Pedagogical Affordances of Multiple External Representations in Scientific Processes

Multiple external representations (MERs) have been widely used in science teaching and learning. Theories such as dual coding theory and cognitive flexibility theory have been developed to explain why the use of MERs is beneficial to learning, but they do not provide much information on pedagogical issues such as how and in what conditions MERs could be introduced and used to support students’ engagement in scientific processes and develop competent scientific practices (e.g., asking questions, planning investigations, and analyzing data). Additionally, little is understood about complex interactions among scientific processes and affordances of MERs. Therefore, this article focuses on pedagogical affordances of MERs in learning environments that engage students in various scientific processes. By reviewing literature in science education and cognitive psychology and integrating multiple perspectives, this article aims at exploring (1) how MERs can be integrated with science processes due to their different affordances, and (2) how student learning with MERs can be scaffolded, especially in a classroom situation. We argue that pairing representations and scientific processes in a principled way based on the affordances of the representations and the goals of the activities is a powerful way to use MERs in science education. Finally, we outline types of scaffolding that could help effective use of MERs including dynamic linking, model progression, support in instructional materials, teacher support, and active engagement.

[1]  Leticia Gallegos Cázares,et al.  Partial Possible Models: An Approach To Interpret Students' Physical Representation. , 1998 .

[2]  W. H. Leonard.  A Comparison of Student Performance Following Instruction by Interactive Videodisc Versus Conventional Laboratory. , 1992 .

[3]  P. Shah,et al.  Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning , 2004 .

[4]  R. Kozma,et al.  The Roles of Representations and Tools in the Chemistry Laboratory and Their Implications for Chemistry Learning , 2000 .

[5]  William A. Sandoval,et al.  Mapping Trade-Offs in Teachers' Integration of Technology-Supported Inquiry in High School Science Classes , 2004 .

[6]  Yehudit Judy Dori,et al.  Computerized Molecular Modeling as a Tool To Improve Chemistry Teaching , 1996, J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci..

[7]  Susan R. Goldman,et al.  Learning in complex domains: When and why do multiple representations help? , 2003 .

[8]  Lon Ferguson,et al.  Technology affordances: the 'real story' in research with K-12 and undergraduate learners , 2006, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[9]  S. Ainsworth.  DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. , 2006 .

[10]  Iris Tabak,et al.  The Teacher as Partner: Exploring Participant Structures, Symmetry, and Identity Work in Scaffolding , 2004 .

[11]  Wolff‐Michael Roth,et al.  Inscriptions: Toward a Theory of Representing as Social Practice , 1998 .

[12]  A. Paivio.  Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach , 1986 .

[13]  Tina Seufert.  Supporting Coherence Formation in Learning from Multiple Representations , 2003 .

[14]  Miky Ronen,et al.  Simulation - a bridge between theory and reality: the case of electric circuits , 2001, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[15]  J. Shea.  National Science Education Standards , 1995 .

[16]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Inscriptional Practices in Two Inquiry-Based Classrooms: A Case Study of Seventh Graders' Use of Data Tables and Graphs. , 2006 .

[17]  Rosária Justi,et al.  A cause of ahistorical science teaching: Use of hybrid models , 1999 .

[18]  Hsin-Kai Wu,et al.  Effects of representation sequences and spatial ability on students’ scientific understandings about the mechanism of breathing , 2013 .

[19]  David Klahr,et al.  Cognition and Instruction : Twenty-five Years of Progress , 2013 .

[20]  I. Greca,et al.  Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling , 2000 .

[21]  Bruce K. Britton,et al.  Analogical Reasoning and Problem Solving in Science Textbooks , 1989 .

[22]  Brian Hand,et al.  Comparing student understanding of quantum physics when embedding multimodal representations into two different writing formats: Presentation format versus summary report format , 2006 .

[23]  Barbara C. Buckley.  Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology , 2000 .

[24]  Rand J. Spiro,et al.  Cognitive flexibility theory : advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains , 1988 .

[25]  Deborah Loewenberg Ball,et al.  Making Change: Instruction and its Improvement , 2001 .

[26]  A. Chemero.  An Outline of a Theory of Affordances , 2003, How Shall Affordances be Refined? Four Perspectives.

[27]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter , 2009 .

[28]  Jan T. van der Veen,et al.  The learning effects of computer simulations in science education , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[29]  Wolfgang Schnotz,et al.  Commentary: Towards an Integrated View of Learning from Text and Visual Displays , 2002 .

[30]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  The Transfer of Scientific Principles Using Concrete and Idealized Simulations , 2005, Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[31]  T. Jong,et al.  Supporting students' learning with multiple representations in a dynamic simulation-based learning environment , 2006 .

[32]  A. H. Johnstone,et al.  The development of chemistry teaching: a changing response to changing demand , 1993 .

[33]  J. Kolodner,et al.  Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design , 2005 .

[34]  Philip Bell,et al.  On the Theoretical Breadth of Design-Based Research in Education , 2004 .

[35]  Ton de Jong,et al.  The Integration of Computer Simulation and Learning Support: An Example from the Physics Domain of Collisions , 1999 .

[36]  A. Renkl,et al.  Instructional Aids to Support a Conceptual Understanding of Multiple Representations. , 2009 .

[37]  J. J. Gibson.  The theory of affordances , 1977 .

[38]  Noah D. Finkelstein,et al.  Strongly and Weakly Directed Approaches to Teaching Multiple Representation Use in Physics , 2007 .

[39]  E. Wong,et al.  Self‐generated analogies as a tool for constructing and evaluating explanations of scientific phenomena , 1993 .

[40]  Albert J. Rosa,et al.  The Role of the Laboratory in Undergraduate Engineering Education , 2005 .

[41]  H. Schweingruber,et al.  TAKING SCIENCE TO SCHOOL: LEARNING AND TEACHING SCIENCE IN GRADES K-8 , 2007 .

[42]  Hans Spada,et al.  The Active Integration of Information during Learning with Dynamic and Interactive Visualisations , 2004 .

[43]  J. Frederiksen,et al.  Inquiry, Modeling, and Metacognition: Making Science Accessible to All Students , 1998 .

[44]  Michael Hammond,et al.  What is an affordance and can it help us understand the use of ICT in education? , 2010, Education and Information Technologies.

[45]  L. Yore,et al.  Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language arts and science research , 2003 .

[46]  Richard Lowe,et al.  Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics , 2003 .

[47]  John W. Shrum,et al.  The effects of microcomputer‐based laboratory exercises on the acquisition of line graph construction and interpretation skills by high school biology students , 1990 .

[48]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  The use of analogue models by students of chemistry at higher education level , 1991 .

[49]  Douglas B. Clark,et al.  Helping students revise disruptive experientially supported ideas about thermodynamics: Computer visualizations and tactile models , 2004 .

[50]  Ileana María Greca,et al.  The kinds of mental representations‐‐models, propositions and images‐‐used by college physics students regarding the concept of field , 1997 .

[51]  Iris Tabak,et al.  Synergy: A Complement to Emerging Patterns of Distributed Scaffolding , 2004, The Journal of the Learning Sciences.

[52]  Chi-Yan Tsui.  Teaching and Learning Genetics with Multiple Representations , 2003 .

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

[54]  Wolff‐Michael Roth,et al.  Mathematization of experience in a grade 8 open-inquiry environment: An introduction to the representational practices of science , 1994 .

[55]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Models in explanations, Part 1 : Horses for courses? , 1998 .

[56]  Barbara Y. White,et al.  Causal Model Progressions as a Foundation for Intelligent Learning Environments , 1990, Artif. Intell..

[57]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Models in explanations, Part 2: Whose voice? Whose ears? , 1998 .

[58]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  A protocol analysis of the influence of technology on students' actions, verbal commentary, and thought processes during the performance of acid‐base titrations , 1993 .

[59]  Russell Tytler,et al.  Representational Issues in Students Learning About Evaporation , 2007 .

[60]  Rolf Ploetzner,et al.  Students' difficulties in learning physics from dynamic and interactive visualizations , 2006 .

[61]  M. Cosgrove,et al.  A study of science‐in‐the‐making as students generate an analogy for electricity , 1995 .

[62]  Robert B. Kozma,et al.  Students Becoming Chemists: Developing Representationl Competence , 2005 .

[63]  Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar,et al.  The interplay of first-hand and second-hand investigations to model and support the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning , 2001 .

[64]  M. Bannert,et al.  Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation , 2003 .

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

[66]  Björn B. de Koning,et al.  Facilitating Understanding of Movements in Dynamic Visualizations: an Embodied Perspective , 2011 .

[67]  R. Kozma,et al.  Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena , 1997 .

[68]  Hans Spada,et al.  Learning to Relate Qualitative and Quantitative Problem Representations in a Model-Based Setting for Collaborative Problem Solving , 1999 .

[69]  Vesna Ferk,et al.  Students' understanding of molecular structure representations , 2003 .

[70]  Jay L. Lemke,et al.  The literacies of science , 2004 .

[71]  Pamela Joy Mulhall,et al.  What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? , 2000 .

[72]  Allan G. Harrison,et al.  Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry , 2000 .

[73]  Kim Pittman,et al.  Student-generated analogies: Another way of knowing? , 1999 .

[74]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Exploring middle school students' use of inscriptions in project-based science classrooms , 2006 .

[75]  Wolff-Michael Roth,et al.  Graphing: Cognitive ability or practice? , 1997 .

[76]  Wolff-Michael Roth,et al.  Interpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: Toward a social practice view of scientific representation practices , 1999 .

[77]  Hsin-Kai Wu,et al.  Ninth-Grade Student Engagement in Teacher-Centered and Student-Centered Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments. , 2007 .

[78]  Marida Ergazaki,et al.  High‐school students’ reasoning while constructing plant growth models in a computer‐supported educational environment , 2005 .

[79]  Brian J. Reiser,et al.  Complementary roles of software-based scaffolding and teacher-student interactions in inquiry learning , 1997, CSCL.

[80]  John J. Clement,et al.  Model based learning and instruction in science , 2008 .

[81]  N. Sanjay Rebello,et al.  Quantum mechanics for everyone: Hands-on activities integrated with technology , 2002 .

[82]  Richard Lowe,et al.  Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning , 2004 .

[83]  Barbara Y. White,et al.  Alternative Approaches to Using Modeling and Simulation Tools for Teaching Science , 1999 .

[84]  R. Duit.  On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. , 1991 .

[85]  Michael R. Abraham,et al.  The effects of computer animation on the particulate mental models of college chemistry students , 1995 .

[86]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Enacting Reform-Based Science Materials: The Range of Teacher Enactments in Reform Classrooms , 2005 .

[87]  Jennifer A. Fredricks,et al.  Inquiry in Project-Based Science Classrooms: Initial Attempts by Middle School Students , 1998 .

[88]  Z. Dagher.  Analysis of analogies used by science teachers , 1995 .

[89]  Shaaron Ainsworth,et al.  The functions of multiple representations , 1999, Comput. Educ..

[90]  Noah S. Podolefsky,et al.  When learning about the real world is better done virtually: A study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment , 2005 .

[91]  Helen R. Quinn,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2013 .

[92]  Thomas Andre,et al.  Using a computer simulation before dissection to help students learn anatomy , 2000 .

[93]  R. Pintó,et al.  Scientific Processes in PISA Tests Observed for Science Teachers , 2009 .

[94]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Influence of levels of information as presented by different technologies on students' understanding of acid, base, and ph concepts , 1994 .

[95]  David F. Treagust,et al.  A typology of school science models , 2000 .

[96]  William J. McKinney.  The Educational Use of Computer Based Science Simulations: Some Lessons from the Philosophy of Science , 1997 .

[97]  Shawn M. Glynn,et al.  Learning from analogy‐enhanced science text , 1998 .

[98]  Barbara Y. White,et al.  Dynamic mental models in learning science : The importance of constructing derivational linkages among models , 1999 .

[99]  B. White.  ThinkerTools: Causal Models, Conceptual Change, and Science Education , 1993 .

[100]  Xueli Zou,et al.  Multiple representations of work-energy processes , 2001 .

[101]  R. Moreno,et al.  Do Multiple Representations Need Explanations? The Role of Verbal Guidance and Individual Differences in Multimedia Mathematics Learning , 2004 .

[102]  Gail Chittleborough,et al.  The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations , 2003 .

[103]  John K. Gilbert,et al.  Visualization in science education , 2005 .

[104]  Vimla L. Patel,et al.  The explanatory role of spontaneously generated analogies in reasoning about physiological concepts , 1996 .

[105]  Jeannett Martin,et al.  Reading Science: Critical and Functional Perspectives on Discourses of Science , 1998 .

[106]  Z. Zacharia,et al.  The effects of an interactive computer-based simulation prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiment on science teachers' conceptual understanding of physics , 2002 .

[107]  V. Prain,et al.  An Exploratory Study of Teachers’ and Students’ Use of Multi‐modal Representations of Concepts in Primary Science , 2006 .