Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Visualization: An Emergent Field of Practice and Enquiry in Science Education

  • Chapter
Visualization: Theory and Practice in Science Education

Part of the book series: Models and Modeling in Science Education ((MMSE,volume 3))

Abstract

Modelling as an element in scientific methodology and models as the outcome of modelling are both important aspects of the conduct of science and hence of science education. The chapter is concerned with the challenges that students face in understanding the three ‘levels’ at which models can be represented – ‘macro’, ‘sub-micro’, ‘symbolic’ – and the relationships between them. A model can, at a given level, be expressed in ‘external representations’ – those versions physically available to others – and in ‘internal representations’ – those versions available mentally to an individual person. The making of meaning for any such representation is ‘visualization’. It is of such importance in science and hence in science education that the acquisition of fluency in visualization is highly desirable and may be called ‘metavisual capability’ or ‘metavisualization’. Criteria for the attainment of metavisualization are proposed. Two approaches to the ontological categorization of representations are put forward, one based on the purpose which the representation is intended to serve, the other based on the dimensionality – 1D, 2D, 3D – of the representation. For the latter scheme, the requirements for metavisualization are discussed in some detail in terms of its components. General approaches to the development of metavisualization are outlined. Multi-disciplinary teams are needed if the research and development needed to improve visualization in science education is to take place.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Aberg-Bengtsson, L. (1999). Dimensions of performance in the interpretation of diagrams, tables and maps: some gender differences in the Swedish Scholastic Aptitude Test. Journal of Research in science Teaching, 36(5), 565–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, J. (2003). Teaching and learning science: A guide to recent research and its applications. London: Continuum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beveridge, M., & Parkins, E. (1987). Visual representation in analogical problem solving. Memory and Cognition, 15(3), 230–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodner, G. M., & McMillen , T. L. B. (1986). Cognitive restructuring as an early stage in problem solving. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 23(8), 727–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, G. M., & Roth, W.-M. (2005). Data and graph interpretation practices amongst pre-service science teachers. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(10), 1063–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, G. M., Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Interpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: Towards a social practice view of scientific representational practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 1020–1043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, M., & Oxenham, J. (1985). Model confusion in science. In R. J. Osborne & J. K. Gilbert (Eds.), Some issues of theory in science education (pp. 81–88). Hamilton, New Zealand: Science Education Research Unit, University of Waikato.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chittleborough, G., Treagust, D. F., Mamiala, T., & Mocerino, M. (2005). Students’ perception of the role of models in the process of science and in the process of learning. Research in Science and Technology Education, 23(2), 195–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cleveland, W. S. (1985). The elements of graphing data. Monterey, California: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coll, R. K., & Treagust, D. F. (2001). Learners’ mental models of chemical bonding. Research in Science Education, 31(3), 357–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Driver, R., Guesne, E., & Tiberghien, A. (Eds.). (1985). Children’s ideas in science. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferk Savec, V., Vrtacnik, M., & Gilbert, J. K. (2005). Evaluating the educational value of molecular structure representations. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in Science Education (pp. 269–298). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gabel, D. (1999). Improving teaching and learning through chemical education research: a look to the future. Journal of Chemical Education, 76, 548–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K. (2005). Visualization: A metacognitive skill in science and science education. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in science education. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., & Boulter, C. J. (Eds.). (2000). Developing models in science education. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, J. K., Boulter, C. J., & Rutherford, M. (2000). Explanations with models in science education. In J. K. Gilbert & C. J. Boulter (Eds.), Developing models in science education (pp. 193–208). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosslight, L., Unger, C., Jay, E., & Smith, C. L. (1991). Understanding models and their use in science:conceptions of middle and high school students and experts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(8), 799–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halpern, D. F., & Collaer, M. L. (2005). Sex differences in visuospatial abilities: More than meets the eye. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuo-spatial thinking (pp. 170–212). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harre, R. ( 1970). The principles of scientific thinking. London: MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Modelling in science lessons: Are there better ways to learn with models? School Science and Mathematics, 98(8), 420–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2000). Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: A case study of multiple-model use in Grade 11 chemistry. Science Education, 84(3), 352–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, A. G., & Treagust, D. F. (2001). Conceptual change using multiple interpretative perspectives: Two case studies in secondary school chemistry. Instructional Science, 29, 45–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hearnshaw, H. (1994). Psychology and displays in GIS. In H. Hearnshaw & D. J. Unwin (Eds.), Visualization in geographic information systems (pp. 193–211). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hesse, M. (1966). Models and analogies in science. London: Sheen and Ward.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinton, M. E., & Nakhleh, M. B. (1999). Students’ microscopic, macroscopic, and symbolic representations of chemical reactions. The Chemical Educator, 4(4), 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodson, D. (1990). A critical look at practical work in school science. School Science Review, 71(256), 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huddle, P. A., White, M. D., & Rogers, F. (2000). Using a teaching model to correct known misconceptions in electrochemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 77(1), 104–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingham, A. M., & Gilbert, J. K. (1991). The use of analogue models by students of chemistry at higher education level. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 1011–1026.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone, A. H. (1993). The development of chemistry teaching: a changing response to a changing demand. Journal of Chemical Education, 70(9), 701–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justi, R., & Gilbert, J. K. (2002). Modelling, teachers’views on the nature of modelling, and implications for the education of modellers. International Journal of Science Education, 24(4), 369–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosma, R. (2003). The material features if multiple representations and their cognitive and social affordances for science learning. Learning and Instruction, 13, 205–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The role of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry ; learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kosma, R., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (2005). Modelling students becoming chemists: Developing representational competence. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in science education (pp. 121–146). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images:The grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., & Petersen, A. C. (1985). Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 56, 1479–1498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe, R. (2004). Interrogation of a dynamic visualization during learning. Learning and Instruction, 14, 257–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathewson, J. H. (2006). The visual core of science: Definitions and applications in education. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Science education: Major themes in education. (Vol. 3, pp.298–320). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • N.R.C. (2006). Learning to think spatially. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakhleh, M., Polles, J., & Malina, E. (2002). Learningchemistry in a laboratory environment. In J. K. Gilbert, O. de Jong, R. Justi, D. F. Treagust, J. H., &van Driel (Eds.), Chemical education: Towards research-based practice (pp.69–94). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, T. O., & Narens, L. (1994). Why investigate metacognition? In J. Metcalfe & A. P. Shinamura (Eds.), Metacognition (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newberry, M. (2002). Pupils’ understanding of diagrams in science: Progression from key stage 3 (11–14 years) and across key stage 4 (14–16 years). Fareham, Hants: Cams Hill School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcombe, N. S., & Learmonth, A. E. (2005). Development of spatial competence. In P. Shah & A. Miyake (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of visuospatial thinking (pp. 213–256). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • NRC. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years. New York: Holt, Rinehart,Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peters, R. (2006) Chemical equations. Retrieved 15 Sept., 2006, from http://www.wissensdrang.com/auf1ce1.htm

    Google Scholar 

  • Ploetzner, R., & Lowe, R. (2004). Dynamic visualizations and learning. Learning and Instruction, 14, 235–240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polya, G. (1957). How to solve it(2nd ed.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pozzer, L. L., & Roth, W.-M. (2003). Prevalence, function, and structure of photographs in high school biology textbooks. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1089–1114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reisberg, D. (1997). Cognition. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., Bowen, G. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Differences in graph-related practices between high school biology textbooks and scientific ecology journals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 977–1019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., & Welzel, M. (2001). From activity to gestures and scientific language. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(1), 103–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taber, K. (2002). Chemical misconceptions –prevention, diagnosis and cure. Volume1: Theoretical background. London: Royal Society of Chemistry.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treagust, D. F., Harrison, A. G., & Venville, G. (1998). Teaching science effectively with analogies: An approach for pre-service and in-service teacher education. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18 (85–101), 91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuckey, H., & Selvaratnam, M. (1993). Studies involving three-dimensional visualisation skills in chemistry. Studies in Science Education, 21, 99–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tufte, E. R. (1983). The visual display of quantitative information. Cheshire, Connecticut: Graphics Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unsworth, L. ( 2001). Teaching Multiliteracies Across the Curriculum. Buckingham: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Education, The University of Reading, UK

    John K. Gilbert

Authors
  1. John K. Gilbert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Reading, UK

    John K. Gilbert

  2. Technion, Israel Institute of Technology, Israel

    Miriam Reiner

  3. Purdue University, USA

    Mary Nakhleh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gilbert, J.K. (2008). Visualization: An Emergent Field of Practice and Enquiry in Science Education. In: Gilbert, J.K., Reiner, M., Nakhleh, M. (eds) Visualization: Theory and Practice in Science Education. Models and Modeling in Science Education, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5267-5_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation