A Meta-analysis Method to Advance Design of Technology-Based Learning Tool: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Research to Understand Learning in Relation to Different Technology Features

Educators design and create various technology tools to scaffold students’ learning. As more and more technology designs are incorporated into learning, growing attention has been paid to the study of technology-based learning tool. This paper discusses the emerging issues, such as how can learning effectiveness be understood in relation to different technology features? And how can pieces of qualitative and quantitative results be integrated to achieve a broader understanding of technology designs? To address these issues, this paper proposes a meta-analysis method. Detailed explanations about the structure of the methodology and its scientific mechanism are provided for discussions and suggestions. This paper ends with an in-depth discussion on the concerns and questions that educational researchers might raise, such as how this methodology takes care of learning contexts.

[1]  Cynthia Sims Parr,et al.  Evaluation of a Handheld Data Collection Interface for Science Learning , 2004 .

[2]  Hee-Sun Lee,et al.  Technology-Rich Inquiry Science in Urban Classrooms: What are the Barriers to Inquiry Pedagogy? , 2002 .

[3]  Sasha A. Barab,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences: Design-Based Research , 2014 .

[4]  Pamela R. Aschbacher,et al.  Fifth Graders' Science Inquiry Abilities: A Comparative Study of Students in Hands-On and Textbook Curricula. , 2006 .

[5]  Kevin Oliver,et al.  An Investigation of Concept Mapping to Improve the Reading Comprehension of Science Texts , 2009 .

[6]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  Using visualizations to teach electrostatics , 2006 .

[7]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  WISE Inquiry in Fifth Grade Biology , 2002 .

[8]  F. Abd‐El‐Khalick,et al.  The impact of technology on the enactment of “inquiry” in a technology enthusiast's sixth grade science classroom , 2007 .

[9]  David Birchfield,et al.  Teaching and Learning in the Mixed-Reality Science Classroom , 2009 .

[10]  Sasha A. Barab,et al.  Design-Based Research: A Methodological Toolkit for the Learning Scientist. , 2006 .

[11]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  WISE Science: Web-Based Inquiry in the Classroom , 2009 .

[12]  Hee-Sun Lee,et al.  Research towards an expanded understanding of inquiry science beyond one idealized standard , 2003 .

[13]  K. Squire,et al.  Design-Based Research: Putting a Stake in the Ground , 2004 .

[14]  R. Sawyer.  The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences: Introduction , 2014 .

[15]  J. Huppert,et al.  Computer simulations in the high school: Students' cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in microbiology , 2002 .

[16]  Roy D. Pea,et al.  Addressing the Challenges of Inquiry-Based Learning Through Technology and Curriculum Design , 1999 .

[17]  Abbie Brown,et al.  Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in c , 1992 .

[18]  Hans C. Jessen,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression Analysis , 1996 .

[19]  Lynn A. Bryan,et al.  Technology-Enhanced Inquiry Tools in Science Education: An Emerging Pedagogical Framework for Classroom Practice. , 2007 .

[20]  M. Baker,et al.  Computer-Mediated Epistemic Dialogue: Explanation and Argumentation as Vehicles for Understanding Scientific Notions , 2002 .

[21]  Paul D. Allison,et al.  Convergence Failures in Logistic Regression , 2008 .

[22]  W. Sandoval,et al.  Explanation-Driven Inquiry: Integrating Conceptual and Epistemic Scaffolds for Scientific Inquiry , 2004 .

[23]  Osman Nafiz Kaya,et al.  Engaging students in environmental research projects: Perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities , 2011 .

[24]  N. Songer,et al.  Student Motivation and Internet Technology: Are Students Empowered to Learn Science? , 2000 .

[25]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Initial Structuring of Online Discussions to Improve Learning and Argumentation: Incorporating Students’ Own Explanations as Seed Comments Versus an Augmented-Preset Approach to Seeding Discussions , 2009 .

[26]  Y. Lincoln,et al.  Scientific Research in Education , 2004 .

[27]  Jazlin Ebenezer,et al.  A Hypermedia Environment to Explore and Negotiate Students' Conceptions: Animation of the Solution Process of Table Salt , 2001 .

[28]  R. Slavin.  Evidence-Based Education Policies: Transforming Educational Practice and Research , 2002 .

[29]  D. C. Phillips,et al.  On the Science of Education Design Studies , 2003 .

[30]  David M. Moss,et al.  A Window on Science: Exploring the JASON Project and Student Conceptions of Science , 2003 .

[31]  David W. Hosmer,et al.  Applied Logistic Regression , 1991 .

[32]  Eui-kyung Shin.  Using Geographic Information System (GIS) to Improve Fourth Graders' Geographic Content Knowledge and Map Skills , 2006 .

[33]  D. Kevin O'Neill.  Knowing When You've Brought Them in: Scientific Genre Knowledge and Communities of Practice , 2001 .

[34]  Allan Collins,et al.  Design Research: Theoretical and Methodological Issues , 2004 .

[35]  Allan Collins,et al.  Toward a Design Science of Education , 1992 .

[36]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  The Role of Mobile Devices in Facilitating Collaborative Inquiry in situ , 2008, Res. Pract. Technol. Enhanc. Learn..

[37]  T. Anderson,et al.  Design-Based Research , 2012 .

[38]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  Technology and science education: Starting points, research programs, and trends , 2003 .

[39]  Daniel C. Edelson.  Design Research: What We Learn When We Engage in Design , 2002 .

[40]  David Birchfield,et al.  Earth science learning in SMALLab: A design experiment for mixed reality , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[41]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Science on the Web: Students Online in a Sixth-Grade Classroom , 2000 .

[42]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Learning Environments: The Case for Evidence-Based Practice and Issue-Driven Research , 2003 .

[43]  Andrew T. Lumpe,et al.  Student Use of Scaffolding Software: Relationships with Motivation and Conceptual Understanding , 2008 .

[44]  Mike Stieff,et al.  Connected Chemistry—Incorporating Interactive Simulations into the Chemistry Classroom , 2003 .

[45]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  A Scaffolding Design Framework for Software to Support Science Inquiry , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[46]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Standardized Test Outcomes for Students Engaged in Inquiry-Based Science Curricula in the Context of Urban Reform. , 2008 .

[47]  Eileen Scanlon,et al.  New Directions in Educational Technology , 2012 .

[48]  S. Puntambekar,et al.  Comparing Classroom Enactments of an Inquiry Curriculum: Lessons Learned From Two Teachers , 2007 .

[49]  Elizabeth A. Davis,et al.  Scaffolding students' knowledge integration: prompts for reflection in KIE , 2000 .

[50]  Orit Parnafes.  What Does “Fast” Mean? Understanding the Physical World Through Computational Representations , 2007 .

[51]  Shawn Y. Holmes,et al.  Assessing twenty‐first century skills through a teacher created video game for high school biology students , 2010 .

[52]  Irit Sasson,et al.  Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case‐based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: The value of bidirectional visual and textual representations , 2008 .