Effects of technology-enhanced constructivist learning on science achievement of students with different cognitive styles

The purpose of this study is to examine the effect of technology-enhanced constructivist learning on science achievement of seventh-grade students with different cognitive styles. Cognitive styles of the students are examined within the frame of Witkin et al. (1977) in terms of field dependent and field independent cognitive styles. The quantitative study was conducted using an experimental method with a factorial design that is a modification of the pretest-posttest control group design. The sample of the study consists of 39 seventh-grade students (19 students in the experimental group and 20 students in the control group). Strength and Energy Achievement Test and The Embedded Figures Test (EFT) were used to collect the data. The results of this study show that there is no statistically significant difference between the mean score ranks of experimental and control groups for the pretest and posttest scores of students. Furthermore, there is no significant difference between the pretest and posttest scores of the field independent students in both experimental and control groups but there are significant differences between pretest and posttest scores of the field dependent students. Suggestions were presented by the results obtained from the research.

[1]  P. Mefoh,et al.  Effect of cognitive style and gender on adolescents’ problem solving ability , 2017 .

[2]  John G. Hedberg,et al.  A framework for Web 2.0 learning design , 2010 .

[3]  Karon Dragon.  Field dependence and student achievement in technology-based learning: A meta-analysis , 2009 .

[4]  Li-fang Zhang,et al.  The nature of intellectual styles , 2006 .

[5]  Helen Rodger,et al.  Pedagogy first: Realising technology enhanced learning by focusing on teaching practice , 2016, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[6]  Gwo-Jen Hwang,et al.  Trends and development in technology-enhanced adaptive/personalized learning: A systematic review of journal publications from 2007 to 2017 , 2019, Comput. Educ..

[7]  Peter Goodyear,et al.  Learning, Technology and Design , 2010 .

[8]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Field dependence-independence and instructional-design effects on learners' performance with a computer-modeling tool , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[9]  Hsin-Kai Wu,et al.  Fostering High School Students’ Conceptual Understandings About Seasons: The Design of a Technology-enhanced Learning Environment , 2008 .

[10]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Individual Differences and Instruction , 2012 .

[11]  Susan M. Land,et al.  The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced student-centered learning environments , 1997 .

[12]  Pithers R. T..  Cognitive learning style: a review of the field dependent-field independent approach , 2002 .

[13]  C. A. Moore,et al.  Field-Dependent and Field-Independent Cognitive Styles and Their Educational Implications , 1977 .

[14]  Vimala Balakrishnan,et al.  Students' learning styles and their effects on the use of social media technology for learning , 2016, Telematics Informatics.

[15]  Daniel C. Edelson.  Learning-for-use : A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities , 2001 .

[16]  Michael J. Hannafin,et al.  Scaffolding problem solving in technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and theory with practice , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[17]  Gail Fitzgerald,et al.  The effects of learner differences on usage patterns and learning outcomes with hypermedia case studies , 1998 .

[18]  C. Marendaz,et al.  Précédence globale et dépendance du champ: des routines visuelles? , 1985 .

[19]  Meg Guerreiro,et al.  Learning styles: Considerations for technology enhanced item design , 2018, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[20]  Mehmet Bahar,et al.  The effect of instructional methods on the performance of the students having different cognitive styles , 2003 .

[21]  C. Angeli,et al.  Examining the effects of text-only and text-and-visual instructional materials on the achievement of field-dependent and field-independent learners during problem-solving with modeling software , 2004 .

[22]  Linda Price *.  Individual Differences in Learning: Cognitive control, cognitive style, and learning style , 2004 .

[23]  Marco Kalz,et al.  Assessing the crossdisciplinarity of technology-enhanced learning with science overlay maps and diversity measures , 2014, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[24]  Brett E. Shelton,et al.  An Examination of the Changes in Science Teaching Orientations and Technology-Enhanced Tools for Student Learning in the Context of Professional Development , 2014 .

[25]  Steven M. Downing,et al.  Handbook of test development , 2006 .

[26]  Shyhnan Liou,et al.  The Relationships among Gender, Cognitive Styles, Learning Strategies, and Learning Performance in the Flipped Classroom , 2018, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[27]  Yueh-Min Huang,et al.  Web 2.0 for interactive e-learning , 2009, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[28]  F. Aydin,et al.  The relationship between pre-service science teachers’ cognitive styles and their cognitive structures about technology , 2015 .

[29]  Erminia Pedretti,et al.  Technology, Text, and Talk: Students' Perspectives on Teaching and Learning in a Technology-Enhanced Secondary Science Classroom. , 1998 .

[30]  Kathryn F. Cochran,et al.  An information processing view of field dependence‐independence∗ , 1989 .

[31]  Brett E. Shelton,et al.  Science Teaching Orientations and Technology-Enhanced Tools for Student Learning , 2013 .

[32]  Julie F Pallant,et al.  SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using IBM SPSS , 2020 .

[33]  Laura Tascón,et al.  Differences in Spatial Memory Recognition Due to Cognitive Style , 2017, Front. Pharmacol..

[34]  Kara Dawson,et al.  The Teach Web 2.0 Consortium: a tool to promote educational social networking and Web 2.0 use among educators , 2008 .

[35]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  The Physics Tutor: Integrating Hypertext and Expert Systems , 1993 .

[36]  Linda Price,et al.  Individual Differences in Learning: Cognitive control, cognitive style, and learning style , 2004 .

[37]  Nancy Law,et al.  A Multilevel System of Quality Technology-Enhanced Learning and Teaching Indicators , 2016, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[38]  J. Voogt,et al.  Supporting Teachers Learning Through the Collaborative Design of Technology-Enhanced Science Lessons , 2015 .

[39]  R. T. Pithers,et al.  Cognitive learning style: a review of the field dependent-field independent approach , 2002 .

[40]  Cheng-Ming Chen,et al.  To Activate English Learning: Listen and Speak in Real Life Context with an AR Featured U-Learning System , 2017, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[41]  Robert D. Macredie,et al.  Cognitive styles and hypermedia navigation: Development of a learning model , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[42]  M. Hassan,et al.  Adaptive gamification in e-learning based on students’ learning styles , 2019, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[43]  Omar López-Vargas,et al.  Students' Metacognition and Cognitive Style and Their Effect on Cognitive Load and Learning Achievement , 2017, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[44]  Aditya Khamparia,et al.  Association of learning styles with different e-learning problems: a systematic review and classification , 2019, Education and Information Technologies.

[45]  Yongqiang Cheng,et al.  Patient-Specific Coronary Artery 3D Printing Based on Intravascular Optical Coherence Tomography and Coronary Angiography , 2019, Complex..

[46]  Brit Toven-Lindsey,et al.  The Open Courseware Movement in Higher Education: Unmasking Power and Raising Questions about the Movement's Democratic Potential , 2013 .

[47]  Xi Chen,et al.  Opinion Dynamics Model Based on Cognitive Styles: Field-Dependence and Field-Independence , 2019, Complex..

[48]  H. Sitompul,et al.  The Effect of Learning Strategies and Cognitive Styles on Learning Outcomes of Mathematics after Controlling Intelligence , 2020 .

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

[50]  O. R. Anderson,et al.  Neuroscience Perspectives for Science and Mathematics Learning in Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments , 2014 .

[51]  Marcia C. Linn,et al.  Technology Enhanced Learning in Science (TELS): Research Programs , 2006 .

[52]  Han-Chin Liu.  Investigating the Impact of Cognitive Style on Multimedia Learners’ Understanding and Visual Search Patterns: An Eye-Tracking Approach , 2018 .

[53]  Esra Akgl Frat,et al.  The relationship between use of Web 2.0 tools by prospective science teachers and their biotechnology literacy , 2017 .

[54]  Sue Greener,et al.  Editorial: travels out of context , 2018, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[55]  Eunjoo Oh,et al.  Cross Relationships between Cognitive Styles and Learner Variables in Online Learning Environment. , 2005 .