Top

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Published in:

01-10-2013

How Dynamic Visualization Technology can Support Molecular Reasoning

Author: Dalit Levy

Published in: Journal of Science Education and Technology | Issue 5/2013

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

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

This paper reports the results of a study aimed at exploring the advantages of dynamic visualization for the development of better understanding of molecular processes. We designed a technology-enhanced curriculum module in which high school chemistry students conduct virtual experiments with dynamic molecular visualizations of solid, liquid, and gas. They interact with the visualizations and carry out inquiry activities to make and refine connections between observable phenomena and atomic level processes related to phase change. The explanations proposed by 300 pairs of students in response to pre/post-assessment items have been analyzed using a scale for measuring the level of molecular reasoning. Results indicate that from pretest to posttest, students make progress in their level of molecular reasoning and are better able to connect intermolecular forces and phase change in their explanations. The paper presents the results through the lens of improvement patterns and the metaphor of the “ladder of molecular reasoning,” and discusses how this adds to our understanding of the benefits of interacting with dynamic molecular visualizations.

previous article Early Identification of Student Performance and Effort Using an Online Homework System: A Pilot Study

next article Assessment for Effective Intervention: Enrichment Science Academic Program

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

Available only for authorised users

Constructing Physics Understanding in a Computer-Supported Learning Environment. http://cpuproject.sdsu.edu.

By the Concord Consortium. See http://mw.concord.org.

http://wise.berkeley.edu.

TELS—Technology-Enhanced Learning in Science, an NSF supported center headed by Prof. Marcia Linn (UC Berkeley) and Dr. Robert Tinker (The Concord Consortium). See http://www.telscenter.org/.

The citation and the image in Fig. 5 can be found at the "About" section of Molecular Workbench (MW) Web site http://mw.concord.org/modeler/moremw.html.

The responses to Item 8 in Fig. 3 as well as to the MC-only items (without the students explaining why the choice was made) were not helpful in expressing levels of molecular reasoning, and therefore, were excluded from the current analysis.

Retrieved September 15, 2012 from http://www.zewail.caltech.edu/nobel/Zewail_Feature.pdf.

The typos appear in the original response.

As the coding scheme does not classify responses as being “right” or “wrong,” correct answers like the one written by pair #226 could still be scored 0 because of not referring to molecules at all.

All the typos are authentic.

Ainsworth S (2008) The educational value of multiple-representations when learning complex scientific concepts. In: Gilbert JK, Reiner M, Nakhleh M (eds) Visualization: theory and practice in science education. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 191–208CrossRef

Ainsworth S, Van Labeke N (2004) Multiple forms of dynamic representation. Learn Instruction 14:241–255CrossRef

Bailey E, Worth B (2004). Making thinking visible: enhancing media literacy instruction. Unpublished design study report, Stanford University School of Education (Prof. Daniel Schwartz)

Berenfeld B, Tinker R (2001) Revolutionizing science teaching with atomic scale models. Paper presented at the national education computer conference (NECC). Chicago, IL

Bogdan RC, Biklen SK (1998) Qualitative research for education: an introduction to theory and methods, 3rd edn. Allyn & Bacon, Mass

Buckley B, Gobert J, Kindfield ACH, Horwitz P, Tinker R, Gerlits B (2004) Model-based teaching and learning with BioLogica: what do they learn? How do they learn? How do we know? J Sci Educ Technol 13(1):23–41CrossRef

Clark DB, Sampson V (2008) Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. J Res Sci Teach 45(3):293–321CrossRef

Clark DB, Varma K, McElhaney K, Chiu J (2008) Design rationale within TELS projects to support knowledge integration. In: Robinson D, Schraw G (eds) Recent innovations in educational technology that facilitate student learning. Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC, pp 157–193

Crouch C, Fagen AP, Callan JP, Mazur E (2004) Classroom demonstrations: learning tools or entertainment? Am J Phys 72(6):835–857CrossRef

Dean S, Illowsky B (2012) Descriptive statistics: box plot. Retrieved September 15, 2012 from the Connexions Web site: http://cnx.org/content/m16296/1.12/

Dori YJ, Hameiri M (2003) Multidimensional analysis system for quantitative chemistry problems—symbol, macro, micro and process aspects. J Res Sci Teach 40(3):278–302CrossRef

Feurzeig W, Roberts N (1999) Modeling and simulation in science and mathematics education. Springer, New YorkCrossRef

Finkelstein ND, Adams WK, Keller CJ, Kohl PB, Perkins KK, Podolefsky NS (2005) When learning about the real world is better done virtually: a study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Phys Rev Special Topics Phys Educat Res 1(1):10103–10110CrossRef

Fredette M (2012) Curriculum update: biology evolved. Transform Educat Through Technol 39(6):16–19

Gerjets P, Imhof B, Kühl T, Pfeiffer V, Scheiter K, Gemballa S (2010) Using static and dynamic visualizations to support the comprehension of complex dynamic phenomena in the natural sciences. In: Verschaffel L, de Corte E, de Jong T, Elen J (eds) Use of external representations in reasoning and problem solving: analysis and improvement. Routledge, London, pp 153–168

Goldberg F (2001) Some roles of computer technology in helping students learn physics: computer simulations. Paper presented at international conference on computer and information technology in physics education, Manila, Philippines. Retrieved September 30, 2012 from http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/CRMSE/old_site/FG/pub1.pdf

Guzdial M (2011) Eric Mazur’s Keynote at ICER 2011: observing demos hurts learning, and confusion is a sign of understanding. Computing Education Blog, Aug 17, 2011. Retrieved September 26, 2011 from http://computinged.wordpress.com/2011/08/17/eric-mazurs-keynote-at-icer-2011-observing-demos-hurts-learning-and-confusion-is-a-sign-of-understanding/

Hegarty M (2004) Dynamic visualizations and learning: getting to the difficult questions. Learn Instr 14:343–351CrossRef

Kali Y, Linn MC (2008) Designing effective visualization for elementary school science. Elementary School J 109(2):181–198CrossRef

Kapitanoff SH (2009) Collaborative testing: cognitive and interpersonal processes related to enhanced test performance. Active Learn Higher Educat 10:56–70CrossRef

Kozma R (2003) Material and social affordances of multiple representations for science understanding. Learn Instr 13(2):205–226CrossRef

Lee H-S, Linn MC, Varma K, Liu OL (2010) How do technology-enhanced inquiry science units impact classroom learning? J Res Sci Teach 47(1):71–90CrossRef

Levy D (2002) Collaborative conceptual change: the case of recursion. J Intell Syst 12(2):113–135

Levy D (2009) Dynamic assessment tools for dynamic constructs: The case of molecular reasoning. Paper presented at the National Association of Research in Science and Technology (NARST) 2009, Garden Grove, CA

Levy D, Tinker R (2008) Links between dynamic representations of atomic-scale phenomena and molecular reasoning. In: Eshet-Alkalai Y, Caspi A, Geri N (eds) Proceedings of the Chais conference on instructional technologies research 2008: Learning in the technological era. The Open University of Israel, Raanana, Israel, pp 66–70

Linn MC, Chiu JL (2011) Combining learning and assessment to improve science education. Res Pract Assess 5:5–14

Linn MC, Eylon B-S (2006) Science education: integrating views of learning and instruction. In: Alexander PA, Winne PH (eds) Handbook of educational psychology, 2nd edn. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 511–544

Linn MC, Eylon B-S (2011) Science learning and instruction: taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration. Routledge, New York, NY

Linn MC, Clark D, Slotta JD (2003) WISE design for knowledge integration. Sci Educat 87:517–538CrossRef

Linn MC, Davis EA, Bell P (2004) Inquiry and technology. In: Linn MC, Davis EA, Bell P (eds) Internet environments for science education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 3–28

Liu JL, Linn MC (2011) Knowledge integration and Wise engineering. J Pre Coll Eng Educat Res 1(1):1–14

Lowe R (2004) Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning. Learn Instr 14(3):257–274CrossRef

Mazur E (2011) The scientific approach to teaching: research as a basis for course design. Keynote presentation at the international computing education research workshop (ICER 2011), Providence, RI. Retrieved September 26, 2011 from http://mazur.harvard.edu/sentFiles/MazurTalk_1712.pdf

Meir E, Perry J, Stal D, Maruka S, Klopfer E (2005) How effective are simulated molecular-level experiments for teaching diffusion and osmosis? Cell Biol Educat 4:235–248CrossRef

Michalchik V, Rosenquist A, Kozma R, Kreikemeier P, Schank P, Coppola B (2008) Representational resources for constructing shared understandings in the high school chemistry classroom. In: Gilbert J, Reiner M, Nakhleh M (eds) Visualization: theory and practice in science education. Springer, New York

Narayanan NH, Hegarty M (2002) Multimedia design for communication of dynamic information. Int J Hum Comput Stud 57(4):279–315CrossRef

Pallant A, Tinker R (2004) Reasoning with atomic-scale molecular dynamic models. J Sci Educ Technol 13(1):51–66CrossRef

Panoff R (2009) Simulations deepen scientific learning. ASCD Express 4(19). Retrieved Aug 25, 2012 from http://www.ascd.org/ascd_express/vol4/419_panoff.aspx

Prince M (2004) Does active learning work? A review of the research. J Eng Educ 93(3):223–231CrossRef

Rowell PM (2002) Peer interactions in shared technological activity: a study of participation. Int J Technol Des Educ 12:1–22CrossRef

Rundgren C-JA, Tibell L (2010) Critical features of visualizations of transport through the cell membrane: an empirical study of upper secondary and tertiary students’ meaning-making of a still image and an animation. Int J Sci Math Educat 8(2):223–246CrossRef

Russell J, Kozma R, Zohdy M, Susskind T, Becker D, Russell C (2000) SMV: Chem (Simultaneous Multiple Representations in Chemistry) [software]. John Wiley, New York

Sampson V, Clark D (2011) A comparison of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices in two high and two low performing groups. Res Sci Educat 41(1):63–97CrossRef

Schmidt H-J, Kaufman B, Treagust DF (2009) Students’ understanding of boiling points and intermolecular forces. Chem Educat Res Pract 4(10):265–272CrossRef

Scott P (1998) Teacher talk and meaning making in science classrooms: a Vygotskian analysis and review. Stud Sci Educat 32(1):45–80CrossRef

Sengupta P, Wilensky U (2009) Learning electricity with NIELS: thinking with electrons and thinking in levels. Int J Comput Math Learn 14(1):21–50CrossRef

Shipley E, Moher T (2008) Instructional framing for nanoscale self-assembly design in middle school: a pilot study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, March 24–28, 2008

Slotta JD, Linn MC (2009) WISE science: web-based inquiry in the classroom. Teachers College Press, New York

Slusser R, Erickson RJ (2006) Group quizzes: an extension of the collaborative learning process. Teach Sociol 34(3):249–262CrossRef

Smith CL, Wiser M, Anderson CW, Krajcik J, Coppola B (2004) Implications of research on children’s learning for assessment: matter and atomic molecular theory. Paper commissioned by the committee on test design for K-12 science achievement, Center for Education, National Research Council

Smith CL, Wiser M, Anderson CW, Krajcik J (2006) Implications of research on children’s learning for standards and assessment: a proposed learning progression for matter and the atomic-molecular theory. Meas Interdiscip Res Perspect 4(1&2):1–98CrossRef

Springer L, Stanne M, Donovan S (1999) Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering and technology: a meta-analysis. Rev Educat Res 69(1):21–52CrossRef

Staudt C (2008) Alternative assessments with snapshots. Spring 2008 @Concord Newsletter. Available online at http://www.concord.org/publications/newsletter/2008-spring/

Stieff M (2005) Connected chemistry—a novel modeling environment for the chemistry classroom. J Chem Educ 82(3):489–493CrossRef

Strauss AL, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research. Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage, Newbury Park, CA

Sutton C (1996) The scientific model as a form of speech. In: Welford G, Osborne J, Scott P (eds) Research in science education in Europe. Falmer Press, London, pp 143–152

Tinker R, Xie Q (2008) Applying computational science to education: the molecular workbench paradigm. Comput Sci Eng 10(5):24–27CrossRef

Tinker R, Berenfeld B, Tinker B (1999) HOMS: hands on molecular science: annual report to the national science foundation (REC-9980620)

Tinker R, Berenfeld B, Tinker B (2000) Molecular workbench: annual report to the national science foundation (REC-9813485)

Vosniadou S (2010) Instructional considerations in the use of external representations: the distinction between perceptually based depictions and pictures that represent conceptual models. In: Verschaffel L, de Corte E, de Jong T, Elen J (eds) Use of representations in reasoning and problem solving: analysis and improvement. Routledge, London, pp 36–54

Wieman CE, Adams WK, Perkins KK (2008) PhET: simulations that enhance learning. Science 322(5902):682–683CrossRef

Wilensky U, Hazzard E, Froemke R (1999) GasLab—an extensible modeling toolkit for exploring statistical mechanics. Paper presented at the seventh annual European Logo conference EUROLOGO 99. Sofia, Bulgaria

Wouters P, Paas F, Van Merriënboer JJG (2008) How to optimize learning from animated models: a review of guidelines based on cognitive load. Rev Educat Res 78:645–675CrossRef

Xie Q, Lee H-S (2012) A visual approach to nanotechnology education. Int J Eng Educat 28(5):1006–1018

Xie Q, Pallant A (2011) The molecular workbench software: an innovative dynamic modeling tool for nanoscience education. In Khine MS, Saleh IM (eds) Models and modeling: cognitive tools for scientific enquiry. Springer, New York, 121–132

Xie Q, Tinker RF (2006) Molecular dynamics simulations of chemical reactions for use in education. J Chem Educ 83:77–83CrossRef

Title: How Dynamic Visualization Technology can Support Molecular Reasoning
Author: Dalit Levy
Publication date: 01-10-2013
Publisher: Springer Netherlands
Published in: Journal of Science Education and Technology / Issue 5/2013
Print ISSN: 1059-0145
Electronic ISSN: 1573-1839
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-012-9424-6

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

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

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 5/2013

The Effect of Clickers in University Science Courses

Evaluating the Usability of a Professional Modeling Tool Repurposed for Middle School Learning

The Use of Online Modules and the Effect on Student Outcomes in a High School Chemistry Class

Student Reciprocal Peer Teaching as a Method for Active Learning: An Experience in an Electrotechnical Laboratory

Assessment for Effective Intervention: Enrichment Science Academic Program

A One-year Case Study: Understanding the Rich Potential of Project-based Learning in a Virtual Reality Class for High School Students

Premium Partners