Generating Students’ Information
Seeking Questions in the Scholar
Lab: What Benefits Can We Expect
From Inquiry Teaching
Approaches?

Tarcilo Torres; Beatriz Milicic; Carlos Soto; Vicente Sanjosé

doi:10.12973/eurasia.2013.934a

Generating Students’ Information Seeking Questions in the Scholar Lab: What Benefits Can We Expect From Inquiry Teaching Approaches?

Full Text (PDF)

Tarcilo Torres ¹, Beatriz Milicic ², Carlos Soto ¹, Vicente Sanjosé ³ ^*

More Detail

¹ University of Antioquia, COLOMBIA² National University of Rosario, ARGENTINA³ University of Valencia, SPAIN^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Physics teachers use experimental devices to show students how scientific concepts, principles, and laws are applied to understand the real world. This paper studies question generation of secondary and under-graduate university students when they are confronted with experimental devices in different but usual teaching situations: reading about devices while studying still images or diagrams, watching an experimental demonstration, and handling the devices in the laboratory. The influence of the prior scientific knowledge on the questions asked is also analysed. Inquiry learning environments, involving lab projects, seemed to stimulate more inferences addressed to causality when students tried to build mental models, whereas reading about devices with the help of still images stimulate more descriptive inferences and inhibited predictive ones.

Keywords

basic physics
problem solving
experimental devices
question generation

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Research Article

EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed, 2013, Volume 9, Issue 3, 259-272

https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.934a

Publication date: 14 Dec 2013

Article Views: 1582

Article Downloads: 981

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Allen, M. (Ed.) (2012). An international review of school science practical work [Special Issue]. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 8(1).
Anderson, R.D. (2002). Reforming science teaching: What research says about inquiry. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13 (1), 1-12.
Barolli, E., Laburú, C.E. & Guridi, V.M. (2010). Laboratorio didáctico de ciencias: caminos de investigación. Revista Electrónica de Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 9 (1), 88-110.
Barsalou, L.W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 617–645.
Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293- 332.
Chin, C. & Brown, D.A. (2002). Students-generated questions: A meaningful aspect of learning in science. International Journal of Science Education, 24 (5), 521-549.
Chin, C. & Chia, L.G. (2004). Problem-based learning: using students’ questions to drive knowledge construction. Science Education, 88, 707-727.
Chin, C. & Osborne, J. (2008). Students' questions: a potential resource for teaching and learning science. Studies in Science Education, 44(1), 1-39.
Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002).Epistemologically Authentic Inquiry in Schools: A Theoretical Framework for Evaluating Inquiry Tasks. Science Education 86, 175– 218.
Costa, J., Caldeira, M.H., Gallástegui, & Otero, J. (2000). An analysis of question asking on scientific texts explaining natural phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 602-614.
Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., Ventura, M., Graesser, A. C., & the Tutoring Research Group. (2000). Overhearing dialogues and monologues in virtual tutoring sessions: Effects on questioning and vicarious learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 242–253.
Cuccio-Schirripa, S. & Steiner, H.E. (2000). Enhancement and analysis of science question level for middle school students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 210- 224.
Dillon, J.T. (1990). The Practice of Questioning. New York: Routledge.
Flammer, A. (1981). Towards a theory of question asking. Psychological Research, 43, 407–420.
Gil, D. (1986). La metodología científica y la enseñanza de las ciencias: unas relaciones controvertidas. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 4 (2), 111-121.
Gil, D. & Valdés, P. (1996). La orientación de las prácticas de laboratorio como investigación: un ejemplo ilustrativo. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 14 (2), 155-163.
Gil, D. & Payá, J. (1998). Los trabajos prácticos de Física y Química y la metodología científica. Revista de Enseñanza de la Física, 2, 73-77
Graesser, A. C., & Bertus, E. L. (1998). The construction of causal inferences while reading expository texts on science and technology. Scientific Studies of Reading, 2(3), 247-269.
Greasser, A.C., & Olde, B.A. (2003). How does one know whether a person understand a device? The quality of the questions the person asks when the device breaks down. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 524-536.
Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 104–137.
Graesser, A. C., & Zwaan, R. A. (1995). Inference generation and the construction of situation models. In C. A. Weaver, S. Mannes, & C. R. Fletcher (Eds.), Discourse comprehension: Strategies and processing revisited. Essays in honor of Walter Kintsch (pp. 117-139). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Greeno, J.G. (1989). Situations, Mental Models, and Generative Knowledge, en Klahr, D. y Kotovsky, K. (eds.). Complex Information Processing: The Impact of Herbert Simon, (pp. 285-318) Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Gunstone, R. & Mitchell, I.J. (1998). Metacognition and conceptual change. In J.L.Mintzes, J.H. Wandersee, & J.D. Noval (Eds.), Teaching for science education: A human constructivist view (pp. 133-163). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Harper, K.A. Etkina, E., & Lin, Y. (2003). Encouraging and analyzing students’ questions in a large physics course: Meaningful patterns for instructors. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40 (8), 776-791.
Hartford, F., & Good, R. (1982). Training chemistry students to ask research questions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 19, 559-570.
Höffler, T.N. & Leutner, D. (2007). Instructional animation versus static pictures: A meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction 17, 722-738.
Hofstein A. &Lunetta V.N. (2004). The laboratory in science education: foundation for the 21st century. Science Education, 88, 28-54.
Ishiwa, K., Sanjosé, V. & Otero, J. (2012).Questioning and reading goals: Information-seeking questions asked on scientific texts read under different task conditions. Accepted for publication in British Journal of EducationalPsychology.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK.
Kintsch, W. & J.G. Greeno (1985). Understanding and solving word arithmetic problems. Psychological Review, 92(1), 109-129.
Lederman, N. (1999). Teachers' understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: Factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching , 36 (8), 916 - 929.
Millis, K., & Graesser, A. (1994).The time-course of constructing knowledge-based inferences for scientific texts.Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 583-599.
Miyake, N. & Norman, D. A. (1979). To ask a question one must know enough to know what is not known. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 357–364.
Nelson, T.O., & Narens, L. (1990). Metamemory: A theoretical framework and new findings. In G.H. Bower (Ed). The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 26, (pp. 125-173). New York: Academic Press
Novak, J.D. (1979). The reception learning paradigm. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 16 (6), 481-488.
Olsher, G. & Dreyfus, A. (1999). Biotechnologies as a context for enhancing junior high-school students’ ability to ask meaningful questions about abstract biological processes. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 781-799.
Otero, J. & Campanario J.M. (1990). Comprehension evaluation and regulation in learning from science texts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 27, 5, 447-460.
Otero, J. (2009). Question Generation and Anomaly Detection in Texts. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds), Handbook of Metacognition in Education (pp. 47-59).New York: Routledge.
Otero, J., & Graesser, A. C. (2001). PREG: Elements of a model of question asking. Cognition and Instruction, 19, 143–175.
Pfeiffer, V.D.I., Scheiter K., Kühl T., & Gemballa, S. (2011). Learning How to Identify Species in a Situated Learning Scenario: Using Dynamic-Static Visualizations to Prepare Students for Their Visit to The Aquarium. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 7(2), 135-147.
Ram, A. (1991). A Theory of Questions and Question Asking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 273-318.
Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66, 181–221.
Sanjosé, V., Torres, T. & Soto, C. (2012). Effects of scientific information format on the comprehension selfmonitoring processes: question generation. Revista de Psicodidáctica, 18(2), 293-311.
Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1992). Text-based and Knowledge-based questioning by children. Cognition and Instruction, 9, 177-199.
Schraw, G.; Crippen, K.J. and Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting Self-Regulation in Science Education: Metacognition as Part of a Broader Perspective on Learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111-139.
Schnotz, W. (2005).An integrated model of text and picture comprehension.In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 49-69).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Singer, M., & Gagnon, N. (1999). Detecting causal inconsistencies in scientific text. In S. R. Golman, A. Graesser, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence: Essays in honor of Tom Trabasso (pp. 179-194). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Solaz-Portolés, J.J. (2012). Sobre cómo el conocimiento científico intenta aproximarse a la realidad. Revista Brasileira de Ensino de Fisica (online), 34 (1), 1308 (1-5). En: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/rbef/v34n1/v34n1a08.pdf
Torres, T., Duque, K.J., Ishiwa, K., Sánchez, G., SolazPortolés, J.J. & Sanjosé, V. (2012). Preguntas de los estudiantes de educación secundaria ante dispositivos experimentales. Enseñanza de las Ciencias, 30 (1), 39-60.
Trabasso, T. & Magliano, J.P. (1996). Conscious Understanding during Comprehension. Discourse Processes, 21, 255-287.
Trumper, R. (2003). The physics laboratory – a historical overview and future perspectives. Science and Education, 12, 645-670.
Truyol, M.E. & Gangoso, Z. (2012). Caracterización del proceso de resolución de problemas: el caso de los estudiantes. 97th Reunión Nacional de la Asociación Física Argentina. Córdoba, Septiembre de 2012.
Truyol, M.E.; Gangoso, Z. & Sanjosé, V. (2012). Modelling in physics: a matter of experience? Accepted for publication in Latin-American Journal of Physics Education.
Van der Meij, H. (1994). Student Questioning: A Componential Analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 6, 137-16.
Wang, M.C.; Haertel, G.D. & Walberg, H.J. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for school learning.Review of Educational Research, 63 (3), 249–294.
Watts, M., Gould, G., & Alsop, S. (1997). Questions of understanding: categorising pupils, questions in science. School Science Review, 79(286), 57-63.
Wiley, J., & Myers, J. L. (2003).Availability and accessibility of information and causal inferences from scientific text.Discourse Processes, 36, 109-129.
Windschitl, M. (2002). Inquiry projects in science teacher education: what can investigative experiences reveal about teacher thinking and eventual classroom practice? Science Education, 87 (1), 112-143.
Zwaan, R. A. (2004). The immersed experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (pp 35- 62). York: Academic Press.
Newel, A. & Simon, H.A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.

How to cite this article

APA

Torres, T., Milicic, B., Soto, C., & Sanjosé, V. (2013). Generating Students’ Information Seeking Questions in the Scholar Lab: What Benefits Can We Expect From Inquiry Teaching Approaches?. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 9(3), 259-272. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.934a

Vancouver

Torres T, Milicic B, Soto C, Sanjosé V. Generating Students’ Information Seeking Questions in the Scholar Lab: What Benefits Can We Expect From Inquiry Teaching Approaches?. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2013;9(3):259-72. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.934a

AMA

Torres T, Milicic B, Soto C, Sanjosé V. Generating Students’ Information Seeking Questions in the Scholar Lab: What Benefits Can We Expect From Inquiry Teaching Approaches?. EURASIA J Math Sci Tech Ed. 2013;9(3), 259-272. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.934a

Chicago

Torres, Tarcilo, Beatriz Milicic, Carlos Soto, and Vicente Sanjosé. "Generating Students’ Information Seeking Questions in the Scholar Lab: What Benefits Can We Expect From Inquiry Teaching Approaches?". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education 2013 9 no. 3 (2013): 259-272. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.934a

Harvard

Torres, T., Milicic, B., Soto, C., and Sanjosé, V. (2013). Generating Students’ Information Seeking Questions in the Scholar Lab: What Benefits Can We Expect From Inquiry Teaching Approaches?. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 9(3), pp. 259-272. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.934a

MLA

Torres, Tarcilo et al. "Generating Students’ Information Seeking Questions in the Scholar Lab: What Benefits Can We Expect From Inquiry Teaching Approaches?". Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, vol. 9, no. 3, 2013, pp. 259-272. https://doi.org/10.12973/eurasia.2013.934a