Scaffolding during Science Inquiry

Haiying Li, J. Gobert, Rachel Dickler
{"title":"Scaffolding during Science Inquiry","authors":"Haiying Li, J. Gobert, Rachel Dickler","doi":"10.1145/3330430.3333628","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Prior studies on scaffolding for investigative inquiry practices (i.e. forming a question/hypothesis, collecting data, and analyzing and interpreting data [21]) revealed that students who received scaffolding were better able to both learn practices and transfer these competencies to new topics than were students who did not receive scaffolding. Prior studies have also shown that after removing scaffolding, students continued to demonstrate improved inquiry performance on a variety of practices across new driving questions over time. However, studies have not examined the relationship between the amount of scaffolding received and transfer of inquiry performance; this is the focus of the present study. 107 middle school students completed four virtual lab activities (i.e. driving questions) in Inq-ITS. Students received scaffolding when needed from an animated pedagogical computer agent for the first three driving questions for the Animal Cell virtual lab. Then they completed the fourth driving question without access to scaffolding in a different topic, Plant Cell. Results showed that students' performances increased even with fewer scaffolds for the inquiry practices of hypothesizing, collecting data, interpreting data, and warranting claims; furthermore, these results were robust as evidenced by the finding that students required less scaffolding as they completed subsequent inquiry activities. These data provide evidence of near and far transfer as a result of adaptive scaffolding of science inquiry practices.","PeriodicalId":20693,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the Sixth (2019) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale","volume":"23 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the Sixth (2019) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3330430.3333628","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Prior studies on scaffolding for investigative inquiry practices (i.e. forming a question/hypothesis, collecting data, and analyzing and interpreting data [21]) revealed that students who received scaffolding were better able to both learn practices and transfer these competencies to new topics than were students who did not receive scaffolding. Prior studies have also shown that after removing scaffolding, students continued to demonstrate improved inquiry performance on a variety of practices across new driving questions over time. However, studies have not examined the relationship between the amount of scaffolding received and transfer of inquiry performance; this is the focus of the present study. 107 middle school students completed four virtual lab activities (i.e. driving questions) in Inq-ITS. Students received scaffolding when needed from an animated pedagogical computer agent for the first three driving questions for the Animal Cell virtual lab. Then they completed the fourth driving question without access to scaffolding in a different topic, Plant Cell. Results showed that students' performances increased even with fewer scaffolds for the inquiry practices of hypothesizing, collecting data, interpreting data, and warranting claims; furthermore, these results were robust as evidenced by the finding that students required less scaffolding as they completed subsequent inquiry activities. These data provide evidence of near and far transfer as a result of adaptive scaffolding of science inquiry practices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
科学探究中的脚手架
先前关于调查性探究实践(即形成问题/假设,收集数据,分析和解释数据[21])的脚手架研究表明,接受脚手架的学生比没有接受脚手架的学生更能学习实践并将这些能力转移到新主题。先前的研究也表明,在移除脚手架后,随着时间的推移,学生在各种驾驶新问题的实践中继续表现出更好的探究表现。然而,研究并没有检验收到的脚手架数量和询问绩效转移之间的关系;这是本研究的重点。107名中学生在Inq-ITS中完成了四个虚拟实验室活动(即驾驶问题)。学生收到脚手架时需要从动画教学计算机代理为动物细胞虚拟实验室的前三个驾驶问题。然后他们完成了第四个驱动问题,没有使用不同主题的支架,植物细胞。结果表明,即使在假设、收集数据、解释数据和证明主张等探究实践的框架较少的情况下,学生的表现也有所提高;此外,这些结果是稳健的,因为发现学生在完成后续的探究活动时需要更少的脚手架。这些数据为科学探究实践的适应性脚手架的结果提供了近迁移和远迁移的证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Creating a Framework for User-Centered Development and Improvement of Digital Education Teaching UI Design at Global Scales: A Case Study of the Design of Collaborative Capstone Projects for MOOCs Mining Students Pre-instruction Beliefs for Improved Learning Achievements for building a learning community Instructors Desire Student Activity, Literacy, and Video Quality Analytics to Improve Video-based Blended Courses
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1