Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using educational software to support collective thinking and test hypotheses in the computer science curriculum

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study analyses the discourse among the teacher and the students, members of three (3) small groups, who learn in the environment of a stand-alone computer. Two educational environments are examined: the first one, a “virtual laboratory” (Virtual scale-DELYS) and the second one, a computer modeling environment (ModelsCreator). The ‘Virtual Scale’ environment provides users with curriculum focused feedback and in that sense it can be categorized as directive. The ModelsCreator environment provides users merely with a representation of their own conception of curriculum concepts, so it can be categorized as an open-ended environment. The goal of this research is to exemplify the way the two educational software environments support (a) the development of collective thinking in peer— and teacher-led discussion and (b) students’ autonomy. The software tools of the “Virtual scale” along with the resources provided for the problem solving created an educational framework of hypothesis testing. This framework did not limit the students’ contributions by directing them to give short answers. Moreover, it supported the students’ initiatives by providing tools, representations and procedures that offered educationally meaningful feedback. Based on the above results, we discuss a new educationally important structure of software mediation and describe the way the two software activities resourced collective thinking and students’ initiatives. Finally, for each type of software environment, we propose certain hypotheses for future research regarding the support of collaborative problem solving.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The term ‘software tools’ defines the symbolic applications on the user interface of the educational software, which mediate the user’s instructions and set in motion representation- and simulation-making procedures.

  2. The stages in parentheses are optional.

  3. “Numeral systems”-related processes: The process of the formation of a number by means of summing the corresponding weight units. The process of the conversion of a binary representation of a number into its decimal representation and conversely.

References

  • Anderson, A., McAtteer, E., Tolmie, A., & Demissie, A. (1999). The effect of software type on the quality of talk. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15(15), 28–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angeli, C. (2008). Distributed cognition: a framework for understanding the role of computers in classroom teaching and learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(3), 271–279.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Boekaerts, M. (1997). Self-regulated learning: a new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learning and Instruction, 7(2), 161–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cazden, C. (2001). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, C. (1994). Computers and the collaborative experience of learning. Routledge.

  • Crook, C. (1998). Children as computer users: the case of collaborative learning. Computers and Education, 30(3/4), 237–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dagdilelis, V., Evangelidis, G., Saratzemi, M., Efopoulos, V., & Zagouras, C. (2003). DELYS: a novel microworld-based educational software for teaching computer science subjects. Computers and Education, 40(4), 307–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dimitracopoulou, A., & Komis, V. (2005). Design principles for the support of modelling and collaboration in a technology based learning environment. International Journal Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning, 15(1/2), 30–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, G. (2007). Designing socio-technical environments in support of meta-design and social creativity. In Proceedings of Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL ’2007), pp. 1–10.

  • Fisher, E. (1993). Characteristics of children’s talk at the computer and its relationship to the computer software. Language and Education, 7(2), 97–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gravani, M., & John, P. (2005). ‘Them and us’: Teachers’ and tutors’ experiences of a ‘new’ professional development course in Greece. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 35(3), 303–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoek, D., & Seegers, D. (2005). Effects of instruction on verbal interactions during collaborative problem solving. Learning Environments Research, 8, 19–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmboe, C., & Scott, P. (2005). Characterising individual and social concept development in collaborative computer science classrooms. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 24(1), 89–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Duchak-Tanner, V., & Rattray, C. (2000). Hypothesis testing in science: group consensus and the acquisition of conceptual and procedural knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10(4), 361–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jimoyiannis, A., & Komis, V. (2007). Examining teachers’ beliefs about ICT in education: implications of a teacher preparation programme. Teacher Development, 11(2), 149–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Ñorwood, NJ: Ablex.

  • Littleton, K. (1998). Productivity through interaction: An overview. In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.), Learning with computers: Analysing productive interactions. Routledge.

  • Lohner, S., van Joolingen, W. R., Savelsbergh, E. R., & van Hout-Wolters, B. (2005). Students’ reasoning during modeling in an inquiry learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(3), 441–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N. (1994). The quality of talk in children’s joint activity at the computer. Journal of computer assisted learning, 10, 24–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, N. (1995). The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Multilingual Matters.

  • Mercer, N. (2000). Words and minds: How we use language to think together. Routledge.

  • Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., & Sams, C. (2004). Reasoning as a scientist: ways of helping children to use language to learn science. British Educational Research Journal, 30(3), 359–377.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, P. (2007). Reading comprehension exercises on line: the effects of feedback, proficiency and interaction. Language Learning and Technology, 11(3), 107–129.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Malley, C. (1992). Designing computer systems to support peer learning. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 7(4), 339–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Panselinas, G. (2002). Groupwork activities and guided construction of knowledge in general applications software environment. In Proceedings of 3rd Hellenic conference with international participation: “Information and Communication Technologies in Education”, Vol. B, pp. 275–285, Rhodes, Greece (In Greek).

  • Panselinas, G. (2004). Computer mediation in cognitive interactions amongst students: the case of general applications software. Themes in education, Vol. 5, 1–3, pp. 133–148 (In Greek).

  • Panselinas, G., Komis, V., Politis, P. (2005). Modelling activities with educational software with regard to computer operation. In Proceedings of 2nd International conference “Hands-on science: Science in a Changing Education”, pp. 70–75. Rethymno, Greece.

  • Panselinas, G., & Komis, V. (2008). Students' initiatives to test hypotheses by using educational software: an aspect of self-regulation. In Proceedings of 4th conference on Didactics of Informatics, Patras, Greece (In Greek).

  • Panselinas, G., & Komis, V. (2009). 'Scaffolding' through talk in groupwork learning. Thinking skills and Creativity 4(2), 86-103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasku-Puttonen, H., Eteläpelto, A., Arvaja, M., & Häkkinen, P. (2003). Is successful scaffolding an illusion? — Shifting patterns of responsibility and control in teacher-student interaction during a long-term learning project. Instructional Science, 31, 377–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rojas-Drummond, S., & Mercer, N. (2003). Scaffolding the development of effective collaboration and learning. International journal of educational research, 39, 99–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saljo, R. (1998). Learning as the use of tools: A sociolcultural perspective on the human-technology link. In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.), Learning with computers: Analysing productive interactions. Routledge.

  • Schilter, D. G, Perret, J-F., Perret-Clermont, A-N., & De Guglielmo, F. (1998). Sociocognitive interactions in a computerised industrial task: Are they productive for learning? In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.), Learning with computers: Analysing productive interactions. Routledge.

  • Tolmie, A., Howe, C. J., Mackenzie, M., & Greer, K. (1993). Task design as an influence on dialogue and learning: primary school group work with object flotation. Social Development, 2, 183–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R. (1996). Using computers to help coach exploratory talk across the curriculum. Computers and Education, 26(1–3), 51–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R. (1997). Factors affecting the quality of children’s talk at computers. In R. Wegerif & P. Scrimshaw (Eds.), Computers and talk in the primary classroom. Multilingual Matters.

  • Wegerif, R. (2002). Report 2: Literature review in thinking skills, technology and learning. Nesta Futurelab Series.

  • Wegerif, R. (2004). The role of educational software as a support for teaching and learning conversations. Computers and Education, 43, 179–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (1998). Software design to support discussion in the primary curriculum. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14(3), 199–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R., Littleton, K., & Jones, A. (2003). Stand-alone computers supporting learning dialogues in primary classrooms. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 851–860.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, G. (1992). The centrality of talk in Education. In K. Norman (Ed.), Thinking voices: The work of the National Oracy Project. London: Hodder and Stoughton.

    Google Scholar 

  • YPEPTH/ΥΠΕΠΘ, (1999a). ‘Basic Mathematics in Computer Science’ curriculum for Vocational Technical Secondary Education. Retrieved February 9, 2009, from http://pi-schools.sch.gr/download/lessons/tee/computer/PS/BASIC-INFORMATICS-CONCEPT.ZIP (in Greek).

  • YPEPTH/ΥΠΕΠΘ, (1999b). ‘Computer Hardware’ curriculum for Vocational Technical Secondary Education. Retrieved February 9, 2009, from http://pi-schools.sch.gr/download/lessons/tee/computer/PS/yliko.zip (in Greek).

  • Zumbach, J., Schonemann, J., & Reimann, P. (2005). Analyzing and supporting collaboration in cooperative computer-mediated communication. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Computer supported collaborative learning 2005: The next ten years. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Terma elpidos Atsalenio, 71306, Iraklio, Crete, Greece

    Giorgos E. Panselinas

  2. Department of Educational Sciences and Early Childhood Education, University of Patras, Greece, 26500, Rio-Patras, Greece

    Vassilis Komis

Authors
  1. Giorgos E. Panselinas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Vassilis Komis
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giorgos E. Panselinas.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 Part of the worksheet accompanying the ‘virtual scale’

1.1.1 Sub-task 1

  • Empty both trays of the Scale. Place 201 weight units on the left tray

    1. 1.

      Lock the Scales

    2. 2.

      Place the weight units 128, 64, 8, 1 on the right tray

    3. 3.

      Unlock the Scales

    4. 4.

      What do you see? Can you explain it?

1.1.2 Sub-task 2

  • Empty the Scales. Place 167 weight units on the left tray.

    1. 1.

      Lock the Scales

    2. 2.

      Place weight units on the right tray so as the scales balance once you unlock them.

    3. 3.

      Unlock the Scales.

1.1.3 Sub-task 3

  • Is there any sum of weight units on the left or the right tray, which is not possible to balance? In other words, if I put a number on a tray is it likely not to be able to balance the scales placing weights on the other tray?

1.2 Part of the Worksheet: constructing and testing a model for the “processor’s properties and application execution time”

How does internal frequency affect applications software execution time in a personal computer? Create a model that explains that influence.

  • Create a model by dragging and dropping the appropriate entities in the models’ activity space

  • Select the appropriate properties and a relation

  • Test model’s behaviour manually by moving the bar, automatically with button “play” or using the button “step by step”.

1.2.1 Let’s think

In which way do changes in internal frequency of a processor affect applications software execution time? How would you explain that?

  • Higher internal clock frequency means more (a)________________________ per second, consequently more (b)______________ per second, therefore, applications software execution time (c)____________.

  • It is possible the answers you have already given to those questions to have led you to change or add something to your model. Integrate your new ideas in the model you have already created and re-test it’s behaviour.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Panselinas, G.E., Komis, V. Using educational software to support collective thinking and test hypotheses in the computer science curriculum. Educ Inf Technol 16, 159–182 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-009-9107-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-009-9107-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation