You are here:

Scientific Inquiry and Web-based Learning Environments: Emerging Perspectives
PROCEEDINGS

, , Learning and Performance Support Laboratory, University of Georgia, United States

EdMedia + Innovate Learning, in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-48-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

This paper critically advances web-enhanced scientific inquiry as a pivotal perspective in classroom learning. In contrast with traditional inquiry approaches that emphasize ritualized, procedural approaches to science, scientific inquiry provides a framework to implement constructivist learning environments that promote and support the unique sense-making of individual students. Essential features for fostering scientific inquiry are explored in the context of open-ended learning environments focusing on theoretical framework, the nature of learning, and students' roles. In addition, examples of web-based learning environments that promote scientific inquiry are contrasted with a case using a traditional inquiry approach.

Citation

Kim, M. & Hannafin, M. (2003). Scientific Inquiry and Web-based Learning Environments: Emerging Perspectives. In D. Lassner & C. McNaught (Eds.), Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2003--World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (pp. 1447-1453). Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 6, 2024 from .

© 2003 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Bloome, D. & Green, J. (1982). The social contexts of reading: A multidisciplinary perspective. In B. A. Hudson (Ed.), Advances in reading/language research (pp. 309-338). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
  2. Blumenfeld, P. C., Soloway, E., Marx, R., Krajcik, J. S., Guzdial, M., & Palinscar, A. (1991). Motivating project-based learning: Sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational Psychologist , 26(3&4), 369-398.
  3. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32-42.
  4. Bruning, R.H., Schraw, G.J., & Ronning, R.R. (1995). Cognitive psychology and instruction. (2nd ed.) Englewood
  5. Chinn, C. A. & Hmelo -Silver, C. E. (2002). Authentic inquiry: Introduction to the special section. Science Education , 86 (2), 171-177.
  6. Collins, A. (1988). Different goals of inquiry teaching. Questioning Exchange , 2 , 45.
  7. Crawford, B. A. (2000). Embracing the essense of inquiry: New r oles for science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 916-937.
  8. Edelson, D. C., Pea, R. D., & Gomez, L. (1996). Constructivism in the collaboratory. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments (pp. 151-164). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
  9. Gilhooly, K. J. (1996). Thinking: Directed, undirected and creative. (3rd ed.) New York: Harcourt Brace & Company, Publishers.
  10. Hannafin, M. J. (1995). Open-ended learning environments: Foundations, assumptions, and implications for automated design. In R. Tennyson (Ed.), Perspectives on automating instructional design (pp. 101-129). New York: Springer-Verlag.
  11. Hannafin, M. J., Land, S. M., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models (pp. 115-140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  12. Hill, J. R. & Hannafin, M. J. (2001). Teaching and learning in digital environments: the resurgence of resource-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(3), 37-52.
  13. Krajcik, J., Soloway, E., Blumenfeld, P., & Marx, R. (1998). Scaffolded technology tools to promote teaching and learning in science. Yearbook of Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 31-45.
  14. Land, S. M. & Hannafin, M. J. (1996). A conceptual framework for the development of theories -in -action with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(3), 37-53.
  15. Linn, M.C. & Slotta, J.D. (2000). WISE science: Webbased integrated science environment project. Educational Leadership, 58(2), 29-32.
  16. National Research Council (1996). National science educations tandards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  17. Oliver, K. M. (1999). Student use of computer tools designed to scaffold scientific problem solving with hypermedia resources: A case study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens.
  18. Otero, J. & Graesser, A. C. (2001). PREG: Elements of a model of question asking. Cognition and Instruction , 19(2), 143-175.
  19. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
  20. Piaget, J. (1952). Autobiography. In E.Boring (Ed.), History of psychology in autobiography. Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
  21. Piaget, J. (1970). The science of education and the psychology of the child. New York: Orion Press.
  22. Pressley, M. & Levin, J.R. (1983). Cognitives tra tegy training: Educational applications. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  23. Pushkin, D. (2002). Atheoretical nature of the National Science Education Standards: There's more theory than we think - A response to Thomas Shiland. Science Education , 86(2), 161-166.
  24. Thomas, S. G. (2002, October 7). Creative input. Time, 160.
  25. Sharma, P. (2001). The evolution of critical thinking and use of scaffolding in a technology-mediated learning environment: An exploratory study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens.
  26. Spitulnik, M. W. & Krajcik, J. (1998). Technological tools to support inquiry in a science methods course. The Journal of Educational Research, 17(1), 63-74.
  27. Texly, J. & Wild, A. (1996). Pathways to the science standards , high school edition . Arlington, VA: NSTA.
  28. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  29. White, B. Y. & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction , 16(1), 3-118.
  30. White, R. & Gunstone, R. (1989). Metalearning and conceptual change. International Journal of Science Education, 11 , 586.
  31. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89-100.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts