Skip to main content

Exploring a Domain with a Computer Simulation: Traversing Variable and Relation Space with the Help of a Hypothesis Scratchpad

  • Conference paper
Simulation-Based Experiential Learning

Part of the book series: NATO ASI Series ((NATO ASI F,volume 122))

Abstract

Computer simulations provide a challenging opportunity to create learning environments in which learners are free to explore the domain and discover the domain properties themselves. Contemporary theories of learning state that knowledge acquired and constructed within such an exploratory environment will be rooted more deeply within the learner’s knowledge structures. On the other hand, it has also become clear that offering a simulation to the learner without offering any additional support may result in learners getting “lost” in the simulation environment, not learning very much. Therefore, additional support is deemed necessary for simulation learning environments.

The current chapter describes a software instrument (a “hypothesis scratchpad”) that can be offered to the learner in order to support the process of hypothesis formation. The design of this instrument is based on an analysis of hypothesis space, one of the two search spaces from the theory of Klahr and Dunbar [14], who describe discovery as search in two related spaces, a hypothesis space and an experiment space. A study was performed in which the hypothesis scratchpad was used to influence the learners search processes in variable space and relation space, the two subspaces of hypothesis space. The moment of stating hypotheses (before doing experiments or during a series of experiments) and the guidance for variable space search (starting with instances or directly going to general variables) was varied in this study. It appeared that the learners who were prompted to state hypotheses before doing experiments stated more hypotheses while doing experiments with the simulation. Learners who were searching varibale space only at the level of general variables, chose relations at a more precise level than learners searching variable space, starting with instances before going to the general concepts.

Part of this paper is based at research conducted in the project SMISLE. SMISLE is a R&D project partially funded by the CEC under contract D2007 within the main phase of the DELTA programme.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alessi S.M., & Trollip, S.R. (1985).Computer based instruction, methods and development. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dunbar, K. & Klahr, D. (1989). developmental differences in scientific discovery processes, in:Klahr,D., &Kotovsky,K.(Ed.) Complex information processing,The impact of Herbert Simon, (pp. 109–145). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum associates.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gorman, M.E., & Gorman, M.E. (1984). A comparison of disconfirmatory, confirmatory and control strategies on Wason’s 2-4-6 task.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 36A, 629–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Gorman, M.E., Stafford, A., & Gorman, M.E. (1987). Disconfirmation and dual hypotheses on a more difficult version of Wason’s 2-4-6 task.The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Greeno, J.G. & Simon, H.A. (1988). Problem solving and reasoning. In R.C. Atkinson, R.J. Herrnstein, G. Lindzey & R.D. Luce (Eds.),Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology;Vol. 2: Learning and cognition (pp. 589–673 ). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Jonassen, D. H . (1991). Objectivism versus constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm?Educational Technology Research &Development, 39, 5–14

    Google Scholar 

  7. de Jong, T . (1991). Learning and instruction with computer simulations,Education and Computing, 6, 217–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. de Jong, T., & Njoo, M. (1992). c. In E. de Corte, M. Linn, H. Mandl, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.)Computer-based learning environments and problem solving (NATO ASI series F: Computer and Systems Series). Berling: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  9. de Jong, T., Tait, K., & van Joolingen, W.R. (1992). Authoring for intelligent simulation based instruction: a model based approach. In S.A. Cerri & J. Whiting (Eds.)Learning Technology in the European Communities (pp. 619–637). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. van Joolingen, W.R. (1992).QMaPS,Qualitative reasoning for intelligent simulation learning environments. Poster presented at the Qualitative Reasoning workshop, Edinburgh, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  11. van Joolingen, W.R. (1993).Understanding and facilitating discovery learning in computer-based simulation environments. PhD. Thesis. Eindhoven: Eindhoven University of Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  12. van Joolingen, W.R., & de Jong, T. (1991). Supporting hypothesis formation by learners exploring an interactive computer simulation.Instructional Science, 20, 389–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. van Joolingen, W.R., & de Jong, T. (1992). Modelling domain knowledge for Intelligent Simulation Learning Environments. Computers & Education, 18, 29–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Klahr, D., & Dunbar, K. (1988). Dual space search during scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 12, 1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kulkarni, D., & Simon, H. A. (1988). The processes of scientific discovery: The strategy of experimentation.Cognitive science, 12, 139–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lawson. A.E., McElrrath, C.B., Burton, M.S., James, B.D., Doyle, R.P., Woodward, S.L., Kellerman, L., & Snyder, J.D. (1991). Hypothetico-deductive reasoning skill and concept acquisition: testing a constructivist hypothesis.Journal of research in science teaching, 28, 953–970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Michael, J.A., Haque, M.M., Rovick, A.A., & Evens, M. (1989). The pathophysiology tutor: a first step towards a smart tutor. In H. Maurer (Ed.),Computer Assisted Learning. Proceedings of the 2 nd International Conference ICCAL (pp. 390–400 ). Berlin: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Mynatt, C.R., Doherty, M.E., & Tweney R.D. (1977). Confirmation bias in a simulated research environment: An experimental study of scientific inference.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 29, 85–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Newell, A. & Simon, H.A. (1972).Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Njoo, M., & de Jong, T. (1992). Exploratory learning with a computer simulation for control theory: Learning processes and instructional support.Journal of Research in Science Teaching (in press).

    Google Scholar 

  21. Peterson, N.S., Jungck, J.R., Sharpe, D.M., & Finzer, W.F. (1987). A design approach to sicnce. Simulated laboratories: Learning via the construction of meaning.Machine-mediated Learning, 2 (1), 111–127.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Plötzner, R., Spada, H., Stumpf, M., & Opwis, K. (1990). Learning qualitative reasoning in a microworld for elastic impacts.European Journal of psychology of education, 4, 501–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Plötzner, R., & Spada, H. (1992). Analysis-based learning on multiple levels of mental domain representation. In:E de Corte M Linn H Mandl&L Verschaffel (eds.) Computer-based learning environments and problem solving, pp. 103–129. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Popper., KR . (1959).The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Qin, Y. & Simon, H.A. (1990). Laboratory replication of scientific discovery processes.Cognitive Science, 14, 281–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Shute, V., & Glaser, R. (1990). A large scale Evaluation of an Intelligent Discovery World: Smithtown.Interactive Learning Environments 1, 59–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Shute, V., Glaser, R., & Raghavan, K. (1989), Discovery and inference in an exploratory laboratory, in P.L. Ackerman, R.J. Sternberg, and R. Glaser (eds.),Learning and Individual Differences, San Francisco: Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wason, P.C. (1964). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task.Quarterly Journal of experimental Psychology, 12, 129–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1993 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

van Joolingena, W., de Jong, T. (1993). Exploring a Domain with a Computer Simulation: Traversing Variable and Relation Space with the Help of a Hypothesis Scratchpad. In: Towne, D.M., de Jong, T., Spada, H. (eds) Simulation-Based Experiential Learning. NATO ASI Series, vol 122. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-78539-9_14

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-78539-9_14

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-78541-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-78539-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics