Inquiry-based learning and retrospective action: Problematizing student work in a computer-supported learning environment

We examined student performance in a computer-supported learning environment after students undertook, among others, a graphing task within an inquiry context. Students were assigned in two conditions: (a) Students were given one variable, and they had to select the second one to construct their graph; (b) students were given four variables, and they had to select two to construct their graph. Both conditions problematized student work by triggering retrospective action, where students returned to previous stages of the learning activity sequence. Retrospective action correlated positively to knowledge gains in Condition 2, where students were more likely to revisit earlier stages of their inquiry. Time-on-task, when students passed through learning tasks for the first time, correlated negatively with retrospective action (second pass), which indicated that there was a minimum amount of time needed to effectively execute tasks. Trade-offs between time-on-task (first pass) and retrospective action demarcate a novel field of research.

[1]  Tina Seufert,et al.  Cognitive load and the format of instructional aids for coherence formation , 2006 .

[2]  Vincent N. Lunetta,et al.  The Laboratory in Science Education: Foundations for the Twenty-First Century , 2004 .

[3]  Heiko Rölke,et al.  The time on task effect in reading and problem solving is moderated by task difficulty and skill: Insights from a computer-based large-scale assessment. , 2014 .

[4]  Martin Valcke,et al.  Eliciting Reciprocal Peer-Tutoring Groups’ Metacognitive Regulation Through Structuring and Problematizing Scaffolds , 2016 .

[5]  Melissa Davidson,et al.  The Taxonomy of Learning , 2008, International anesthesiology clinics.

[6]  Cor J. M. Suhre,et al.  The effect of the timing of instructional support in a computer-supported problem-solving program for students in secondary physics education , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[7]  Naomi J. Aldrich,et al.  Does Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning?. , 2011 .

[8]  J. Metcalfe,et al.  Evidence that judgments of learning are causally related to study choice , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[9]  Jodi L. Davenport,et al.  Comparing three online testing modalities: Using static, active, and interactive online testing modalities to assess middle school students' understanding of fundamental ideas and use of inquiry skills related to ecosystems , 2014 .

[10]  James D. Klein,et al.  The Impact of Scaffolding and Student Achievement Levels in a Problem-based Learning Environment , 2007 .

[11]  Laura E. Levine,et al.  22. Multitasking and Attention , 2015 .

[12]  Abigail Jurist Levy,et al.  Inquiry-based science instruction—what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002 , 2010 .

[13]  Slava Kalyuga,et al.  Measuring Knowledge to Optimize Cognitive Load Factors During Instruction. , 2004 .

[14]  Stuart Bevins,et al.  Reconceptualising inquiry in science education , 2016 .

[15]  Erin Marie Furtak,et al.  The problem with answers: An exploration of guided scientific inquiry teaching , 2006 .

[16]  Zacharias C. Zacharia,et al.  Identifying potential types of guidance for supporting student inquiry when using virtual and remote labs in science: a literature review , 2015, Educational Technology Research and Development.

[17]  SchererRonny,et al.  Understanding students' performance in a computer-based assessment of complex problem solving , 2016 .

[18]  Samuel Greiff,et al.  Understanding students' performance in a computer-based assessment of complex problem solving: An analysis of behavioral data from computer-generated log files , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[19]  Tasos Hovardas,et al.  A learning progression should address regression: Insights from developing non-linear reasoning in ecology , 2016 .

[20]  M. Tibus,et al.  Scientific Reasoning in Elementary School Children: Assessment of the Inquiry Cycle , 2016, Journal of Advanced Academics.

[21]  Denis Gillet,et al.  Innovations in STEM education: the Go-Lab federation of online labs , 2014, Smart Learning Environments.

[22]  Lars Bollen,et al.  Scaffolding learning by modelling: The effects of partially worked-out models , 2016 .

[23]  Ruth Harmsen,et al.  Meta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning , 2016 .

[24]  L. Cohen,et al.  Research Methods in Education , 1980 .

[25]  Yao-Ting Sung,et al.  Effects of learning support in simulation-based physics learning , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[26]  I. Molenaar,et al.  Metacognitive scaffolding during collaborative learning: a promising combination , 2014 .

[27]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  Scaffolding Complex Learning: The Mechanisms of Structuring and Problematizing Student Work , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[28]  Ton de Jong,et al.  Technological Advances in Inquiry Learning , 2006 .

[29]  Martin Reisslein,et al.  Encountering the expertise reversal effect with a computer-based environment on electrical circuit analysis , 2006 .

[30]  James R. Okey,et al.  Development of an integrated process skill test: TIPS II , 1985 .

[31]  Detlef Urhahne,et al.  The relationship in biology between the nature of science and scientific inquiry , 2014 .

[32]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching , 2006 .

[33]  Marlene Scardamalia,et al.  Smart technology for self-organizing processes , 2014, Smart Learning Environments.

[34]  Anjo Anjewierden,et al.  Providing guidance in virtual lab experimentation: the case of an experiment design tool , 2018, Educational Technology Research and Development.

[35]  Thomas Brush,et al.  Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments , 2002 .

[36]  Robert E. Slavin,et al.  Measuring Time-On-Task: Issues of Timing, Sampling and Definition. , 1980 .

[37]  Nilgün Tatar,et al.  Monitoring students' goal setting and metacognitive knowledge in technology-enhanced learning with metacognitive prompts , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[38]  I. Molenaar,et al.  Metacognitive scaffolding in an innovative learning arrangement , 2011 .

[39]  Ton de Jong,et al.  Use of Heuristics to Facilitate Scientific Discovery Learning in a Simulation Learning Environment in a Physics Domain , 2006 .

[40]  N. Großmann,et al.  Experimentation in biology lessons: guided discovery through incremental scaffolds , 2019, International Journal of Science Education.

[41]  Jennifer J. Vogel-Walcutt,et al.  Differential impact of two types of metacognitive prompting provided during simulation-based training , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[42]  Rachel Mamlok-Naaman,et al.  Developing students' ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry-type chemistry laboratories , 2005 .

[43]  Giray Berberoglu,et al.  The Effect of Guided-Inquiry Instruction on 6th Grade Turkish Students' Achievement, Science Process Skills, and Attitudes Toward Science , 2014 .

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

[45]  Martin Reisslein,et al.  Learner Achievement and Attitudes under Different Paces of Transitioning to Independent Problem Solving , 2007 .

[46]  Panagiotis Zervas,et al.  The Go-Lab Inventory and integration of online labs – Labs offered by large scientific organisations , 2013 .

[47]  David J. Therriault,et al.  Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. , 2003 .

[48]  Slava Kalyuga Expertise Reversal Effect and Its Implications for Learner-Tailored Instruction , 2007 .

[49]  J. Arnold,et al.  Understanding Students' Experiments—What kind of support do they need in inquiry tasks? , 2014 .

[50]  Ellen T. Kamp,et al.  Phases of inquiry-based learning: Definitions and the inquiry cycle , 2015 .