Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Developing Scientific Inquiry in Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education

Part of the book series: Springer International Handbooks of Education ((SIHE))

Abstract

This chapter discusses theory, pedagogy, and design of technology-enhanced learning environments in promoting inquiry in science classrooms. Inquiry refers to both the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and the means of engaging students actively in developing an understanding about science content, science process, and how science develops. Supported by technology, students can be scaffolded to engage in inquiry practices, like those used by scientists, to help them deepen their understanding of science and to develop twenty-first-century educational competencies.

This chapter employs the Learning Sciences research paradigm that emphasizes social-constructivist frameworks and design-based research methodology. We first outline changing theories and frameworks of learning, pedagogy, and assessment, and discuss how they influence the design of technology-based learning environments. We then examine several major research programs, including Knowledge Integration, Project-Based Science, Virtual Environments, and Knowledge Building, all of which focus on the alignment of technology, theory, and pedagogy, and emphasize iterative implementation and design principles. Analysis and comparison of these different programs help illuminate theoretical issues and educational implications and identify challenges to designing technology-enhanced inquiry-based environments. We conclude that theory, pedagogy, and technology need to be integrated, and design-based research can illuminate and support learner processes synergizing theory and practice in real-world classrooms.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Azevedo, R. (2005). Computer environments as metacognitive tools for enhancing learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 193–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: designing for learning from the web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, C. J., Delgado, C., Davis, E. A., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Investigating teacher learning supports in high school biology curricular programs to inform the design of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(9), 977–998. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in education: Principles, policy, and practice, 5, 7–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenfeld, P., Fishman, B. J., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (2000). Creating usable innovations in systemic reform: Scaling up technology-embedded project-based science in urban Schools. Educational Psychologist, 35(3), 149–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carless, D. (2010). From testing to productive student learning: Implementing formative assessment in confucian-heritage settings. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chan, C. K. K. (2011). Bridging research and practice: Implementing and sustaining knowledge building in Hong Kong classrooms. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(2), 147–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, C. K. K. (2013). Collaborative knowledge building: Towards a knowledge creation perspective. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan, & A. O’Donnell (Eds.), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 437–461., Chapter xii, 516 Pages). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, B., & Hong, H.-Y. (2016). Schools as knowledge-building organizations: Thirty years of design research. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 266–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, B., & Zhang, J. (2016). Analytics for knowledge creation: Towards epistemic agency and design-mode thinking. Journal of Learning Analytics, 3(2), 139–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, B., Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2015). Advancing knowledge-building discourse through judgments of promising ideas. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(4), 345–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-015-9225-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clarke-Midura, J., & Dede, C. (2009). Design for scalability: A case study of the River City curriculum. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 353–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damşa, C. I. (2014). The multi-layered nature of small-group learning: Productive interactions in object-oriented collaboration. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(3), 247–281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawley, L., & Dede, C. (2014). Situated learning in virtual worlds and immersive simulations. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. 723–734), New York, Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dede, C., Grotzer, T. A., Kamarainen, A., & Metcalf, S. (2017). EcoXPT: Designing for deeper learning through experimentation in an immersive virtual ecosystem. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 20(4), 166–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3-4), 391–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eslinger, E., White, B., Frederiksen, J., & Brobst, J. (2008). Supporting inquiry processes with an interactive learning environment: Inquiry Island. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 610–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of Educational Research, 83(1), 70–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geier, R., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Krajcik, J. S., Fishman, B., Soloway, E., & Clay-Chambers, J. (2008). Standardized test outcomes for students engaged in inquiry-based science curricula in the context of urban reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 922–939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in Activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (1st ed., pp. 79–96). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halatchliyski, I., Moskaliuk, J., Kimmerle, J., & Cress, U. (2014). Explaining authors’ contribution to pivotal artifacts during mass collaboration in the Wikipedia’s knowledge base. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 9(1), 97–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herrenkohl, L. R., Tasker, T., & White, B. Y. (2011). Pedagogical practices to support classroom cultures of scientific inquiry. Cognition and Instruction, 29(1), 1–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, S. L., Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway E. (1994). Making dynamic modeling accessible to precollege science students. Interactive Learning Environment, 4(3), 233–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, M. J., Kim, B., Miao, C., Shen, Z., & Chavez, M. (2010). Design perspectives for learning in virtual worlds. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, M. J., Taylor, C. E., & Richards, D. (2016). Computational scientific inquiry with virtual worlds and agent-based models: New ways of doing science to learn science. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(8), 2080–2108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 247–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ketelhut, D. J., Nelson, B. C., Clark-midura, J., & Dede, C. (2010). A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 56–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, M. C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Scaffolding problem solving in technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and theory with practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J., Krajcik, J., Reiser, B., Edelson, D., & Starr, M. (2009-2013). Project based inquiry science. It’s about time. Mt. Kisco: Middle School Science Curriculum Materials.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krajcik, J. S., & Shin, N. (2014). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 275–297). New York: The Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Leelawong, K., & Biswas, G. (2008). Designing learning by teaching agents: The Betty’s brain system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18, 181–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B. S. (2011). Science learning and instruction. Taking advantage of technology to promote knowledge integration. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. E. (2004). Internet environments for science education. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn, M. C., Lee, H. S., Tinker, R., Husic, F., & Chiu, J. L. (2006). Teaching and assessing knowledge integration in science. Science, 313, 1049–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academics Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and the three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74, 557–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quintana, C., & Zhang, M. (2004). The Digital IdeaKeeper: Extending digital library services to scaffold online inquiry. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quintana, C., Zhang, M., & Krajcik, J. (2005). A framework for supporting metacognitive aspects of online inquiry through software-based scaffolding. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 235–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13, 273–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomon, G. (Ed.). (1993). Distributed cognition: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K. (Ed.). (2006). The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. K. (2014). Introduction: The new sciences of learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 1–20). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97–115). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2014). Knowledge building and knowledge creation: theory, pedagogy, and technology. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 397–417). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67–98). Chicago, IL: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D. L., & Arena, D. (2013). Measuring what matters most: Choice-based assessments for the digital age. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shepard, L. E. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shum, S. B., & Ferguson, R. (2012). Social learning analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slotta, J. D., & Linn, M. C. (2009). Wise Science: Web-based inquiry in the classroom. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition: Computer support for building collaborative knowledge. Cambridge. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Aalst, J., & Chan, C. K. K. (2007). Student-directed assessment of knowledge building using electronic portfolios. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(2), 175–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Aalst, J., Chan, C., Tian, S. W., Teplovs, C., Chan, Y. Y., & Wan, W.-S. (2012). The knowledge connections analyzer. In J. van Aalst, K. Thompson, M. J. Jacobson, & P. Reimann (Eds.), The future of learning: Proceedings of the 10th international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS 2012) (Vol. 2, pp. 361–365). Sydney: ISLS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, R., Kupperman, J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Science on the Web: Students online in a sixth-grade classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9, 75–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B., Frederiksen, J., & Collins, A. (2009). The interplay of scientific inquiry and metacognition: More than and marriage of convenience. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 175–205). New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Y., van Aalst, J., Chan, C. K. K., & Tian, W. (2016). Reflective assessment in knowledge building by students with low academic achievement. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(3), 281–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Leaning Sciences, 18(1), 7–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, J., Tao, D., Chen, M. H., Sun, Y., Judson, D., & Naqvi, S. (2016). Co-organizing the collective journey of inquiry with Idea Thread Mapper. Journal of the Learning Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2018.1444992.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The University of Hong Kong, Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong

    Carol K. K. Chan

  2. Central China Normal University, Wuhan, Hubei, China

    Yuqin Yang

Authors
  1. Carol K. K. Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yuqin Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carol K. K. Chan .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Amsterdam , Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Joke Voogt

  2. University of North Texas , Denton, Texas, USA

    Gerald Knezek

  3. University of North Texas , Denton, Texas, USA

    Rhonda Christensen

  4. University of Otago , Dunedin, New Zealand

    Kwok-Wing Lai

Section Editor information

  1. University of Otago College of Education, Dunedin, New Zealand

    Kwok-Wing Lai

  2. University of Otago College of Education, North Dunedin, New Zealand

    Keryn Pratt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Chan, C.K.K., Yang, Y. (2018). Developing Scientific Inquiry in Technology-Enhanced Learning Environments. In: Voogt, J., Knezek, G., Christensen, R., Lai, KW. (eds) Second Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education . Springer International Handbooks of Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_11-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_11-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-53803-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-53803-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation