Abstract
Teachers' failure to utilise MBL activities more widely may be due to not recognising their capacity to transform the nature of laboratory activities to be more consistent with contemporary constructivist theories of learning. This research aimed to increase understanding of how MBL activities specifically designed to be consistent with a constructivist theory of learning support or constrain student construction of understanding. The first author conducted the research with his Year 11 physics class of 29 students. Dyads completed nine tasks relating to kinematics using a Predict-Observe-Explain format. Data sources included video and audio recordings of students and teacher during four 70-minute sessions, students' display graphs and written notes, semi-structured student interviews, and the teacher's journal. The study identifies the actors and describes the patterns of interactions in the MBL. Analysis of students' discourse and actions identified many instances where students' initial understanding of kinematics were mediated in multiple ways. Students invented numerous techniques for manipulating data in the service of their emerging understanding. The findings are presented as eight assertions. Recommendations are made for developing pedagogical strategies incorporating MBL activities which will likely catalyse student construction of understanding.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Appleton, K. (1997). Teaching science. Rockhampton, Queensland: Central Queensland University Press.
Beichner, R. J. (1990). The effect of simultaneous motion presentation and graph generation in a kinematics lab. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(8), 803–815.
Berger, C. F., Lu, C. R., Belzer, S. J., & Voss, B. E. (1994). Research on the uses of technology in science education. In D. L. Gabel (Ed.), Handbook of research on science teaching and learning (pp. 466–490). New York: Macmillan.
Bigum, C. (1998, November 19). Computers in schools: Mothering necessity. Queensland Teachers' Union Professional Magazine, 16, 2–9.
Chin, C., & Brown, D. E. (2000). Learning in science: A comparison of deep and surface approaches. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(2), 109–138.
Clark, S. A., & Jackson, D. F. (1998, April). Laboratory technology and student motivation in a conceptual physics classroom: A year-long case study. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Diego, CA.
Dexter, S., & Anderson, R. (1998, April). Teachers' views on the influence of computers on changes in their instructional practice. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5–12.
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., & Scott, P. (1995, April). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom: A theoretical perspective on pedagogy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
Duit, R., & Treagust, D. F. (1998). Learning in science – from behaviourism towards social constructivism and beyond. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 3–25). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Fensham, P., Gunstone, R., & White, R. (Eds.). (1994). The content of science: A constructivist approach to its teaching and learning. London, UK: Falmer Press.
Geelan, D. (1997). Prior knowledge, prior conceptions, prior constructs: What do constructivists really mean, and are they practising what they preach? The Australian Science Teachers' Journal, 43(3), 26–28.
Hogan, K. (1999). Assessing depth of sociocognitive processing in peer groups' science discussions. Research in Science Education, 29(4), 457–477.
Kelly, G. J., & Crawford, T. (1996). Students' interaction with computer representations: Analysis of discourse in laboratory groups. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(7), 693–707.
Kozma, R. B. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179–211.
Lee, N., & Brown, S. (1994). Otherness and the actor network: The undiscovered continent. American Behavioral Scientist, 37(6), 772–791.
Lidstone, J., & Lucas, K. B. (1998). Teaching and learning research methodology from interactive multimedia programs: Post graduate students' engagement with an innovative program. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 7(2/3), 237–261.
Linn, M. C., Layman, J. W., & Nachmias, R. (1987). Cognitive consequences of microcomputer-based laboratories: Graphing skills development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12, 244–253.
Linn, M. C., & Songer, N. B. (1991). Teaching thermodynamics to middle school students: What are appropriate cognitive demands? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(10), 885–918.
McLellan, H. (1994). Interactions of student partners in a high school astronomy computer lab. Computers in the Schools, 11(1), 29–41.
McRobbie, C. J., & Thomas, G. P. (2000). Epistemological and contextual issues in the use of microcomputer-based laboratories in a year 11 chemistry classroom. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19(2), 137–160.
Nachmias, R., & Linn, M. C. (1987). Evaluations of science laboratory data: The role of computer-presented information. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24(5), 491–506.
Nakhleh, M. B., & Krajcik, J. S. (1991, April). The use of videotape to analyze the correspondence between the verbal commentary of students and their actions when using different levels of instrumentation during laboratory activities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Lake Geneva,WI.
Nakhleh, M. B., & Krajcik, J. S. (1994). Influence of levels of information as presented by different technologies on students' understanding of acid, base and pH concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(10), 1077–1096.
Newton, L. R., & Rogers, L. (2001). Teaching science with ICT (1st ed.). London, UK: Continuum.
Pennington, B. F., Bennetto, L., McAleer, O., & Roberts, J. (1996). Executive functions and working memory: Theoretical andmeasurement issues. In G. R. Lyon & N. A. Krasnegor (Eds.), Attention, memory, and executive function (pp. 327–348). Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Redish, E. F., Saul, J. M., & Steinberg, R. N. (1997). On the effectiveness of activeengagement microcomputer-based laboratories. American Journal of Physics, 65(1), 45–55.
Roth, W.-M. (1996).Knowledge diffusion* in a grade 4–5 classroom during a unit on civil engineering:An analysis of a classroom community in terms of its changing resources and practices. Cognition and Instruction, 14(2), 179–220.
Roth, W.-M., McRobbie, C. J., Lucas, K. B., & Boutonné, S. (1997).Why may students fail to learn from demonstrations? A social practice perspective on learning in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(5), 509–533.
Settlage, J., Jr. (1995). Children's conceptions of light in the context of a technologybased curriculum. Science Education, 79(5), 535–553.
Smith, E. L., Blakeslee, T. D., & Anderson, C.W. (1993). Teaching strategies associated with conceptual change learning in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(2), 111–126.
Sparks, G. (1983). Synthesis of research on staff development for effective teaching. Educational Leadership, 41(3), 65–72.
Svec, M. T. (1995, April). Effect of micro-computer based laboratory on graphing interpretation skills and understanding of motion. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, CA.
Tebbutt, M. (2000). ICT in Science: Problems, possibilities... and principles? School Science Review, 81(297), 57–64.
Weller, H. G. (1996). Assessing the impact of computer-based learning in science. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28, 461–485.
White, R. T.,& Gunstone, R. F. (1992). Probing understanding. London,UK: Falmer Press.
Wilkinson, J. W., & Ward, M. (1997). The purpose and perceived effectiveness of laboratory work in secondary schools. The Australian Science Teachers' Journal, 43(2), 49–55.
Williams, D., Coles, L., Wilson, K., Richardson, A., & Tuson, J. (2000). Teachers and ICT: Current use and future needs. British Journal of Educational Technology, 31(4), 307–320.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Russell, D.W., Lucas, K.B. & McRobbie, C.J. The Role of the Microcomputer-Based Laboratory Display in Supporting the Construction of New Understandings in Kinematics. Research in Science Education 33, 217–243 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025073410522
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025073410522