Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Education Research International
Volume 2013 (2013), Article ID 194363, 11 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/194363
Research Article

A Case-Based Study of Students' Visuohaptic Experiences of Electric Fields around Molecules: Shaping the Development of Virtual Nanoscience Learning Environments

Department of Science and Technology, Linköping University, 601 74 Norrköping, Sweden

Received 5 October 2012; Accepted 13 January 2013

Academic Editor: Zubair Amin

Copyright © 2013 Gunnar E. Höst et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. E. Richard, A. Tijou, P. Richard, and J. L. Ferrier, “Multi-modal virtual environments for education with haptic and olfactory feedback,” Virtual Reality, vol. 10, no. 3-4, pp. 207–225, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. S. J. Lederman and R. L. Klatzky, “Hand movements: a window into haptic object recognition,” Cognitive Psychology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 342–368, 1987. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. M. Reiner, “Conceptual construction of fields through tactile interface,” Interactive Learning Environments, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 31–55, 1999. View at Google Scholar
  4. J. Minogue and M. G. Jones, “Haptics in education: exploring an untapped sensory modality,” Review of Educational Research, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 317–348, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. K. J. Schönborn, P. Bivall, and L. A. E. Tibell, “Exploring relationships between students' interaction and learning with a haptic virtual biomolecular model,” Computers and Education, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 2095–2105, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. M. Wilson, “Six views of embodied cognition,” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 625–636, 2002. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. C. Dede, “Immersive interfaces for engagement and learning,” Science, vol. 323, no. 5910, pp. 66–69, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. E. N. Wiebe, J. Minogue, M. G. Jones, J. Cowley, and D. Krebs, “Haptic feedback and students' learning about levers: unraveling the effect of simulated touch,” Computers and Education, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 667–676, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. J. Minogue, M. G. Jones, B. Broadwell, and T. Oppewall, “The impact of haptic augmentation on middle school students' conceptions of the animal cell,” Virtual Reality, vol. 10, no. 3-4, pp. 293–305, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. C. Furió and J. Guisasola, “Difficulties in learning the concept of electric field,” Science Education, vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 511–526, 1998. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. M. C. Pocoví, “The effects of a history-based instructional material on the students’ understanding of field lines,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 44, no. 1, pp. 107–132, 2007. View at Google Scholar
  12. S. Törnkvist, K.-A. Petterson, and G. Tranströmer, “Confusion by representation: on students comprehension of the electric field concept,” American Journal of Physics, vol. 61, no. 4, pp. 335–338, 1993. View at Google Scholar
  13. D. Clark and D. Jorde, “Helping students revise disruptive experientially supported ideas about thermodynamics: computer visualizations and tactile models,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 1–23, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. C. Dede, M. Salzman, R. B. Loftin, and K. Ash, “The design of immersive virtual learning environments: fostering deep understandings of complex scientific knowledge,” in Innovations in Science and Mathematics Education: advanced Designs for Technologies of Learning, M. Jacobson and R. B. Kozma, Eds., pp. 361–414, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2000. View at Google Scholar
  15. C. Dede, M. C. Salzman, and R. B. Loftin, “ScienceSpace: research on using virtual reality to enhance science education,” in Proceedings of the ED-MEDIA Conference (AACE '96), P. Carlson and F. Makedon, Eds., pp. 172–177, Charlottesville, Va, USA, 1996.
  16. A. Křenek, “Haptic rendering of molecular conformations,” in Proceedings of the EuroHaptics 2001, C. Baber, M. Faint, S. Wall, and A. Wing, Eds., Educational Technology Research Paper Series, pp. 142–145, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK, July 2001.
  17. K. L. Palmerius, M. Cooper, and A. Ynnerman, “Haptic rendering of dynamic volumetric data,” IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 263–276, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. T. R. Tretter, M. G. Jones, T. Andre, A. Negishi, and J. Minogue, “Conceptual boundaries and distances: students' and experts' concepts of the scale of scientific phenomena,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 282–319, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. A. M. Stoneham, “The challenges of nanostructures for theory,” Materials Science and Engineering C, vol. 23, no. 1-2, pp. 235–241, 2003. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. S. Y. Stevens, L. M. Sutherland, and J. S. Krajcik, The Big Ideas of Nanoscale Science and Engineering: A Guidebook for Secondary Teachers, NSTA Press, Arlington, Va, USA, 2009.
  21. B. Hingant and V. Albe, “Nanosciences and nanotechnologies learning and teaching in secondary education: a review of literature,” Studies in Science Education, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 121–152, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. C. A. Batt, A. M. Waldron, and N. Broadwater, “Numbers, scale and symbols: the public understanding of nanotechnology,” Journal of Nanoparticle Research, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 1141–1148, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. K. M. Eisenhardt, “Building theories from case study research,” Academy of Management Review, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 532–550, 1989. View at Google Scholar
  24. V. Dawson, “An exploration of high school (12–17 year old) students' understandings of, and attitudes towards biotechnology processes,” Research in Science Education, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 59–73, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. A. G. Harrison, D. J. Grayson, and D. F. Treagust, “Investigating a grade 11 student's evolving conceptions of heat and temperature,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 55–87, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. A. G. Harrison and D. F. Treagust, “Learning about atoms, molecules, and chemical bonds: a case study of multiple-model use in grade 11 chemistry,” Science Education, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 352–381, 2000. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. S. B. Merriam, Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, Calif, USA, 1998.
  28. F. Erickson, “Qualitative methods in research on teaching,” in Handbook of Research on Teaching, M. Wittrock, Ed., pp. 119–161, Macmillan, New York, NY, USA, 3rd edition, 1986. View at Google Scholar
  29. K. J. Schönborn and T. R. Anderson, “A model of factors determining students’ ability to interpret external representations in biochemistry,” International Journal of Science Education, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 193–232, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  30. C. Y. Tsui and D. F. Treagust, “Understanding genetics: analysis of secondary students' conceptual status,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 205–235, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. R. K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, Calif, USA, 1994.
  32. B. G. Glaser and A. L. Strauss, The Discovery of Grounded Theory, Aldine, Chicago, Ill, USA, 1967.
  33. Y. S. Lincoln and E. G. Guba, Naturalistic Inquiry, Sage, Newbury Park, Calif, USA, 1985.
  34. H. K. Wu, J. S. Krajcik, and E. Soloway, “Promoting understanding of chemical representations: students' use of a visualization tool in the classroom,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 38, no. 7, pp. 821–842, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  35. M. D. Gall, W. R. Borg, and J. P. Gall, Educational Research: An Introduction, Longman, New York, NY, USA, 6th edition, 1996.
  36. R. Justi and J. van Driel, “A case study of the development of a beginning chemistry teacher's knowledge about models and modelling,” Research in Science Education, vol. 35, no. 2-3, pp. 197–219, 2005. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  37. S. Eigner-Thiel and S. Bögeholz, “Bildung für Nachhaltige Entwicklung aus Sicht von MultiplikatorInnen außerschulischer Bildungsträger,” Umweltpsychologie, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 80–100, 2004. View at Google Scholar
  38. P. J. Russell, S. L. Wolfe, P. E. Hertz, C. Starr, and B. McMillan, Biology: The Dynamic Science, Thomson, Belmont, Calif, USA, 2008.
  39. A. Baddeley, “Working memory,” Science, vol. 255, no. 5044, pp. 556–559, 1992. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  40. E. von Glasersfeld, “Cognition, construction of knowledge, and teaching,” Synthese, vol. 80, no. 1, pp. 121–140, 1989. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  41. S. Wansom, T. O. Mason, M. C. Hersam et al., “A Rubric for post-secondary degree programs in nanoscience and nanotechnology,” International Journal of Engineering Education, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 615–627, 2009. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus