Different Theoretical Approaches to the Use of ICT in Science Education

Some authors have investigated the effectiveness of educational technologies for supporting the teaching and learning of science. To deepen the discussion, this chapter presents an analysis of the main theoretical approaches that support research on science education mediated by Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). Different studies were used to reflect on four aspects: (1) approaches to teaching and learning through the use of ICT (reflecting trends in a “theory of technological education” or “cognitive tools”); (2) cognitivist approaches (with emphasis on “social constructivism and sociocultural theory”, “constructivist approaches” and “the effects of collaborative work” allowed by the use of ICT); (3) approaches based on inquiry, research, projects and case studies (with a tendency towards renewal of the science curriculum); and (4) approaches that emphasise conceptual knowledge (investigating “conceptual understanding” and “conceptual change” facilitated by the use of ICT). The main contribution of this chapter is in the understanding that the use of ICT in science education is not an isolated action without a theoretical basis. The use of ICT is still planned and supported by traditional theoretical trends in teaching, learning, knowledge and curriculum design.

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

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

eBook EUR 42.79 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 52.74 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Notes

A mental set includes an existing model for the representation of a particular phenomenon or information (She & Liao, 2010, p. 94).

References

• Ardac, D., & Akaygun, S. (2004). Effectiveness of multimedia-based instruction that emphasizes molecular representations on students’ understanding of chemical change. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 317–337. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20005ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Barab, S., Sadler, T., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., & Zuiker, S. (2007). Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: Supporting consequential play. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9033-3ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Barab, S., Scott, B., Siyahhan, S., Goldstone, R., Ingram-Goble, A., Zuiker, S., & Warren, S. (2009). Transformational play as a curricular scaffold: Using videogames to support science education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9171-5ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Barak, M., Ashkar, T., & Dori, Y. J. (2011). Learning science via animated movies: Its effect on students’ thinking and motivation. Computers & Education, 56, 839–846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.025ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Bell, R., & Bell, L. (2003). A bibliography of articles on instructional technology in science education. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 2(4). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol2/iss4/science/article2.cfm
• Bertrand, Y. (2001). Teorias contemporâneas da educação (2nd ed.). Lisboa, Portugal: Editora Piaget. Google Scholar
• Byrne, J., & Grace, M. (2010). Using a concept mapping tool with a photograph association technique (compat) to elicit children’s ideas about microbial activity. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 479–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802688071ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Chang, C., Yeh, T., & Barufaldi, J. P. (2010). The positive and negative effects of science concept tests on student conceptual understanding. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 265–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802650055ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Chang, H.-Y., Quintana, C., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). The impact of designing and evaluating molecular animations on how well middle school students understand the particulate nature of matter. Science Education, 94, 73–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20352ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Cher Ping, L. (2008). Global citizenship education, school curriculum and games: Learning mathematics, English and science as a global citizen. Computers & Education, 51, 1073–1093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.10.005ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Chin-Chung, T. (2009). Conceptions of learning versus conceptions of web-based learning: The differences revealed by college students. Computers & Education, 53(4), 1092–1103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.05.019ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Clark, D., & Jorde, D. (2004). Helping students revise disruptive experientially supported ideas about thermodynamics: Computer visualizations and tactile models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10097ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dalacosta, K., Kamariotaki-Paparrigopoulou, M., Palyvos, J. A., & Spyrellis, N. (2009). Multimedia application with animated cartoons for teaching science in elementary education. Computers & Education, 52, 741–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.018ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Devolder, A., van Braak, J., & Tondeur, J. (2012). Supporting self-regulated learning in computer-based learning environments: Systematic review of effects of scaffolding in the domain of science education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28, 557–573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00476.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dimopoulos, K., & Asimakopoulos, A. (2009). Science on the web: Secondary school students’ navigation patterns and preferred pages’ characteristics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 19, 246–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9197-8ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect undergraduate students’ understanding of electromagnetism concepts? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14, 243–279. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1402_3ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Dori, Y. J., & Sasson, I. (2008). Chemical understanding and graphing skills in an honors case-based computerized chemistry laboratory environment: The value of bidirectional visual and textual representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 219–250. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20197ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Driver, R., Hilary, A., John, L., Mortimer, E. F., & Philip, S. (1999). Construindo conhecimento científico na sala de aula. Química Nova na Escola, 1(9). Google Scholar
• Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84(3), 287–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(200005)84:33.0.CO;2-AArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ebenezer, J., Kaya, O. N., & Ebenezer, D. L. (2011). Engaging students in environmental research projects: Perceptions of fluency with innovative technologies and levels of scientific inquiry abilities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 94–116. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20387ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ergazaki, M., Zogza, V., & Komis, V. (2007). Analysing students’ shared activity while modeling a biological process in a computer-supported educational environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00214.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Furberg, A., & Ludvigsen, S. (2008). Students’ meaning-making of socio-scientific issues in computer mediated settings: Exploring learning through interaction trajectories. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 1775–1799. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701543617ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Furman, M., & Barton, A. C. (2006). Capturing urban student voices in the creation of a science mini-documentary. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43, 667–694. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20164ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Gelbart, H., Brill, G., & Yarden, A. (2009). The impact of a web-based research simulation in bioinformatics on students’ understanding of genetics. Research in Science Education, 39, 725–751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9101-1ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Progressive inquiry in a computer-supported biology class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 1072–1088. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10121ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hansson, L., Redfors, A., & Rosberg, M. (2011). Students’ socio-scientific reasoning in an astrobiological context during work with a digital learning environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9260-5ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hoffman, J. L., Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2003). The nature of middle school learners’ science content understandings with the use of on-line resources. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 323–346. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10079ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hsu, Y.-S. (2006). Lesson rainbow: The use of multiple representations in an internet-based, discipline-integrated science lesson. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 539–557. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00551.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Hsu, Y.-S., Wu, H.-K., & Hwang, F.-K. (2008). Fostering high school students’ conceptual understandings about seasons: The design of a technology-enhanced learning environment. Research in Science Education, 38, 127–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-007-9041-1ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Jaakkola, T., & Nurmi, S. (2008). Fostering elementary school students’ understanding of simple electricity by combining simulation and laboratory activities. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00259.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Jacobson, M. J., & Archodidou, A. (2000). The design of hypermedia tools for learning: Fostering conceptual change and transfer of complex scientific knowledge. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 145–199. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0902_2ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Jang, S. (2006). The effects of incorporating web-assisted learning with team teaching in seventh-grade science classes. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 615–632. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500339753ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computadores, ferramentas cognitivas: Desenvolver o pensamento crítico nas escolas (2nd ed.). Porto, Portugal: Porto Editora. Google Scholar
• Katz, P. (2011). A case study of the use of internet photobook technology to enhance early childhood “scientist” identity. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 525–536. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9301-8ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ketelhut, D. (2007). The impact of student self-efficacy on scientific inquiry skills: An exploratory investigation in river city, a multi-user virtual environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9038-yArticleGoogle Scholar
• Khan, S. (2010). New pedagogies on teaching science with computer simulations. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20(3), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9247-2ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kong, S. C., Yeung, Y. Y., & Wu, X. Q. (2009). An experience of teaching for learning by observation: Remote-controlled experiments on electrical circuits. Computers & Education, 52, 702–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.11.011ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kubasko, D., Jones, M. G., Tretter, T., & Andre, T. (2008). Is it live or is it memorex? Students’ synchronous and asynchronous communication with scientists. International Journal of Science Education, 30, 495–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701217220ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lee, S. W., Tsai, C., Wu, Y., Tsai, M., Liu, T., Hwang, F., et al. (2011). Internet-based science learning: A review of journal publications. International Journal of Science Education, 33, 1893–1925. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.536998ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Li, S. C., Law, N., & Lui, K. F. A. (2006). Cognitive perturbation through dynamic modelling: A pedagogical approach to conceptual change in science. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 405–422. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2006.00187.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lim, C. P., Nonis, D., & Hedberg, J. (2006). Gaming in a 3D multiuser virtual environment: Engaging students in science lessons. British Journal of Educational Technology, 37, 211–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00531.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lin, J. M., Wang, P., & Lin, I. (2012). Pedagogy technology: A two-dimensional model for teachers’ ICT integration. British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(1), 97–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01159.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lin, L.-F., Hsu, Y.-S., & Yeh, Y.-F. (2012). The role of computer simulation in an inquiry-based learning environment: Reconstructing geological events as geologists. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 370–383. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9330-3ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lindgren, R., & Schwartz, D. L. (2009). Spatial learning and computer simulations in science. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 419–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690802595813ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Liu, L., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2009). Promoting complex systems learning through the use of conceptual representations in hypermedia. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46, 1023–1040. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20297ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Looi, C.-K., Zhang, B., Chen, W., Seow, P., Chia, G., Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2011). 1:1 mobile inquiry learning experience for primary science students: A study of learning effectiveness. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 269–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00390.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Lowe, D., Newcombe, P., & Stumpers, B. (2012). Evaluation of the use of remote laboratories for secondary school science education. Research in Science Education, 43, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-012-9304-3ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mayer, R. E. (2009). Teoria cognitiva da aprendizagem multimédia. In Ensino online e aprendizagem multimédia. Lisboa, Portugal: Relógio D’Água Editores. Google Scholar
• Mayer-Smith, J., Pedretti, E., & Woodrow, J. (2000). Closing of the gender gap in technology enriched science education: A case study. Computers & Education, 35, 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(00)00018-XArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mayo, A., Sharma, M., & Muller, D. (2009). Qualitative differences between learning environments using videos in small groups and whole class discussions: A preliminary study in physics. Research in Science Education, 39, 477–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9090-0ArticleGoogle Scholar
• McCrory Wallace, R., Kupperman, J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Science on the web: Students online in a sixth-grade classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 75–104. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0901_5ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mistler-Jackson, M., & Butler Songer, N. (2000). Student motivation and internet technology: Are students empowered to learn science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 459–479. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(200005)37:53.0.CO;2-CArticleGoogle Scholar
• Moreira, M. A., & Greca, I. M. (2003). Conceptual change: Critical analysis and proposals in the light of the meaningful learning theory. Ciência & Educação, 9(2), 301–315. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-73132003000200010ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Mortimer, E. F. (1995). Conceptual change or conceptual profile change? Science & Education, 4(3), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00486624ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Nelson, B. (2007). Exploring the use of individualized, reflective guidance in an educational multi-user virtual environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 83–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9039-xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ng, W., & Gunstone, R. (2002). Students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of the world wide web as a research and teaching tool in science learning. Research in Science Education, 32, 489–510. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022429900836ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96, 21–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20463ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Oshima, J., Oshima, R., Murayama, I., Inagaki, S., Takenaka, M., Nakayama, H., & Yamaguchi, E. (2004). Design experiments in Japanese elementary science education with computer support for collaborative learning: Hypothesis testing and collaborative construction. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1199–1221. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069032000138824ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. BookGoogle Scholar
• Park, H., Khan, S., & Petrina, S. (2009). ICT in science education: A quasi-experimental study of achievement, attitudes toward science, and career aspirations of Korean middle school students. International Journal of Science Education, 31, 993–1012. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701787891ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pata, K., & Sarapuu, T. (2006). A comparison of reasoning processes in a collaborative modelling environment: Learning about genetics problems using virtual chat. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 1347–1368. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500438670ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pedretti, E., Mayer-Smith, J., & Woodrow, J. (1998). Technology, text, and talk: Students’ perspectives on teaching and learning in a technology-enhanced secondary science classroom. Science Education, 82, 569–589. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199809)82:53.0.CO;2-7ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pol, H., Harskamp, E., & Suhre, C. (2005). Solving physics problems with the help of computer-assisted instruction. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 451–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000266164ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Posner, G. J., Strike, K. A., Hewson, P. W., & Gertzog, W. A. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66(2), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730660207ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Pyatt, K., & Sims, R. (2012). Virtual and physical experimentation in inquiry-based science labs: Attitudes, performance and access. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9291-6ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Reid, D. J., Zhang, J., & Chen, Q. (2003). Supporting scientific discovery learning in a simulation environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00002.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Ronen, M., & Eliahu, M. (2000). Simulation — a bridge between theory and reality: The case of electric circuits. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 16, 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2729.2000.00112.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Russell, D. W., Lucas, K. B., & McRobbie, C. J. (2004). Role of the microcomputer-based laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in thermal physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41, 165–185. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10129ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Scalise, K., Timms, M., Moorjani, A., Clark, L., Holtermann, K., & Irvin, P. S. (2011). Student learning in science simulations: Design features that promote learning gains. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48, 1050–1078. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20437ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Shapiro, A. M. (1999). The relevance of hierarchies to learning biology from hypertext. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 215–243. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0802_2ArticleGoogle Scholar
• She, H.-C., Cheng, M.-T., Li, T.-W., Wang, C.-Y., Chiu, H.-T., Lee, P.-Z., et al. (2012). Web-based undergraduate chemistry problem-solving: The interplay of task performance, domain knowledge and web-searching strategies. Computers & Education, 59, 750–761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.02.005ArticleGoogle Scholar
• She, H.-C., & Lee, C.-Q. (2008). SCCR digital learning system for scientific conceptual change and scientific reasoning. Computers & Education, 51, 724–742. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.07.009ArticleGoogle Scholar
• She, H.-C., & Liao, Y.-W. (2010). Bridging scientific reasoning and conceptual change through adaptive web-based learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47, 91–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20309ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Shin, N., Jonassen, D. H., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured and ill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40, 6–33. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10058ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012). Computer simulations to support science instruction and learning: A critical review of the literature. International Journal of Science Education, 34, 1337–1370. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2011.605182ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Snir, J., Smith, C. L., & Raz, G. (2003). Linking phenomena with competing underlying models: A software tool for introducing students to the particulate model of matter. Science Education, 87(6), 794–830. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10069ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Spiro, R. J., Collins, B. P., Thota, J. J., & Feltovich, P. J. (2003). Cognitive flexibility theory: Hypermedia for complex learning, adaptive knowledge application, and experience acceleration. Educational Technology, 43(5), 5–10. Google Scholar
• Squire, K., & Jan, M. (2007). Mad city mystery: Developing scientific argumentation skills with a place-based augmented reality game on handheld computers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16, 5–29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-006-9037-zArticleGoogle Scholar
• Starbek, P., Starčič Erjavec, M., & Peklaj, C. (2010). Teaching genetics with multimedia results in better acquisition of knowledge and improvement in comprehension. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26, 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00344.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sun, K., Lin, Y., & Yu, C. (2008). A study on learning effect among different learning styles in a web-based lab of science for elementary school students. Computers & Education, 50, 1411–1422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.01.003ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Tekos, G., & Solomonidou, C. (2009). Constructivist learning and teaching of optics concepts using ICT tools in Greek primary school: A pilot study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 415–428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9158-2ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Tolentino, L., Birchfield, D., Megowan-Romanowicz, C., Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., Kelliher, A., & Martinez, C. (2009). Teaching and learning in the mixed-reality science classroom. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 501–517. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9166-2ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Tseng, C., Tuan, H., & Chin, C. (2010). Investigating the influence of motivational factors on conceptual change in a digital learning context using the dual-situated learning model. International Journal of Science Education, 32, 1853–1875. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690903219156ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Veermans, K., van Joolingen, W., & de Jong, T. (2006). Use of heuristics to facilitate scientific discovery learning in a simulation learning environment in a physics domain. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 341–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690500277615ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1994). Mental models of the day/night cycle. Cognitive Science, 18(1), 123–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/0364-0213(94)90022-1ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Waight, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2012). Nature of technology: Implications for design, development, and enactment of technological tools in school science classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 34(18), 2875–2905. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2012.698763ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Wang, C., Ke, Y.-T., Wu, J.-T., & Hsu, W.-H. (2012). Collaborative action research on technology integration for science learning. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 125–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9289-0ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Wu, H.-K., & Huang, Y.-L. (2007). Ninth-grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-centered technology-enhanced learning environments. Science Education, 91, 727–749. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20216ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zacharia, Z. C., Olympiou, G., & Papaevripidou, M. (2008). Effects of experimenting with physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual understanding in heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 1021–1035. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20260ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zhang, B., Looi, C.-K., Seow, P., Chia, G., Wong, L.-H., Chen, W., et al. (2010). Deconstructing and reconstructing: Transforming primary science learning via a mobilized curriculum. Computers & Education, 55, 1504–1523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.016ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zhang, J., Chen, Q., Sun, Y., & Reid, D. J. (2004). Triple scheme of learning support design for scientific discovery learning based on computer simulation: Experimental research. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00062.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zheng, R. Z., Yang, W., Garcia, D., & McCadden, E. P. (2008). Effects of multimedia and schema induced analogical reasoning on science learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 474–482. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00282.xArticleGoogle Scholar
• Zydney, J., & Grincewicz, A. (2011). The use of video cases in a multimedia learning environment for facilitating high school students’ inquiry into a problem from varying perspectives. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20, 715–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-010-9264-1ArticleGoogle Scholar

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Departamento de Ciências Biológicas, Universidade Federal dos Vales do Jequitinhonha e Mucuri, Diamantina, Minas Gerais, Brazil Geraldo W. Rocha Fernandes
2. Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, UIDEF, Instituto de Educação, Universidade de Lisboa, LaPed, Laboratório de Pedagogia, Lisboa, Portugal António M. Rodrigues
3. UIDEF, Instituto de Educação, Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Motricidade Humana, Lisboa, Portugal Carlos Alberto Rosa Ferreira

1. Geraldo W. Rocha Fernandes