Abstract
Situating science concepts in concrete and authentic contexts, using information and communications technologies, including multimodal modeling tools, is important for promoting the development of higher-order thinking skills in learners. However, teachers often struggle to integrate emergent multimodal models into a technology-rich informal learning environment. Our design-based research co-designs and develops engaging, immersive, and interactive informal learning activities called “Embodied Modeling-Mediated Activities” (EMMA) to support not only Singaporean learners’ deep learning of astronomy but also the capacity of teachers. As part of the research on EMMA, this case study describes two prospective teachers’ co-design processes involving multimodal models for teaching and learning the concept of the seasons in a technology-rich informal learning setting. Our study uncovers four prominent themes emerging from our data concerning the contextualized nature of learning and teaching involving multimodal models in informal learning contexts: (1) promoting communication and emerging questions, (2) offering affordances through limitations, (3) explaining one concept involving multiple concepts, and (4) integrating teaching and learning experiences. This study has an implication for the development of a pedagogical framework for teaching and learning in technology-enhanced learning environments—that is empowering teachers to become active sense-makers using multimodal models.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Like usual model we have a light bulb indicating the sun, because we need the sun to give out light to represent the sun. Ok, for the earth we’ll use a big Styrofoam ball with a stick to represent the axis of rotation and we would er…stick it in such a way that it is around 23.… and we assume that the amount of light received on the surface is actually proportional to the heat received. (Simon).
Our model could also explain …people living in the Northern hemisphere as in they will see sunrise at different points as in they will see…the sun will still rise in the east but at different positions throughout the year, er but…it’s easier with the real model but… (Daniel).
References
Bakas C, Mikropoulos T (2003) Design of virtual environments for the comprehension of planetary phenomena based on students’ ideas. Int J Sci Educ 25(8):949–967
Barab SA (2006) Design-based research: A methodological toolkit. In: Sawyer RK (ed) The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 153–170
Barab SA, Squire K (2004) Design-based research: putting a stake in the ground. J the Learn Sci 13(1):1–14
Barab SA, Hay KE, Barnett M, Squire K (2001) Constructing virtual worlds: tracing the historical development of learner practices. Cogn Instr 19(1):47–94
Barab SA, Schatz S, Scheckler R (2004) Using activity theory to conceptualize online community and using online community to conceptualize activity theory. Mind Cult Act 11(1):25–47
Barnett M, Yamagata-Lynch L, Keating T, Barab SA, Hay KE (2005) Using virtual reality computer models to support student understanding of astronomical concepts. J Comput Math Sci Teach 24(4):333–356
Birchfield DB, Thornburg H, Megowan-Romanowicz C, Hatton S, Mechtley B, Dolgov I, Burleson W (2008) Embodiment, multimodality, and composition: convergent themes across HCI and education for mixed-reality learning environments. Retrieved on 05 Dec 2013 from http://www.public.asu.edu/~idolgov/pubs/SMALLab_HCI_v32.pdf
Blown EJ, Bryce TGK (2010) Conceptual coherence revealed in multi-modal representations of astronomy knowledge. Int J Sci Educ 32(1):31–67
Boler M (1999) Feeling power: emotions and education. Routledge, New York
Brown AL (1992) Design experiments: theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. J Learn Sci 2(2):141–178
Bryce TGK, Blown EJ (2006) Cultural mediation of children's cosmologies: a longitudinal study of the astronomy concepts of Chinese and New Zealand children. Int J Sci Educ 28(10):1113–1160
Chin C (2006) Classroom interaction in science: teacher questioning and feedback to students’ responses. Int J Sci Educ 28(11):1315–1346
Chin C, Osborne J (2010) Students’ questions and discursive interaction: their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science. J Res Sci Teach 47(7):883–908
Clement J (2000) Model based learning as a key research area for science education. Int J Sci Educ 22(9):1041–1053
Collins A (1992) Towards a design science of education. In: Scanlon E, O’Shea T (eds) New directions in educational technology. Springer, Berlin, pp 15–22
Dede C (2005) Why design-based research is both important and difficult. Educ Technol 45(1):5–8
DiPardo A, Potter C (2003) Beyond cognition: A Vygotskian perspective on emotionality and teachers’ professional lives. In: Kozulin A, Gindis B, Ageyev VS, Miller SM (eds) Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 317–345
Engeström Y (2008). From design experiments to formative interventions. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on International conference for the learning sciences, vol 1, pp 3–24
Gee JP (2004) Language in the science classroom: academic social languages as the heart of school-based literacy. In: Saul EW (ed) Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: Perspectives on theory and practice. International Reading Association and National Science Teachers Association, Newark, pp 10–32
Gobert JD, Buckley BC (2000) Introduction to model-based teaching and learning in science education. Int J Sci Educ 22(9):891–894
Hansen JA, Barnett M, MaKinster JG, Keating T (2004) The impact of three- dimensional computational modeling on student understanding of astronomical concepts: a quantitative analysis. Int J Sci Educ 26(11):1365–1378
Hsu YS, Wu H-K, Hwang FK (2008) Fostering high school students’ conceptual understandings about seasons: the design of a technology-enhanced learning environment. Res Sci Educ 38(2):127–147
Hull A, Nelson ME (2005) Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Writ Commun 22(2):224–261
Keating T, Barnett M, Barab SA, Hay KE (2002) The virtual solar system project: developing conceptual understanding of astronomical concepts through building three-dimensional computational models. J Sci Educ Technol 11(3):261–275
Ketelhut DJ (2007) The impact of student self-efficacy on scientific inquiry skills: an exploratory investigation in River City, a multi-user virtual environment. J Sci Educ Technol 16(1):99–111
Kim, MS (2012) CHAT perspectives on the construction of ICT-mediated teaching metaphors. Eur J Teach Educ 35(4):435–448
Kim, MS (2013) Technology-mediated collaborative learning environments for young CLD children and their families: Vygotsky revisited. Br J Educ Stud 61(2):221–246
Kling R, McKim G, King A (2003) A bit more to it: scholarly communication forums as socio-technical interaction networks. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 54(1):47–67
Kucukozer H, Korkusuz ME, Kucukozer HA, Yurumezoglu K (2009) The effect of 3D computer modeling and observation-based instruction on the conceptual change regarding basic concepts of astronomy in elementary school students. Astron Educ Rev 8(1):010104–010118
Kuhn M, Hoppe U, Lingnau A, Wichmann A (2006) Computational modelling and simulation fostering new approaches in learning probability. Innov Educ Teach Int 43(2):183–194
Latour B (1987) Science in sction. How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Open University Press, Milton Keynes
Latour B (1993) We have never been modern. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Latour B (1999) Pandora’s hope: essays on the reality of science studies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Lehrer R, Schauble L (2000) The development of model-based reasoning. J Appl Dev Psychol 21(1):39–48
Lemke JL (1998) Metamedia literacy: transforming meanings and media. In: Reinking D, McKenna MC, Labbo LD, Kieffer RD (eds) Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 283–301
Lemke JL (2004) The literacies of science. In: Saul EW (ed) Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction: perspectives on theory and practice. International Reading Association and National Science Teachers Association, Arlington, pp 33–47
Lesh R, Doerr HM (2003) Beyond constructivism: models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching. Erlbaum, Mahwah
Lincoln YS, Guba EG (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. Sage, Beverly Hills
Mahn H, John-Steiner V (2002) The gift of confidence: a Vygotskian view of emotions. In: Wells G, Claxton G (eds) Learning for life in the 21st century: sociocultural perspectives on the future of education. Blackwell, New York, pp 46–58
Padalkar S, Ramadas J (2008) Modeling the round earth through diagrams. Astron Educ Rev 6(2):54–74
PISA, OECD Programme for International Student Assessment (2009) PISA 2009 results: what students know and can do. Retrieved on 22 May 2011 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/61/48852548.pdf
Rosenbaum E, Klopfer E, Perry J (2007) On location learning: authentic applied science with networked augmented realities. J Sci Educ Technol 16(1):31–45
Roth WM, Lawless D (2002) Science, cultures and the emergence of language. Sci Educ 86:368–385
Shen J, Confrey J (2007) From conceptual change to transformative modeling: a case study of an elementary teacher in learning astronomy. Sci Educ 91(6):948–966
Sherrod SE, Wilhelm J (2009) A study of how classroom dialogue facilitates the development of geometric spatial concepts related to understanding the cause of moon phases. Int J Sci Educ 31(7):873–894
Stake R (2005) Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) The Sage handbook of qualitative research, 3rd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks
Stratford SJ, Krajcik J, Soloway E (1998) Secondary students’ dynamic modeling processes: analyzing, reasoning about, synthesizing, and testing models of stream ecosystems. J Sci Educ Technol 7(3):215–234
Trundle KC, Atwood RK, Christopher JE, Sackes M (2010) The effect of guided inquiry-based instruction on middle school students’ understanding of lunar concepts. Res Sci Educ 40(3):451–478
Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Vygotsky LS (1987a) Thinking and speech (trans: Minick N). In: Rieber RW, Carton AS (eds) The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, vol 1. Problems of general psychology. Plenum Press, New York, pp 39–285
Vygotsky LS (1987b) Emotions and their development in childhood (trans: Minick N). In: Rieber RW, Carton AS (eds) The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: vol 1. Problems of general psychology. Plenum, New York, pp 325–338
Vygotsky LS (1994) The problem of the environment. In: Van deer Veer R, Valsiner J (eds) The Vygotsky reader. Blackwell, Cambridge, pp 338–354
Yin RK (2009) Case study research: design and methods, 4th edn. Sage, Los Angeles
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix: The Coding Scheme
Appendix: The Coding Scheme
Categories | Coding | Definition |
---|---|---|
Move (turns of utterance) | Initiation | The move that is made to open a new exchange on a topic/theme. The initiation can be made by teachers/facilitators or students/participants |
Response | The move that responds to the questions in initiation or questions aroused in the follow-up. It can be made by teachers/facilitators or students/participants | |
Feedback or follow-up | The move that follows up to the responses to evaluate, comment, or clarify the responses, or to supplement the previous response. It can be made by teachers/facilitators or students/participants | |
Type of utterance | Question | The interrogative utterance |
Answer | Utterance that spoken in response to a question | |
Presentation | Teachers/facilitators or students presenting in groups or a whole-class | |
Statement | Further content-related propositions made by teachers/facilitators or students/participants for summarization or conclusion | |
Comment | An evaluative or neutral utterance given by teachers/facilitators or students/participants in response to a student/participant’s reply to the question; or a restatement/reformulation of students/participants’ responses | |
Argument | A verbal, social and rational activity aimed at convincing a reasonable critic of the acceptability of a standpoint by putting forward a constellation of proposition justifying or refuting the proposition expressed in the standpoint (Chin and Osborne 2010) | |
Purpose of utterance | Elicit | To draw out students/participants’ prior knowledge or previous experiences |
Probe | To let the other speaker justify ‘why’ certain answer is given so as to explore certain topics (e.g., How can you show … using your model?) | |
Extend | To switch from one sub-topic to another related sub-topic within a topic discussed (e.g., when students/participants are not sure of concept A, teachers/facilitators guide them to know about concept B in order to understand concept A) | |
Clarify | To make sure whether information is correctly received by repeating or rephrasing based on others’ statements | |
Challenge | To point out the limitations of others’ response and to rebut claims or arguments | |
Reply | To response to others’ questions | |
Explain | To explain phenomena by providing reasoning, giving examples, justifying what they said, elaborating ideas, etc. [sometimes, the purpose is fulfilled by the action of using models] | |
Enquire | To seek for basic information when the speaker is not sure about the idea | |
Complement | To add on or supplement the other speaker’s statements by giving concrete examples or giving further explanation | |
Procedural instruct | To give instruction in order to manage the process of task | |
Express emotions | To show emotions such as confusedness, doubt, excitement, or frustration | |
The use of models | Construct a model spontaneously without clear objectives | Construct a model randomly without any objective (e.g., students/participants just aimlessly build toys or some unrelated stuff using modeling materials) |
Construct, represent, visualize, and illustrate single phenomenon or system | Use a model to externalize and concretize the abstract or internal image of certain processes or phenomena or system; Use a model to discuss a topic that is closely related to representation | |
Use a model to explore or investigate the phenomenon | Use a model to investigate and further explore certain concepts without clear expectation or prediction about the possible outcome (e.g., modifying certain elements in the models, or observing a model from different perspectives) | |
Use a model to explain why the phenomenon occurs with reasoning | Use a model to explain a process, reasoning, or factors of certain phenomena or concepts | |
Use a model to explain and predict how the phenomenon occurs by expanding to related phenomena | Use a model to bring out, explain and predict other related phenomena based on understanding of current phenomena | |
Use a model to ask questions | Ask questions based on models | |
Use a model to generate argument or show contradiction | Use a model to create arguments by using some evidences emerged from the model | |
Use a model to give comments | Use models to give evaluative or neutral comments related to the model components or the object that the model represents | |
Guide others to modify the model | Teachers/facilitators or students/participants give comments or instructions to revise or modify the model |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kim, M.S. Empowering Prospective Teachers to Become Active Sense-Makers: Multimodal Modeling of the Seasons. J Sci Educ Technol 24, 610–627 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9550-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9550-z