MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1509716283

Contentious Issues in Science Education: Building Critical Thinking Patterns through Two-Dimensional Concept Mapping.

2006· article· en· W1509716283 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of educational multimedia and hypermedia · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePsychology
ThématiqueInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Établissements canadiensAcadia University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLaptopScience educationIBMContext (archaeology)Computer scienceCritical thinkingMathematics educationGeneral partnershipPedagogyPsychologySociology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Using a survey and follow-up qualitative research design, an elaborate model of technology integration has been studied in a science education classroom. Using a coding system known as cognotes, teacher-interns were first taught how to recognize electronic discussion contributions consisting specifically of critical approaches such as compare, contrast, cause and effect, inductive and deductive reasoning. An electronic concept map outlining the instructor's consideration of a contentious issue (creationism vs. evolution) was supplied to students. Students further developed concept maps (using Inspiration[R] software) in two ways: (a) students hyperlinked the individual concepts in their map to html-based learning logs and (b) students hyperlinked their own relational phrases between concepts to captured electronic discussions. The impact of the instructional approach was assessed through a survey of 68 students, standardized semi-structured interviews, and focus group methodology. Students were especially positive with regard to using a two-dimensional hyperlinked graphic organizer to lend a framework to their understanding of a contentious issue in science education. With regard to electronic discussion, students identified improvements in (a) their ability to formulate arguments, (b) their ability to lead effective discussions, and (c) their ability to substantiate their conceptual frameworks. The technology-integration model described is generic in its application and could be used with a variety of content knowledge. CONTEXT OF THE STUDY The study was undertaken in the School of Education at Acadia University, the first laptop institution in Canada. In 1996 Acadia entered into a partnership with IBM that would place laptop computers in the hands of some 3500 students and 400 faculty. Through an elaborate network, participants have anywhere-anytime access to the internet and an extensive offering of software. Classrooms are equipped with complete digital audio-visual systems and network connections allowing for an excellent environment to study the pedagogical impacts pf technology integration. Teacher interns (n=68) in two sections of a science education course were necessarily involved in the action research study. All interns were enrolled in a two-year post-degree Bachelor of Education program leading to teacher certification. A cursory electronic survey of all 68 students established that their level of competency in computer technologies (e.g., word processing, e-mail, spreadsheets, databases, internet searching) was good to very good on a Likert scale. (LS= 4.5 where 1 was very poor and 5 was very good) A MODEL FOR USING TECHNOLOGY TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUES SURROUNDING THE CREATION VERSUS EVOLUTION CONTROVERSY Typically teacher interns in science education are exposed to systematic strategies for engaging the contentious issues in science (National Science Teachers Association [NSTA], 2000). In particular, science teacher interns are anxious to gain experience in dealing with the complicated controversy of creationism versus evolution. The instructor supplied students with an incomplete electronic hierarchical concept map (Novak, 1990) prepared with the software Inspiration[R] (Figure 1). A conscious choice was made to access electronic concept mapping tools in that they have been shown to result in more conceptually complex mapping amongst students (Royer & Royer, 2004). The concept map was based on component topical aspects that the instructor would introduce in three consecutive class lectures on aspects of engaging evolution versus creationism in science classrooms. The concept map was incomplete in that the relational phrases between concepts were purposefully left blank. A unique aspect of the Inspiration[R] software (which students have network access to) is its ability to hyperlink external documents (local or online) not only to concept boxes but also to the propositional phrases that link the concepts. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,275
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,785

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,001
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,036
Tête enseignante GPT0,416
Écart entre enseignants0,380 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle