Co-creating scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning and its effects on students’ logical thinking in earth science

References

• Abdullah, S., & Shariff, A. (2008). The effects of inquiry-based computer simulation with cooperative learning on scientific thinking and conceptual understanding of gas laws. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science, & Technology Education, 4(4), 387–398.
   Google Scholar
• Aksu, G., & Koruklu, M. (2015). Determination the effects of vocational high school students’ logical and critical thinking skills on mathematics success. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 59, 181–206.
   Google Scholar
• Bello, A. (2014). The acquisition of the six formal reasoning abilities by students in Kaduna state, Nigeria. International Journal of Education and Research, 2(6), 613–628.
   Google Scholar
• Berland, L., Schwarz, C., Krist, C., Kenyon, L., Lo, A., & Reiser, B. (2015). Epistemologies in practice: Making scientific practices meaningful for students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(7), 1082–1112.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bird, L. (2010). Logical reasoning ability and student performance in general chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 87(5), 541–546.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bodzin, A. M., Fu, Q., Bressler, D., & Vallera, F. L. (2015). Examining the enactment of web GIS on students’ geospatial thinking and reasoning and tectonics understandings. Computers in the Schools, 32, 63–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheung, A., Slavin, R., Kim, E., & Lake, C. (2016). Effective secondary science programs: A best-evidence synthesis. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(1), 58–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin, C. (2002). Student-generated questions: Encouraging inquisitive minds in learning science. Teaching and Learning, 23(1), 59–67.
   Google Scholar
• Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Students’ questions and discursive interaction: Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), 883–908.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doymus, K., Şimşek, U., & Karaçöp, M. (2009). The effects of computer animations and cooperative learning methods in micro, macro and symbolic level learning of states of matter. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 36, 109–128.
   Google Scholar
• Efendioglu, A. (2012). Courseware development model: The effects of CDM on primary school pre-service teachers’ achievements and attitudes. Computers and Education, 59, 687–700.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ercan, O., Bilen, K., & Ural, E. (2016). ‘Earth, Sun and Moon’: Computer assisted instruction in secondary school science-achievement and attitudes. Issues in Educational Research, 26(2), 206–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fang, S. C., Hsu, Y. S., & Hsu, W. H. (2016). Effects of explicit and implicit prompts on students’ inquiry practices in computer-supported learning environments in high school earth science. International Journal of Science Education, 38(11), 1699–1726.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hmelo-Silver, C., Liu, L., Gray, S., & Jordan, R. (2015). Using representational tools to learn about complex systems: A tale of two classrooms. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(1), 6–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofstein, A., Navon, O., Kipnis, M., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2005). Developing students’ ability to ask more and better questions resulting from inquiry-type chemistry laboratories. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(7), 791–806.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, X., Lederman, N., & Cai, C. (2017). Improving Chinese junior high school students’ ability to ask critical questions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(8), 963–987.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huitt, W. (1997). Cognitive development: Applications. Educational psychology interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cogsys/piagtuse.html
   Google Scholar
• Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. (2009). Metacognition in chemical education: Question posing in the case-based computerized learning environment. Instructional Science, 37, 403–436.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karacop, A., & Doymus, K. (2013). Effects of Jigsaw cooperative learning and animation techniques on students’ understanding of chemical bonding and their conceptions of the particulate nature of matter. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 22, 186–203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirschner, P. A., & Erkens, G. (2013). Toward a framework for CSCL research. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kobbe, L., Weinberger, A., Dillenbourg, P., Harrer, A., Hamalainen, R., & Fischer, F. (2007). Specifying computer-supported collaboration scripts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(3), 211–224.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. (2006). Collaboration scripts – a conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18, 159–185.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koray, O., & Köksal, M. S. (2009). The effect of creative and critical thinking-based laboratory applications on creative and logical thinking abilities of prospective teachers. Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, 10(1), 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Kreijns, K., Fischer, P. A., & Vermeulen, M. (2013). Social aspects of CSCL environments: A research of framework. Educational Psychologists, 48(4), 229–242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review. Retrieved from https://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/CriticalThinkingReviewFINAL.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Lawson, A., Banks, D., & Logvin, M. (2007). Self-efficacy, reasoning ability, and achievement in college biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(5), 706–724.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, Y.-H. (2015). Facilitating critical thinking using the C-QRAC collaboration script: Enhancing science reading literacy in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. Computers & Education, 88, 182–191.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, M., Preston, A., Kharrufa, A., & Kong, Z. (2016). Making L2 learners’ reasoning skills visible: The potential of computer supported collaborative learning environments. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 22, 303–322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, Q. T., Liu, B.-W., & Lin, Y.-R. (2018). The influence of prior knowledge and collaborative online learning environment on students’ argumentation in descriptive and theoretical scientific concept. International Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 165–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McConnell, D., Steer, D., Owens, K., & Knight, C. (2005). How students think: Implications for learning in introductory geoscience courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53(4), 462–470.
   Google Scholar
• Next Generation Science Standards Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. 48–78. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Osborne, J., Henderson, J., MacPherson, A., Szu, E., Wild, A., & Yao, S. (2016). The development and validation of a learning progression for argumentation in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53(6), 821–846.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Othman, M., Hussain, F. K., & Nikman, M. (2010). Enhancing logical thinking among computer science students through cooperative learning. Grading Business and Management Journal, 14, 1–19.
   Google Scholar
• Othman, M., & Zain, M. (2015). Online collaboration for programming: Assessing students’ cognitive abilities. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 16(4), 84–97.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roadrangka, V., Yeany, R. H., & Padilla, M. J. (1983). The construction and validation of group assessment of logical thinking. A paper presented at the annual meeting of the national association of research in science teaching, Dallas Texas.
   Google Scholar
• Ryoo, K., & Bedell, K. (2017). The effects of visualizations on linguistically diverse students’ understanding of energy and matter in life science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 54(10), 1274–1301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryoo, K., & Linn, M. (2012). Can dynamic visualizations improve middle school students’ understanding of energy in photosynthesis? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(2), 218–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryoo, K., & Linn, M. (2014). Designing guidance for interpreting dynamic visualizations: Generating versus reading explanations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(2), 147–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sadi, O., & Cakiroglu, J. (2014). Relations of cognitive and motivational variables with students’ human circulatory system achievement in traditional and learning cycle classrooms. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(5), 1997–2012.
   Google Scholar
• Stahl, G., Koschman, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An historical perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409–426). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stamovlasis, D., Kypraios, N., & Papageorgiou, G. (2015). A SEM model in assessing the effect of convergent, divergent and logical thinking on students’ understanding of chemical phenomena. Science Education International, 26(3), 284–306.
   Google Scholar
• Tsai, S. C. (2012). Integration of multimedia courseware in ESP instruction for technological purposes in higher technical education. Educational Technology & Society, 15(2), 50–61.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tuna, A., Biber, A. C., & İncikapı, L. (2013). An analysis of mathematics teacher candidates’ logical thinking levels: Case of Turkey. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the World, 3(1), 83–91.
   Google Scholar
• Vogel, F., Wecker, C., Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2016). Socio-cognitive scaffolding with computer-supported collaboration scripts: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-016-9361-7.
   Google Scholar
• Waldrip, B., & Prain, V. (2017). Engaging students in learning science through promoting creative reasoning. International Journal of Science Education, 39(15), 2052–2072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang, C., Jen, C.-H., Chang, C.-Y., & Yeh, T.-K. (2018). Comparison of animation and static-picture based instruction: Effects on performance and cognitive load for learning genetics. Educational Technology & Society, 21(4), 1–11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yenilmez, K., & Turgut, M. (2016). Relationship between prospective middle school mathematics teachers’ logical and reflective thinking skills. Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the World, 6(4), 15–20.
   Google Scholar