Challenges Solving Science Tasks with Text–Picture Combinations Persist beyond Secondary School

References

• Ainsworth, S. (1999). The functions of multiple representations. Computers & Education, 33(2–3), 131–152. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0360-1315(99)00029-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ainsworth, S. (2006). DeFT: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16(3), 183–198. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arsenault, D. J., Smith, L. D., & Beauchamp, E. A. (2006). Visual inscriptions in the scientific hierarchy: Mapping the “treasures of science”. Science Communication, 27(3), 376–428. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547005285030
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bobis, J., Sweller, J., & Cooper, M. (1993). Cognitive load effects in a primary-school geometry task. Learning and Instruction, 3(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(09)80002-9
   Google Scholar
• Bowen, G. M., & Roth, W.-M. (1998). Lecturing graphing: What features of lectures contribute to student difficulties in learning to interpret graphs? Research in Science Education, 28(1), 77–90. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02461643
   Google Scholar
• Bowen, G. M., & Roth, W.-M. (2002). Why students may not learn to interpret scientific inscriptions. Research in Science Education, 32(3), 303–327. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020833231966
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowen, G. M., Roth, W.-M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Interpretations of graphs by university biology students and practicing scientists: Toward a social practice view of scientific representation practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 1020–1043. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199911)36:9 < 1020::AID-TEA4 > 3.0.CO;2-#
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brixius, R., Jannan, M., & Kunze, H. (2012). Abitur; Prüfungsaufgaben mit Lösungen 2013; NRW; Biologie LK. 6th ed. Stark.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20(1), 37–46. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000104
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, M. P. (2006). Visual representations in science education: The influence of prior knowledge and cognitive load theory on instructional design principles. Science Education, 90(6), 1073–1091. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20164
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cromley, J. G., Snyder-Hogan, L. E., & Luciw-Dubas, U. A. (2010). Cognitive activities in complex science text and diagrams. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department for Education. (2015, May 06). Statutory guidance – National curriculum in England: Science programmes of study. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-science-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-science-programmes-of-study
   Google Scholar
• Eilam, B., & Gilbert, K. K. (2014). The significance of visual representations in the teaching of science. In B. Eilam & K. K. Gilbert (Eds.), Science teachers’ use of visual representations (pp. 3–28). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Eilam, B., & Poyas, Y. (2008). Learning with multiple representations: Extending multimedia learning beyond the lab. Learning and Instruction, 18(4), 368–378. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A.-G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feinstein, A. R., & Cicchetti, D. V. (1990). High agreement but low Kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 43(6), 543–549. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0895-4356(90)90158-L
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halverson, K. L., Pires, C. J., & Abell, S. K. (2011). Exploring the complexity of tree thinking expertise in an undergraduate systematics course. Science Education, 95(5), 794–823. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20436
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hegarty, M., & Just, M. A. (1993). Constructing mental models of machines from text and diagrams. Journal of Memory and Language, 32(6), 717–742. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1993.1036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heller, K. A., & Perleth, C. (2000). KFT 4-12 + R - Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4. bis 12. Klassen, Revision. Beltz.
   Google Scholar
• IBM Corporation. (2016). IBM SPSS statistics for Windows (24). IBM Corp.
   Google Scholar
• Knippels, M.-C. P. J., Waarlo, A. J., & Boersma, K. T. (2005). Design criteria for learning and teaching genetics. Journal of Biological Education, 39(3), 108–112. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2005.9655976
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krajcik, J. S., & Sutherland, L. M. (2010). Supporting students in developing literacy in science. Science, 328(5977), 456–459. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1182593
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159–174. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. (1998). Multiplying meaning – Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text. In J. R. Martin & R. Veel (Eds.), Reading science: Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (pp. 87–113). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lindner, M. A., Ihme, J. M., Saß, S., & Köller, O. (2018). How representational pictures enhance students’ performance and test-taking pleasure in low-stakes assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 34(6), 376–385. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000351
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states. The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• Novick, L. R., Stull, A. T., & Catley, K. M. (2012). Reading phylogenetic trees: The effects of tree orientation and text processing on comprehension. BioScience, 62(8), 757–764. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2012.62.8.8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paivio, A. (1986). Dual coding theory. In A. Paivio (Ed.), Mental representations: A dual coding approach (pp. 53–83). Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pociask, F. D., & Morrison, G. R. (2008). Controlling split attention and redundancy in physical therapy instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 56(4), 379–399. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9062-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, W.-M., & Bowen, G. M. (1999). Of cannibals, missionaries, and converts: Graphing competencies from grade 8 to professional science inside (classrooms) and outside (field/laboratory). Science, Technology, & Human Values, 24(2), 179–212. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/016224399902400201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, W.-M., Bowen, G. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1999). Differences in graph-related practices between high school biology textbooks and scientific ecology journals. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(9), 977–1019. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-2736(199911)36:9 < 977::AID-TEA3 > 3.0.CO;2-V
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saß, S., & Schütte, K. (2016). Helping poor readers demonstrate their science competence: Item characteristics supporting text–picture integration. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 34(1), 91–96. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282915588389
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saß, S., Wittwer, J., Senkbeil, M., & Köller, O. (2012). Pictures in test items: Effects on response time and response correctness. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26(1), 70–81. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schnotz, W. (2002). Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 101–120. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013136727916
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schnotz, W. (2014). Integrated model of text and picture comprehension. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed., pp. 72–103). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schnotz, W., & Bannert, M. (2003). Construction and interference in learning from multiple representation. Learning and Instruction, 13(2), 141–156. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(02)00017-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. (2004). Einheitliche Prüfungsanforderungen in der Abiturprüfung Biologie. Luchterhand.
   Google Scholar
• Sekretariat der Ständigen Konferenz der Kultusminister der Länder in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. (2005). Bildungsstandards im Fach Biologie für den Mittleren Schulabschluss. Beschluss vom 16.12.2004. Luchterhand.
   Google Scholar
• Strobel, B., Lindner, M. A., Saß, S., & Köller, O. (2018). Task-irrelevant data impair processing of graph reading tasks: An eye tracking study. Learning and Instruction, 55, 139–147. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.10.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweller, J. (2005). The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 159–167). Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thorndike, R. L., & Hagen, E. (1971). Cognitive abilities test. Houghton-Mifflin.
   Google Scholar
• Tsui, C.-Y., & Treagust, D. F. (2013). Introduction to multiple representations: Their importance in biology and biological education. In D. F. Treagust & C.-Y. Tsui (Eds.), Multiple representations in biological education (pp. 3–18). Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wilhelm, O., Hildebrandt, A., & Oberauer, K. (2013). What is working memory capacity, and how can we measure it? Frontiers in Psychology, 4(433), 1–22. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00433
   PubMedGoogle Scholar