Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Events
Topic Page
Marketing
Log in
Learn more about individual access
Request company access
Electric Powertrains and Energy Systems 2025 | 26 + 27 March 2025

19th International MTZ Congress on Future Powertrains

Take this opportunity to attend the conference. Experts from the automotive industry, energy providers, and grid operators will meet up with representatives from politics and science to discuss important topics for this sector.
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Technology, Knowledge and Learning
Published in:

26-04-2021 | Original research

Details Matter: How Contrasting Design Features in Two MUVEs Impact Learning Outcomes

Authors: Emily A. Gonzalez, Tina A. Grotzer, Eileen McGivney, Joseph Reilly

Published in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning | Issue 3/2022

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Multi-User Virtual Environments (MUVEs) provide a rich and immersive context for introducing inquiry-based and Problem-Based Learning (PBL) into science classrooms. MUVES can have a significant effect on learning outcomes, however, illuminating how particular design features interact with those outcomes is an important area of investigation for the field. There has been a trend in the development of instructional technology towards designing MUVEs with a top-down, central narrative and positioning the student as an active protagonist in the storyline. A case study contrasted two MUVEs focused on the same science content, a eutrophication scenario, but with different overarching structures and types of guidance. Quest Atlantis: Mystery of Taiga River adopts a narrative approach in which students enter into the storyline about a declining fish population in a local national park and develop an explanation for who is responsible. EcoXPT adopts an epistemological approach that seeks to leverage the affordances of MUVEs to engage students in the investigative approaches that ecosystems scientists use; it invites students to explore an ecosystem in which they discover an environmental puzzle and then, using epistemologically authentic approaches, try to figure out what is going on and why. The case study found that these contrasting structural features interacted with student modes of engagement and their learning outcomes, with the Taiga classes grasping complex human impacts on the environment and EcoXPT classes understanding the epistemologies involved in understanding complex processes within ecosystems.
previous article Information Communication Technology in schools: Students Exercise ‘Digital Agency’ to Engage with Learning
next article The Patterns of School Improvement in Digitally Innovative Schools

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
Literature
Barab, S. A., Sadler, T. D., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007). Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play. Journal of science education and technology, 16(1), 59–82CrossRef
Berland, L. K., Schwarz, C. V., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A. S., & Reiser, B. J. (2015). Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082–1112CrossRef
Carini P. F. (1982). Interpretation, Ambiguity and The Art of Observation. Unpublished manuscript. An Address to the Philosophical Division of the American Psychological Association.
Carini, P. F. (1979). The Art of Seeing and the Visibility of the Person. University of North Dakota Press.
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Chen, J., Wang, M., Grotzer, T. A., & Dede, C. (2018). Using a three-dimensional thinking graph to support inquiry learning. Journal for Research in Science Teaching, 55(9), 1239–1263.CrossRef
Clark, R. E. (2009). How much and what type of guidance is optimal for learning from instruction. (pp. 158–183). Success or failure.
Clarke-Midura, J., & Dede, C. J. (2009). Design for scalability: A case study of the River City Curriculum. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(4), 353–365CrossRef
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. (4th ed.). Sage.
Cuzzolino, M. P., Grotzer, T. A., Tutwiler, M. S., & Torres, E. W. (2019). An agentive focus may limit learning about complex causality and systems dynamics: A study of seventh graders’ explanations of ecosystems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(8), 1083–1105CrossRef
Dede, C., Ketelhut, D., & Ruess, K. (2004). Designing for motivation and usability in a museum-based multi-user virtual environment. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference.
Dodick, J., & Orion, N. (2003). Cognitive factors affecting student understanding of geologic time. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(4), 415–442CrossRef
Fokides, E., & Chachlaki, F. (2020). 3D multiuser virtual environments and environmental education: The virtual island of the mediterranean monk seal. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25(1), 1–24CrossRef
Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415CrossRef
Goldstone, R. L., & Sakamoto, Y. (2003). The transfer of abstract principles governing complex adaptive systems. Cognitive psychology, 46(4), 414–466CrossRef
Grotzer, T. A., & Basca, B. B. (2003). How does grasping the underlying causal structures of ecosystems impact students’ understanding? Journal of Biological Education, 38(1), 16–29.CrossRef
Grotzer, T. A., Kamarainen, A., Tutwiler, M. S., Metcalf, S., & Dede, C. (2013). Learning to reason about ecosystems dynamics over time: The challenges of an event-based causal focus. BioScience, 63(4), 288–296.CrossRef
Grotzer, T. A., Tutwiler, M. S. Kamarainen, A. M., Derbiszewska K. M., Metcalf, S. J., & Dede, C. J. (2016) Students’ Reasoning Tendencies about the Causal Dynamics of Ecosystems and the Impacts of MUVE vs. Non-MUVE Instructional Contexts, The Next Phase of Research in Complex Systems in Science Education, American Educational Research Association (AERA) Conference, Washington D.C.
Grotzer, T. A., Metcalf, S. J., Tutwiler, M. S., Kamarainen, A. M., Thompson, M. & Dede, C. (2017). Teaching the Systems Aspects of Epistemologically Authentic Experimentation in Ecosystems through Immersive Virtual Worlds, National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), San Antonio, TX.
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112CrossRef
Herman, P., & Gomez, L. M. (2009). Taking guided learning theory to school: Reconciling the cognitive, motivational, and social contexts of instruction. Constructivist Instruction (pp. 74–93). Routledge.
Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark. Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107CrossRef
Hofstein, A., & Lunetta, V. N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: Foundations for the twenty-first century. Science Education, 88(1), 28–54CrossRef
Hogan, K., & Fishkeller, J. (1996). Representing students’ thinking about nutrient cycling in ecosystems: Bi-dimensional coding of a complex topic. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33, 941–970CrossRef
Horwitz, P., Lord, T., & Reichsman, F. (2020). Students learn genetics with Geniventure. @Concord 24(2).
Kafai, Y. B. (2010). World of Whyville: An introduction to tween virtual life. Games and Culture, 5(1), 3–22CrossRef
Kamarainen, A. M., & Grotzer, T. A. (2019). Constructing causal understanding in complex systems: Epistemic strategies used by ecosystem scientists. BioScience, 69(7), 533–543.
Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B., Bergey, B., & Ryu, M. (2014). Design and gender in immersive learning environments. In C. Busch (Ed.), Proceedings of the European Conference on Games-based Learning (pp. 265–271). Dechema.
Lamb, A., & Johnson, L. (2010). Virtual expeditions: Google earth, GIS, and geovisualization technologies in teaching and learning. Teacher Librarian (Vancouver), 37(3), 81
Manz, E. (2018). Designing for and analyzing productive uncertainty in science investigations. International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS).
Metcalf, S., Kamarainen, A., Torres, E., Grotzer, T., & Dede, C. (2018). EcoMUVE: A case study on the affordances of MUVEs in ecosystem science education, In Y. Qian (Ed.) Integrating Multi-User Virtual Environments in Modern Classrooms (pp.1–25). Hershey, PA, IGI Global. https://​doi.​org/​10.​4018/​978-1-5225-3719-9.
National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States. The National Academies Press.
Quintana, C., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J., Fretz, E., Duncan, R., Kyza, E., Edelson, D., & Soloway, E. (2004). A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 337–386CrossRef
Reilly, C. M., Yang, S. Y., Grotzer, T. A., Joyal, J. A., & Oriol, N. E. (2019). Pedagogical moves and student thinking in technology-mediated medical problem-based learning: Supporting novice-expert shift. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5).
Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304CrossRef
Reiser, B. J., & Tabak, I. (2014). Scaffolding. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences. (2nd ed., pp. 44–62). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Sawyer, R. K. (2011). What makes good teachers great? The artful balance of structure and improvisation. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Structure and Improvisation in Creative Teaching. (pp. 1–24). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Schaller, D. T., Goldman, K.H., Spickelmier, G., Allison- Bunnell, S., & Koepfler, J. (2009). Learning in the wild: What Wolfquest taught developers and game players. Museums and the Web. http://​www.​archimuse.​com/​ mw2009/papers/schaller/schaller.html
Shaffer, D. W., & Resnick, M. (1999). “ Thick” authenticity: New media and authentic learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 10(2), 195–216
Tawfik, A. A., Gill, A., Hogan, M., York, C. S., & Keene, C. W. (2019). How novices use expert case libraries for problem solving. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24(1), 23–40CrossRef
Tutwiler, M.S., (2014). Trends in the salience of data collected in a Multi-User Virtual Environment: An exploratory study. Doctoral Dissertation, Harvard University.
Wise, A. F., & O’Neill, K. (2009). Beyond more versus less: A reframing of the debate on instructional guidance. Constructivist Instruction (pp. 94–117). Routledge.
Metadata
Title
Details Matter: How Contrasting Design Features in Two MUVEs Impact Learning Outcomes
Authors
Emily A. Gonzalez
Tina A. Grotzer
Eileen McGivney
Joseph Reilly
Publication date
26-04-2021
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Technology, Knowledge and Learning / Issue 3/2022
Print ISSN: 2211-1662
Electronic ISSN: 2211-1670
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-021-09513-6

Other articles of this Issue 3/2022

Examining the Primacy and Recency Effect on Learning Effectiveness with the Application of Interactive Response Systems (Irs)

  • Original research

Investigation of The Web-based Self-Assessment System Based on Assessment Analytics in Terms of Perceived Self-intervention

  • Original research

Information Communication Technology in schools: Students Exercise ‘Digital Agency’ to Engage with Learning

Do Teachers Find Dashboards Trustworthy, Actionable and Useful? A Vignette Study Using a Logs and Audio Dashboard

  • Open Access
  • Original research

Correction to: Do Teachers Find Dashboards Trustworthy, Actionable and Useful? A Vignette Study Using a Logs and Audio Dashboard

  • Correction

The Patterns of School Improvement in Digitally Innovative Schools

  • Open Access
  • Original research

Premium Partners

    Image Credits