Understanding the life cycle of computer-based models: the role of expert contributions in design, development and implementation
This paper examined the nuances of the background process of design and development and follow up classroom implementation of computer-based models for high school chemistry. More specifically, the study examined the knowledge contributions of an interdisciplinary team of experts; points of tensions, negotiations and non-negotiable aspects of model design; and the evolutionary trajectory of technological artefacts as they are readied for classroom implementation. A Discourse-in-use methodological approach examined planning sessions involved in the design and development of models and a case study of classroom implementation in two high school chemistry classrooms were conducted. The data included transcripts of planning sessions, classroom observations and teacher and student interviews. Design and development sessions reflected five major themes: (i) the nature of models: function, goals and limitations of models (ii) the role of students, background knowledge, and goals for student learning (ii) pedagogical decisions of the modeling process (iv) models and assessment and (v) the role of implementation. In comparison to the educator group, the scientist/programmer knowledge contributions dominated the form that technologies eventually assumed. Surely, implementation exposed teacher and student challenges with sub micro NetLogo representations; this finding reinforced the tensions and non-negotiable aspects of design that were involved in ensuring accurate representations. Models were configured to accommodate what was scientifically and technically reproducible within the constraints of context. However, these visual representations were not always commensurable with chemistry expectations at the high school level. These findings have implications for pedagogical decisions aligned with implementation, content understanding and assessment; and the sustainability of computer-based models in precollege science classrooms.
KeywordsDesign and development Implementation Nature of technology Computer-based models Role of expertise Chemistry High school
The materials reported in this paper are based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DRL-0918295. The authors sincerely thank the contributions made by Dr. Gail Zichittella, Silin Wei, Saranya Harikrishnan and Melinda Whitford. Conclusions or recommendations expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.
- Adadan, E., Trundle, K. C., & Irving, K. E. (2010). Exploring grade 11 students’ conceptual pathways of the particulate nature of matter in the context of multirepresentational instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 1004–1035.Google Scholar
- Arthur, W. B. (2009). The nature of technology. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Basalla, G. (1996). The evolution of technology. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Bell, P., Hoadley, C. M., & Linn, M. C. (2004). Design-based research in education. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis, & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet environments for science education (pp. 3–27). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Bloome, D., & Clark, C. (2006). Discourse-in-use. In J. L. Green, G. Camilli, & P. B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp. 227–241). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
- Chang, H., Quintana, C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2009). The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter. Science Education, 94, 73–94.Google Scholar
- Friedman, R., & Saponara, A. (2008). Novice and expert collaboration in educational software development: Evaluating application effectiveness. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19, 271–292.Google Scholar
- Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.Google Scholar
- Gregorius, R. Ma. (2010). Good animations: Pedagogy and learning theory in the design and use of multimedia. In R. E. Belford, J. W. Moore, & H. E. Pence (Eds.), Enhancing learning with online resources, social networking, and digital libraries (pp. 167–190). Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Kanter, D. E. (2009). Doing the project and learning the content: Designing project-based science curricula for meaningful understanding. Science Education, 94, 525–551.Google Scholar
- Mor, Y. (2011). Context is what we take for granted: Addressing context in design-centric teacher training. In Context and technology enhanced learning (ConTEL): Theory, methodology and design. Palermo: Workshop, EC-TEL 2011, 21/9/2011.Google Scholar
- National Research Council. (2011). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Russell, D. W., Lucas, K. B., & McRobbie, C. J. (2004). Role of microcomputer-based laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in thermal physics. Journal of Science and Technology, 41, 165–185.Google Scholar
- Sins, P. H. M., Savelsbergh, E. R., van Joolingen, W. R., & van Hout Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2009). The relation between students’ epistemological understanding of computer models and their cognitive processing on a modeling task. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 1205–1229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Waight, N., Liu, X., Gregorius, R. M., Smith, E., & Park, M. (2014). Teacher conceptions and approaches associated with an immersive instructional implementation of computer-based models and assessment in secondary chemistry classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 36, 467–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wilensky, U. (1999). NetLogo, Center for connected learning and computer-based modeling. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University. http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo.