Improving research on computers in science learning

Although research in Computer Assisted Instruction (CAI) currently lacks a well-developed literature and experimental foundation, the number of papers relating to CAI at the 1985 NARST convention at French Lick Springs increased substantially over those presented at the 1984 meeting. This commentary critiques some of those papers and suggests implications for the conduct of research on computers in science learning. The spirit of inquiry and the willingness to share ideas at the 1985 NARST meeting at French Lick Springs enhanced the quality of the meeting and made possible the gathering of papers and information that are the basis for this commentary. One team of authors (Choi & Gennaro, 1985) was so generous as to provide us with software they had developed for their study. The willingness to share was impressive and can facilitate research and development.     

An ecological perspective on research with computers in science education

This paper presents an “ecological perspective” on research with computers in science education. It is proposed that current and past research within the computer education field has been characterised by an over-emphasis on technical applications of the machinery, rather than a deeper consideration of the teaching and learning process. This tendency toward “technocentric thinking” has usually failed to take into account the important social and cognitive interactions within the computer learning environment. The view advanced here, is that an understanding of the effects of computers on students' learning can be achieved only through an analysis of the dynamic interactions between students and teachers as they work with computers in a particular environment. A theoretical framework for understanding this range of interactions is presented. Finally, an ecological model is proposed for conducting future research on the application of computers in science education. Specializations: information technology in education, science education, technology education, environmental education, and media education     

A validation framework for science learning progression research

This article provides a validation framework for research on the development and use of science Learning Progressions (LPs). The framework describes how evidence from various sources can be used to establish an interpretive argument and a validity argument at five stages of LP research—development, scoring, generalisation, extrapolation, and use. The interpretation argument contains the interpretation (i.e. the LP and conclusions about students’ proficiency generated based on the LP) and the use of the LP. The validity argument specifies how the evidence from various sources supports the interpretation and the use of the LP. Examples from our prior and current research are used to illustrate the validation activities and analyses that can be conducted at each of the five stages. When conducting an LP study, researchers may use one or more validation activities or analyses that are theoretically necessary and practically applicable in their specific research contexts.     

Pupil engagement in learning tasks: A fertile area for research in science teaching

This synthesis of research in academic engagement addresses studies in several academic areas. A general relationship of teacher performance and student engagement in learning tasks is noted. More importantly, a substantial relationship between degree of engagement and achievement has been reported in numerous studies. The paucity of engagement studies in science is surprising given the variation in engagement rates in science classrooms. Numerous research questions are suggested for science education researchers. A particularly fertile area for investigation is the categorization of engagement.     

School Innovation in Science: Improving science teaching and learning in Australian schools

School Innovation in Science is a major Victorian Government initiative that developed and validated a model whereby schools can improve their science teaching and learning. The initiative was developed and rolled out to more than 400 schools over the period 2000–2004. A research team worked with 200+ primary and secondary schools over three years, supporting them in developing new initiatives in science, and monitoring the impact on school and classroom practice, and student outcomes. The research effort underpinning the development phase included the development and validation of a set of components describing effective teaching, the refinement of a school and teacher change strategy, the development of instruments to monitor teacher classroom practice and a variety of student outcomes, and the development of insights into the change process using questionnaires, observations, and interviews across four years. This paper describes the project and its major outcomes, and raises a number of issues concerning the nature of school and teacher change, pedagogy, school and community, and student learning, and the way these interact. A number of research issues are raised by the size and developmental nature of the project, the range of research methods, and the different audiences served by the research. The issue of sustainability of such system‐wide change initiatives is discussed.     

Methods matter: Improving causal inference in educational and social science research: A review article

Professors Richard J. Murnane and John B. Willett set out to capitalize on recent developments in education data and methodology by attempting to answer the following questions: How can new methods and data be applied most effectively in educational and social science research? What kinds of research designs are most appropriate? What kinds of data are needed? What statistical methods are best used to process these data, and how can results be interpreted so that policymakers are best informed? In this review we summarize main contributions of the book, assess the unique value-added of the text, and discuss the usability of it to various potential audiences.     

Science of learning is learning of science: why we need a dialectical approach to science education research

Research on learning science in informal settings and the formal (sometimes experimental) study of learning in classrooms or psychological laboratories tend to be separate domains, even drawing on different theories and methods. These differences make it difficult to compare knowing and learning observed in one paradigm/context with those observed in the other. Even more interestingly, the scientists studying science learning rarely consider their own learning in relation to the phenomena they study. A dialectical, reflexive approach to learning, however, would theorize the movement of an educational science (its learning and development) as a special and general case—subject matter and method—of the phenomenon of learning (in/of) science. In the dialectical approach to the study of science learning, therefore, subject matter, method, and theory fall together. This allows for a perspective in which not only disparate fields of study—school science learning and learning in everyday life—are integrated but also where the progress in the science of science learning coincides with its topic. Following the articulation of a contradictory situation on comparing learning in different settings, I describe the dialectical approach. As a way of providing a concrete example, I then trace the historical movement of my own research group as it simultaneously and alternately studied science learning in formal and informal settings. I conclude by recommending cultural-historical, dialectical approaches to learning and interaction analysis as a context for fruitful interdisciplinary research on science learning within and across different settings.     

International research on computers in education

Since 1987, International Co-ordinator of the IEA Computers in Education Study; was national project coordinator for the IEA Second International Mathematics Study and Second International Science Study (1980–85). Co-author of several published studies on the Second International Science Study as well as The Implemented and Attained Mathematics Curriculum: A Comparison of Eighteen Countriesand The Use of Computers in Education Worldwide.