Skip to main content

Pedagogical Affordances of Multiple External Representations in Scientific Processes

Abstract

Multiple external representations (MERs) have been widely used in science teaching and learning. Theories such as dual coding theory and cognitive flexibility theory have been developed to explain why the use of MERs is beneficial to learning, but they do not provide much information on pedagogical issues such as how and in what conditions MERs could be introduced and used to support students’ engagement in scientific processes and develop competent scientific practices (e.g., asking questions, planning investigations, and analyzing data). Additionally, little is understood about complex interactions among scientific processes and affordances of MERs. Therefore, this article focuses on pedagogical affordances of MERs in learning environments that engage students in various scientific processes. By reviewing literature in science education and cognitive psychology and integrating multiple perspectives, this article aims at exploring (1) how MERs can be integrated with science processes due to their different affordances, and (2) how student learning with MERs can be scaffolded, especially in a classroom situation. We argue that pairing representations and scientific processes in a principled way based on the affordances of the representations and the goals of the activities is a powerful way to use MERs in science education. Finally, we outline types of scaffolding that could help effective use of MERs including dynamic linking, model progression, support in instructional materials, teacher support, and active engagement.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams DD, Shrum JW (1990) The effects of microcomputer-based laboratory exercises on the acquisition of line graph construction and interpretation skills by high school biology students. J Res Sci Teach 27(8):777–787

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ainsworth S (1999) The functions of multiple representations. Comput Educ 33:131–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ainsworth S (2006) DeFT: a conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learn Instr 16(3):183–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnea N, Dori YJ (1996) Computerized molecular modeling as a tool to improve chemistry teaching. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 36:629–636

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell P (2004) On the theoretical breadth of design-based research in education. Educ Psychol 39(4):243–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berthold K, Renkl A (2009) Instructional aids to support a conceptual understanding of multiple representations. J Educ Psychol 101:70–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodemer D, Ploetzner R, Feuerlein I, Spada H (2004) The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualizations. Learn Instr 14:325–341

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen GM, Roth W-M, McGinn MK (1999) Interpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: toward a social practice view of scientific representation practices. J Res Sci Teach 36(9):1020–1043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckley BC (2000) Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in biology. Int J Sci Educ 22(9):895–935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camacho FF, Cazares LG (1998) Partial possible models: an approach to interpret students’ physical representation. Sci Educ 82(1):15–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang H-Y, Quintana C, Krajcik JS (2009) The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter. Sci Educ 94:73–94

    Google Scholar 

  • Chemero A (2003) An outline of a theory of affordances. Ecol Psychol 15(2):181–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark D, Jorde D (2004) Helping students revise disruptive experientially supported ideas about thermodynamics: computer visualizations and tactile models. J Res Sci Teach 41(1):1–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clement JJ, Rea-Ramirez MA (eds) (2008) Model based learning and instruction in science. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen DK, Ball DL (2001) Making change: instruction and its improvement. Phi Delta Kappan 83(1):73–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosgrove M (1995) A study of science-in-the-making as students generate an analogy for electricity. Int J Sci Educ 17(3):295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dagher ZR (1995) Analysis of analogies used by science teachers. J Res Sci Teach 32(3):259–270

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis EA, Petish DA (2001) Developing expertise in science teaching-and in science teacher education. Paper presented at the American educational research association conference, Seattle

  • de Jong T, Martin E, Zamarro J-M, Esquembre F, Swaak J, van Joolingen WP (1999) The integration of computer simulation and learning support: an example from the physics domain of collisions. J Res Sci Teach 36(5):597–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Koning BB, Tabbers HK (2011) Facilitating understanding of movements in dynamic visualizations: an embodied perspective. Educ Psychol Rev 23(4):501–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duit R (1991) On the role of analogies and metaphors in learning science. Sci Educ 75(6):649–672

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl RA, Schweingruber HA, Shouse AW (eds) (2007) Taking science to school: learning and teaching science in Grades K-8. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Feisel LD, Rosa AJ (2005) The role of the laboratory in undergraduate engineering education. J Eng Educ 94(1):121–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferk V, Vrtacnik M, Blejec A, Gril A (2003) Students’ understanding of molecular structure representations. Int J Sci Educ 25(10):1227–1245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein ND, Adams WK, Keller CJ, Kohl PB, Perkins KK, Podolefsky NS et al (2005) When learning about the real world is better done virtually: a study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Phys Rev Special Top Phys Educ Res 1(1):010103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederiksen JR, White BY, Gutwill J (1999) Dynamic mental models in learning science: the importance of constructing derivational linkages among models. J Res Sci Teach 36(7):806–836

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson J (1977) The theory of affordances. In: Shaw R, Bransford J (eds) Perceiving, acting, and knowing. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 67–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert JK, Boulter C, Rutherford M (1998a) Models in explanations, Part 1: Horses for courses? Int J Sci Educ 20(1):83–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert JK, Boulter C, Rutherford M (1998b) Models in explanations, Part 2: whose voice? Whose ears? Int J Sci Educ 20(2):187–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glynn SM, Takahashi T (1998) Learning from analogy-enhanced science text. J Res Sci Teach 35(10):1129–1149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glynn SM, Britton BK, Semrud-Clikeman M, Muth KD (1989) Analogical reasoning and problem solving in science textbooks. In: Glover JA, Ronning RR, Reynolds CR (eds) Handbook of creativity: perspectives on individual differences. Plenum Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman SR (2003) Learning in complex domains: when and why do multiple representations help? Learn Instr 13:239–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstone RL, Son JY (2005) The transfer of scientific principles using concrete and idealized simulations. J Learn Sci 14(1):69–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greca IM, Moreira MA (1997) The kinds of mental representations-models, propositions and images-used by college physics students regarding the concept of field. Int J Sci Educ 19(6):711–724

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greca IM, Moreira MA (2000) Mental models, conceptual models, and modelling. Int J Sci Educ 22(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunel M, Hand B, Gunduz S (2006) Comparing student understanding of quantum physics when embedding multimodal representations into two different writing formats: presentation format versus summary report format. Sci Educ 90(6):1092–1112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagevik R, Beilfuss M, Dickerson D (2006) Multiple representation sin science education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching (NARST), April 3–6, San Francisco

  • Hammond M (2010) What is an affordance and can it help us understand the use of ICT in education? Educ Inf Technol 15(3):205–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison AG, Treagust DF (2000a) Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: a case study of multiple-model use in Grade 11 chemistry. Sci Educ 84(3):352–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison AG, Treagust DF (2000b) A typology of school science models. Int J Sci Educ 22(9):1011–1026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart C, Mulhall P, Berry A, Loughran J, Gunstone R (2000) What is the purpose of this experiment? Or can students learn something from doing experiments? J Res Sci Teach 37(7):655–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstein A, Lunetta VN (2004) The laboratory in science education: foundations for the twenty-first century. Sci Educ 88:28–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hyman BS (1982) The role of student manipulation of molecular models and spatial visualization ability on achievement in college level organic chemistry. Dissertation Abstracts International 43(5-A):1491

  • Ingham AM, Gilbert JK (1991) The use of analogue models by students of chemistry at higher education level. Int J Sci Educ 13(2):193–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone AH (1982) Macro- and microchemistry. School Sci Rev 64:377–379

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnstone AH (1993) The development of chemistry teaching: a changing response to changing demand. J Chem Educ 70(9):701–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Justi R, Gilbert JK (1999) A cause of ahistorical science teaching: use of hybrid models. Sci Educ 83(2):163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaput J (1994) Democratizing access to calculus: new routes using old roots. In: Schoenfeld A (ed) Mathematical thinking and problem solving. LEA, Hillsdale, pp 77–156

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufman DR, Patel VL, Magder SA (1996) The explanatory role of spontaneously generated analogies in reasoning about physiological concepts. Int J Sci Educ 18(3):369–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohl PB, Rosengrant D, Finkelstein ND (2007) Strongly and weakly directed approaches to teaching multiple representation use in physics. Phys Rev Special Top Phys Educ Res 3(1):010108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma R, Russell J (1997) Multimedia and understanding: expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. J Res Sci Teach 34(9):949–968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma R, Russell J (2005) Students becoming chemists: developing representational competence. In: Gilbert J (ed) Visualization in science education. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 121–145

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kozma R, Russell J, Jones T, Marx N, Davis J (1996) The use of multiple, linked representations to facilitate science understanding. In: Vosniadou S, Corte ED, Glaser R, Mandel H (eds) International perspective on the psychological foundations of technology-based learning environments. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 41–60

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozma R, Chin E, Russell J, Marx N (2000) The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry instruction. J Learn Sci 9(2):105–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krajcik JS, Blumenfeld PC, Marx RW, Bass KM, Fredricks J, Soloway E (1998) Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: initial attempts by middle school students. J Learn Sci 7(3&4):313–350

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke JL (1998) Multiplying meaning: visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In: Martin JR, Vell R (eds) Reading science: critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science. Routledge, New York, pp 87–113

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke JL (2004) The literacies of science. In: Saul EW (ed) Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction. International Reading Association, Newark

    Google Scholar 

  • Leonard WH (1992) A comparison of student performance following instruction by interactive videodisc versus conventional laboratory. J Res Sci Teach 29(1):93–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowe RK (2003) Animation and learning: selective processing of information in dynamic graphics. Learn Instr 13:157–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKinney WJ (1997) The educational use of computer based science simulations: some lessons from the philosophy of science. Sci Educ 6(6):591–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno R, Duran R (2004) Do multiple representations need explanations? The role of verbal guidance and individual differences in multimedia mathematics learning. J Educ Psychol 96(3):492–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakhleh MB, Krajcik JS (1993) A protocol analysis of the influence of technology on students’ actions, verbal commentary, and thought processes during the performance of acid-base titrations. J Res Sci Teach 30(9):1149–1168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakhleh MB, Krajcik JS (1994) Influence of levels of information as presented by different technologies on students’ understanding of acid, base, and pH concepts. J Res Sci Teach 31(10):1077–1096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (1996) National science education standards. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2000) Inquiry and the national science education standards: a guide for teaching and learning. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2011) A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar AS, Magnusson SJ (2001) The interplay of first-hand and second-hand investigations to model and support the development of scientific knowledge and reasoning. In: Carver SM, Klahr D (eds) Cognition and instruction: twenty-five years of progress. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 151–193

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavio A (1986) Mental representations: a dual-coding approach. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearson (2006) Science and literacy—a natural integration. Retrieved from http://www.nsta.org/main/news/stories/nsta_story.php?news_story_ID=52301

  • Pinto R, Boudamoussi SE (2009) Scientific processes in PISA tests observed for science teachers. Int J Sci Educ 31(16):2137–2159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pittman KM (1999) Student-generated analogies: another way of knowing? J Res Sci Teach 36(1):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ploetzner R, Fehse E, Kneser C, Spada H (1999) Learning to relate qualitative and quantitative problem representations in a model-based setting for collaborative problem-solving. J Learn Sci 8:177–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plötzner R, Lippitsch S, Galmbacher M, Heuer D (2006) Students’ difficulties in learning physics from dynamic and interactive visualizations. Paper presented at the international conference of the learning sciences 2006, Bloomington, IN

  • Prain V, Waldrip B (2006) An exploratory study of teachers’ and students’ use of multi-modal representations of concepts in primary science. Int J Sci Educ 28(15):1843–1866

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar S, Kolodner JL (2005) Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: helping students learn science from design. J Res Sci Teach 42(2):185–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Puntambekar S, Stylianou A, Goldstein J (2007) Comparing classroom enactments of an inquiry curriculum: lessons learned from two teachers. J Learn Sci 16(1):81–130

    Google Scholar 

  • Romberg TA, Carpenter TP (1986) Research on teaching and learning mathematics: two disciplines of scientific inquiry. Handb Res Teach 3:850–873

    Google Scholar 

  • Ronen M, Eliahu M (2000) Simulation—a bridge between theory and reality: the case of electric circuits. J Comput Assist Learn 16:14–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth W-M, Bowen GM (1994) Mathematization of experience in a grade 8 open-inquiry environment: an introduction to the representational practices of science. J Res Sci Teach 31(3):293–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth W-M, McGinn MK (1997) Graphing: cognitive ability or practice? Sci Educ 81(1):91–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth W-M, McGinn MK (1998) Inscriptions: toward a theory of representing as social practice. Rev Educ Res 68(1):35–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutten N, van Joolingen WR, van der Veen JT (2012) The learning effects of computer simulations in science education. Comput Educ 58(1):136–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sandoval WA, Daniszewki K (2004) Mapping the trade-offs in teachers’ integration of technology-supported inquiry in high school science classes. J Sci Educ Technol 13(2):161–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saul W (ed) (2004) Crossing borders in literacy and science instruction. International Reading Association, Newark

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider RM, Krajcik J, Blumenfeld P (2005) Enacting reform-based science materials: the range of teacher enactments in reform classrooms. J Res Sci Teach 42:283–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schnotz W (2002) Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educ Psychol Rev 14(1):101–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seufert T (2003) Supporting coherence formation in learning from multiple representations. Learn Instr 13(2):227–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spiro RJ, Coulson RL, Feltovich PJ, Anderson DK (1988) Cognitive flexibility theory: advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domain. Paper presented at the 10th annual conference of the cognitive science society

  • Tabak I (2004) Synergy: a complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. J Learn Sci 13(3):305–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabak I, Baumgartner E (2004) The teacher as partner: exploring participant structures, symmetry, and identity work in scaffolding. Cogn Instr 22(4):393–429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tabak I, Reiser B (1997) Complementary roles of software-based scaffolding and teacher-student interactions in inquiry learning. In: Hall R, Miyake R, Enyedy N (eds) Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on computer support for collaborative learning (CSCL ‘97), Toronto, Canada, pp 289–298

  • Treagust DF, Chittleborough G, Mamiala TL (2003) The role of submicroscopic and symbolic representations in chemical explanations. Int J Sci Educ 25(11):1353–1368

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui C-Y (2003) Teaching and learning genetics with multiple representations. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Australia

  • Tyler R, Prain V, Peterson S (2007) Representational issues in students learning about evaporation. Res Sci Educ 37:313–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Meij J, de Jong T (2006) Supporting students’ learning with multiple representations in a dynamic simulation-based learning environment. Learn Instr 16:199–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Heuvelen A, Zou X (2001) Multiple representations of work-energy processes. Am J Phys 69(2):184–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White BY (1993) ThinkerTools: causal models, conceptual change, and science education. Cogn Instr 10(1):1–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White BY, Frederiksen JR (1998) Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: making science accessible to all students. Cogn Instr 16(1):3–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wijekumar KJ, Meyer BJF, Wagoner D, Ferguson L (2006) Technology affordances: the ‘real story’ in research with K-12 and undergraduate learners. Br J Educ Technol 37(2):191–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson VM, Abraham MR (1995) The effects of computer animation on the particulate mental models of college chemistry students. J Res Sci Teach 32(5):521–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong D (1993) Self-generated analogies as a tool for constructing and evaluating explanations of scientific phenomena. J Res Sci Teach 30(4):367–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu H-K, Huang Y-L (2007) Ninth grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-centered technology-enhanced learning environments. Sci Educ 91:727–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu H-K, Krajcik JS (2006a) Exploring middle school students’ use of inscriptions in project-based science classrooms. Sci Educ 90(5):852–873

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu H-K, Krajcik JS (2006b) Inscriptional practices in two inquiry-based classrooms: a case study of seventh graders’ use of data tables and graphs. J Res Sci Teach 43(1):63–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu H-K, Lin Y-F (under review) Effects of representation sequences and spatial ability on students’ scientific understandings about the mechanism of breathing

  • Wu H-K, Shah P (2004) Exploring visuospatial thinking in chemistry learning. Sci Educ 88:465–492

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yore L, Bisanz GL, Hand BM (2003) Examining the literacy component of science literacy: 25 years of language and science research. Int J Sci Educ 25:689–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zacharia Z, Anderson O (2003) The effects of an interactive computer-based simulation prior to performing a laboratory inquiry-based experiment on students’ conceptual understanding of physics. Am J Phys 71:618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zollman DA, Rebello NS, Hogg K (2002) Quantum mechanics for everyone: hands-on activities integrated with technology. Am J Phys 70(3):252–529

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was based upon work supported by the National Science Council of Taiwan under NSC 97-2918-I-003-01 and NSC 100-2511-S-003-041-MY3.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hsin-Kai Wu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wu, HK., Puntambekar, S. Pedagogical Affordances of Multiple External Representations in Scientific Processes. J Sci Educ Technol 21, 754–767 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9363-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9363-7

Keywords