Comparison of the effects of 1:1 and 1:m CSCL environments with virtual manipulatives for scientific inquiry-based learning: a counterbalanced quasi-experimental study

References

• Ahmed, S., & Parsons, D. (2013). Abductive science inquiry using mobile devices in the classroom. Computers & Education, 63(4), 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.017
   Google Scholar
• Baltes, B. B., Dickson, M. W., Sherman, M. P., Bauer, C. C., & LaGanke, J. (2002). Computer-mediated communication and group decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 87(1), 156–179. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2001.2961
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bebell, D., & O’dwyer, L. M. (2010). Educational outcomes and research from 1: 1 computing settings. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9(1). Retrieved May 27, 2016, from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/54634/
   Google Scholar
• Billett, S. (2001). Co-Participation: Affordance and engagement at work. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2001(92), 63–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/ace.41
   Google Scholar
• Bouck, E. C., & Flanagan, S. M. (2010). Virtual manipulatives: What are they and how teachers can use them? Intervention in School and Clinic, 45(3), 186–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451209349530
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burke, K., Aytes, K., & Chidambaram, L. (2001). Media effects on the development of cohesion and process satisfaction in computer-supported workgroups – An analysis of results from two longitudinal studies. Information Technology & People, 14(2), 122–141. https://doi.org/10.1108/09593840110397894
   Google Scholar
• Carlson, C. B. (2007). A case study of pilot one-to-one laptop initiative in a high computing Catholic high school. DEd Thesis, Wichita State University, Wichita, KS, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Crompton, H., Burke, D., Gregory, K. H., & Gräbe, C. (2016). The use of mobile learning in science: A systematic review. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(2), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9597-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Jong, T. D., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013). Physical and virtual laboratories in science and engineering education. Science, 340(6130), 305–308. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230579
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL, Can we support CSCL (pp. 61–91). Open Universiteit Nederland.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., & Betrancourt, M. (2006). Collaboration load. In J. Elen & R. E. Clark (Eds.), Theory, handling complexity in learning (pp. 142–163). Pergamon.
   Google Scholar
• Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2007). Designing integrative scripts. In Frank Fischer, Ingo Kollar, Heinz Mandl, & Jorg M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (pp. 275–301). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, D., Cornwell, P., & Williams, J. (2007). Teaching dynamics using interactive tablet PC instruction software. In Frontiers in education conference-global engineering: knowledge without borders. IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Fjermestad, J. (2004). An analysis of communication mode in group support systems research. Decision Support Systems, 37(2), 239–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9236(03)00021-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fokides, E., & Mastrokoukou, A. (2018). Results from a study for teaching human body systems to primary school students using tablets. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(2), 154–170. https://doi.org/10.30935/cet.414808
   Google Scholar
• Ha, O., & Fang, N. (2018). Interactive virtual and physical manipulatives for improving students’ spatial skills. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 55(8), 1088–1110. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117697730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillmayr, D., Ziernwald, L., Reinhold, F., Hofer, S. I., & Reiss, K. M. (2020). The potential of digital tools to enhance mathematics and science learning in secondary schools: A context-specific meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 153, 103897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103897
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ibáñez, M. B., Di Serio, Á, Villarán, D., & Delgado Kloos, C. (2014). Experimenting with electromagnetism using augmented reality: Impact on flow student experience and educational effectiveness. Computers & Education, 71(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Järvelä, S., Kirschner, P. A., Panadero, E., Malmberg, J., Phielix, C., Jaspers, J., Koivuniemi, M., & Järvenoja, H. (2015). Enhancing socially shared regulation in collaborative learning groups: Designing for CSCL regulation tools. Educational Technology Research and Development, 63(1), 125–142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-014-9358-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 247–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1158654
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jou, M., Lin, Y. T., & Tsai, H. C. (2016). Mobile APP for motivation to learning: An engineering case. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(8), 2048–2057. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1075136
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kapici, H. O., Akcay, H., & de Jong, T. (2019). Using hands-on and virtual laboratories alone or together—Which works better for acquiring knowledge and skills? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(3), 231–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-018-9762-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King, A. (2007). Scripting collaborative learning processes: A cognitive perspective. In Frank Fischer, Ingo Kollar, Heinz Mandl, & Jorg M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives (pp. 13–37). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., Kirschner, F., & Zambrano, R. J. (2018). From cognitive load theory to collaborative cognitive load theory. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 13(2), 213–233. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9277-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klahr, D., Triona, L. M., & Williams, C. (2007). Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 183–203. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20152
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006). Collaboration scripts – A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9007-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koning, B. B. D., & Tabbers, H. K. (2011). Facilitating understanding of movements in dynamic visualizations: An embodied perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 23(4), 501–521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-011-9173-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin, C. P., Wong, L. H., & Shao, Y. J. (2012). Comparison of 1:1 and 1:m CSCL environment for collaborative concept mapping. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(2), 99–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2011.00421.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linn, M. C., Lee, H., Tinker, R., Husic, F., & Chiu, J. L. (2006). Inquiry learning: Teaching and assessing knowledge integration in science. Science, 313(5790), 1049–1050. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1131408
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lipponen, L., Rahikainen, M., Lallimo, J., & Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning and Instruction, 13(5), 487–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00042-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Looi, C. K., Zhang, B., Chen, W., Seow, P., Chia, G., Norris, C., & Soloway, E. (2011). 1:1 mobile inquiry learning experience for primary science students: A study of learning effectiveness. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(3), 269–287. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00390.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mercier, E. M., & Higgins, S. E. (2013). Collaborative learning with multi-touch technology: Developing adaptive expertise. Learning and Instruction, 25(3), 13–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2012.10.004
   Google Scholar
• Moyer, P. S., Bolyard, J. J., & Spikell, M. A. (2002). What are virtual manipulatives? Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 372–377. https://doi.org/10.5951/TCM.8.6.0372
   Google Scholar
• Olympiou, G., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2012). Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students’ conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education, 96(1), 21–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20463
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reychav, I., & Wu, D. (2015). Mobile collaborative learning: The role of individual learning in groups through text and video content delivery in tablets. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 520–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.019
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reychav, I., & Wu, D. (2016). The interplay between cognitive task complexity and user interaction in mobile collaborative training. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savicki, V., Kelley, M., & Lingenfelter, D. (1996). Gender, group composition, and task type in small task groups using computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 12(4), 549–565. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(96)00024-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shadiev, R., Hwang, W. Y., Huang, Y. M., & Liu, T. Y. (2015). The impact of supported and annotated mobile learning on achievement and cognitive load. Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 53–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251–296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022193728205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Varma, K., & Linn, M. C. (2012). Using interactive technology to support students’ understanding of the greenhouse effect and global warming. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(4), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-011-9337-9
   Web of Science ®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, 29(3), 1–35. doi:10.1007/s10648-016-9361-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vrellis, I., Avouris, N., & Mikropoulos, T. A. (2016). Learning outcome, presence and satisfaction from a science activity in second life. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(1), 59–77. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2164
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C., Fang, T., & Gu, Y. (2020). Learning performance and behavioral patterns of online collaborative learning: Impact of cognitive load and affordances of different multimedia. Computers & Education, 143, 103683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103683
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C., Fang, T., & Miao, R. (2018). Learning performance and cognitive load in mobile learning: Impact of interaction complexity. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(6), 917–927. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12300
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, C., Ma, Y., & Wu, F. (2020). Comparative learning performance and mental involvement in collaborative inquiry learning: Three modalities of using virtual lever manipulative. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(5), 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09838-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, T., & Tseng, Y. (2018). The comparative effectiveness of physical, virtual, and virtual-physical manipulatives on third-grade students’ science achievement and conceptual understanding of evaporation and condensation. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(2), 203–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9774-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong, L., & Looi, C. (2011). What seams do we remove in mobile-assisted seamless learning? A critical review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2364–2381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, P. H., Hwang, G. J., Yang, M. L., & Chen, C. H. (2018). Impacts of integrating the repertory grid into an augmented reality-based learning design on students’ learning achievements, cognitive load and degree of satisfaction. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(2), 221–234. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1294608
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yuan, Y., Lee, C. Y., & Wang, C. H. (2010). A comparison study of polyominoes explorations in a physical and virtual manipulative environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(4), 307–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00352.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zacharia, Z. C., & Michael, M. (2016). Using physical and virtual manipulatives to improve primary school students’ understanding of concepts of electric circuits. In M. Riopel & Z. Smyrnaiou (Eds.), New developments in science and technology education (pp. 125–140). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Zacharia, Z. C., & Olympiou, G. (2011). Physical versus virtual manipulative experimentation in physics learning. Learning and Instruction, 21(3), 317–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2010.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zacharia, Z. C., Olympiou, G., & Papaevripidou, M. (2008). Effects of experimenting with physical and virtual manipulatives on students’ conceptual understanding in heat and temperature. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(9), 1021–1035. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20260
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar