Wilensky, U. (2003). Connected chemistry —Incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(3), 285-302.
25. Tinker, R. (2000). A history of probeware. Retrieved May 12, 2006, from the Stanford University MakingSENS Website: http://makingsens.stanford.edu/pubs/AHistoryOfProbeware.pdf
26. Williams, R.L., II, Chen, M.-Y., & Seaton, J.M. (2003). Haptics-augmented simplemachine educational tools. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12(1), 1-12.
27. Yang, E., Andre, T., & Greenbowe, T.J. (2003). Spatial ability and the impact of visualization/animation on learning electrochemistry. International Journal of Science Education, 25(3), 329-349.

Cited By

• Teaching Science with Technology: A decade of research

  David Slykhuis, James Madison University, United States; Rebecca Krall, University of Kentucky, United States

  Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2011 (Mar 07, 2011) pp. 4142–4151

• Exploring Teacher Knowledge and Technology Use in Creating the Inquiry Classroom: Implications for Novice Science Teacher Professional Development

  Hye Jeong Kim, Heather Miller, Bruce Herbert, Cathy Loving & Susan Pedersen, Texas A&M University, United States

  Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2009 (Mar 02, 2009) pp. 3155–3161

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Links

• HTML version at citejournal.org