Using Scientific Visualization to Enhance the Teaching and Learning of Core Concepts

  • S. Raj Chaudhury
  • Lynn Mandeltort
  • Amy B. Mulnix
  • Eleanor V.H. Vandegrift
  • Jennifer R. Yates
Chapter

Abstract

Scientific visualization is a particular type of information representation that involves the use of static and dynamic visual and graphical media. To develop fluency with scientific visualization, one needs to develop the ability to interpret, analyze, and construct meaning from appropriate visual representations. Results from the cognitive sciences and discipline-based education research indicate that visual images help us learn and reason. We present vignettes from a variety of higher education perspectives in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) disciplines that illustrate the use of scientific visualizations in different settings. In particular, the cases illustrate how faculty recognized that a lack of media literacy was impairing student success and then responded by embedding the teaching of those skills into course content. In this chapter, we move from basic interpretation of xy line graphs in mathematics, physics, and chemistry courses to learning biology from animated simulations and student-generated digital videos to explain neuroscience concepts. Practitioners reading this chapter will gain instructional insight into the challenges students encounter when learning and strategies that faculty can employ to overcome those challenges.

Keywords

Biology Chemistry Graphing Neuroscience Physics Science education Scientific visualization 

References

  1. American Chemical Society (ACS). (1930). Visual aids in chemical education. Journal of Chemical Education, 7(4), 828–833.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. San Francisco: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, C. W., & Blumer, L. S. (2012). Inquiry-based ecology laboratory courses improve student confidence and scientific reasoning skills. Ecosphere, 3(12), art112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beichner, R. J. (1994). Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs. American Journal of Physics, 62(8), 750–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beichner R. (2008). The SCALE-UP project: A student-centered active learning environment for undergraduate programs. Evidence on promising practices in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education workshop 2. Symposium convened by the Board on Science Education, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  6. Brainfacts.org.(n. d.)http://www.brainfacts.org/. Accessed (2014 December 15)
  7. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn. Washington DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  8. Brown, P. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2014). Make it stick: The science of successful learning. Cambridge: Belknap.Google Scholar
  9. Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of training, time, incentives, and tensions with professional identity? CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 339–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlson, M., Jacobs, S., Coe, E., Larsen, S., & Hsu, E. (2002). Applying covariational reasoning while modeling dynamic events: A framework and a study. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 33(5), 352–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chaudhury, S. R. (2005). Learning science through visualizations. Announcer, American Association of Physics Teachers, 34(4), 77.Google Scholar
  12. Davis, E. R. (1929). More about problems and graphs. Journal of Chemical Education, 6(5), 943.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. DeMeo, S. (2005). Mass relationships in a chemical reaction: Incorporating additional graphing exercises into the introductory chemistry laboratory. Journal of Chemical Education, 82(8), 1219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Duke, N. K., Bennett-Armistead, V. S., & Roberts, E. M. (2003). Bridging the gap between learning to read and reading to learn. In D. Barone & L. M. Morrow (Eds.), Literacy and young children: Research-based practices, (pp. 226–242). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  15. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U S A, 111(23), 8410–8415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fulton, K. (2012). Upside down and inside out: Flip your classroom to improve student learning. Learning & Leading with Technology, 39(8), 12–17.Google Scholar
  17. Gillis, R. V., & MacDougall, G. (2007). Reading to learn science as an active process. The Science Teacher, 74(5), 45–50.Google Scholar
  18. Gormally, C., Brickman, P., & Lutz, M. (2012). Developing a test of scientific literacy skills (TOSLS): Measuring undergraduates’ evaluation of scientific information and arguments. CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(4), 364–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Graham, M. J., Frederick, J., Byars-Winston, A., Hunter, A. B., & Handelsman, J. (2013). Increasing persistence of college students in STEM. Science, 341(6153), 1455–1456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Greene, H., & Crespi, C. (2012). The value of student created videos in the college classroom—An exploratory study in marketing and accounting. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 5, 273–283.Google Scholar
  21. Handelsman, J., Miller, S., & Pfund, C. (2007). Scientific teaching. New York: Freeman.Google Scholar
  22. Hoshall, E. M. (1934). Chemical drawing. IV. Charts, graphs, and diagrams. Journal of Chemical Education, 11(4), 235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jenkinson, J., & McGill, G. (2012). Visualizing protein interactions and dynamics: Evolving a visual language for molecular animation. CBE Life Sciences Education, 11(1), 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kearny, M., & Schuck, S. (2005). Students in the director's seat: Teaching and learning with students-generated video. In P. Kommers & D. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings from 2005: World conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia, and telecommunications (pp. 2864–2871). Norfolk: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.Google Scholar
  25. Kozma, R., & Russell, J. (2005). Students becoming chemists: Developing representational competence. In J. K. Gilbert (Ed.), Visualization in science education. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Mayer, R. E., & Alexander, P. A. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of research on learning and instruction. New York: Routlge.Google Scholar
  27. Pellegrino, J. W. & Hilton, M. L. (Eds.). (2012). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  28. Pe'rez-Echeverria, M.-P., Postigo, Y., & Marin-Oller, C. (2014). Students’ handling of graphs at the university level. In B. M. Bruzuela & B. E. Gravel (Eds.), ‟Show me what you know: Exploring student representations across stem disciplines (pp. 71–85). New York: Teachers College PressGoogle Scholar
  29. Picone, C., Rhode, J., Hyatt, L., & Parshall, T. (2007). Assessing gains in undergraduate students’ abilities to analyze graphical data. Teaching Issues and Experiments in Ecology, 5, 1–54.Google Scholar
  30. Reed, S. K. (2010). Thinking visually. New York: Psychology.Google Scholar
  31. Rocke, A. J. (2010). Image and reality: Kekule, Kopp, and the scientific imagination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roth, W.-M. (2002). Reading graphs: Contributions to an integrative concept of literacy. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 34(1), 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schönborn, K. J., & Anderson, T. R. (2006). The importance of visual literacy in the education of biochemists. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 34(2), 94–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Singer, S. R., Nielsen, N. R., & Schweingruber, H. A. (Eds). (2012). Discipline-based education research: Understanding and improving learning in undergraduate science and engineering. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  35. Speth, E. B., Momsen, J. L., Moyerbrailean, G. A., Ebert-May, D., Long, T. M., Wyse, S., & Linton, D. (2010). 1, 2, 3, 4: Infusing quantitative literacy into introductory biology. CBE Life Sciences Education, 9(3), 323–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Summers, M. F., & Hrabowski, F. A. (2006). Preparing minority scientists and engineers. Science, 311(5769), 1870–1871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learning and instruction, 4(4), 295–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Testa, I., Monroy, G., & Sassi, E. (2002). Students’s reading images in kinematics: The case of real-time graphs. International Journal of Science Education, 24(3), 235–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Toto, J., & Booth, K. (2008). Effects and implications of mini-lectures on learning in first-semester general chemistry. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 9(3), 259–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Uttal, D. H., & O'Doherty, K. (2008). Comprehending and learning from ‟visualizations”: A developmental perspective. In J. K. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakhleh (Eds.), Models and modeling in science education: Vol. 3. Visualization: theory and practice in science education. The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Viel, A. & Liu, R. A. (n. d.) Inner life of the cell. http://multimedia.mcb.harvard.edu/. Accessed (2014 December 15).
  42. Watkins, J., & Mazur, E. (2013). Retaining students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) majors. Journal of College Science Teaching, 42(5), 36–41.Google Scholar
  43. Wieman, C. (2004). Why not try a scientific approach to science education. Change,(Sept–Oct) 9–15.Google Scholar
  44. Willmott, C. (2014). Teaching bioethics via the production of student-generated videos. Journal of Biological Education. doi:10.1080/00219266.2014.897640. (1–12)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Raj Chaudhury
    • 1
  • Lynn Mandeltort
    • 1
  • Amy B. Mulnix
    • 2
  • Eleanor V.H. Vandegrift
    • 3
  • Jennifer R. Yates
    • 4
  1. 1.Auburn UniversityAuburnUSA
  2. 2.Franklin and Marshall CollegeLancasterUSA
  3. 3.University of OregonEugeneUSA
  4. 4.Ohio Wesleyan UniversityDelawareUSA

Personalised recommendations