Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Which Setting to Choose: Comparison of Whole-Class vs. Small-Group Computer Simulation Use

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Studies considering whole-class use of computer simulations are limited, despite the increasing interest in this mode of use. The current study explored how a collection of computer simulations was integrated into both whole-class and small-group instructional settings during a high school chemistry unit on atomic structure. Participants included one teacher and all of the students in two of her classes. Descriptive statistics are reported for pre- and post-instruction quantitative assessments of student conceptual understanding. Analytic induction guided analysis of a variety of qualitative data sources, including classroom observations, artifacts and interviews. Findings indicated that, regardless of the setting, computer simulations positively contributed to students’ learning gains. Further, highly collaborative talk, coupled with meaningful teacher–student interactions, was more frequent in the whole-class group. These results suggest that both whole-class and small-group settings are appropriate for using simulations in science. Further, the effective incorporation of simulations into whole-class instruction may provide a solution to the dilemma of technology penetration versus integration in today’s classrooms.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akpan JP, Andre T (2000) Using a computer simulation before dissection to help students learn anatomy. J Comp Math Sci Teach 19(3):297–313

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnes D (1992) From communication to curriculum. Penguin, Harmondsworth

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell RL (2008) Teaching the nature of science through process skills: activities for grades 3–8. Allyn & Bacon/Longmann, New York

  • Bell RL, Trundle KC (2008) The use of a computer simulation to promote scientific conceptions of moon phases. J Res Sci Teach 45:346–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett J, Hogarth S, Lubben F, Campbell B, Robinson A (2010) Talking science: the research evidence on the use of small group discussions in science teaching. Int J Sci Educ 32(1):69–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown AL, Campione J (1990) Communities of learning and thinking, or a context by any other name. Contributions Hum Dev 21:108–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JS, Collins A, Duguid S (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Edu Res 18(1):32–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bull G, Garofalo J (2006) The 20-foot view. Learng Lead Technol 33(5):36–37

    Google Scholar 

  • Çalık M, Ayas A, Ebenezer JV (2005) A review of solution chemistry studies: insights into students’ conceptions. J Sci Educ Technol 14(1):29–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsen WS (2007) Language and science learning. In: Abell SK, Lederman NG (eds) Handbook of research on science education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 57–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang K, Chen Y, Lin H, Sung Y (2008) Effects of learning support in simulation-based physics learning. Comput Educ 51(4):1486–1498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • deJong T, van Joolingen W (1998) Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Rev Educ Res 68(2):179–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Engle RA, Conant FC (2002) Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognit Instr 20(4):399–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson F (1986) Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In: Wittrock M (ed) Handbook of research on teaching. MacMillan, New York, pp 119–161

    Google Scholar 

  • Fienberg J, Leinhardt G (2002) Looking through the glass: reflections of identity in conversations at a history museum. In: Leinhardt G, Crowley K, Knutson K (eds) Learning conversations in museums. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp 167–211

    Google Scholar 

  • Gabric K, Hovance C, Comstock S, Harnisch D (2006) Scientists in their own classroom: the use of type II technology in the science classroom. Comput Sch 22(3/4):77–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Gallimore R, Tharp R (1990) Teaching mind in society. In: Moll L (ed) Vygotsky and education: instructional implications and social applications of sociohistorical psychology. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 175–205

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Garofalo J, Bull G, Bell R, van Hover S (2004) Interactive whole-class display systems. Learn Lead Technol 32(2):28–32

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerard L, Varma K, Corliss S, Linn M (2011) Professional development for technology—enhanced inquiry science. Rev Educ Res 81(3):408–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillies R (2006) Teachers’ and students’ verbal behaviours during cooperative and small-group learning. Br J Educ Psychol 76:271–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillies R (2008) Teachers’ and students’ verbal behaviours during cooperative learning. In: Gillies R, Ashman A, Terwel J (eds) The teacher’s role in implementing cooperative learning in the classroom. Springer, Brisbane, pp 243–262

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Goldenberg C (1991). Instructional conversations and their classroom applications. Berkeley, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from http://escholarship.org/uc/item/6q72k3k9

  • Hausfather SJ (1996) Vygotsky and schooling: creating a social contest for learning. Act Teach Educ 18:1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Hennessy S, Deaney R, Ruthven K (2006) Situated expertise in integrating use of multimedia simulations into secondary science teaching. Int J Sci Educ 28(7):701–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins S, Beauchamp G, Miller D (2007) Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learn Media Technol 32(3):213–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoek D, Seegers G (2005) Effects of instruction on verbal interactions during collaborative problem solving. Learn Environ Res 8:19–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • International Society for Technology in Education [ISTE] (2008) National Education Technology Standards. Retrieved from: http://www.iste.org/standards.aspx

  • Jordan B, Henderson A (1995) Interaction analysis: foundations and practice. J Learn Sci 4(1):39–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly G (2007) Discourse in science classrooms. In: Abell SK, Lederman NG (eds) Handbook of research on science education. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 443–469

    Google Scholar 

  • Khan S (2011) New pedagogies on teaching science with computer simulations. J Sci Educ Technol 20(3):215–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King A (1990) Enhancing peer interaction and learning in the classroom through reciprocal questioning. Am Educ Res J 27:664–687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lave J, Wenger E (1991) Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. University of Cambridge Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lee Y-H, Waxman H, Wu J-Y, Michko G, Lin G (2013) Revisit the effect of teaching and learning with technology. Educ Technol Soc 16(1):133–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Lemke JL (1990) Talking science: language, learning, and values. Ablex, Norwood, NJ

  • Limniou M, Papadopoulos N, Whitehead C (2009) Integration of simulation into pre-laboratory chemical course: computer cluster versus WebCT. Comput Educ 52(1):45–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lou Y, Abrami P, d’Apollonia S (2001) Small group and individual learning with technology: a meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 71(3):449–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maeng JL, Mulvey BK, Smetana LK, Bell RL (2013) Preservice teachers’ TPACK: using technology to support inquiry instruction. J Sci Educ Technol. doi:10.1007/s10956-013-9434-z

  • Meloth MS, Deering PD (1999) The role of the teacher in promoting cognitive processing during collaborative learning. In: O’Donnell AM, King A (eds) Cognitive perspectives on peer learning. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 235–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Mercer N (1996) The quality of talk in children’s collaborative activity in the classroom. Learn Instr 6(4):359–377

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer N (2000) Words and Minds: how we use language to think together. Routledge, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer N, Wegerif R, Dawes L (1999) Children’s talk and development of reasoning in the classroom. British Educ Res J 25(1):95–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer EF (1998) Multivoicedness and univocality in classroom discourse: an example from theory of matter. Int J Sci Educ 20(1):67–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mortimer EF, Scott PH (2003) Meaning making in secondary science classrooms. Open University Press, Maidenhead

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakhleh MB (1993) Are our students conceptual thinkers or algorithmic problem solvers? Chem Educ 70(1):52–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (2012) A framework for K-12 science education: practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academy Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Palincsar AS (1998) Social constructivist perspectives on teaching and learning. Annu Rev Psychol 49:345–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reid DJ, Zhang J, Chen Q (2003) Supporting scientific discovery learning in a simulation environment. J Comp Assist Learn 19:9–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rojas-Drummond SM, Pérez V, Vélez M, Gómez L, Mendoza A (2003) Talking for reasoning among Mexican primary school children. Learn Instr 13(6):653–670

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roschelle J (1992) Learning by collaborating: convergent conceptual change. J Learn Sci 2(3):235–276

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross SM, Morrison GR, Lowther DL (2010) Educational technology research past and present: balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemp Educ Technol 1:17–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Scalise K, Timms M, Moorjani A, Clark L, Holtermann K, Irvin PS (2011) Student learning in science simulations: design features that promote learning gains. J Res Sci Teach 48:1050–1078

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slavin RE, Hurley EA, Chamberlain A (2003) Cooperative learning and achievement: theory and research. In: Reynolds WM, Miller GE (eds) Handbook of psychology: educational psychology, vol 7. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Smetana LK, Bell RL (2012) Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: a critical review of the literature. Int J Sci Educ 34(9): 1337–1370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stake Robert (2005) Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin NK, Lincoln YS (eds) Qualitative research, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 433–466

    Google Scholar 

  • Stieff M, Wilensky U (2003) Connected chemistry—incorporating interactive simulations into the chemistry classroom. J Sci Educ Technol 12(3):285–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tharp R. G, Gallimore R. (1991). The instructional conversation: Teaching and learning in social activity. Berkeley, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity and Excellence, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from: http://escholarship.org/uc/item/5th0939d

  • Tobin K, Tippins D, Gallard A (1994) Research on instructional strategies for teaching science. In: Gabel DL (ed) Handbook of research on science teaching and learning. Macmillan, New York, pp 45–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Trundle KC, Bell RL (2010) The use of a computer simulation to promote conceptual change: a quasi-experimental study. Comput Educ 54(4):1078–1088

    Google Scholar 

  • van Zee EH, Minstrell J (1997) Reflective discourse: developing shared understandings in a high school physics classroom. Int J Sci Educ 19:209–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb NM (1989) Peer interaction and learning in small groups. Int J Educ Res 13:21–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif R, Mercer N, Dawes L (1999) From social interaction to individual reasoning: an empirical investigation of a possible socio-cultural model of cognitive development. Learn Instr 9:493–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenger E (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch JV (1991) Voices of the mind: a sociocultural approach to mediated action. Harvester Wheatsheaf, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu H, Huang Y (2007) Ninth-grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-centered technology-enhanced learning environments. Sci Educ 91(5):727–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu H, Krajcik J, Soloway E (2001) Promoting understanding of chemical representations: students’ use of a visualization tool in the classroom. J Res Sci Teach 38(7):821–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou G, Brouwer W, Nocente N, Martin B (2005) Enhancing conceptual learning through computer-based applets: the effectiveness and implications. J Interact Learn Res 16(1):31–49

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Loyola University Chicago, 820 N. Michigan Avenue, Lewis Towers, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Lara K. Smetana

  2. College of Education, Oregon State University, 104 Joyce Collin Furman Hall, Corvallis, OR, 97331, USA

    Randy L. Bell

Authors
  1. Lara K. Smetana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Randy L. Bell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lara K. Smetana.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smetana, L.K., Bell, R.L. Which Setting to Choose: Comparison of Whole-Class vs. Small-Group Computer Simulation Use. J Sci Educ Technol 23, 481–495 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9479-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-013-9479-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation