Abstract
Inquiry-based instruction including problem-, project-, and case-based methods often incorporate complex sets of learning activities. The numerous activities run the risk of becoming disconnected in the minds of learners and teachers. STAR.Legacy is a software shell that can help designers organize learning activities into an inquiry cycle that is easy to understand and pedagogically sound. To ensure that classroom teachers can adapt the inquiry activities according to their local resources and needs, STAR.Legacy was built upon four types of design principles: learner centered, knowledge centered, assessment centered, and community centered. We describe how a STAR.Legacy constructed for an educational psychology course helped preservice teachers design and learn about effective inquiry-based instruction.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barron, B.J., Schwartz, D.L., Vye, N.J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., Bransford, J.D., & Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1998). Doing with understanding: Lessons from research on problem- and project-based learning.Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 271–311
Barron, B.J., Vye, N.J., Zech, L., Schwartz, D., Bransford, J.D., Goldman, S.R., Pellegrino, J., Morris, J., Garrison, S., & Kantor, R. (1995). Creating contexts for community-based problem solving: The Jasper challenge series. In C.N. Hedley, P. Atonacci, & M. Rabinowitz (Eds.),Thinking and literacy: The mind at work. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Barrows, H.S. (1985).How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years. New York: Springer.
Bell, B. (1998). Investigate and decide learning environments: Specializing task models for authoring tool design.Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 65–107.
Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1985). Cognitive coping strategies and the problem of “inert” knowledge. In S.F. Chipman, J.W. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.),Thinking and learning skills: Current research and open questions (Vol. 2, pp. 65–80). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bransford, J.D., Franks, J.J., Vye, N.J., & Sherwood, R.D. (1989). New approaches to instruction: Because wisdom can't be told. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.),Similarity and analogical reasoning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bransford, J.D., & Nitsch, K.E. (1978). Coming to understand things we could not previously understand. In J.F. Kavanagh & W. Strange (Eds.),Speech and language in the laboratory, school and clinic. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bransford, J.D., & Schwartz, D.L. (in press). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. To appear in A. Iran-Nejad & P.D. Pearson (Eds.),Review of Research in Education, 24, xxx-xxx. Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.
Bransford, J.D., Sherwood, R.D., Hasselbring, T.S., Kinzer, C.K., & Williams, S.M. (1990). Anchored instruction: Why we need it and how technology can help. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.),Cognition, education, and multi-media: Exploring ideas in high technology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bransford, J.D., Zech, L., Schwartz, D.L., Barron, B.J., Vye, N., & Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (in press). Design environments that invite and sustain mathematical thinking. To appear in P. Cobb (Ed.),Symbolizing, communicating, and mathematizing: Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bridges, E.M., & Hallinger, P. (1995).Implementing problem based learning in leadership development. University of Oregon: ERIC Clearinghouse of Educational Management.
Brown, A.L., & Campione, J.C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.),Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229–272). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical development.Educational Researcher, 23, 13–20.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1992). The Jasper series as an example of anchored instruction: Theory, program description, and assessment data.Educational Psychologist, 27, 291–315.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1994). Generative learning and anchored instruction: Design, research and implementation issues. In B.P.M. Creemers and G.J. Reezigt (Eds.),New directions in educational research: Contributions from an international perspective. Groningen: ICO.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1996). Looking at technology in context: A framework for understanding technology and education research. In D.C. Berliner & R.C. Calfee (Eds.),The handbook of educational psychology (pp. 807–840). NY: Simon & Schuster MacMillan.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997).The Jasper project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (in press). Adventures in anchored instruction: Lessons from beyond the ivory tower. To appear in R. Glaser (Ed.),Advances in instructional psychology (Vol. 5), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Dweck, C.S. (1989). Motivation. In A. Lesgold & R. Glaser (Eds.),Foundations for a psychology of education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Gardner, H. (1991). Assessment in context: The alternative to standardized testing. In B. Gifford & C. O'Connor (Eds.),Future assessments: Changing views of aptitude, achievement, and instruction (pp. 77–120). Boston: Kluwer.
Gibson, J.J., & Gibson, E.J. (1957). Perceptual learning: Differentiation or enrichment.Psychological Review, 62, 32–51.
Gick, M.L., & Holyoak, K.J. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer.Cognitive Psychology, 15, 1–38.
Gragg, C.L. (1940, October 19). Wisdom can't be told.Harvard Alumni Bulletin.
Hmelo, C.E. (1998). Problem-based learning: Effects on the early acquisition of cognitive skills in medicine.Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 173–208.
Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P.C., Marx, R.W., Bass, K.M., & Fredricks, J. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students.Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 313–350.
Kuhn, T.S. (1962).The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lin, X.D., & Bielaczyc, K. (1998).Supporting metacognitive activities in learning about complex subject domains. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Michael, A.L., Klee, T., Bransford, J.D., & Warren, S. (1993). The transition from theory to therapy: Test of two instructional methods.Applied Cognitive Psychology, 7, 139–154.
Murray, T. (1998). Authoring knowledge-based tutors: Tools for content, instructional strategy, student model, and interface design.Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 5–64.
Newell, A., & Simon, H. (1972).Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Nunn, C.E. (1996). Discussion in college classrooms: Triangulating observation and survey results.Journal of Higher Education, 67, 23–26.
Penner, D.E., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (1998). From physical models to biomechanics: A design-based modeling approach.Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7, 429–449.
Perfetto, G.A., Bransford, J.D., & Franks, J.J. (1983). Constraints on access in a problem solving context.Memory and Cognition, 11, 24–31.
Sato, N.E., & McLaughlin, M W. (1992). Context matters: Teaching in Japan and in the United States.Phi Delta Kappan, 73, 359–366.
Schwartz, D.L., Biswas, G., Bransford, J.D., Bhuva, B., Balac, T., & Brophy, S. (in press). Computer tools that link assessment and instruction: Investigating what makes electricity hard to learn. To appear in S. Lajoie (Ed.),Computers as cognitive tools: The next generation. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Schwartz, D.L., & Bransford, J.D. (1998). A time for telling.Cognition & Instruction, 16, 475–522.
Schwartz, D.L., Lin, X.D., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J.D. (in press). Towards the development of flexibly adaptive instructional design. To appear in C. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models, Volume II. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Spiro, R.J., & Jehng, J.C. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for the non-linear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In D. Nix and R.J. Spiro (Eds.),Cognition, education, and multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Towler, L., & Broadfoot, P. (1992). Self-assessment in the primary school.Educational Review, 44, 137–151.
Vye, N.J., Schwartz, D.L., Bransford, J.D., Barron, B., Zech, L., and Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1998). SMART environments that support monitoring, reflection, and revision. In Hacker, Dunlosky, & Graesser (Eds.),Metacognition in educational theory and practice. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Wertime, R. (1979). Students' problems and “courage spans”. In J. Lockhead and J. Clements (Eds.),Cognitive process instruction. Philadelphia: The Franklin Institute Press.
Whitehead, A.N. (1929).The aims of education. New York: MacMillan.
Williams, S.E. (1992). Putting case-based instruction into context: Examples from legal and medical education.Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 367–427.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
This work was supported by grant #R305F60090 from the Department of Education. The authors thank the educational psychology students for their contributions to this paper and Amy Ryce for her editorial talents.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Schwartz, D.L., Brophy, S., Lin, X. et al. Software for managing complex learning: Examples from an educational psychology course. ETR&D 47, 39–59 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299464
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299464