Using External Visualizations to Extend and Integrate Learning in Mobile and Classroom Settings

  • Yvonne Rogers

Abstract

Advances in mobile technologies and pervasive computing provide new opportunities for supporting and enhancing learning that goes beyond that which has been made possible using the desktop PC. “Visualizations” can be presented or accessed via mobile devices or ambient displays at opportune times that can be pertinent to an ongoing physical activity. This chapter examines how external representations can be designed, accessed and interacted with to facilitate scientific inquiry processes, through using pervasive and mobile technologies. It begins by providing an overview of how different technologies have been used to support learning about and the practicing of scientific inquiry. Next, it describes the kinds of representations that are considered most effective to use. Two case studies are then presented that show how small-scale and large-scale representations were successfully integrated and used by students to understand and hypothesize about habitats and environmental restoration.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ackermann, E. (1996). Perspective-taking and object construction: Two keys to learning. In Y. Kafai & M. Resnick (Eds.), Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking and learning in a digital world. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  2. Bederson, B., Shneidemann, B. (eds.) (2003). The craft of information visulization: Readings and reflections. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  3. Boud, D., Keough, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Kogan Page.Google Scholar
  4. Card, S. K., Mackinlay, J. D., & Shneiderman, B. (1999). Readings in information visualization. Using vision to think. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
  5. Chen, C. (2004). Information visulization. London: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  6. Chi, M. (1997). Why is self explaining an effective domain for general learning activity? In Glasser, R. (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the collaborative experience of learning. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Gay, R., Rieger, R., & Bennington, T. (2002). Using mobile computing to enhance field study. In N. Miyake, R. Hall, & T. Koschmann (Eds.),CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation(pp. 507–528). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  9. Grant, W. C. (1993) Wireless coyote: A computer-supported field trip. Communication of the ACM, 36(2), 57–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hine, M., Rentoul, R., & Specht, M. (2004). Collaboration and roles in remote field trips. In J. Attewell & C. Savill-Smith (Eds.), Learning with mobile devices: Research and development. London, UK: Learning and Skills Development Agency.Google Scholar
  11. Larkin, J., & Simon, H. (1987). Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11, 65–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Laws, P. (1997). Millikan lecture 1996: Promoting active learning based on physics education re-search in introductory courses. American Journal Physics, 65(1),13–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Layman, J. W., & Krajcik, J. S. (1990). The use of microcomputer-based laboratories in constructing science concepts. Presentation at the National Science Teachers Association, Area Convention, December 13–15, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  14. Loh, B., Radinsky, J., Gomez, L., Reiser, B., Edelson, D., & Russell, E. (2001). Developing reflective inquiry practices: A case study of software, the teacher and students. In S. K. Crowley, C. S. Chunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  15. Metcalf, S. J., & Tinker, R. (2003). TEEMSS: Technology Enhanced Elementary and Middle School Science. Annual Meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, March 23–26, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  16. Rogers, Y., & Scaife, M. (1998) How can interactive multimedia facilitate learning? In Lee, J. (Ed.), Intelligence and multimodality in multimedia interfaces: Research and applications. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI. Press.Google Scholar
  17. Rogers, Y., Price, S., Randell, C., Stanton-Fraser, D., Weal, M., & Fitzpatrick. G. (2005). Ubi-learning: Integrating outdoor and indoor learning experiences. Communication of ACM, 48(1), 55–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rogers, Y., & Price, S. (2006). Using ubiquitous computing to extend and enhance learning experiences. In M. van t’Hooft & K. Swan (Eds.), Ubiquitous computing in education: Invisible technology, Visible Impact. LEA.Google Scholar
  19. Roschelle, J., & Pea, R. (2002). A walk on the wild side: How wireless handhelds may change CSCL, In Proceedings of CSCL 2002, LEA, NJ, 51–60.Google Scholar
  20. Scaife, M., & Rogers, Y. (1996). External cognition: how do graphical representations work? International Journal of Human-computer Studies, 45, 185–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Scaife, M., & Rogers, Y. (2005). External cognition, innovative technologies and effective learning. In P. Gardenfors & P. Johansson (Eds.), Cognition, education and communication technology. LEA.181–202.Google Scholar
  22. Sharples, M., Corlett, D., & Westmancott, O. (2002). The design and implementation of a mobile learning environment. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 6, 220–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Soloway, E., Jackson, S. L., Klein, J., Quintana, C., Reed, J., Spitulnik, J., et al. (1996). Learning theory in practice: case studies of learner-centered design. Proceedings of CHI, Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM Press, 189–96.Google Scholar
  24. Soloway, E., Norris, C., Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. (2001). Log on education: Handheld devices are ready-at-hand. Communication of the ACM, 44(6), 15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Stratford, S. J., & Finkel, E. A. (1996). The impact of ScienceWare and Foundations on student’s attitudes towards science and science classes. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 5(1), 59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yvonne Rogers
    • 1
  1. 1.Computing Department, Open UniversityUK

Personalised recommendations