for peer reviewti-researchlibrary.com/lists/ti education...the science education literature...

For Peer Review

Engaging Students in Environmental Research Projects: Perceptions of Fluency with Innovative Technologies and

levels of Scientific Inquiry Abilities

Journal: Journal Research Science Teaching

Manuscript ID: JRST-2009-12-0335

Wiley - Manuscript type: Research Article

Conceptual Area: Learning Technologies

Science Content Area: Science/Life Science

Research Focus/Suggested

Keywords:

science education, science teacher education, technology

education/software design

Grade Level: Secondary (age 14-18)

Methodology: Quantitative (includes experimental, quasi-experimental, large scale)

John Wiley & Sons

Journal of Research in Science Teaching

For Peer Review

1

Engaging Students in Environmental Research Projects: Perceptions of Fluency

with Innovative Technologies and levels of Scientific Inquiry Abilities

Abstract: The purpose of this mixed-method study was to investigate the changes in

high school students’ perceptions of fluency in innovative technologies (IT) and the

levels of students’ scientific inquiry abilities as the result of engaging students in long-

term scientific research projects focusing on community-based environmental issues.

Over three years, a total of 125 ninth- through twelfth-grade students (69 females and 56

males) participated in this study. A project-specific Likert-scale survey consisting of

three parts (fluency in technologies, GPS/GIS, and CBL2/EasyData) was administered to

all students as a pre- and post-test. At the end of the study, 45 students were randomly

interviewed and asked to elaborate on the changes in their perceptions of fluency with

IT. The results indicated statistically significant increases (p<0.001) in students’

perceptions of their fluency with IT. Qualitative analysis of students’ interview results

corroborated the statistical findings of students’ changes in perceptions of their fluency

with IT. Students’ research papers based on the environmental studies conducted at the

interface of classroom and community were analyzed using the Scientific Inquiry

Rubrics, which consist of 11 criteria developed by the researchers. Results indicated the

students’ abilities to conduct scientific inquiry for seven out of eleven criteria were at the

proficient level. This study clearly points to the correlation between the development of

IT fluency and ability levels to engage in scientific inquiry based on respective

competencies. Ultimately, this research study recommends that students’ IT fluency

ought to be concurrently developed and assessed with an emphasis on contemporary

higher order scientific inquiry abilities.

Page 1 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

2

Key words: perceptions; fluency with technology; scientific inquiry abilities;

environmental research projects

Most educational experts in the U.S.A., in principle, believe that “scientific inquiry is at

the heart of science and science learning" (National Research Council, 1996, p. 15). In a quest to

put this principle into practice, the more recent forms of technology incorporation into science

curricula have been based on design principles. The built-in tools in virtual science curricula are

primarily for “learning to learn” the scientific practices. For example, Model-It is a meta-

cognitive technological tool that enables students to represent and test their ideas through

dynamic model building of science phenomena and running simulations with their models to

verify and analyze the results (Jackson, Krajcik, & Soloway, 2000). To scaffold students in

constructing and evaluating scientific explanations, Sandoval and Reiser (2004) designed a

technology-supported inquiry curriculum for the study of the natural phenomena of evolution

and natural selection. These authors concluded that an epistemic affordance especially designed

for a particular purpose can support that process in students’ scientific inquiry. Friedrichsen,

Munford, and Zembal-Saul (2003) used inquiry-empowering technologies, (i.e., computer-based

tools specially designed to support scientific inquiry) to document individual prospective

teachers' understanding of science as argumentation. These authors concluded that technological

tools have the potential to challenge or reinforce prospective science teachers' perceptions of

what it means to learn science, what science is, and what characterizes school science. Clearly,

the foregoing design-based studies have added value to developing student understanding of

certain epistemic aspects of scientific inquiry.

Page 2 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

3

Instead of the design-based virtual means for developing students’ understanding of

scientific inquiry, we launched the IT (pseudonym) project that enabled students to work with

innovative technology in authentic research contexts. Our assumption was that the use of

technologies in environmental research projects in real world context would develop not

only fluency with innovative technologies (IT) but also scientific inquiry abilities. Thus, in the

second phase of the IT project, participating teachers engaged students in environmental research

projects with innovative technologies to improve students' use of technologies in scientific

inquiry.

This study, as part of the IT project, which took place in schools,

explores whether immersing students in authentic environmental research projects using

innovative technologies develops fluency in using those specific innovative technologies. Based

on the innovative technologies we expected students to use in their research projects, we review

the science education literature pertaining to the goals of using IT in science research projects.

Then, based on the literature review, we develop a theoretical framework that reflects the use of

IT and the standards of scientific inquiry. Founded on these standards scientific inquiry, rubrics

are presented that assess students' scientific inquiry abilities as manifested in their' research

papers. The major focus of this study is to observe students' changes in their perceptions of their

fluency with IT when these technologies were used in environmental projects. Determining

students’ level of attainment in scientific inquiry became the secondary purpose.

Scientific Inquiry with Innovative Technologies Studies

Enabling learners to use technology as a tool in conducting scientific inquiry is a National

Science Education Standard (NRC, 1996). There are two standards pertinent to the use of

technologies in scientific inquiry. Using a variety of technologies for investigation refers to the

Page 3 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

4

necessary tools (e.g., hand tools; measuring instruments and calculators; electronic devices; and

computers for the collection, analysis, and display of data). The use of mathematical tools and

statistical software refers to applying these to collect, analyze, and display data in charts and

graphs and to conduct statistical analyses. Closely aligned with these scientific inquiry standards

is one of the technology performance indicators--"research and information fluency" advocated

by the International Society for Technology Education (ISTE’s) National Education Technology

Standards for Students (NETS.S) (ISTE, 2008). Each of the science and technology standards

may be accomplished by various technologies. Critical to the focus of the issue in this article is,

however, the use of high-end technologies in scientific inquiry, which include calculator-based

laboratory learning and the Global Positioning System (GPS) and the Geographic Information

System (GIS).

Calculator-based laboratories are hand-held computers connected to an interface box and

a probe (e.g., temperature, pressure, pH etc.). In the calculator-based laboratory experience,

students gather real-time data in less time and spend more time analyzing graphical

representations of the data, questioning results, restructuring ideas, questioning the implications

of their own findings, and exploring new questions to investigate, ostensibly based on a newly

introduced variable into the experiment (Lapp & Cyrus, 2000; Schultz, 2003). The calculator-

based laboratories overcome the barrier of brief class periods for laboratory work because

students can conduct their experiments the time period these call for. Because graphs are

generated as students collect data, experimental design can be revised. Students, in different

geographic locales, have the opportunity to ask common questions and research methods as well

as share their data and interpretations.

Page 4 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

5

Studies on computer-based laboratories (e.g., Adams & Shrum, 1990; Brasell, 1987a;

Dori & Sasson, 2008; Mokros & Tinker, 1987; Sokoloff & Thornton, 1998) and, more recently,

hand-held computer connected to probes or calculator-based laboratory learning (Griffin &

Carter, 2008; Kwon, 2002; Metcalf & Tinker, 2004) have focused primarily on their effect on

student graphing abilities. For example, Dori and Sasson (2008) developed computerized

laboratory with a focus on scientific inquiry and comprehension. These authors investigated

chemical understanding and graphing skills of 857 Israeli 12th chemistry honors students in the

computerized learning environment over three years. Assessment of students' graphing and

chemical understanding-retention skills indicated significant improvement. Kwon (2002) upon

studying the effect of Calculator-Based Ranger (CBR) activities on middle school students'

graphing abilities found out significant development in interpreting, modeling, and transforming.

While graphing ability symbolizes understanding of the physical phenomena, such research

focuses on measures pertaining to a minor aspect of the broader goals of conducting scientific

inquiry. More pertinent to the study at hand is the study of Griffin and Carter (2008) although

limited to three groups of middle school students demonstrated that students were able to use the

portable data collection devices and tools to conduct scientific inquiry and engage in scientific

discourse related to the concepts of temperature and heat.

Complementing the latest probe technologies are the Global Positioning System (GPS)

and the Geographic Information System (GIS). The GPS is a U.S. space-based radio navigation

system that provides accurate location and time information for an unlimited number of people in

all weather, day and night, anywhere in the world (National Space-Based Positioning,

Navigation, and Timing Coordination Office, 2009). The GIS is “a computer-based system for

managing, storing, analyzing, modeling, and visualizing spatial information” (Zerger et al., 2002,

Page 5 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

6

p. 67). GIS technology is especially suitable for studying the environment of a local community

through data collection to a discussion of the watershed and computerized mapping (Bednarz,

2004). Hess and Cheshire (2002) administered a pre- and post-sequence survey to evaluate the

effectiveness of their "problem-based learning approach" in studying the forest basal areas using

spatial information technologies and to determine how undergraduate students perceived their

learning. Students acknowledged that the integration of the GIS, GPS, and sampling techniques

helped in problems associated with measurements of natural resources, and understanding of the

application of the GIS, GPS, and sampling techniques. In Ramos, Miller, and Korfmacher's

(2003) study, undergraduate students performed a common analysis of lead in sediment using

atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS), and this research was incorporated into a GIS-based

environmental assessment of sediment deposition rates in a local pond. Student evaluations of

the course at the end of semester clearly indicated that they preferred the problem-oriented

approach to learning about heavy metal analysis of sedimentation to the more traditional modes

of instruction. The visual images generated through the GIS analysis naturally led to a

discussion of the watershed and extended the chemical analysis to land management issues.

Calculator-based laboratories and Global Positioning System/Geographic Information

System (GPS/GIS) technologies are gradually becoming integral parts of the learning process

and the ways learners generate (construct), manage (represent), and communicate (validate)

knowledge in science classrooms (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000). With these innovative

technologies, students can be creative problem explorers and problem solvers. Together, “this

combination of real-world investigations and interactive visualizations helps students grasp the

interrelationships of natural and human elements in their environments and develop key concepts

and inquiry skills” (Sanders, Kajs, & Crawford, 2001, p. 125).

Page 6 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

7

Problem Statement

While the design and other technology research projects have focused on various ways IT

can be used in science learning, no study has examined students’ use of technologies in real-

world research projects designed to develop fluency in technologies and scientific inquiry. In

addition, research has yet to be published on whether students’ IT fluency pays dividends in

terms of improving their scientific inquiry abilities. And finally, no study as of yet has shown

the development of scientific inquiry abilities in the context of conducting authentic research

with IT.

Although our present study highlights the importance of fluency acquisition related to

innovative technologies, IT primary focus is not on acquiring technology skills per se but rather

enabling students to achieve relevant science learning goals by increasing their fluency with IT

and their technological skills. Our assumption is that fluency in innovative technologies

acquired through education and training in authentic learning contexts is an important part of

enabling students to confidently use technologies in research projects. IT fluency in our present

study can be defined as demonstrating the necessary confidence to appropriately use technology

applications in empirical science or to explore real-life problems. Developing fluency with

innovative technologies is a lifelong endeavor, and our work focuses on the beginning aspects of

high school learners’ fluency in innovative technologies and how it might influence developing

scientific inquiry abilities. This study on the fluency of IT and IT influence on scientific inquiry

abilities is, therefore, guided by two major research questions:

1. Is there a significant difference in students’ perceptions of fluency in IT after their

experience with long-term environmental research projects? Do students’ interpretations

of their experience support the changes in perceptions?

Page 7 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

8

2. How do students’ research papers point to their levels of scientific inquiry abilities as a

result of using IT in environmental research projects?

This study is significant for several reasons. First, observing students’ changes in

perceptions (pre- to post-intervention) of their collective experience suggests that our work with

teachers and, in turn, their work with students, can provide a professional development model for

those who intend to educate and train students in innovative technologies. Secondly, critically

analyzing students’ research papers using a set of rubrics based on the standards of scientific

inquiry illuminates their scientific inquiry abilities. Readily discernible are the scientific inquiry

criteria by which students skills can be classified as proficient, developing, beginning, or

missing. This approach to determining students’ scientific inquiry abilities may be more valid

than surveying students (for example, Lederman, 2004) about their scientific inquiry abilities.

And finally, this study reveals that immersing high school students in scientific inquiry about

environmental issues in order to develop IT fluency enables them to acquire scientific inquiry

abilities. Hence, the context of IT development might be a justifiable learning environment in

which to develop scientific inquiry abilities.

Theoretical Framework: Technology-Embedded Scientific Inquiry

"Science as inquiry" (NRC, 1996) is a concept that simply is not equivalent to the science

processes promoted in the 1960s and 70s. Scientific inquiry combines "the use of processes of

science and scientific knowledge as they (students) use scientific reasoning and critical thinking"

(p. 105). Teachers must, therefore, promote learning conceptual, social, and technological skills

using three hallmarks of scientific inquiry: scientific conceptualization, scientific investigation,

and scientific communication (see Figure 1). Our assumption is that conducting technology-

embedded scientific inquiry within in-classroom and out-of–classroom settings will have a

Page 8 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

9

significant impact on the development of students' IT fluency and their scientific inquiry

abilities (NRC, 1996).

Scientific Conceptualization

Instruction in scientific conceptualization requires teachers to provide opportunities for

students to test and clarify conceptual ideas in ways that lead to a deeper understanding of

subject matter knowledge, thus shaping the way learners engage in the problem of inquiry. For

example, knowledge scaffolding and integration framework include the processes of eliciting

ideas, making ideas visible, adding ideas, developing criteria, and sorting out ideas (Davis &

Linn, 2000; Linn, 2003; Linn, Davis, & Bell, 2004). Templates can be created to provide

scaffolding for students to help them conceptualize their ideas and revise their work

when completing complex activities (Kolodner, Owensby, & Guzdial, 2004). Scientific

conceptualization also involves engaging students in “investigative empirical science with

technology," allowing students to conduct computer-simulated investigations, modeling, and

visualization (Bell & Trundell, 2008; Author, 2001; Edelson & Gordin, 1998; Feurzig &

Roberts, 1999; Hsu & Thomas, 2002; Huppert, Lomask, & Lazarowitz, 2002; Linn, Davis, &

Bell, 2004; McFarlane & Sakellariou, 2002). Dori and Sasson (2008) have demonstrated that

student creation of chemical compounds using molecular modeling software has enabled them to

compare their representations to those of their peers on the pathway to understanding physical

and chemical properties.

There are also additional ways of engaging in scientific conceptualization through the use

of technologies. For example, online concept maps have been useful for enhancing collaborative

learning because students are able to discuss and negotiate the relational links among concepts of

the knowledge network (Cañas et al., 2001). Technology-enhanced Learning in Science (TELS)

Page 9 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

10

features a module that focuses on the science concept of velocity and embeds scientific terms in

the context of an interview (Tate, 2005). In a conversational style, a student exposes her

understanding of science content and her knowledge of science terms. Virtually, the student has

to reveal that she knows how to use data to compute the velocity of her trip when she travels

from a particular park to a movie theater to meet her friends. Discernible are many creative ways

of aiding students in the conceptualization of scientific knowledge through the use of innovative

technologies.

While simulations such as molecular motion and the process of hydration are used to help

students learn concepts that are abstract or invisible, students must be reminded that simulations

are only models representing the phenomena being studied. They must be encouraged to reflect

personally or relationally (with others) on the nature of scientific models and their applications in

the construction of scientific knowledge (Flick & Bell, 2000). In short, while virtual learning has

a role to play in science education, it does not fully engage learners in the most beneficial form

of scientific conceptualization unless they put forth effort in learning the scientific model

through personal reflection or in collaboration. For example, Chang, Quintana, and Krajcik

(2010) have argued that allowing learners to design animations of the particulate nature of matter

with simple tools and engaging in peer evaluation was more effective at improving student

learning than designing animations with no peer evaluation. In short, scientific conceptualization

via virtual models should accompany collaborative thinking.

Scientific Investigation

Instruction in scientific investigation involves scaffolding students in the following

critical abilities: (a) formulating researchable questions or testable hypotheses; (b) demonstrating

logical connections between scientific concepts guiding a hypothesis and the design of an

Page 10 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

11

experiment; (c) designing and conducting scientific investigations; (d) using measurement

instruments; (e) using mathematical tools and statistical software to collect, analyze, and display

data in charts and graphs; (f) recognizing how investigation itself requires clarification of

research questions, methods, comparisons, and explanations; and (g) weighing evidence using

scientific criteria to find explanations and models (NRC, 1996). The Global Learning and

Observations to Benefit the Environment (GLOBE) program provides a good example of ways

that these abilities can be fostered in a technology-embedded environment (see

http://www.globe.gov/). In this program, students are immersed in conducting authentic science

investigation. Students take scientifically valid measurements, analyze data, and report data

through the Internet; publish their research projects based on GLOBE data and protocols; create

maps and graphs on a free interactive Web site; analyze data sets; and collaborate with scientists

and other GLOBE students around the world. These projects, and others like them, demonstrate

the importance of scientific investigation as an embedded component of scientific inquiry and

also model the importance of the development of students' IT fluency and their scientific inquiry

abilities.

Scientific Communication

While scientific conceptualization and scientific investigation have traditionally

comprised the two primary pillars of scientific education, a third pillar provides an important and

often overlooked aspect of scientific education: scientific communication. Instruction in

scientific communication involves students in communicating research processes, research

results, and knowledge claims via classroom discourse and public presentation, often including a

critical response from peers and experts. Innovative communication technology tools incorporate

computer-based scaffolds to either support or refute competing theories by constructing valid yet

Page 11 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


http://www.globe.gov/

For Peer Review

12

opposing arguments from multiple perspectives in response to issues. This new emphasis on

scientific communication represents a fundamental shift from teaching science as “exploration

and experiment” to teaching science as “argument and explanation” (NRC, 1996, p. 113).

Clearly, this shift has had an impact on how the scientific educational communities

perceive the role of communication in science endeavors. For example, transformative

communication as a cultural tool for guiding inquiry science (Polman & Pea, 2001), teaching

science through online peer discussions (Hoadley & Linn, 2000); and emphasizing computer-

mediated reasoned argumentation have been successful in creating communities of

enquirers who value knowledge communication as much as knowledge creation (Bell & Linn,

2000, de Vries et al., 2002; Author & Co-author, 2005). For example, Cavalli-Sforze, Weiner, &

Lesgold (1994) have developed a prototype software to help students construct and propose

theories and to guide individuals or groups in designing investigations. This software has helped

students synthesize data that they have collected and engage scientific principles. More

specifically, it has helped to make students' ideas explicit and public so that dialogical

argumentation can be set up and opposing ideas can be examined (Clark & Sampson, 2008).

As another example of this shift in emphasis, the Author and Co-author (2005)

conducted a study on the argumentation styles of middle school students’ about the particle

theory of matter. The study used WebCT discussion boards and resulted in three general

categories of dialogues that can occur in science learning (experiential, referential, provisional).

Students’ presumptive reasoning consisted of “argument from sign,” “argument from cause to

effect,” “argument from evidence to hypothesis,” and “argument from position to know.”

Students used argumentation, even though their arguments were presumptive in nature, in

dialogues with their peers and with teachers, suggesting that communication is more than a

Page 12 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

13

passive activity in scientific endeavors; rather, it is an active force that shapes the way science

inquiry is perceived.

Closely related to the study at hand, the Author, Co-author, and Co-author (2009) have

discussed the characteristics of pre-service teachers’ discourse on a WebCT Bulletin Board in

their investigations of local streams in an integrated mathematics and science course. A

qualitative analysis of data revealed that the pre-service teachers engaged in collaborative

discourse when framing their research questions, conducting research, and writing reports. The

science teacher provided feedback and carefully crafted prompts to help pre-service teachers

develop and refine their work. Overall, the online discourse formats enhanced out-of-class

communication and supported collaborative group work. But the discourse on the critical

examination of one another’s viewpoints rooted in scientific inquiry appeared to be missing. This

absence suggested that pre-service teachers should be given more guidance and opportunities in

science courses when engaging in scientific discourse that reflects reform-based scientific

inquiry.

In summary, the three hallmarks of scientific inquiry demonstrate that a variety of

technology applications exist that promote scientific inquiry. The authors of the foregoing

empirical studies have used technologies in the science contexts of teaching, learning, and

inquiry--with a science objective in mind that contributes to scientific literacy (AAAS, 1993).

Our focus in this study, instead, is the development of fluency with innovative technologies (and

any secondary outcomes) when students are engaged in authentic environmental research

projects.

Methods

Context of Inquiry

Page 13 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

14

The aim of the IT project was to educate and train high school science teachers (9-12

grades) to use IT when conducting empirical science in their classrooms by first engaging them

in specially designed summer institutes; assisting them in the study of the Lake Erie ecosystem

with their students using investigation and measurement tools; and finally, helping them to infuse

technologies into their curricula. The three phases of the IT project were as follows:

Phase 1: Teacher Professional Development in IT to Promote Student Capacity

Building. The TITiC project is founded on the notion that the key to supporting students in

learning school science and conducting community-based science research projects is first

building science teacher capacity in innovative technology within authentic research contexts

(Knezek & Christensen, 2002). When teachers immerse students in innovative technologies

embedded in a context of scientific inquiry, it is expected that students will become fluent in IT

and acquire scientific inquiry abilities.

Based on the above premises, each year, in Phase 1 of the IT project (a specially

designed 2-week summer institute)15 teachers, 5 from three school districts, through a

participatory approach, were taught the capabilities of the following technologies: All

Technologies include the Internet, computer database, web page, power point presentation,

analytical hardware such as the spectrophotometer and digital titrator; Global Positioning

Systems (GPS) and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) devices; and Texas Instrument TI

83+/84 graphing calculators; and Calculator-Based Laboratories (CBL2s) with various Vernier

sensors and/or Labpro interface unit, the LoggerPro software areas. The application of these

technologies was taught within the authentic context of the watersheds of a lake at a

Mathematics and Science Center in a Midwestern state. At the end of the summer institute, the

external evaluator and his team asked teachers to rate their preparedness to use specific

Page 14 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

15

technologies on a scale of 1 (not well prepared) to 4 (well prepared). Except for GIS-related

technologies, which require a high learning curve, all the other technologies, which are crucial in

science teaching and learning, received high ratings. The average scores of the ratings of teacher

preparedness in various technologies for 2005, 2006, and 2007 follow consecutively (cite): 3.39

for the Logger Pro Software, 3.44 for Vernier probes, 3.36 for the GPS, 3.47 for the Water Test

kit, 3.51 for the Spectrophotometer for analyzing water quality, and 2.54 for the GIS. The

teacher positive results and outcomes of are outlined here to establish the fact that the IT project

lends support to the conclusion that the teachers are now better able to use IT in environmental

research projects and, perhaps most importantly, to teach their students how to use these

technologies.

Phase 2: Teachers Engage Students in Research Projects. At the beginning of each

school year, the IT teachers taught their students how to use innovative technologies to conduct

scientific inquiry. This was Phase 2 of the IT project. Then the teachers engaged these students

in semester- or year-long scientific research projects that were related to community-based

environmental issues. At the end of Phase 2, the IT students presented their research papers to

more than 100 participants at the Student Research Symposium held in May of each year from

2005 to 2007 at a Regional Educational Service Agency (RESA). Their peers, teachers, and

administrators, as well as the members of the IT management and National Advisory Group,

were present at these symposia. At least three groups of students from each school delivered

paper presentations, and other groups constructed poster presentations. Moreover, students from

one school created their own website to share their research. Two schools published students’

research projects in their respective journals: Journal 1 and Journal 2 (pseudonyms). All of

Page 15 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

16

these publications are available to the public online through school Web pages. (Please see

Appendix A for a list of research projects.)

Phase 3: Teachers Integrate Innovative Technologies into Classrooms. During Phase 3,

teachers were expected to infuse TESI into their regular science curricula and show evidence of

their work. Some teachers showed evidence via video-recordings of their various activities that

employed IT. Others invited the research team to observe their classes. IT was integrated into

their science curricula. For example, a 9th

grade teacher integrated IT into a unit on ecology

(cite). Abiotic factors covered in this unit included temperature, pH, water quality, pollution,

and sunlight. Students used a variety of the previously described technologies to test hypotheses

on the difference between these abiotic factors in various areas of the campus (i.e., “Is there a

difference in pH between water in the Lake Erie channel, the 2 ponds and the swamp?). The unit

concluded by focusing on photosynthesis and cellular respiration as an explanation for the flow

of energy through ecosystems. Students used technology in a series of experiments designed to

measure changes in carbon dioxide levels of closed systems based on manipulating a variety of

variables (i.e., amount of sunlight provided to a plant, effects of temperature on cold-blooded

organisms).

Sample

The sample consisted of a total of 125 high school students (69 females and 56 males)

from 9th

to 12th

grades (age 14-18) over a period of three years (2005-2007). There were 45

students (26 females and 19 males) in the program the first year, 53 students (28 females and 25

males) in the second year, and 27 students (15 females and 12 males) in the third year. Sixty-

three 9th

grade students, 31 10th

grade students, 20 11th

grade students, and 11 12th

grade students

took part in the study. The population of students came from middle socio-economic status

Page 16 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

17

homes. The ethnicity of the students was as follows: White American - 91%; African American

- 5%; and Other - 4%.

Procedures and Research Design

This study employed a one-group pretest-posttest design (Campbell & Stanley, 1963).

To identify students’ pre-perceptions of their IT fluency, the surveys were administered each

year to all students as a pretest at the beginning of Phase 2 of the IT project. The posttest was

administered each year at the end of Phase 2, when the students had finished their environmental

research projects and had incorporated relevant technologies into scientific inquiry. At the end of

Phase 2 (after working on IT-enhanced environmental research projects), semi-structured

individual interviews were conducted with 45 randomly selected students in order to explore

their IT fluency.

Quantitative Data Collection and Analysis

Fifty-one items were developed and incorporated into a Likert-type survey to measure

students’ perceptions of IT fluency. The items on the survey were developed by mining a

center’s assessment database and by further researching the characteristics of various IT. The

survey was then reduced to 45 items and organized around three sub-scales after three university

science educators and two IT experts examined the content validity of each item. The first sub-

scale consisted of 15 items focusing on students’ general IT fluency. This sub-scale focused on

technologies students may have used when they worked on their long-term research projects. The

second sub-scale consisted of 18 items that were related to students’ fluency with GIS and GPS

technologies. The third sub-scale consisted of 9 items and focused on students’ fluency using the

CBL2 interface with the EasyData program. For all items on these scales, students were asked to

rate their responses to the following statement on a 4-point scale (1 = not fluent, 4 = very fluent):

Page 17 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

18

"I am able to formulate a testable hypothesis.” The option “Not applicable” was included in the

survey to accommodate students who did not have any experience with technologies indicated in

the survey items, and this option was anchored by 0. The survey provided an opportunity to

systematically investigate the consequences of using IT in varying contexts. Alpha reliability

coefficients of the scales were found to be 0.84, 0.88, and 0. 80, respectively. A paired-sample t-

test for each individual sub-scale for pre and posttests was used to evaluate the impact of

conducting environmental research projects with IT on the students’ perceptions of fluency in IT.

To control for the possible inflated Type I error rates due to multiple t-tests, the p value was

adjusted to 0.0167 (0.05 divided by the number of t-tests).

Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis

Qualitative data were collected through interviews and students’ scientific research

papers. At the end of the study, individual interviews were carried out with 45 randomly selected

students in order to explore their IT fluency. Students were asked general questions about their

experiences using IT, such as the following: What research did you do? What kinds of

technologies did you use in your research? How did you use these technologies? Do you think

you are better now than before in using technology because of your experience in this project?

Give me an example. What was your experience in using technology in your research? Each

interview lasted about 30 minutes. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim.

Interview data were used to confirm of disconfirm the statistical data.

Students conducted their environmental research studies in small groups of two to four.

Each year, each school was allowed to present no more than four papers. The remaining students

provided poster presentations. Among students who orally presented their research, some

provided PowerPoint presentations while others presented their written papers. Thus, we

Page 18 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

19

collected 38 research papers (year 1=19, year 2=10, and year 3=9) written by 110 students that

were presented at the Student Research Symposium, RESA each spring over three years (see

Appendix A for the titles of research papers). The Scientific Inquiry Rubrics consisting of 11

abilities was used for assessing the quality of each paper (see Appendix B).

Creation of Rubrics

Reform documents (NRC, 1996, 2000) were reviewed to formulate scientific inquiry

criteria to assess the quality of student papers. Through extensive discussion over several days,

we initially outlined 15 ideal scientific inquiry criteria. But not all criteria seemed to be fruitful.

Because most of the students’ papers were not experimental in nature and because some

scientific inquiry criteria never appeared in students' papers, we eliminated four full criteria and a

few phrases from the wording of two criteria. The four criteria we eliminated included the

following: (1) Define variables and constants that guide the experimental design; (2) Analyze

alternative explanations and select the plausible one by reviewing scientific understandings,

weighing evidence, and examining logic; (3) Formulate, support, elaborate, revise, or reject

explanations and models using scientific knowledge and logical reasoning and evidence from

investigation; and (4) Use technologies for communication. Original phrases we left out of two

criteria were: (1) Formulate a testable hypothesis (revealing relationship between variables) and

propose explanation(s) to answer the question; and (2) Defend scientific arguments (and respond

to critical comments) connected with investigation, evidence, and scientific explanation.

Although we eliminated these phrases from the original rubrics, teachers and science

teacher educators should emphasize all 15 scientific inquiry criteria to help students conduct

effective scientific inquiry and write research papers that reflect scientific credibility and quality.

Page 19 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

20

Finally, 11 scientific inquiry criteria were formulated by examining the scientific inquiry

standards and students’ research papers.

Conceptualization of Scientific Inquiry Criteria

In this section, we briefly explain all 11 scientific inquiry criteria we included in our

rubrics. An interesting observation is how the criteria may be grouped into three hallmarks of

scientific inquiry as discussed in the theoretical framework: scientific conceptualization (criteria

1-4), scientific investigation (criteria 5-9), and scientific communication (criteria 10-11).

Criterion 1-- “Define a scientific problem based on personal or societal relevance with

need and/or source” means that students ought to identify and accurately define a community-

based problem that is meaningful to them. The problem must have personal or societal

relevance. Students should defend the problem based on the need for the study or because they

have identified the problem from a reliable source.

Criterion 2-- “Formulate a statement of purpose and/or scientific question” means

students should write the purpose and state a scientific question with clarity and precision.

Criterion 3--“Formulate a testable hypothesis and propose explanation(s)” means students

should be able to state a hypothesis that lends itself to testing. Also, the hypothesis should be

accompanied by coherent explanation(s).

Criterion 4--“Demonstrate logical connections between scientific concepts guiding a

hypothesis and research design” means that students should identify the scientific concepts and

create a conceptual system that will guide the hypothesis and research design.

Criterion 5--“Design and conduct scientific investigations related to the hypothesis”

means that students should logically outline methods and procedures, use proper measuring

Page 20 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

21

equipment, heed safety precautions, and conduct a sufficient number of repeated trials to validate

the results.

Criterion 6--“Collect and analyze data systematically and rigorously with appropriate

tools” means students should collect and analyze data accurately using appropriate tools,

methods, and procedures.

Criterion 7--“Make logical connections between evidence and scientific explanation”

means students should connect evidence from their investigations to explanations based

on science theories.

Criterion 8--“Use a variety of technologies for investigation” means that students should

use the necessary tools (e.g., hand tools; measuring instruments and calculators; electronic

devices; and computers for the collection, analysis, and display data).

Criterion 9--“Use mathematical tools and statistical software” means students should use

these to collect, analyze, and display data in charts and graphs and to conduct statistical analyses.

Criterion 10--“Communicate through scientific paper for replication and enhancement”

means that students should be able to write a clear scientific paper with sufficient details so that

another researcher can replicate or enhance the methods and procedures.

Criterion 11--“Defend scientific arguments connected with investigation, evidence, and

scientific explanation” means students should defend scientific arguments based on the event or

problem that they are studying, evidence they have gathered, and the scientific theory. In other

words, students should see the relationships among events, evidence, and explanations to make

and defend a scientific argument.

Analysis of Students’ Research Papers

Page 21 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

22

Thirty-eight research papers (see Appendix A) were written by small groups of students

on the study of environmental issues. Each essay was critically analyzed, and scores were

assigned for each criterion using the Scientific Inquiry Rubrics (see Appendix B) in order to

identify students’ scientific inquiry ability levels: proficient, developing, beginning, or missing

(see Table 1). Inter-rater reliability of students’ research papers was performed by one of the

researchers and one external expert independently using the above rubric. During the analyses of

the research papers, when discrepancies arose across individual analyses, the researcher and

expert reviewed the relevant papers together, discussed discrepancies in analyses, and reached

consensus on the students’ scientific inquiry abilities based on their research papers. The

researcher and expert agreed on the interpretations with 93% agreement.

To best explain how we derived the scores for each criterion and assigned various levels

(as represented in Table 1), and because of space limitations, we provide evidence from research

papers for criterion 11 only. For Criterion 11, “Defend scientific arguments connected with

investigation, evidence, and scientific explanation,” 4 research papers received a score of 3

(proficient), 17 research papers received a score of 2 (developing), 15 research papers received a

score of 1 (beginning), and 2 research papers received a score of zero (missing).

The Long Term Study on the Effects of Road Salt and Volume on the Salt Load Levels of

Bean Creek, from which the following excerpt was taken, was scored at the “proficient” level.

Scientific argument was indeed evident in the research paper, and it was connected with

hypothesis, investigation, evidence, and scientific explanation. Evidence of these elements is

underlined and within brackets in the following excerpt:

One reason that the chloride levels did not significantly increase [investigation] is

because of the massive increase of volume [explanation] in Bean Creek. At the

Page 22 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

23

downstream site, there was a 7,401% increase in the water that flows through the

stream per second [evidence], which means that the increase of stream flow was

apparently diluting the chloride levels [scientific explanation] of the sites. The

salt load levels of the downstream site significantly increased 6,980% once salt

was applied to the roads, which supports my hypothesis that they would increase,

but I believe the significant increase is caused by the significant increase in

volume instead of the salt applied to the roads [alternate explanation].

The student authors/researchers of the Water Quality at Ives Road Fen Preserve study

defended scientific arguments reasonably well by connecting them with investigation, evidence,

and explanation, indicating a “developing” level of proficiency. The ammonium, chloride,

conductivity, hardness, and phosphorus levels of the groundwater were discussed with possible

explanations using terms such as “think” and “feel.” Arguments were not connected to evidence

based on numerical values or their t-test values. For example, the following test exemplifies the

five reasons these student authors/researchers gave based on five tests for the foregoing

variables. Concerning the chloride test, students stated thus:

We think we got these results for chloride because of the well locations. TNC 1

and 3 are by the golf course so the chemicals from the grass are running into the

fen and polluting the wells.

In the pH Level in Precipitation study, students collected rainwater and snow from

November to March and measured the pH level of the water to determine whether it was acidic.

They defended their results through scientific arguments weakly connected to evidence and

scientific explanation, indicating a “beginning” level of proficiency. For example, they stated

two reasons why there would be a greater level of acidity in the winter months when they tested

Page 23 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

24

the rain water samples, but their results actually showed a much higher rain water acidity level

than the other months tested. The reasons they indicated for the increase in the acidity level were

as follows:

…Thus, it is conclusive that people in Southgate use more fossil fuels during the

winter months. Furthermore, Southgate is so close to Detroit that all the pollution

from the 'Motor City' is mixed in Southgate's atmosphere, consequently making

our overall air pollution worse already.

These students explained scientifically why increasing the fossil fuels would cause air

pollution. However, without adequate explanation, these students simply stated that Detroit

causes air pollution in Southgate because of the mix of pollutants from both places.

The Surrounding Rivers Impact on Lake Erie and IT Watershed study was classified into

the “missing” level of proficiency. Students simply repeated the results instead of defending

arguments based on the problem that they studied and evidence they gathered:

…The Detroit, Huron, and Rouge Rivers showed to have the least amount of

bacteria; while the Raisin Rive proved to have the largest amount. The phosphor

results have just enough nutrients for the water supply but do not contain an

excessive amount that could be harmful to the life of the environment. The water

clarity varied depending on location. For example, Wyandotte the Detroit River

only had a reading of 4 compared to Dearborn Heights at the Rouge River with a

reading of 28, which proved to be cloudier.

Results and Discussion

Based on the two major research questions, the results section consists of two

parts: The first part discusses changes in students’ perceptions of their IT fluency based

Page 24 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

25

on the comparison of pre- and posttest survey results. The second part discusses students’

acquisition of scientific inquiry abilities as reflected in their research papers as a result of

having engaged in environmental projects with IT.

Students’ Perceptions of Their Fluency in Innovative Technologies

Table 2 indicates changes in high school students’ perceptions of their IT fluency based

on the statistical analyses of the three components of the pre- and post-test Likert survey: (a)

Fluency with all technologies; (b) Fluency with GPS/GIS; and (c) Fluency with the CBL2

interface with the EasyData program. All results show statistically significant increases

(p<0.001) in students’ perceptions of their IT fluency after their engagement and experience with

community-based environmental research projects. Interview data are used to support the

significant change in each of the foregoing components.

All Technologies. In terms of student fluency in "all technologies" that they used when

completing their projects, Table 2 indicates that there was a significant increase in the scores

from pre- (M=26.42, SD=7.22) to post- (M=42.03, SD=9.61) because of the intervention

(students’ engagement in and experiences with environmental research projects) [t(124) = 15.58,

p < 0.001]. For example, in the interview, 64% of students reported that the TITiC project had

impacted their Internet fluency at a "high level." This outcome was expected because students

used the Internet extensively to study background information related to their research problems.

One student made the following comment: “During this project, I did a lot of research for

background information. I used some articles from local papers, but found that it was much

easier and efficient to use the internet for research.” Another student stated the purpose for which

the Internet was used and provided an example: “We also used the Internet to learn about our

Page 25 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

26

topic. Internet was very useful to understand what exactly we had to do to go for and understand

the implications of dissolved oxygen, fish anatomies, how their metabolisms work.”

GPS/GIS. The GPS/GIS survey results in Table 2 indicate that the post-test scores

(M=27.54, SD= 8.88) were statistically better than their pre-test scores (M=16.70, SD=7.61)

because of the intervention [t(124) = 12.66, p < 0.001]. In the interview 13% and 24% of

students reported that the IT Project had impacted their fluency in GPS/GIS to a “high level,”

and an “accepted level”, respectively. When students were asked to explain the changes in their

fluency in GPS and GIS in the interview, we realized that most students were good at using the

GPS but not the GIS. The students particularly stated that they were very good at using a GPS

unit to pinpoint a location, to navigate to a given set of coordinates, and to bring GPS data into

ArcView GIS. The fact that students were more proficient at the GPS than the GIS is

substantiated by the following excerpt:

We wanted to mark the type of the samples of plants and trees around our school

using GPS unit and to analyze and make a map of the trees around surroundings

with the GIS. We were going to make a field guide for the elementary school kids

about these plants. We did not have a real opportunity to learn how to use

technology before this project. We are definitely better than earlier. I spent three

days talking on the phone how to use GIS after looking at the book. It is horrible.

But I learned it finally. With GIS software, you have to follow each dot exactly

and perfectly. Otherwise it does not work. GPS is pretty easy to use itself to mark

the points. First I fell uncomfortable when hearing using the technology. I thought

I can’t figure how to do this. But, it is easier now. We like using it a lot more than

the first time.

Page 26 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

27

This student was a representative of many students who attempted to learn the GPS and

GIS. The student together with his classmates learned to use the GPS by identifying trees around

the school and mapping them using the GIS ArcView software. This student found the GPS to be

easy when marking the points. However, the student felt overwhelmed to map the various trees

simply by looking at the GIS book. But his persistence to learn the GIS technology had him

spend three days on the phone. He found learning of the GIS program to be “horrible.” He

admitted that if each dot is not followed “exactly and perfectly,” the GIS will not work. The

student claimed that he was uncomfortable with the GIS and never thought he could figure it

out. Likewise, the teachers also attested that learning the GIS was very difficult. At the end of

summer institute, the average scores of teacher preparedness to teach GPS and GIS were 3.36

and 2.54, respectively, which are comparable to students' fluency of the same technologies.

The analysis of students’ responses to the CBL2/EasyData survey indicated that there

was a significant increase in the scores from pre- (M=10.86, SD= 5.77) to post- (M=22.28, SD=

6.97) because of the intervention [t(124) = 14.97, p < 0.001]. In the interview 44% and 38% of

students reported that the TITiC Project had impacted their fluency in CBL2 to a “high level,”

and an “accepted level”, respectively. Importantly, students expressed that they were able to

design laboratory activities that incorporated the use of EasyData to collect, analyze, interpret,

and transfer data. For example, consider what one student stated in the interview:

I am much better when it comes to using technology after this (IT) experience. I

was able to do all of the tests that were needed such as turbidity, nitrates,

phosphates, and pH. In the beginning I had never even heard of some of them and

by the end I was doing them in a short amount of time. Now I am able to just pick

up a probe and go through the directions and have no trouble at all at calibrating

Page 27 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

28

them and using them. I like using the probes and sensors... I thought it was funny

when I seen a temperature probe at my doctors office... Like hey I know what that

is.

Referring to the probes and sensors, one student stated that he had never even heard of

such technologies. After the IT experience he was able to use all the water testing probes. He

was also adept at using these IT because he was able to use them in a shorter period of time. He

also stated that he is able to pick a probe and use it. He can now relate what he used in his

classroom with what is being used in the hospital setting. Students’ change in perceptions of

CBL2, in fact, correlates with teachers’ preparedness in the use of CBL2 (3.39/4.0). This finding

clearly suggested that the teacher fluency of IT has a direct impact on students' IT fluency.

Comparisons of the students’ pre-test mean scores represented in Table 2 (with maximum

values of 60.00, 72.00, and 36.00 for each scale, respectively) showed that the students perceived

their pre-fluency in technologies at a rate of 44%, 23% and 30%. This means that the students’

pre-perceptions of fluency in GPS/GIS were lower than their pre-perceptions of fluency in

CBL2/EasyData and especially compared to all technologies such as the Internet, computer

database, web page, power point presentation, spectrophotometer and digital titrator.

When comparing each scale's mean pre-test and post-test scores (see Table 2), the

percentage increases of mean values with respect to students’ fluency in all technologies,

GPS/GIS, and CBL2/EasyData were 59%, 65%, and 105%, respectively. Although statistical

findings revealed significant increases for all three scales, these percentage increases clearly

showed that the most positive change in students’ perceptions of fluency was related to

CBL2/EasyData. The comparison of students’ post-test mean values (with a maximum score for

each scale) showed success rates of 70%, 38%, and 62% for all technologies, GPS/GIS, and

Page 28 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

29

CBL/EasyData scales, respectively. These values indicate that the students were more fluent in

their abilities to use all technologies and CBL2/EasyData than they were in their abilities to use

GPS/GIS.

Students’ Development of Scientific Inquiry Abilities

The IT project objective was to develop the IT skills of teachers so that they, in turn, will

build student fluency with IT by engaging students in environmental research projects. A

student in our project described the link between the use of IT and the design and doing of

scientific inquiry in the following manner:

The technology that our teacher taught shaped the research questions because we

had to use them in research projects. We selected this project because we wanted

to use the water quality probes. We used the GPS to select three spots to take

water samples. Our group also used the Internet to gather background knowledge

and to find out about people who lived around River Huron so that we can talk to

them about the river. We used the GIS ArcView to map the GPS locations and to

decide on the levels of the river.

This excerpt suggests that students selected their environmental research project based on

IT they wanted to learn. They wanted to use the probes to determine water quality of the Huron

River. They used the Internet to gather background knowledge of the river and to find out about

the people who lived in the areas surrounding the river so that they could talk with them about

the river. They used the GIS to map the data they collected based on the GPS locations. Based

on students’ research experience, aside from determining the water quality of the Huron River,

one can assume that they learned how to use the IT instruments and also improved in their

Page 29 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

30

scientific inquiry abilities. Thus, to become fluent in using IT and cultivate scientific inquiry

abilities, students need to be immersed in technology-embedded scientific inquiry.

Although the IT project was not necessarily focused on developing students’ scientific

inquiry abilities, we were curious to find out whether conducting environmental research

projects with IT had any influence on the development of scientific inquiry abilities. As

mentioned in the methodology section, we originally outlined 15 scientific inquiry criteria based

on scientific inquiry standards (NRC, 1996) to assess students’ research papers to determine their

scientific inquiry abilities. But as we analyzed their papers, four criteria seemed to be

completely and conspicuously absent. Based on their papers, we were able to apply 11 criteria.

Although there is much to learn about developing students’ scientific inquiry abilities in terms of

scientific inquiry standards, their research papers based on the scientific criteria indicated gave

ample evidence that students had developed in seven of the eleven scientific inquiry abilities.

While the Scientific Inquiry Rubrics (see Appendix B) were used to critically analyze all

38 research papers (see Appendix A), the students were not explicitly made aware of the

scientific inquiry standards in their research projects because this was not the focus of the IT

project. However, the process of qualitatively analyzing and classifying information in 38

research papers into the categories of “missing,” “beginning,” “developing,” and “proficient" as

shown in Table 1 in the methods section; converting them into scores; and finding the mean

values for each criterion was revealing (see Figure 2 and Table 3).

Mean scores of students’ scientific inquiry ability for each criterion in the rubric were

computed. The mean values were interpreted using the following guide: Missing (0-0.74);

Beginning (0.75-1.49); Developing (1.50-2.24); and, Proficient (2.25-3.00). As represented in

Figure 2 and Table 3, the mean values in the 2.25-3.00 range indicate that the students’ abilities

Page 30 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

31

to conduct scientific inquiry according to seven criteria, i.e., 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8, were at the

proficient level. It should also be noted that the mean values of criteria 1, 2, 3, and 8 are higher

than 2.50, which indicates that students’ scientific inquiry abilities reached extremely high

levels. These criteria include defining a scientific problem based on personal or societal

relevance with need and/or source (M=2.79, SD=0.62), formulating a statement of purpose

and/or scientific question (M=2.66, SD=0.58), formulating a testable hypothesis and proposing

explanation(s) (M=2.53, SD=0.83), and using a variety of technologies for investigation

(M=2.63, SD= 0.71). Mean values of the remaining four criteria (7, 9, 10, and 11) in the rubric

were within the range of 1.50-2.24, which showed that the students achieved the level of

"developing."

Students’ mean value of 2.32 for overall criteria was at the "proficient level" considering

the mean score of 2.25. As well, the comparison of the students’ total average score of 25.42

with the rubrics' maximum value of 33.00 showed a success rate of 77%.

Except for criterion eight (see Table 3), which has to do with IT, students’ levels of

proficiency for criteria 1-6 might be attributed to their teachers’ past science instructional

practice and/or the discussion of scientific inquiry standards with teachers in each summer

institute. Teachers were given handouts on scientific inquiry standards and how they can be

applied to research. Teachers were encouraged to pay particular attention to the standards when

students were engaged in environmental research projects with IT.

Current emphases in scientific inquiry according to the national body of science

educators focus on criterion 7 (evidence and explanation connection); criterion 9 (the use of

mathematical tools and statistical software); criterion 10 (communication); and criterion 11

(argumentation). These are new dimensions of epistemology of science. Students scored lower

Page 31 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

32

in these areas, particularly on Criteria 11 (M=1.63, SD=0.79), compared to all other criteria.

Students’ mean scores on these criteria suggest that teachers have not acquired skills in these

areas and thus these skills are not in their repertoire of pedagogical content knowledge in

science.

Among scientific criteria 7, 9, 10, and 11, we paid considerable attention to criterion 9,

“the use of mathematical tools and statistical software,” because the IT year-one students’

research papers showed a lack of statistical analysis. They had not calculated even the mean

scores of their experimental values. Hence, starting from year 2, simple statistics (e.g., paired

and independent samples t-tests, ANOVA and correlation) were taught to teachers during the

summer institute so that they, in turn, could teach these simple statistics to their students. Also,

the graduate research assistants and the IT project's postdoctoral scholar visited schools to help

teachers with statistical analysis in scientific inquiry. This extra attention to professional

development focused on statistics began to show effect on students’ research in year 2 of the IT

project.

In fact, we found that the mean scores of the first-year students’ scientific inquiry

abilities were lower than those of the second- and third-year students for criteria 7, 9, 10, and 11.

For example, mean scores of the first-year students’ scientific inquiry abilities were 1.95, 1.56,

1.84, and 1.53, while the mean scores of second- and third-year students together were 2.16,

2.41, 2.53, and 1.73 for criteria 7, 9, 10, and 11, respectively. When these mean values for

criteria 7, 9, 10, and 11 were compared, there was a noticeable increase for the Criterion 9—the

use of mathematical tools and statistical software--from the first year to the following years since

there was a 55% increase in favor of the second- and third-year students. During the past three

years of the project, we have witnessed much improvement in teacher knowledge of statistics

Page 32 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

33

and students’ application of statistics in their research. In future projects, we need to attend to

the “developing” and the neglected dimensions of scientific inquiry.

Implications

In most research projects, student exploration of a particular scientific issue is the

primary focus. Technology use and/or learning to use technology and understanding of scientific

inquiry criteria within the hallmarks of conceptualization, investigation, and communication are

rarely brought to the foreground in research. Technology and science education reformers are

constantly asking educators to pay attention to the use of technologies and understand scientific

inquiry criteria by highlighting respective standards. The purpose of the IT project was to

develop IT fluency by engaging students in hands-on issue-based environmental research.

Although students participated in real-world environmental projects that had personal and/or

societal relevance and some indeed studied and contributed to existing science-related research

in parks, nature conservancies, and the NOAA, the intention of this participation was not to focus

on the awareness of the problem or problem-solving techniques but rather to help teachers and

students become more proficient with the IT being used. However, because students went

through the experience of researching real-life issues, they also benefitted from the mentoring

process and/or from their previous science learning experience. Either way, the use of

innovative technologies in the first place allowed students to conduct high-end technology-

related projects and learn to use IT. As a result, two corollaries are apparent: (1) Conducting

scientific inquiry that employs IT leads to increased IT fluency; and (2) IT fluency within

research projects influences scientific inquiry abilities.

Conducting Scientific Inquiry with IT Leads to Increased IT Fluency

Page 33 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

34

During the summer institute, the IT project intentionally selected the study of

environmental issues to develop teacher skills in using innovative technologies. Teachers, in

turn, engaged students in scientific inquiry with IT by focusing on environmental issues (see

Appendix A for students’ research projects). The environmental research topics students

selected with the assistance of teachers is a reflection of the various innovative technologies that

they had learned to use. For example, students involved in The Surrounding Rivers Impact on

Lake Erie and its Watershed project used LabPro, DataMate program, turbidity sensor, pH

sensor, Phosphate Accu Vac, Nitrate Accu Vac, stopwatch, TI graphing calculator, GPS unit,

GIS ArcView program and Hach spectrophotometer. At each testing location where the rivers

flowed into Lake Erie, students used the GPS to “plot the coordinates where the water was taken

from.” The GPS also allowed them to “view as well as compare the distance between test sites.”

Once each river sample was collected, “the GPS points were plotted onto an ArcView map.”

Then the testing of each water sample began for pH, turbidity, phosphates, and nitrates. For

example, the Vernier Turbidity Sensor allowed students to determine the overall murkiness of

the water of the surrounding rivers. While students determined the water quality for murkiness

of the surrounding rivers of Lake Erie, they were, indeed, learning to use the turbidity sensor.

Similarly, they had had practice with the pH sensor. While gathering data in real time and using

Texas Instrument TI 83+/84 graphing calculators to construct graphs, students in the river study

learned to use the various technologies. This research project demonstrates how students learned

to use the innovative technologies in authentic research contexts in studying real environmental

problems. It is, therefore, not surprising that students changed their perceptions of IT fluency by

the end of their immersion in research projects when the post-intervention survey was conducted.

Because change in perceptions of fluency in IT were consistently increased, conducting scientific

Page 34 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

35

inquiry with IT in order to understand and assess environmental issues seems to provide a fertile

ground for increasing proficiency with IT.

While the focus of Lapp and Cyrus (2000) and Schultz's (2003) research studies is on

learning to conduct science investigations with IT, our study focused on the reverse—learning to

use IT while conducting science investigations. Similarly, while Ramos, Miller, and Korfmacher

(2003) studied how to integrate environmental analysis and assessment by implementing GIS

technology in the chemistry laboratory, our study conducted environmental research projects in

order to foster learning about how to use the GPS and GIS. In order to use IT in research,

immersing students in the study of real-life problems is important.

IT Fluency Development within Research Projects Influences Scientific Inquiry Abilities

Often studies in science learning focus on the use of relevant IT in

conducting investigations that attempt to solve environmental problems. For example, Ramos,

Miller, and Korfmacher (2003) in their GIS-based project focused on the problem of lead in the

sediment of a local pond. In the foregoing study, unlike our study, the educational aim was

neither the technology used (i.e., GIS) nor the development of understanding of scientific

inquiry. Perhaps, these aims may have been the natural spin-off in the inquiry of the problem in

the foregoing study.

In our study, as the result of using innovative technologies such as the GPS/GIS, students

conducted scientific inquiry of environmental issues that were relevant to and compatible with

using IT. Because of such a learning environment to develop IT fluency, the natural outcome

was student development in scientific inquiry criteria as reflected by their research papers. Thus,

we are able to make claims in this study how becoming fluent with IT has supported student

scientific inquiry in their environmental research projects. Student engagement in research

Page 35 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

36

projects to learn the use of IT and writing scientific papers has provided us with insights into

their understanding of the various criteria of scientific inquiry. This process also has helped us to

understand what scientific criteria students achieved and did not. Hence, what we have also

learned is the assessment of student understanding of scientific inquiry.

Although the outcome of IT fluency in our study was also the development of scientific

inquiry abilities, it is likely that more can be achieved if teachers intentionally help

students become more cognizant of the meaning behind each scientific inquiry criterion. In our

study, teachers seemed to have attended to those scientific inquiry criteria that they were already

well-versed with. Teachers’ scaffolding of students in writing scientific research papers

reflected students’ achievement of seven of the eleven criteria. Mentoring teachers to develop

student abilities while conducting research projects with forms of scientific thinking as reflected

by the 11 plus criteria is important. In particular, teachers need epistemic affordances to

cultivate students’ scientific thinking based on the following two scientific criteria: Criterion 7--

“Make logical connections between evidence and scientific explanation,” and criterion 11--

“Defend scientific arguments connected with investigation, evidence, and scientific explanation.”

Teachers should be mentored to facilitate student recognition of the relationship among event,

evidence, and explanation to make and defend a scientific argument. To attend to the foregoing

epistemic aspect of scientific inquiry, real context inquiry with IT should be augmented with

design tools in the virtual platform (Friedrichsen, Munford, & Zembal-Saul, 2003; Sandoval &

Reiser, 2004). Teachers should learn to scaffold students’ thinking on the credibility and quality

of scientific inquiry criteria, particularly the ones that were neglected. Hence, professional

development of teachers in the neglected criteria of scientific inquiry is crucial so that they may

engage their students in technology-embedded scientific inquiry, which attends to sound criteria

Page 36 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

37

as characterized by the new standards (NRC, 1996, 2000) and science educators’ new insights

(Duschl & Grandy, 2008). Learning to use the IT to monitor and assess the environmental issue

as well as understanding all of the scientific inquiry criteria are essential in a research project.

References

Adams, D. D., & Shrum, J. W. (1990). The effects of microcomputer-based laboratory

exercises on the acquisition of line graph construction and interpretation skills by high school

biology students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 777-787.

( (2001). Journal of Science Education and Technology

Author & Co-Author (2005). Educational Research and Evaluation: An International

Journal on Theory and Practice

Author et al. (2009). Journal of Science Education and Technology

Bednarz, S.W. (2004). Geographic Information Systems: A tool to support geography

and environmental education? GeoJournal, 60, 191-199.

Bell, P., & Linn, M. (2000). Scientific arguments as learning artifacts: Designing for

learning from the Web with KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 797-817.

Bell, R. & Trundle, K. (2008). The use of a computer simulation to promote scientific

conceptions of moon phases. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45, 346-372.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Mind,

brain, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Brasell, H. (1987a). The effect of real-time laboratory graphing on learning graphic

representations of distance and velocity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 385-395.

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs

for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Page 37 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

38

Cañas, A.J., Ford, K. M., Novak, J.D., Hayes, P., Reichherzer, T., & Suri, N. (2001).

Online concept maps: Enhancing collaborative learning by using technology with concept maps.

The Science Teacher, 68(4), 49-51.

Cavalli-Sforza, V., Weiner, A. W., & Lesgold, A. M. (1994). Software support for

students engaging in scientific activity and scientific controversy. Science Education, 78, 577-

599.

Chang, H., 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(1), 73-94.

Clark, D.B., & Sampson, V. (2008). Assessing dialogic argumentation in online

environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. Journal of Research in Science

Teaching, 45(3), 293-321.

Davis, E.A., & Linn, M.C. (2000). Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration:

Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 819-837.

de Vries, E., Lund, K., & Baker, M. (2002). Computer-mediated epistemic dialogue:

Explanation and argumentation as vehicles for understanding scientific notions. The Journal of

the Learning Sciences, 11(1), 63-103.

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(2), 219-250.

Duschl, R.A., Grandy, R.E. (Eds. 2008). Teaching scientific inquiry: Recommendation

for research and implementation. Sense Publlishers: Rotterdam. Netherlands.

Page 38 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

39

Edelson, D. & Gordin, D.N. (1998). Visualization for learners: A framework for adapting

scientists' tools. Computers and Geosciences, 24(7), 607-616.

Feurzig, W., & Roberts, N. (Eds. 1999). Modeling and simulation in precollege science

and mathematics education. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Flick, L., & Bell, R. (2000). Preparing tomorrow's science teachers to use technology:

Guidelines for Science educators. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education

[Online serial], 1 (1). Available:

http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/science/article1.htm

Friedrichsen, P., Munford, D., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2003). Using inquiry empowering

technologies to support prospective teachers’ scientific inquiry & science learning.

Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 3(2), 223-239.

Griffin, A.R., & Carter, G. (2008). Uncovering the potential: The role of technologies on

science learning of middle school students. International Journal of Science and Mathematics

Education, 6(2), 329-350.

Hess, G.R., & Cheshire, H. M. (2002). Integrating spatial information technologies into

forestry and natural resources curricula. Journal of Forestry, 100(1), 29-34.

Hoadley, C.M. & Linn, M.C. (2000). Teaching science through on-line peer

discussions: Speakeasy in the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of

Science Education, 22, 839-857.

Hsu, Y., & Thomas, R.A. (2002). The impacts of a web-aided instructional simulation

on science learning. International Journal of Science Education, 24(9), 955-979.


Page 39 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/science/article1.htm


For Peer Review

40

Huppert, J., Lomask, I.S.M., & Lazarowitz, R. (2002). Computer simulations in the high

school: Students’ cognitive stages, science process skills and academic achievement in

microbiology. International Journal of Science Education, 24(8), 803-821.

International Society for Technology in Education. (2008). National Educational

Technology Standards for Students. Retrieved September 12, 2008, from

http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Tea

chers_2008.htm

Jackson, S., Krajcik, J., Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A Design Retrospective. In

Jacobson, M. and Kozma, R (Eds.), Advanced Designs For The Technologies Of Learning:

Innovations in Science and Mathematics Education. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Kolodner, J.L., Owensby, J.N., & Guzdial, M. (2004). Case-based learning aids. In D.H.

Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Education Communications and Technology, (2nd

Ed., pp. 829-861). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (2002). Impact of new information technologies on

teachers and students. Education and Information Technologies, 7(4), 369-376.

Kwon, O. H. (2002). The Effect of Calculator-Based Ranger Activities on Students'

Graphing Ability. School Science and Mathematics, 102, 5-15.

Lapp, D.A., & Cyrus, V.F. (2000). Using Data-Collection Devices to Enhance Students’

Understanding. Mathematics Teacher, 93(6), 504-10.

Lederman, N.G. (2004). Syntax of nature of science within inquiry and science

instruction. In L. B. Flick & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Scientific Inquiry and Nature of Science

(pp. 301-317). Bordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Page 40 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm

http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm

For Peer Review

41

Linn, M. (2003). Technology and science education: Starting points, research programs,

and trends. International Journal of Science Education, 25, 727-758.

Author, Co-author, and Co-author (2009)

Linn, M.C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (2004, Eds.). Internet Environments for Science

Education: how information technologies can support the learning of science. Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McFarlane, A., & Sakellariou, S. (2002). The role of ICT in science education.

Cambridge Journal of Education, 32(2), 219-232.

Metcalf, S. J., & Tinker, R. (2004). Probeware and Handhelds in Elementary and Middle

School Science. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 43-49.

Mokros, J.R., & Tinker, R.F. (1987). The impact of micro-computer based labs on

children’s ability to interpret graphs. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 24, 369-383.

National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington,

DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (2000). Inquiry and the National Education Standards.

Washington, D.C. National Academy press.

Polman, J., & Pea, R. (2001). Transformative communication as a cultural tool for

guiding inquiry science. Science Education, 85(3), 223-238.

Ramos, B., Miller, S., & Korfmacher, K. (2003). Implementation of a Geographic

Information System in the Chemistry Laboratory: An Exercise in Integrating Environmental

Analysis and Assessment. Journal of Chemical Education, 80(1), 50-53.

SAMPI (2005, 2006, 2007).

Page 41 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

42

Sanders, R.L.J., Kajs, L.T., & Crawford, C.M. (2001). Electronic Mapping in Education:

The use of geographic information systems. Journal of Research on Technology in Education,

34(2), 121-129.

Sandoval, W.A., Reiser, B.J. (2004). Explanation-driven inquiry: Integrating conceptual

and epistemic scaffolds for scientific inquiry. Science Education, 88, 345– 372.

Schultz, S. (2003). Probe Science Teaching and Learning. Stanford Educator. Stanford

University. Spring, 2000.13 June.

Sokoloff , D. &, Thornton, R. (1998). “Assessing Student Learning of Newton's Laws:

The Force and Motion Conceptual Evaluation of Active Learning Laboratory and Lecture

Curricula”, American Journal of Physics. 66, 338-352.

Tate, E. (2005). Hanging with friends, velocity style! A preliminary investigation of how

technology-enhanced instruction impacts students’ understanding of multiple representations of

velocity. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research

Association, Montreal, Canada.

Zerger, A., Bishop, L. D., Escobar, F., & Hunter G. J. (2002). A self-learning

multimedia approach for enriching GIS education. Journal of Geography in Higher Education,

26(1), 67-80.

Appendix

Appendix A. List of Research Projects

1. Erie Marsh Monitoring Program: Frogs and Toads

2. Age and Length Correspondence of Various Species of Fish on Campus

3. Invasive Species Control on Campus

4. Munson Park Prairie Restoration Project

5. Nesting Birds on Campus

6. River Raisin Water Quality

7. Surface Temperature Studies on Campus

8. pH Level in Precipitation

Page 42 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

43

9. Emerald Ash Borer Destruction in relation to Tree Placement

10. The Surrounding Impact on Lake Erie and its Watershed

11. The Study of Soil Content

12. Fecal Coliform Bacteria in the Lower Ecorse Creek and Detroit River

13. Dissolved Oxygen Related effects of Thermal Pollution on Aquatic Life in the Lake Erie

Watershed

14. Water Comparison Between the Detroit and Huron Rivers

15. Marina Pollutants along the Detroit River

16. A study of pH levels in Lakes, Rivers and Pounds surrounding the Lake Erie Watershed

17. Seasonal Changes in Chloride Concentrations and Total Dissolved Solids in the Lower

Ecorse Creek /Detroit River

18. Aquatic Macro-invertebrates Communities as Indicators of Pollution in the Frank and

Poet Creek

19. Native Species Field Guide

20. The Effect of Light on the Growth of Big Bluestem

21. The Effects of Road Salting on Water Quality

22. Macroinvertebrates in the River Raisin

23. A Comparison of Our Fish Tanks and Pond

24. Invasive Species on Campus

25. GLOBE Surface Temperature Study

26. DTE Prairie Restoration Monitoring

27. Erie Marsh Nature Preserve Marsh Monitoring Program

28. Nesting Birds on Campus

29. Ives Road Fen Groundwater Monitoring Project

30. The Effects of Chlorine on Fish

31. War of the Plants

32. Study of Spider Web Structures

33. Water Quality at Ives Road Fen Preserve

34. Macroinvertebrates in the River Raisin

35. Long Term Study on the Effects of Road Salt and Volume on the Salt Load Levels of

Bean Creek

36. The Effect of Road Salt on Macro Invertebrates

37. Pond and Fish Tank Comparison

38. Tree Height vs. Circumference

Appendix B. Scientific Inquiry Rubrics

Scientific

Inquiry

Abilities

Missing (0

points)

Beginning (1

point)

Developing (2

points)

Proficient (3

points)

Not

Applica

ble

Tot

al

1. Define a

scientific

problem

based on

personal or

Defines no

scientific

problem with

need and/or

source

Defines

scientific

problem

improperly;

without

Defines

scientific

problem

partially

accurate; with

Defines

scientific

problem

accurately;

with

Page 43 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

44

societal

relevance

with need

and/or

source

defensible

statement of

need and/or

source

either the

defensible

statement of

need or source

defensible

statement of

need and

source

2.

Formulate

a

statement

of purpose

and/or

scientific

question

Formulate

s no statement

of purpose

and/or

scientific

question

Formulate

s statement of

purpose

and/or a

scientific

question

with no

clarity

Formulate

s statement of

purpose

and/or

scientific

question with

partial clarity

Formulate

s statement of

purpose

and/or

scientific

question with

clarity

3.

Formulate

a testable

hypothesis

and

propose

explanatio

n(s)

Formulate

s no testable

hypothesis

and propose

explanation(s)

Formulate

s testable

hypothesis

and propose

incoherent

explanation(s)

Formulate

s testable

hypothesis

and proposes

partially

coherent

explanation(s)

Formulate

s a testable

hypothesis

and proposes

coherent

explanation(s)

4.

Demonstra

te logical

connection

s between

scientific

concepts

guiding a

hypothesis

and

research

design

Demonstra

tes no logical

connections

between

scientific

concepts

guiding a

hypothesis

and research

design

Demonstra

tes improper

connections

between

scientific

concepts

guiding a

hypothesis

and research

design

Demonstra

tes partial

connections

between

scientific

concepts

guiding a

hypothesis

and research

design

Demonstra

tes logical

connections

between

scientific

concepts

guiding a

hypothesis

and research

design

5.

Design

and

conduct

scientific

investigati

ons related

to the

hypothesis

Designs

and conducts

scientific

investigation

related to the

hypothesis --

methods and

procedures are

not logically

Designs

and conducts

scientific

investigation

related to the

hypothesis --

The methods

and

procedures are

Designs

and conducts

scientific

investigation

related to the

hypothesis –

The methods

and

procedures are

Designs

and conducts

scientific

investigation

related to the

hypothesis--

The methods

and

procedures

Page 44 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

45

-- methods

and

procedures

are

logically

outlined;

proper

measuring

equipment

are used;

safety

precaution

s are

heeded;

and

sufficient

repeated

trials are

taken to

validate

the results

outlined; no

proper

measuring

equipment are

used; not

heeding to

safety

precautions;

no repeated

trials

outlined but

difficult to

follow; Using

measuring

equipment

carelessly;

heeding to

safety

precautions

carelessly;

trials are

insufficient to

test

hypothesis

outlined but

not logically

sequenced;

Using

measuring

equipment

with some

care; pays

some attention

to safety

precautions;

evidence of

repeated trials

to test

hypothesis

logically

outlined; good

use of

measuring

equipment;

pays close

attention to

safety

precautions;

and repeated

trials are

sufficient to

validate the

results

6.

Collect

and

analyze

data

systematic

ally and

rigorously

with

appropriat

e tools

Collects

and analyzes

no data

Collects

and analyzes

data with

errors and/or

gaps

Collects

and analyzes

data with

minor

inaccuracies

Collects

and analyzes

data with

accuracy

7.

Make

logical

connection

between

evidence

and

scientific

explanatio

n

Makes no

logical

connection

between

evidence and

scientific

explanation

Makes

weak

connection

between

evidence and

scientific

explanation

Makes

some

connection

between

evidence and

scientific

explanation

Makes

logical

connection

between

evidence and

scientific

explanation

8. Use Uses no Uses Uses Uses

Page 45 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

46

a variety

of

technologi

es for

investigati

on

technologies

for

investigation

technologies

ineffectively

for

investigation

technologies

with some

effectiveness

for

investigation

technologies

effectively for

investigation

9. Use

mathemati

cal tools

and

statistical

software”

means

students

should use

these for

collecting,

analyzing,

and

displaying

data in

charts and

graphs and

for doing

statistical

analysis.

Uses no

mathematical

tools and

statistical

software

Uses

mathematical

tools and

statistical

software

ineffectively

Uses

mathematical

tools and

statistical

software with

some

effectiveness

Uses

mathematical

tools and

statistical

software with

effectiveness

10.

Communic

ate

through

scientific

paper for

replication

and

enhanceme

nt

Communi

cates through

scientific

papers with no

allowance for

replication

and/or

enhancement

of

investigation

Communi

cates through

scientific

paper with

less clarity

and accuracy

causing

difficulty for

replication

and/or

enhancement

of

investigation

Communi

cates through

scientific

paper with

some clarity

and accuracy

that may not

fully allow for

replication

and/or

enhancement

of

investigation

Communi

cates through

scientific

paper with

clarity and

accuracy to

enable

replication

and/or

enhancement

of

investigation

11.

Defend

scientific

arguments

Defends

no scientific

arguments

connected

Defenses

scientific

arguments

weakly

Defenses

scientific

arguments

reasonably

Defenses

scientific

arguments

strongly

Page 46 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

47

connected

with

investigati

on,

evidence,

and

scientific

explanatio

n

with

investigation,

evidence, and

scientific

explanation

connected

with

investigation,

evidence, and

scientific

explanation

connected

with

investigation,

evidence, and

scientific

explanation

connected

with

investigation,

evidence, and

scientific

explanation

Page 47 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

Table 1

Numbers of research papers based on each level of scientific inquiry abilities in each criterion

Scientific Inquiry Criteria

Levels 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9* 10 11

Proficient (3 points) 33 27 26 17 15 20 10 28 10 15 5

Developing (2 points) 3 9 8 17 19 14 22 7 15 16 16

Beginning (1 point) 1 2 2 4 3 4 4 2 6 6 15

Missing (0 point) 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 1 2 1 2

*5 research papers were assessed as not applicable.

Page 48 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

Table 2

The descriptive statistics and t-test results of the fluency surveys

Scales No. of

items

N Pre-scores

Mean (SD)

Post-scores

Mean (SD)

Mean

Difference

t(124)

All Technologies 15 125 26.42 (7.22) 42.03 (9.61) 15.61 15.58*

GPS/GIS 18 125 16.70 (7.61) 27.54 (8.88) 10.84 12.66*

CBL2/EasyData 9 125 10.86 (5.77) 22.28 (6.97) 11.42 14.97*

*p < .001

Page 49 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

Table 3

Means and standard deviations of students’ scientific inquiry abilities based on eleven criteria,

including the overall mean and total average scores

Scientific Inquiry Abilities Average

(N=38)

1

Define a scientific problem based on personal or societal relevance with

need and/or source 2.79 (0.62)

2 Formulate a statement of purpose and/or scientific question

2.66 (0.58)

3 Formulate a testable hypothesis and propose explanation(s) 2.53 (0.83)

4

Demonstrate logical connections between scientific concepts guiding a

hypothesis and research design 2.34 (0.67)

5

Design and conduct scientific investigations related to the hypothesis --

methods and procedures are logically outlined; proper measuring equipment

are used; safety precautions are heeded; and sufficient repeated trials are

taken to validate the results 2.26 (0.72)

6 Collect and analyze data 2.42 (0.68)

7 Make logical connection between evidence and scientific explanation 2.05 (0.77)

8 Use a variety of technologies for investigation 2.63 (0.71)

9 Use mathematical tools and statistical software 2.00 (0.87)

10 Communicate through scientific paper for replication and enhancement 2.18 (0.80)

11

Defend scientific arguments connected with investigation, evidence, and

scientific explanation 1.63 (0.79)

Mean for all criteria 2.32 (0.34)

Total average score 25.24 (4.57)

Page 50 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

Figure 1. The Technology Embedded Scientific Inquiry (TESI) Model

Page 51 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


For Peer Review

Figure 2. Mean scores of students’ scientific inquiry abilities based on eleven criteria

Page 52 of 52

John Wiley & Sons


for peer reviewti-researchlibrary.com/lists/ti education...the science education literature...

Documents