Abstract
This chapter reports on the use of representational resources within a computer-based environment, called ChemSense, to support high school chemistry students’ representational practices and their understanding of key chemical concepts. In designing ChemSense, we hypothesized that it would provide students with symbolic resources they could use to jointly construct representations of observable physical phenomena and to explain these phenomena in terms of underlying chemical entities and processes. This study examines the role that these representational resources play in supporting students’ representational practices and their emerging chemical understanding. To elucidate how ChemSense supports the development of representational practice and chemical understanding, we provide an analysis of students’ conversation while they use ChemSense in the laboratory. Our findings indicate that students use ChemSense to construct their shared understanding of chemical phenomena in a common representational space. Their representations serve as key symbolic resources in students’ collaborative efforts to generate coherent explanations of the phenomena they are investigating. On the basis of our analysis we conclude that when using representational resources as part of collaborative investigations, the nature of students’ conversation becomes more “chemical” and students deepen their understanding of the molecular nature of physical phenomena that have, as a result, become chemical.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1993). Benchmarks for science literacy. New York: Oxford University Press.
American Chemical Society. (2001). General chemistry (conceptual) 2001. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society.
Amman, K., & Knorr Cetina, K. (1990). The fixation of (visual) evidence. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 85–122). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307–359.
Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for learning. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797–817.
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom Lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice. Cambridge: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
Bunce, D., & Gabel, D. (2002). Differential effects on the achievement of males and females of teaching the particulate nature of chemistry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(10), 911–927.
Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.
Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in education research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.
Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.
diSessa, A. A., Hammer, D., Sherin, B., & Kolpakowski, T. (1991). Inventing graphing: Meta-representational expertise in children. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 10, 117–160.
Dori, Y. J., Barak, M., & Adir, N. (2003) A Web-based chemistry course as a means to foster freshmen learning. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(9), 1084–1092.
Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists really reason: Scientific reasoning in real-world laboratories. In R. Sternberg & J. Davidson (Eds.), The nature of insight (pp. 365–396). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gabel, D. (1998). The complexity of chemistry and implications for teaching. In B. J. Fraser & K. G. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 233–249). Great Britain: Klewer Academic Press.
Goodwin, C. (1995). Seeing in depth. Social Studies of Science, 25, 237–274.
Greeno, J. G. (1998). The situativity of knowing, learning, and research. American Psychologist, 53(1), 5–26.
Greeno, J. G., & Hall, R. P. (1997). Practicing representation: Learning with and about representational forms. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 361–367.
Hanks, W. F. (1999). Intertexts: Writings on language, utterance and context. Denver: Rowman & Littlefield.
Hinton, M. E., & Nakhleh, M. B. (1999). Students’ microscopic, macroscopic, and symbolic representations of chemical reactions. The Chemical Educator, 4(5), 1–29.
Hoffmann, R., & Laszlo, R. (1991). Representation in chemistry. Angewandte Chemie, 30, 1–16.
Kozma, R. (2000a). Representation and language: The case for representational competence in the chemistry curriculum.Paper presented at the 16th Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Ann Arbor, MI.
Kozma, R. (2000b). Students collaborating with computer models and physical experiments. In J. Roschelle & C. Hoadley (Eds.), Proceedings of the Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 1999.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kozma, R. (2000c). The use of multiple representations and the social construction of understanding in chemistry. In M. Jacobson & R. Kozma (Eds.), Innovations in science and mathematics education: Advanced designs for technologies of learning (pp. 11–45). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kozma, R. B., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry instruction. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105–143.
Kozma, R. B., & Russell, J. (1997). Multimedia and understanding: Expert and novice responses to different representations of chemical phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(9), 949–968.
Krajcik, J. S. (1991). Developing students’ understandings of chemical concepts. In S. H. Glynn, R. H. Yeany, & B. K. Britton (Eds.), The psychology of learning science. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R., Bass, K., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 313–351.
Lemke, J. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Linn, M., Bell, P., & Hsi, S. (1998). Using the Internet to enhance student understanding of science: The Knowledge Integration Environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 6(1–2), 4–38.
Nakhleh, M. B. (2002). Some thoughts about molecular-level representations in conceptual problem solving. Presented at Problem Solving in Chemistry: An Online CONFCHEM Conference on Chemistry. Available at http://www.chem.vt.edu/confchem/2002/b/nakhleh.html.
Nakhleh, M. B., Lowrey, K. A., & Mitchell, R. C. (1996). Narrowing the gap between concepts and algorithms in freshman chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 73(8), 758–762.
Council. (1996). From analysis to action: Undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Pea, R. D. (1992). Augmenting the discourse of learning with computer-based learning environments. In E. de Corte, M. Linn, & L. Verschaffel (Eds.), Computer-based learning environments and problem-solving (NATO Series, subseries F: Computer and System Sciences) (pp. 313–343). New York: Springer-Verlag.
Pea, R. D. (1994). Seeing what we build together: Distributed multimedia learning environments for transformative communications. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 283–298.
Roth, W.-M. (2004). What is the meaning of meaning? A case study from graphing. Journal of Mathematical Behavior.
Roth, W.-M. (2001). Situating cognition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1&2), 27–61.
Roth, W.-M. (1998). Teaching and learning as everyday activity. In B. Fraser & K. Tobin (Eds.), International handbook of science education (pp. 169–181). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Roth, W.-M. (1995). Affordances of computers in teacher-student interactions: The case of interactive physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 32, 329–347.
Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (1999). Of cannibals, missionaries, and converts: Graphing competencies from grade 8 to professional science inside (classrooms) and outside (field/laboratory). Science, Technology, and Human Values, 24(2), 179–212.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283.
Schank, P., & Kozma, R. (2002). Learning chemistry through the use of a representation-based knowledge-building environment. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 21(3), 253–279.
Schegloff, E. (1992). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97(5), 1295–1345.
Shavelson, R. J., Phillips, D. C., Towne, L., & Feuer, M. J. (2003). On the science of education design studies. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 25–28.
Stevens, R., & Hall, R. (1998). Disciplined perception: Learning to see in technoscience. In M. Lampert & M. L. Blunk (Eds.), Talking mathematics in school: Studies of teaching and learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Woolgar, S. (1990). Time and documents in researcher interaction: Some ways of making out what is happening in experimental science. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice(pp. 123–152). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2008 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Michalchik, V., Rosenquist, A., Kozma, R., Kreikemeier, P., Schank, P. (2008). Representational Resources for Constructing Shared Understandings in the High School Chemistry Classroom. In: Gilbert, J.K., Reiner, M., Nakhleh, M. (eds) Visualization: Theory and Practice in Science Education. Models and Modeling in Science Education, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5267-5_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5267-5_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-5266-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-5267-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)