Journal of Science Education and Technology

, Volume 19, Issue 5, pp 505–511 | Cite as

Learning with Web Tools, Simulations, and Other Technologies in Science Classrooms

  • Todd Campbell
  • Shaing Kwei Wang
  • Hui-Yin Hsu
  • Aaron M. Duffy
  • Paul G. Wolf


This position paper proposes the enhancement of teacher and student learning in science classrooms by tapping the enormous potential of information communication and technologies (ICTs) as cognitive tools for engaging students in scientific inquiry. This paper serves to challenge teacher-held assumptions about students learning science ‘from technology’ with a framework and examples of students learning science ‘with technology’. Whereas a high percentage of students are finding their way in using ICTs outside of school, for the most part they currently are not doing so inside of school in ways that they find meaningful and relevant to their lives. Instead, the pedagogical approaches that are most often experienced are out-of-step with how students use ICTs outside of schools and are not supportive of learning framed by constructivism. Here we describe a theoretical and pedagogical foundation for better connecting the two worlds of students’ lives: life in school and life outside of school. This position paper is in response to the changing landscape of students’ lives. The position is transformative in nature because it proposes the use of cyber-enabled resources for cultivating and leveraging students new literacy skills by learning ‘with technology’ to enhance science learning.


Web tools Simulations Technologies Inquiry Formal and informal settings Reform Cognitive tools Information communication and technologies (ICTs) 


  1. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1989) Science for all Americans. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  2. Aypay A, Erdoğan M, Sözer MA (2007) The variation among schools on classroom practices in science based on TIMSS-1999 in Turkey. J Res Sci Teach 44(10):1417–1435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baylor A, Ritchie D (2002) What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Comput Educ 39(4):395–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bell R, Gess-Newsome J, Luft J (2008) Technology in the secondary science classroom. NSTA Press, Arlington, VAGoogle Scholar
  5. Bennett S, Maton K, Kervin L (2008) The ‘digital natives’ debate: a critical review of the evidence. Brit J Educ Technol 39(5):775–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Besnoy KD, Housand BC, Clarke LW (2008) Changing nature of technology and the promise of educational technology for gifted education. In: Karnes FA, Bean SM (eds) Methods and materials for teaching the gifted, 3rd edn. Prufrock Press, Inc, Waco, TexasGoogle Scholar
  7. Blumenfeld P, Fishman B, Krajcik J, Marx RW, Soloway E (2000) Creating useable innovations in systemic reform: scaling-up technology-embedded project-based science in urban schools. Educ Psychol 35(3):149–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlone H, Webb S (2006) On (not) overcoming our history of hierarchy: complexities of university/school collaboration. Sci Educ 90(3):544–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Campbell T, Bohn C (2008) Science laboratory experiences of high school students across one state in the U.S.: descriptive research from the classroom. Sci Educ 17(1):36–48Google Scholar
  10. Clarke LW, Besnoy KD (2009) Introduction: technology and the evolving classroom. In: Besnoy KD, Clarke L (eds) High-tech teaching success! A step-by-step guide to using innovative technology in your classroom. Prufrock Press, Waco, TX, pp 2–18Google Scholar
  11. Cuban L (2001) Oversold and underused: computers in the classroom. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  12. Dede C (2000) Emerging influences of information technology on school curriculum. J Curric Stud 32(2):281–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dunleavy M, Dede C, Mitchelle R (2009) Affordances and limitations of immersive participatory augmented reality simulations for teaching and learning. J Sci Educ Technol 18:7–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fetters MK, Czerniak CM, Fish L, Shawberry J (2002) Confronting challenging, and changing teachers’ beliefs: implications from a local systemic change professional development program. J Sci Teacher Educ 12(2):101–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Friedman T (2005) The world is flat: a brief history of the twenty-first century. Farrar, Straus and GirouxGoogle Scholar
  16. Hsu H-Y, Wang S-K (in press a) The exploration of New York City high school students’ global literacy. Multicult Educ Technol JGoogle Scholar
  17. Hsu H-Y, Wang S-K (in press b) The impact of using blogs on college students’ reading comprehension and learning motivation. Literacy Res InstructGoogle Scholar
  18. Ito M et al (2008) Living and learning with new media: summary of findings from the digital youth project. Retrieved from
  19. Ito M et al (2009) Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: kids living and learning with new media. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnston A (2008) Demythologizing or dehumanizing? A response to settlage and the ideals of open inquiry. J Sci Teacher Educ 19:11–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jonassen DH (1996) Computers in the classroom: mindtools for critical thinking. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  22. Jonassen DH, Reeves TC (1996) Learning with technology: using computers as cognitive tools. In: Jonassen DH (ed) Handbook of research for educational communications, technology. New York, Macmillan, pp 693–719Google Scholar
  23. Kim M, Hannafin M, Bryan L (2007) Technology-enhanced inquiry tools in science education: an emerging pedagogical framework for classroom practice. Sci Educ 96(6):1010–1030Google Scholar
  24. Kinchin I (2002) Why professional development should challenge teachers’ core beliefs. School Sci Rev 84(306):77–81Google Scholar
  25. Krause GF, Judd TS, Churchward A, Gray K, Krause K (2008) First year students’ experiences with technology: are they really digital natives? Aus J Educ Technol 24(1):108–122Google Scholar
  26. Lajoie SP, Derry SJ (eds) (1993) Computers as cognitive tools. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJGoogle Scholar
  27. Lee H, Linn MC, Varma K, Liu OL (2010) How do technology-enhanced inquiry science units impact classroom learning? J Res Sci Teach 47(1):71–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lenhart A, Arafeh S, Smith A, Rankin A (2008) Writing, technology and teens. Washington, DC: Pew/Internet. Available from:
  29. Leu DJ Jr, Kinzer CK, Coiro J, Cammack D (2004) Toward a theory of new literacies emerging from the internet and other information and communication tecnologies. In: Ruddell RB, Unrau N (eds) Theoretical models and processes of reading, 5th edn. International Reading Association, Newark, DE, pp 1568–1611Google Scholar
  30. Levin D, Arafeh S (2002) The digital disconnect: the widening gap between internet-savvy students and their schools. Retrieved on February 20, 2006, from
  31. Lewin C, Mavers D, Somekh B (2003) Broadening access to the curriculum through using technology to link home and school: a critical analysis of reforms to improve attainment for all K12 students. Curric J 14(1):23–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Livingstone S, Bober M (2005) UK children go online: final report of key project findings. Economic and Social Research Council, LondonGoogle Scholar
  33. Loucks-Horsley S, Hewson P, Love N, Stiles K (1997) Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks, CAGoogle Scholar
  34. Luft JA, Roehrig GH, Patterson NC (2003) Contrasting landscapes: a comparison of the impact of different induction programs on beginning secondary science teachers’ practices, beliefs, and experiences. J Res Sci Teach 40(1):77–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lussier C, Gomez S, Hurst R, Hendrick S (2007) Improving science classroom instruction by means of constructivism and technology. In: Montgomerie C, Seale J (eds) Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications 2007. AACE, Chesapeake, VA, pp 2282–2284Google Scholar
  36. Mistler-Jackson M, Songer NB (2000) Student motivation and internet technology: are students empowered to learn science? J Res Sci Teach 37:459–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mumtaz S (2000) ‘Factors affecting teachers’ use of information and communications technology: a review of the literature. Technol Pedagog Educ 9(3):319–342Google Scholar
  38. National Research Council (2008) Ready, set, science: putting research to work in K-8 science classrooms. National Academy Press, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  39. National Research Council (NRC) (1996) National science education standards. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  40. National Research Council (NRC) (2000) How people learn: brain, experience and school. Bransford JR, Brown AL, Cocking RR (Eds.) Committee on developments in the science of learning, commission on behavioral and social sciences and education. Washington, DC: National Academy PressGoogle Scholar
  41. National Research Council (NRC) (2005) America’s lab report: investigations in high school science. National Academy Press, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  42. National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) (2007) NSTA position statement. Scientific inquiry.
  43. Pew Internet & American Life report (2002) Use of the internet at major life moments. Retrieved December 9, 2008, Web site:
  44. Ping Lim C, Sing Chai C (2008) Teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and their planning and conduct of computer-mediated classroom lessons. Brit J Educ Technol 39(5):807–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Prensky M (2001) Digital native’s digital immigrants. Horizon 9(5):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Quintana C, Reiser BJ, Davis EA, Krajcik J, Fretz E, Duncan RG et al (2004) A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. J Learn Sci 13(3):337–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Reif F (2008) Applying cognitive science to education. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  48. Reynard R (2008) Web 2.0 meets conventional Ed. Campus Technol 18–19Google Scholar
  49. Salomon G, Perkins DN, Globerson T (1991) Partners in cognition: extending human intelligence with intelligent technologies. Educ Res 20(3):2–9Google Scholar
  50. Waight N, Abd-El-Khalick F (2007) The impact of technology on the enactment of “Inquiry” in a technology enthusiast’s sixth grade science classroom. J Res Sci Teach 44(1):154–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wang S, Hsu H-Y, Campbell T (2009) Science learning, literacy, and the development of 21st century digital literacy. In: Besnoy KD, Lane C (eds) High-tech teaching success! A step-by-step guide to using innovative technology in your classroom. Prufrock Press, Waco, TXGoogle Scholar
  52. Weiss I, Pasley J, Smith S, Banilower E, Heck D (2003) Looking inside the classroom: a study of K-12 mathematics and science education in the United States. Horizon Research, Inc, Chapel Hill, NCGoogle Scholar
  53. Windschitl M (2003) Inquiry projects in science teacher education: what can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Sci Educ 87(1):112–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Zhao Y, Cziko GA (2001) Teacher adoption of technology: a perceptual control theory perspective. J Technol Teach Educ 9(1):5–30Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Todd Campbell
    • 1
  • Shaing Kwei Wang
    • 2
  • Hui-Yin Hsu
    • 2
  • Aaron M. Duffy
    • 1
  • Paul G. Wolf
    • 1
  1. 1.Utah State UniversityLoganUSA
  2. 2.New York Institute of TechnologyOld WestburyUSA

Personalised recommendations