J Sci Educ Technol (2008) 17:466–482
DOI 10.1007/s10956-008-9115-5
The Impact of Learner’s Prior Knowledge on Their Use
of Chemistry Computer Simulations: A Case Study
Han-Chin Liu Æ Thomas Andre Æ Thomas Greenbowe
Published online: 17 July 2008
Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008
Abstract It is complicated to design a computer simu-
lation that adapts to students with different characteristics.
This study documented cases that show how college stu-
dents’ prior chemistry knowledge level affected their
interaction with peers and their approach to solving prob-
lems with the use of computer simulations that were
designed to learn electrochemistry. Students with different
prior knowledge levels were found to use different
approaches to solving problems with the use of computer
simulations. In particular, the cases showed that students
with a high level of prior knowledge tended to use the
equations and formulas to accomplish the learning tasks
and then use the computer simulations to confirm their
predictions. Students with a low level of prior chemistry
knowledge used the computer simulations as the main
resources to accomplish their tasks. Considerations of
individual differences and the integration of learning
materials were suggested for further research on instruc-
tional use of computer simulations.
Keywords Chemical education Science education
Computer simulation Computer-supported learning
H.-C. Liu (&)
Department of E-Learning Design and Management, National
Chiayi University, No. 85, Wunlong Village, Minsyong
Township, Chiayi County 621, Taiwan
e-mail: hcl@mail.ncyu.edu.tw
T. Andre
Department of Curriculum and Instruction, Iowa State
University, Ames, IA, USA
T. Greenbowe
Department of Chemistry, Iowa State University, Ames, IA,
USA
123
Introduction
In a traditional college chemistry classroom, the teacher
lectures on particular scientific topics while students take
notes. Both in large institutions, where introductory classes
are typically large, and in smaller institutions, lecture is the
predominant teaching strategy used in most classes. Stu-
dents usually work individually on assignments and tasks.
As a result, many students learn to solve problems on
examinations by mechanically calculating answers without
fully understanding the relevant chemistry concepts
(Pickering 1990; Sanger and Greenbowe 1997a, b). Even
though instructors attempt to explain and teach chemical
concepts during classes, traditional lecturing does not seem
to effectively help the majority of students understand
abstract chemical concepts (Noh and Scharmann 1997). As
a result, alternative strategies, such as computer simula-
tions designed to be used in an inquiry approach, have been
developed to successfully help students understand abstract
chemistry theories and concepts (Sanger and Greenbowe
1997a, b). In a computer-assisted learning environment, an
individual’s prior knowledge of both content domain and
problem-solving skills has been argued to have an impact
on her/his understanding of scientific concepts (Gredler
1996; Mayer and Sims 1994; Njoo and de Jong 1993). In
regular computer classroom setup, students use computers
in groups; therefore, prior knowledge level may also affect
how an individual interacts with instructional computer
simulations and how an individual comprehends the
information distributed by the computer programs (Mayer
and Sims 1994). Therefore, an in-depth investigation on the
conversation between group members of different prior
knowledge levels may provide insights of the influence of
student’s prior knowledge level in a computer-supported
collaborative learning context.
Theoretical Framework
Text, symbols, and static graphics are commonly used to
describe and represent chemical reactions. In addition,
formulas and equations are frequently used to represent and
communicate explanations about reactions and chemical
phenomena. However, the static visuals presented in the
textbook may not provide sufficient information to help
students understand the dynamic nature of chemical reac-
tions such as the movement of electrons, the change of the
color of chemicals during a reaction, and the particular
position of atoms in a molecule (Sanger and Greenbowe
1997a, b). In addition, college students are found to have
insufficient representational competence to communicate
and to describe chemical phenomena (Kozma 2003).
Johnstone (1982) argued that, to learn chemistry concepts,
students need to build knowledge and skills to comprehend
chemistry reactions that are represented at molecular,
macroscopic, and symbolic levels. As a result, students
need to build models that are similar to those used by
scientists to explicate the mechanism of chemical reactions
based on all three levels of representations. As defined by
Gilbert and Priest (1997), a model is ‘‘a representation
of an idea, object, event, process, or system’’ (p. 751). A
model in science is not only a simplified or replicated
representation of phenomena but also a collection of ideas
that can be run mentally to describe natural phenomena or
processes (Giere
1988; Kitcher 1984). Commonly, scientific models are used
by scientists to explain the data collected and to predict the
results of further experiments. A mental model represents
an individual’s view of the real world. How phenomena
make sense, how things work, and how to solve an
encountered problem are presented in the format of models
in an individual’s mind (Holland 1986; Johnson-Laird
1983). Driver and Easley (1978) argued that it is common
for students to hold a set of concepts which they use to
make sense of the world around them. When learning
science, a learner often uses her/his prior experience to
mentally build models that represent natural phenomena
and events. A mental model that is built based on such
experience may represent an individual’s understanding of
science concepts that is not scientifically correct.
Visual representations have been found to help students
construct mental models of scientific concepts and princi-
ples that are used to explain natural phenomena (Gilbert
et al. 2000; Gilbert and Priest 1997). Chemists convert and
use a variety of visual representations to illustrate their
mental models of chemical compounds and reactions
(Kozma and Russell 2007). Individuals’ mental models
could be built based on the interpretation of the visual
information, which is communicated via pictorial contents,
symbols, and other formats of imagery (Ballstaedt et al.
1989; Saunders 1994). However, some natural phenomena
(e.g., the molecular level of chemical reactions) that cannot
be observed with naked eyes may require the learners to
visualize their dynamic mechanism. Computer technology
has been considered to be effective in delivering visual
information and helping an individual construct mental
models of natural phenomena (Renk et al. 1993). The
molecular level of chemical reactions can be seen by cre-
ating dynamic ‘‘enlarged’’ molecules and atoms on the
computer screen (Peters and Daiker 1982). The magnified
molecular level of chemical reactions helps students visu-
alize how the dynamic systems operate during chemical
reactions. Among those computer-generated media,
dynamic graphics integrated in computer simulations are
commonly accepted among instructors and science educa-
tors as helping students understand scientific theories and
concepts (Kozma and Russell 2007; Burke et al. 1998;
Sanger and Greenbowe, 1997a, 2000).
In general, computer simulations are designed to help
students visualize the processes or events of chemical
reactions and to communicate abstract concepts and theo-
ries to students (Burke et al. 1998). With the ability to
demonstrate molecular level chemical reactions, computer
simulations have been found to be effective in helping
students learn chemistry concepts (Rieber 1989; Sanger
et al. 2001; Sanger and Greenbowe, 1997a, 2000). As
defined by de Jong and van Joolingen (1998), ‘‘a computer
simulation is a program that contains a model of a system
(natural or artificial; e.g., equipment) or a process’’ (p.
180). The system and process are calculated according to
the specifications of the computer program and are
commonly demonstrated in a computer animation format.
By allowing effects of changes to be seen in models before
invoking the change in the real world, computer
simulations are con- sidered to be effective for learning
(Marks 1982). Given the opportunity of manipulating the
system and process, a computer simulation designed to
teach science concepts can be seen as analogical to the
models that scientists used to solve scientific problems
(Roschelle and Teasley 1995). Instructional use of
computer simulations provides oppor- tunities for learners
to discover properties of a model or patterns through the
collection and analysis of data or information provided by
the computer programs. These characteristics tend to
promote students’ problem-solving skills. Therefore,
computer simulations can be effective in helping students
in learning if the program provides opportunities for users
to discover the science concepts at their own pace (Penuel
et al. 2006; Horowitz and Christie
2000; White and Frederiksen 1998; Wu et al. 2001).
However, it is argued that novice learners may not be
able to either interpret the computer animation or correctly
make use of the computer simulation in learning due to the
insufficiency of prior understanding of science principles or
skills in analyzing scientific problems (Njoo and de Jong
212 J Sci Educ Technol (2008) 17:466–482
J Sci Educ Technol (2008) 17:466–482 213
1993; Kozma and Russell information. It is important M
1997; ChanLin 2001). s to understand whether e
Gredler (1996) argued that p these needs are because of t
students’ prior knowledge a different experiences with h
in both con- tent and c the system or with o
problem-solving skills e different levels of d
might have an impact on ’ knowledge. It is obvious o
’ that designing a computer l
the use of computer
. simulation that is well o
simulations that are
In a computer-based g
designed to help stu- dents adapted to each
collaborative learning y
build their understanding individual’s particular
of different content areas. context, the interaction characteristics, learning
with group members could P
Otero et al. (1999) preferences, and needs
be beneficial to the a
found that computer would be complex. How- r
simulations can be used as students who lack in either ever, studying how t
a vehicle to promote prior knowledge or students with different i
communication and col- problem solving skills. levels of prior knowledge c
laboration among group Therefore, insights of how interact with their group i
members. Computer students make use partners and how they p
simulations allow students computer simulations in interact with the computer a
to rerun a particular solving problem and how simulation could yield n
program and come to an their interaction with peers more in- depth information t
agreement after reflecting and with computers affect that would be useful in s
on their ideas in group their understanding of improving the quality of
discus- sions. The science concept could be computer simulations and a
representations and worthy of fur- ther for planning how to use n
investigation. simulations instructionally d
features of computer
simulations that are to better benefit students
who use them. Therefore, D
related to specific science
the purpose of this study is e
principles have been found P s
to enhance student u to understand within a
i
discourse about sci- ence r computer-supported
g
concepts (Kozma 2003). p collaborative learning n
In addition, Roschelle and o environment:
Teasley (1995) suggested s
1. How students with The target population for
that computer simulation e
different levels of this study was freshman
can promote collaborative prior knowledge students at a large
problem solving and o
interact with their Midwestern University in
students addi- tionally f
peers and with the United States.
construct a shared instructional com- Electrochemistry is one of
conceptual structure t
h puter simulations, the topics included in a
called 2. How the interactions second semester
e
‘ affect students’ introductory chemistry
‘ course. A purposive
S understanding of
j sampling procedure was
t chemistry concepts
o
u with the help of employed and 6 female
i
d computer simulations. volunteers (three pairs)
n
t y among 47 students who
had volunteered for a
p Students have different larger study were selected
r needs with regard to as the participants in this
o learning in a system in study. Students’ point
b which they need to make totals from the
l use of different rep- prerequisite (first
e resentations of semester) course were
m used as a measure of their
 214 J Sci Educ Technol (2008) 17:466–482
prior knowledge. Pairs simulations have been
were selected by designed to teach
examining each member’s chemistry concepts by a
score on the ACS chemical education
California Chemistry research group in the
Diagnostic Test. The ACS Department of Chemistry
test provided a measure of at the university where
students’ chemistry this study was undertaken
background before they (Greenbowe 2003).
enrolled in the According to Sanger and
prerequisite course. The Greenbowe’s studies
first pair of students (1997a, b,
(labeled G1SA and G1SB) 2000), a variety of student
each had ACS test scores misconceptions regarding
that were 15 points electrochemistry were
higher than the average found. Thus, among these
score of all 47 computer simulations, four Fig. 1 ‘‘Activity series of
participants. The second simulations regarding metals’’ simulation
pair of students (labeled electrochemistry concepts Fig. 3 ‘‘Voltaic cell
G2SA and G2SB) was were designed based on (electromotive force) and
composed of one student the findings of their concentration’’
simulation
whose ACS test score was studies to help students
15 points higher than learn electrochemistry.
average and the other Therefore electrochemistry
whose test score was 10 was selected as the content
points lower than average. topic and the series of
The third pair of computer simulations
students (labeled G3SA were used in this study.
and G3SB) was composed The ‘‘Activity Series
of students who each had of Metals’’ simulation
test scores that were 10 was designed to
points lower than the demonstrate oxidation–
average score. reduction reactions
between different metals
Computer and solutions containing
Simulatio different metal ions (see
ns Fig. 1). As illustrated, Fig. 2 ‘‘Voltaic cell’’
Designed students can choose simulation Fig. 4 ‘‘Electrolysis’’
to Teach different metals to react simulation
E with different metal ions.
l clicking on the voltaic cell. By clicking on
When the metal of the strip
e ‘‘Activity 2’’ button (see the power switch of the
is more active than the
c Fig. 1). The Activity voltmeter, animations of
metal that is in ionic form
t Series of Metal and the the reactions in both
in the solution, colored
r Voltaic Cell simulations beakers take place. The
o shapes appear on the strips
were used together movement of electrons
c indicating ions from the
because these two topics through the circuit, the
h solution have been
are related and are studied movement of ions in the
e reduced on the strips. The
during the same solutions, and the
m color of the strip was
laboratory period. exchange of electrons
i designed to match the
The Voltaic Cell between ions and atoms
s color of the product of real
simulation replicates the in the beakers are
t reactions. Next, students
r settings of a real voltaic illustrated in an
can proceed to the
y cell. Metals and solutions animation format. The
‘‘Voltaic Cell’’ simulation
can be selected for each animation of electron and
(see Fig. 2) by
A series of computer electrode to set up the ion movement takes place
J Sci Educ Technol (2008) 17:466–482
and the resulting voltage
shows up on the display
panel of the voltmeter
only when the metals and
solutions are correctly set
up (see Fig. 2). In
addition, two buttons
labeled
‘‘Molecular Level
Reaction’’ appear on the
beakers when the
animation of electron
movement ends. Clicking
on the
215
buttons causes a window
to pop-up that illustrates
the molecular level
reactions between the
metal atoms on the strip
and metal ions in the
solution (see Fig. 3).
The third simulation,
‘‘Voltaic Cell EMF,’’ was
devel- oped based on the
second simulation
(Voltaic Cell); it added
the options of changing
the molarities of both
solutions (see Fig. 3)
because the EMF
(electromotive force) of an
oxidation–reduction
reaction in a voltaic cell is
determined not only by the
type of reaction, but also
by the concentrations of
the reactants and products.
The voltage of the cell
varies according to the
differences of molarities
between the solutions in
the half cells.
The ‘‘Electrolysis’’
simulation shares the
mechanism of the Voltaic
Cell series simulations.
Additional controls are
added to the power supply
that functions as a
voltmeter in the Voltaic
Cell simulation. Students
can control the amount of
time for the electrolysis
experiment (see Fig. 4);
the time selected by the
students moves faster
than real
time, allowing the students t electrolysis,’’ video- and audio-taped. In
to explore the simulation t consecutively. Printout addition, students’
with more situations per i tutorials (Appendix A) interactions and activities
unit of real time than users n including instructions, conducted while using the
could do with physical g tasks, and questions were computer simula- tions,
equipment. Users are handed out to the such as mouse movement,
given the opportunity to The study was participants when they login time, logout time,
set and modify the value conducted in a chemistry started to use these selections, and values set
of the voltage to force the laboratory in which simulations. The in the simulations were
electrolysis reaction to students who were taking simulation activities recorded by the computer
take place. The initial the course usually conduct required participants to program and saved in a
mass of the metal bar on their laboratory activities. answer these questions database to be compared
either electrode can be The computer simulations from their observations with the observations from
modified by dragging the were installed and ready and from the data students’ learning
slider under the names of for use in the laboratory on demonstrated by the com- activities.
the metals in this two laptop computers with puter simulations. Students The transcripts of
simulation. This feature is Internet connections. in each pair needed to student interactions were
designed to help users Students needed to work with the same group categorized and organized
identify the change of the complete their normal member on all the based on constant
masses on either electrode laboratory activities as simulations. comparison principles
at the end of the reaction; well as the computer (Strauss and Corbin 1990).
the change of mass of simulations in a 3-h D The transcriptions were
metals bars on each period. Therefore, in order a coded and then the coded
electrode is dis- played on to save participants’ time, t segments were constantly
each of two additional a web page with the a compared within the
boxes colored in blue. simulations embedded was transcribed contents.
Similar to the other opened and ready for use. A Finally the concepts and
simulations, animations of Two video camcorders n themes were compared
were also set up in the a
the molec- ular level of the across student interactions
laboratory to record l
reactions such as the until recurring themes
students’ interactions with y
movement of ions in emerged. During the data
each other as well as their s
solutions, the metal e analysis process, several of
deposits on the metal bar interactions with the the data sources were used
s
of the cathode, and the computer programs. to triangulate the results of
movement of electrons in The data collected this study. Such type of
the circuit are illustrated P triangulation has been
included the students’
according to the users’ r identified by Denzin
o answers to tutorial
choices of metals and questions on the (1978) as ‘‘data
c
solutions. worksheets accompanying triangulation.’’ Students’
e
the computer simulations answers for the final
d
E u (Appendix A); and examinations and for the
q r interactions between group open-ended tutorial
u e questions, and the database
members and with the
i information of students’
computer simulations,
p use of the computer
The instructional unit and which were
m simulations demonstrated
e assessments took up three
labo- ratory periods in the students’ learn- ing
n
three consecutive weeks, process over time.
t
for a total of nine hours. Therefore, those data were
The laboratory periods used to triangulate the
a
covered topics of ‘‘activity findings of the video
n
d series of metal and voltaic transcripts.
cell,’’ ‘‘voltaic cell This study specifically
EMF,’’ and implemented the
S
e ‘‘quantitative analysis of procedures of open, axial,
and selective coding problems with sim-
(Strauss and Corbin 1990). ulations (see Table 3).
The transcripts were first The presentation of the
analyzed line by line to results of this study are
understand the connections organized around these
among ideas, incidents, two themes and presented
and themes, and then the in the form of case
data were sorted into examples or short studies.
proper categories based on Students in this study
the connections. As initial were selected according to
and continuous insight their level of prior
occurred during open, knowledge based on their
axial, and selective ACS test scores. The
coding, connections were purpose of grouping
then seen between and students is to realize how
among categories and prior knowledge has an
properties (Strauss and impact on their learning
Corbin 1998). As the process and understanding.
process of categorizing In
and refining continued,
analytical domains were
derived from the initial
categories by delineating
properties and dimensions.
As categorizing and
refining went on, two
major themes emerged.
Tables 1 and 2 present an
overview of the coding
procedures. The patterns
and themes were used to
identify the ways students
interacted with computer
simu- lations and with
their group members, and
their understanding of
electrochemistry concepts.

R
e
s
u
l
t
s

Two major themes

emerged from the
qualitative data analysis.
These themes were
labeled: (a) impact of prior
knowledge on interaction
with group members and
(b) impact of prior
knowledge on solving
Table 1 Initial categories identified in the data
Category Emerging incidents, ideas, and themes

Difficulty of: Setting up experiment; making predictions; reaching conclusions; following instructions;
operating the computer simulations
Assistance from: Teaching assistant; the researcher; textbook; class notes; peers; computer simulations
Comment on: The computer; the simulations; the tasks
Agreement/disagreement on: The use of simulations; the simulation results; the answers; predictions
Confusion of: The computer simulations; the handout questions; the instructions; the tasks
Expression of understanding: Spoken description; gesture; written description
Reference to: Formulas; chemistry principles; textbook

Table 2 Analytical domains derived from coding

Analytical domains properties Dimensions

Visual aid
Macroscopic level Color change during reactions; apparatus for experiments; options for setting up experiments
Molecular level Movement of electron; movement of molecules
Confusion/difficulty
Computer simulation Navigation of the programs; misunderstanding of the results; conflict with predictions
Task Making predictions; making conclusions;
Interactions
With computer simulations Making new trials; attitude toward the simulations; questioning the results
With group members Reaching agreement; arguing with understanding; collaboration;
Problem-solving Strategies
Help seeking Resource from group members; resource from outside of the group; resource from the simulations
References to simulations From macroscopic level of representation to molecular level of representation
Involvement of prior knowledge
Understanding Misconceptions; description of electrochemistry principles; trace of reasoning
Memories Memories of formulas and equations; memories of rules and principles
Mathematical skills Algorithm; calculation; solving algebra

Table 3 Main themes and subcategories Impact on Interaction with Group Members
Themes Subcategories
In order to compare the degree of involvement of each
Solving problems with Conflicts caused by the simulations group, the researcher observed students’ interactions from
simulations Promoting discussions the videotapes and identified and recorded the duration of
Problem-solving strategies with the use meaningful discussions between group members as ‘‘high
of simulations
involvement’’ seconds. The duration during which students
The impact of prior Impact on interaction with group
were expressing their understanding, raising questions
knowledge members
about the results, and debating their predictions was
Impact on solving problems with
simulations recorded in units of seconds. These durations were added
Impact of attitude toward simulations up and compared to the total seconds each group spent on
each activity. The results are presented in Table 4.
Table 4 shows that Group 3 seemed to spend less time in
this study, students’ prior chemistry knowledge was found meaningful interactions than did the other two groups
to have an impact on the interactions between group during the simulation activities. The insufficient prior
members, on the ways they used the computer simulations, chemistry knowledge of the students in Group 3 seemed to
and on how they accomplished the tasks. Examples of diminish the opportunities for meaningful discussion. The
student interac- tions and conversations presented in the following sections show examples that are related to the
next section represent the findings regarding the research results demonstrated in Table 4.
purpose.
Table 4 The Seconds Spent on High Involvement Discussion members tended to passively accept the results from the
Number of seconds computer simulations to accomplish the worksheet. The
time students spent on meaningful discussion also relates to
Activity Activity Activity the patterns of interaction among the groups. Table 4
shows that Group 2 used a larger proportion (654 out of
Group 1 High 261 615 305 957 s) of their activity time than did Group 3 (198 out of
(High–High) involvement 601 s) discussing and communicating about issues that
Total 612 833 584 were related to the tasks.
Group 2 High 654 594 326
(High–Low) involvement
Total 957 890 617 Impact on Solving Problems with Simulations
Group 3 High 198 285 157
(Low–Low) involvement Conversation 2
Total 601 859 512
1 G1SA: [looking at the lab manual] in the equation…
we have 2.0 for copper when the ratio is smaller, then
Conversation 1 the natural log Q is smaller…. Then what it said right
there?
1 G2SB: So the more reactive they are, the more positive
2 G1SB: The smallest one is zero… so…
they are?
3 G1SA: Then… because you have… so that has to be
2 G2SA: As we do it this way… it just like with… with
2+
smaller… so… yes…see cause…
this way is like you start with the … MG 2 plus [Mg ] 4 G1SB: Zn equals to .1… and 2 [for Copper, points at
like in the MG [Mg] solution. What would it react the question] and then you say…
with? Nothing. This liquid reacts with nothing because 5 G1SA: We are supposed to find the E cell, not this
it’s so negative. You know the more negative it is, the [pointing at worksheet].
less spontaneous it is. 6 G1SB: I know! When this is smaller… then you
3 G2SB: Why do not we say they are reactive in the minus less… and this is greater [pointing at the
solution? formula on the worksheet] … see!
2+ 2+
4 G2SA: Well it is MG 2 plus [Mg ], MG 2 plus [Mg ] 7 G1SA: Yeah. You can write it.
is liquid [in pointing at the activity table]. 8 G1SA: Is it positive?
5 G2SB: So…then … ? 9 G1SB: Yes positive.
6 G2SA: So it makes sense that they are liquid too. 10 G1SA: Is this a spontaneous reaction?
7 G2SB: So… should I write something? The more 11 G1SB: Yes.
reactive …. The more reactive they are… the more
positive or the more negative their reduction potential? Students in Group 1 used a formula to calculate and
8 G2SA: This is the reductions, so if you say the more confirm their prediction (#1 and #6). In addition, they
reactive then they are the more negative reduction reached their conclusion that this is a spontaneous reaction
potential they are. based on the positive value from their resultant calculation
(#8 to #11). Note that both students in Group 1 have high
In Group 2, the student with the higher prior knowledge prior knowledge levels. When tackling the problems for the
level (G2SA) seemed to dominate the discussion. As a tasks, prior knowledge seemed to work as the main
result, the student with the lower level of prior knowledge resource for solving problems for high ACS score students.
(G2SB) seemed to be passively expecting the answer from Although given the opportunity for manipulating the
the other group member. G2SA used the term ‘‘liquid’’ in experiments for their predictions in the simulations, the
her utterance to explain the activity of the magnesium formulas and equa- tions became the vehicle to promote
atom (#4 and #6). However, the state of the magnesium student interactions.
ion is indicated as Conversation 3
‘‘(aq)’’ that stands for ‘‘aqueous’’ (particles that dissolved
in pure water) in the attached activity table. The case also 1 G2SA: I like to make logic guess and watch it later.
show that although G2SA has higher prior knowledge level 2 G2SB: So the negative electrode is?
than G2SB does, she held an alternative conception 3 G2SA: See the electrons are moving this way [pointing
regarding the symbolic level of representation and used at the screen, from copper metal to zinc metal]. So this
‘‘surface feature’’ (Kozma 2003) of the display to try to is the place [pointing at the screen] that becomes 2 plus,
construct knowledge of the chemical phenomena they 4 plus, 5 plus. So it should be Zn solid.
presented. Similar to G1SA’s approach to solving problems, G2SA
Group 3 accomplished the tasks with less questioning of (with a higher ACS score) preferred using her prior
or about their findings than the other groups. The two group
chemistry
understanding to solve the problem before trying the simu- 1.10. Students were asked to predict the value of their setup
lation (#1). In addition, when she needed to identify the before they turned on the power supply for the experiment.
anode of the voltaic cell, she described that the anode is the
place where metal atoms switch from solid state to ion state
(#3). The phrase, ‘‘2 plus, 4 plus, 5 plus,’’ represents the
state of atoms that lose two, four, or five electrons during an
oxidation reaction. Apparently, G2SA has already
constructed a mental model of oxidation–reduction reaction
using both symbolic and molecular level representations
other than those surface features of representations. With
the additional expression by G2SA such as ‘‘Yeah I don’t
understand the volt meter at all… what is this doing to us…
so this isn’t helping… ‘cause it doesn’t… like which one
goes on red… doesn’t matter.’’ ‘‘If you break the
computer, it doesn’t matter because we are doing exactly
the same thing.’’ The similar response toward the computer
simulations can also be found in Group 1 stu- dents’
conversation: ‘‘I don’t know… it’s like what we do in the
lab….’’ It seems that high prior knowledge level students
could relate the symbolic level to the molecular level of
representation without the help of the surface feature or
representation in the computer program.
In this example, the molecular level animation was used
by G2SA to explain and confirm her prediction to the other
group member (#3). While formulas and equations were
used as the space for communication between group
members in Group 1, computer animations were used as
the tools for communication in Group 2. The conversation
between members in Group 2 indicates that, the computer
animations were used by the high level student to represent
her mental model when their partners have insufficient
prior knowledge to understand the group member’s verbal
repression.
Conversation 4
1 G3SA: It has to be greater than 1.1… [working on
simulation]
2 G3SB: It has to be greater so we want… do we want to
try a higher copper and lower… zinc?
3 G3SA: I guess so…yeah… and… [working on
simulation]
4 G3SB: [points at screen]… higher…(works on
simulation)
5 G3SA: higher concentration? …. copper …. right?
6 G3SB: Yeah…(works on simulation) G3SA: …. OK…
point one…
7 G3SB: Alright…. You want to make this… lower
(zinc)?
8 G3SA: Let’s try the lowest (.001).(works on
simulation)
9 G3SB: We can do it in this way…more… here… and
we lower this.(works on simulation)
Activity 2 required students to construct a voltaic cell
and obtain a reading of cell potential that was greater than
Group 3 spent their time working mainly on the simulation
rather than on the formula for their prediction possibly
because of the lack of adequate prior chemistry knowledge.
Whereas the high ACS score group (Group 1) and the
mixed group (Group 2) recalled their understanding of the
formula to predict the result for this task, Group 3, com-
posed of both low prior knowledge level students, relied
mainly on the simulations and struggled for their answer in
a trial-and-error manner for their predictions (#3 and #8).
The examples mentioned in this section indicate that, in
this study, the computer simulations seemed to work dif-
ferently for students with different levels of prior chemistry
knowledge. Students with a high level of prior chemistry
understanding tended to depend mainly on their prior
knowledge to predict and plan for accomplishing the tasks.
The computer simulations worked as tools to confirm their
predictions and conclusions. For the students with a low
level of prior knowledge, the computer simulation worked
as a major resource that they could use to generate answers
for accomplishing the tasks after several trials. However,
the results showed that simply trying different setups on the
simulation to get answers did not seem to promote mean-
ingful discussion during learning activities.
For the more open-ended questions, such as the question
in this activity, Group 3 seemed to need more guidance
about the activity than the other groups in order to realize
the principles and concepts presented in the formats of
animations. This finding confirms Rieber’s (1989) conclu-
sion that students with lower ability need more guidance on
computer simulation integrated learning activities to help
them achieve a learning outcome.

Discussion

Students with different prior chemistry knowledge levels

reacted differently toward the computer simulations and
during their discussions. Fewer interactions between group
members were revealed in the group that was composed of
students with a lower level of prior knowledge (Group 3)
than in the groups that were composed of at least one
student who had a higher prior knowledge level. When
working with the computer simulations, the high ACS
score group and the high ACS score member in the mixed
group were more likely to refer to their prior understanding
to predict their findings and come to conclusions for the
tasks than the low ACS score group. This study found that
students with high ACS scores seemed to provide more
verbal explanations about their predictions and arguments
when working on the simulation than the low ACS score
students. It was likely that high ACS score students had
fewer difficulties relating the visual information to the
equations, formulas, and their mental models for the
answers than the low
ACS score students. This
finding confirms Kozma
and Russell’s (1997)
conclusion that students
with a higher level
chemistry background
seem to be more capable
of transforming different
formats of rep-
resentations into chemistry
statements than those who
have a lower level
chemistry background.
Kozma and Russell
(1997) found that when
dealing with information
in different
representations, novices
tended to gather all the
information they could get
together whereas experts
analyzed and organized
information more
precisely and accurately.
According to the findings
of this study, stu- dents
with more chemistry
knowledge might already
have constructed more
solid mental models for
explaining chemistry
phenomena. Therefore,
they could more easily
predict the results and
make conclusions from the
symbols and signs in the
equations for the
problems. Without suffi-
cient chemistry
background, information
from the computer
simulations served as the
main resource for students
with a low level of prior
knowledge to complete the
tasks. In this study,
students with a high level
of prior knowledge
seemed to plan and make
predictions about the tasks
before trying the computer
simulations for their
answers. Students with a
low level of prior
knowledge worked on the
simulations in a trial- and-
error manner. Such
instances demonstrate that
students used different
strategies to solve
problems while using
computer simulations to
learn chemistry. Although
it is not age-related, the
knowledge-level related
problem-solving
approaches students used
seem to share the same
structure with that of
Piaget’s (1964) ‘‘stages of
cognitive develop- ment’’
argument. In terms of
problem solving, students
with a high level of prior
chemistry understanding
seemed to be able to
perform ‘‘hypothetical
thinking’’ when asked to
accomplish the tasks using
computer simulations. In
this study, the questions on
the worksheets were
designed based on an
active learning strategy.
Therefore, the tasks
required students to
explore electrochemistry
principles with limited
guidance. However,
students with insufficient
prior chem- istry
knowledge did not seem to
investigate a problem in a
careful and systematic
fashion like those who had
adequate prior chemistry
knowledge. As a result, the
context of the activities
with computer simulations
did not seem to provide
situations that were
concrete enough for those
who had insufficient prior
chemistry knowledge to
solve problems. Thus,
students with a high level
of prior knowledge in this
study can likely be related
to children in the ‘‘formal
oper- ations’’ stage ACS score students were
whereas students with a more able to relate the
low level of prior visual information to their
knowledge can be related prior understanding and
to those in the ‘‘concrete to provide more verbal
opera- tions’’ stage when explanations and
comparing them to predictions. Conversely,
Piaget’s stages of the group comprising two
cognitive development low ACS score students
theory. seemed to accomplish their
The activities using learning activity without
computer simulations any explanation provided
seemed to promote more (Webb et al. 1995). As a
discussions in the groups result, it is not surprising
with high level prior that fewer interactions
knowledge students than occurred in the low ACS
in the group with both low score group. In this study,
level prior knowledge student activities were
students. As discussed designed using an active
above, high learning approach.
Therefore, these activities
aimed to promote student
interactions and the results
also showed that students
interacted with each other
when solving assigned
electrochemistry problems
without mak- ing use of
the computer simulations.
However, for those
students with insufficient
background knowledge,
they did not have solid
mental models to interpret
the verbal information
provided by group
members without the
additional visual
information. As a result,
low prior knowledge level
students might have
difficulties under-
standing the verbal
explanations and therefore
hinder the communication
among group members.
Students in this study were
found to make use of the
visual information in the
computer simulations to
communicate with group
members. Students were
found to point at the
computer screen and used
the dynamic illustrations
as supplements for their possibly reduce the
predictions, discussions, cognitive workload of
and verbal explanations. students with insufficient
In this study, the visual prior knowledge (Rieber
information, especially the 1994). Mayer and Sims
molecular level (1994) suggested that
animations, seemed to integrating a voice-over
provide affordances to support system in
promote effective multimedia learning
communication among systems could possibly
students when they benefit students with
worked with computer insufficient prior
simulations. knowledge in learning.
For the high ACS score They argued that Paivio’s
students, the equipment in (1986) dual coding
the simulations did not theory does not reveal
seem to make too much the
sense to them. The surface
feature of the
representations such as the
instrument in the
simulations did not seem
to make more sense than
those symbolic
representations to the high
ACS score students. The
findings corresponded
with Rieber’s (1989) study
that students with a higher
level of background
knowledge seemed to
need just to be prompted
to pay attention to the
related details. In addition,
the results also revealed an
‘‘expertise reversal effect’’
(Kalyuga et al. 2003;
Kalyuga 2005, 2006)
which indicates that
features designed
specifically to support
learning of low knowledge
users can have no or even
negative effect on that of
expert users. On contrary,
the open-ended style of
the computer simulation
might not be helpful to
students with insufficient
chemistry background
(ChanLin 2001). This
finding suggests the
consideration of an
alternative style of design,
for example, a linear style
of simulation that could
importance of the referential relationship between verbal cient background knowledge seemed to have difficulties
and visual information in an individual’s working memory developing strategies for effective problem solving because
while that individual is performing a problem-solving task.
According to Mayer and Sims’ model of dual coding
theory, in a multimedia learning environment, an
individual can successfully perform problem-solving tasks
when there is sufficient verbal information to which an
individual can refer the visual information. Without
sufficient verbal information provided by the learning
media in the working memory, an individual retrieves the
information to which she/he can refer the visual
information mainly from her/his long-term memory. As a
result, Mayer and Sims argued that students with
insufficient prior knowledge might have difficulties
performing problem-solving tasks by simply using anima-
tion/simulation without a supplement of verbal
information.
Computer simulations are found to be effective in help-
ing novices in learning science by providing opportunities
for users to explore science concepts at their own pace
(Penuel et al. 2006; White and Frederiksen 1998; Wu et al.
2001). However, findings from this study suggested that it
could be the case only when the novices were working with
high prior knowledge level peers on the simulation-based
learning tasks. In the current study, groups that were com-
posed of at least one student with a high level of prior
chemistry knowledge seemed to work on the computer
simulations and to accomplish the tasks more efficiently
than did the group with students who both had a low level
of prior chemistry knowledge. Although there was no
verbal support system integrated into the design of the
simulations used in this study, it is likely that the
interactions between group members provided verbal
information which group members could relate to the
visual information in the working memory, thereby
reducing their cognitive work- load. In addition, the
examples of the study show that the high ACS score
student in Group 2 tended to use the molecular level of
animations that work as representations of their mental
models in their conversation. As a result, in Group 2, the
student with adequate prior chemistry knowledge not only
worked as the ‘‘explanation provider’’ (Webb et al. 1995),
but also offered supplemental verbal information in
helping the student who had insufficient prior
knowledge accomplish learning tasks. Without a verbal
support system in the simulations used in this study, in
order to benefit low ACS score students in learning when
integrating these computer simulations to help them learn
electrochemistry concepts, it seemed essential to have a
group member who had high ACS scores in each group.
In summary, findings from this study revealed that the
surface features of the computer simulations did not seem
to make sense to students who already had sufficient
background knowledge. Meanwhile, students with insuffi-
of the open-ended nature of the computer simulations.
Therefore, the computer simulations in this study seemed
to be effective only when novices were working with peers
who had higher prior knowledge level. The animations in
the computer simulations made chemical reactions explicit
to students. As a result, the dynamic illustrations of
chemical reactions worked not only as visual supplements
of the verbal explanations during student discussions but
also as a vehicle to promote student communications in
problem solving activities.

Conclusions

According to the findings in this study, students with dif-

ferent levels of prior knowledge used different approach to
solve problems with the use of the computer simulations.
Specifically, the molecular level animations in the com-
puter simulations were used by high prior knowledge level
students as visual supplements to explain to other group
members in group problem solving activities, which was
not possible with active learning approaches in traditional
classrooms. However, more interactions were demon-
strated in the high ACS group and the mixed group than in
the low ACS group. The computer simulation itself did not
seem to fit the needs of every individual student in the
present study. A linear design with more supportive fea-
tures such as voice over and just-in-time feedback is
recommended to benefit low prior knowledge level stu-
dents. Meanwhile, high prior knowledge level students
seem to benefit more from an open-ended design with
limited surface features. Thus, computer simulations with
options from which students can select the level of sup-
portive features to meet each individual’s needs seem to
pave the way for effective simulation-based learning. In
chemistry, molecular level of chemical reactions are often
presented as static illustrations and learning chemistry
involves building mental models of reactions in various
natural phenomena from those static illustrations. The
computer simulation dynamically presents reactions such
as the exchange of electrons between ions and atoms, the
structures of different molecules, the collision of particles,
and many other chemical reactions in microscopic level.
Thus, it can be effective in helping students build mental
models of chemical phenomena in various disciplines. This
study may explore only limited scope in the field of com-
puter-based science learning due to a small sample size and
the simulations of specific contents. Factors such as indi-
vidual differences, the integration of learning materials,
and teaching/learning strategies on the design of a learning
system would be recommended as essential variables for
further large-scale studies in helping students build their
understanding of electrochemistry.
Acknowledgements The experiment described in this article is part University. The authors would also like to acknowledge the contri-
of a research project that is supported by the Chemical Education butions of all the participants in the study.
Research Group of the Department of Chemistry at Iowa State

Appendix A. Tutorials

1. Electrochemistry Simulation

Section

Name Partner’s Name

Today’s date: Time (now)

Instructions: You and your partner will be working with a computer simulation that

covers electrochemistry, please discuss each question with your partner and write down

your best answer.

Section 1. Activity Series (Type in the names of both group members in the login

window.)

Activity 1

1) Pick one of the four metals and follow the instructions on the screen. Please write down

your observations (e.g. what reactions occurred). Repeat this procedure for the other three

metals and make sure to write all your observations down.

Your brief observations (PLEASE PRINT):

2) Considering magnesium, zinc, copper, and silver

a) Which of the four metals you tested is the most reactive? Briefly explain why (PLEASE

PRINT).

b) Which is the least reactive? Why? (PLEASE PRINT)

c) Arrange the metals in order of increasing reactivity (from least reactive to most reactive)
d) Locate the magnesium, zinc, copper, and silver in the attached standard reduction potential

table. Is there a correlation between the reactivity of metals and the table? Explain why or

why not. (PLEASE PRINT)

Click on the “Activity 2” button when you are done with Activity 1.
 Section 2. Electrochemical cells

Activity 2

1. Begin by assembling a zinc-copper cell. Please be sure to follow the instructions on the

screen.

2. Is there an electron transfer between species? If so, complete the following table:

(PLEASE PRINT)

Zinc Copper

Mark the species that loses electrons

Write down the appropriate oxidation

half reaction under the species that is

undergoing oxidation.

Mark the species that gains electrons

Write down the appropriate reduction

half reaction under the species that is

undergoing reduction.

The anode half cell is : (circle one a. Zn

2+
b. Zn c. Cu
2+
d. Cu

answer)
2+ 2+
The cathode half cell is : (circle one a. Zn b. Zn c. Cu d. Cu

answer)

As a reminder:
Oxidation: A process in which a substance loses one or more electrons

Reduction: A process in which a substance gains one or more electrons

Anode: an electrode at which oxidation occurs

Cathode: an electrode at which reduction occurs
3. Is this a spontaneous reaction? Explain your reasoning. (PLEASE PRINT)
4. Write the complete balanced equation for the reaction. (PLEASE PRINT)
Click “Click here when you are done!” button when you are done.
 2. Electrochemistry Simulations: Voltaic Cell EMF
Section
Name Partner’s Name

Today’s date: Time (now)

Please mark one of the following:
Your actual lab regarding Voltaic Cell EMF is: Finished Not done yet
2+
1. Start the software and construct a zinc-copper electrochemical cell using 1.0 M Zn and
2+
1.0 M Cu solutions.

a. What is the EMF of this cell (include units)?

b. For the voltage that you are measuring, is this E°cell or Ecell?

. Please explain (PLEASE PRINT).

c. Write the chemical equation that represents the reaction occurring in this

cell. d. Is this a spontaneous or non-spontaneous reaction?

Please explain (PLEASE PRINT).

e. Draw a cell diagram for this electrochemical cell.

f. What is the oxidation half-reaction that occurs?

Where does it occur? (At which electrode?)

(Look at the molecular level animation.).

The anode is .

2. Construct an electrochemical cell for which the EMF of the cell is greater than +1.10 V.

Before doing the simulation, predict the EMF of the cell. Your prediction:

please explain (PLEASE PRINT). (The E°s of metal will show when you move your mouse

to the bottom-right corner of this movie.)

a. Draw the cell diagram of the electrochemical cell that you construct.

b. What is the EMF of this cell (include units)?

c. Is the voltage that you are measuring E°cell or Ecell?

d. Is this a spontaneous or non-spontaneous reaction?

e. What is the oxidation half-reaction that occurs?

Where does it occur? (At which electrode?)

(Look at the molecular level animation.)

The anode is .

f. Write the chemical equilibrium equation that represents the reaction occurring in this cell.

Click “Click here when you are done” button when you are done with the tasks.

3. Electrochemistry Simulations: Electrolysis

Section

Name Partner’s Name

Today’s date: Time (now)

Please mark one of the following:

Your actual lab regarding Voltaic Cell EMF is: Finished Not done yet

1. Set-up the electrolysis experiment and connect two strips of nickel metal to a power supply

and select nickel (II) nitrate as the solution.

2. Select the mass of each electrode by dragging the slider and record the initial mass of each

electrode.

3. Set the voltage and the current on the power supply. Select the amount of time you want

the current to flow.

a. Before you begin the simulation, make the following prediction:

Will nickel metal spontaneously react with aqueous nickel (II) nitrate?

Yes No

b. Turn on the power supply. Observe what happens in the bath. At the end of the

experiment, record the initial and final mass of each electrode in the table below.

Nickel on the red wire Nickel on the black wire

Initial mass Final mass Initial mass Final mass

g g g g
c. What is the direction of the flow of electrons in the wire? (mark one)
 Black to Red Red to Black

d. From your observation from the simulation, which metal in the diagram is the anode?

(a or b) . Which one is the cathode? (a or b) . Write down half

reactions for each electrode in the table.

Half reaction at the anode:

Half reaction at the cathode:

Click on the “New Trial” button to start a new electrolysis experiment.

4. Set-up another electrolysis experiment and connect a nickel electrode and an iron

electrode to a power supply and select iron (II) nitrate as the solution.

5. Select the mass of each electrode by dragging the slider and record the initial mass of each

electrode.

6. Set the voltage and the current on the power supply. Select the amount of time you want

the current to flow. Your goal is to set-up the electrodes so that iron metal will be

deposited

on the nickel electrode when the power supply is turned on.

e. Will nickel metal spontaneously react with aqueous iron (II) nitrate?

Yes No Why?

Please briefly explain (PLEASE PRINT)

f. Turn on the power supply. Observe what happen in the bath. At the end of the

experiment, record the initial and final mass of each electrode in the table below.

Metal on the red wire Metal on the black wire

Initial mass Final mass Initial mass Final mass

g g g g
g. What is the direction of the flow of electrons in the wire? (mark one)
 Black to Red Red to Black
h. From your observation from the simulation, which metal in the diagram is the anode?
(a or b) . Which one is the cathode? (a or b)
reactions for each electrode in the table.
Half reaction at the anode:
Half reaction at the cathode:
Click on the “Click here when you are done” button when you have finished the tasks.
References
Ballstaedt SP, Mandl H, Molitor S (1989) Problems in knowledge
acquistion from text and pictures. In: Levin JR, Mandl H (eds)
Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures. Elsevier,
Amsterdam, pp 3–29
Burke KA, Greenbowe TJ, Windschitl MA (1998) Developing and
using conceptual computer animations for chemistry instruction.
J Chem Educ 75(12):1658–1661
ChanLin L-J (2001) Formats and prior knowledge on learning in a
computer-based lesson. J Comput Assist Learn 17(4):409–419.
doi:10.1046/j.0266-4909.2001.00197.x
de Jong T, van Joolingen WR (1998) Scientific discovery learning
with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Rev Educ Res
68(2):179–201
Denzin NK (1978) Sociological methods: a sourcebook, 2nd ed edn.
McGraw-Hill, New York
Driver R, Easley J (1978) Pupils and paradigms: a review of literature
related to concept development in adolescent science students.
Stud Sci Educ 5:61–84
Giere RN (1988) Explaining science: a cognitive approach. Univer-
sity of Chicago Press, Chicago
Gilbert J, Priest M (1997) Models and discourse: a primary school
science class visit to a museum. Sci Educ 81(6):749–762.
doi:10.1002/ (SICI)1098-237X(199711)81:6\749::AID-
SCE10[3.0.CO;2-I
Gilbert JK, Boulter CJ, Elmer R (2000) Positioning models in science
education and in designing and technology education. In: Gilbert
JK, Boulter CJ (eds) Developing models in science education.
Kluwer, Boston, pp 3–18
Gredler ME (1996) Educational games and simulations: a technology
in search of a (research) paradigm. In: Jonassen DH (ed)
Handbook of research for educational communications and
technology. MacMillan, New York, pp 521–540
Greenbowe TJ (2003) Chemistry experiment simulations, tutorials
and conceptual computer animations for Introduction to College
Chemistry (aka General Chemistry). Ames, IA: Chemical Educa-
tion Research Group, Department of Chemistry, Iowa State
University. Retrieved September 4, 2004, from
http://www.chem.
iastate.edu/group/Greenbowe/sections/projectfolder/animations
index.htm
. Write down half
Holland JH (1986) Induction: processes of inference, learning, and
discovery. MIT Press, Cambridge
Horowitz P, Christie MA (2000) Computer-based manipulatives for
teaching scientific reasoning: an example. In: Jacobson MJ,
Kozma RB (eds) Innovations in science and mathematics
education: advanced designs for technologies of learning.
Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, pp 163–192
Johnstone AH (1982) Macro- and micro- chemistry. Sch Sci Rev
64:377–379
Johnson-Laird PN (1983) Mental models: towards a cognitive science
of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, New York
Kalyuga S (2005) Prior knowledge principle. In: Mayer R (ed)
Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, New York, pp 325–337
Kalyuga S (2006) Assessment of learners’ organized knowledge
structures in adaptive learning environments. Appl Cogn Psychol
20:333–342. doi:10.1002/acp.1249
Kalyuga S, Ayres P, Chandler P, Sweller J (2003) Expertise reversal
effect. Educ Psychol 38:23–31.
doi:10.1207/S15326985EP3801_4
Kitcher P (1984) 1953 And all that: a tale of two sciences. Philos Rev
93:335–373. doi:10.2307/2184541
Kozma R (2003) The material features of multiple representations and
their cognitive and social affordances for science understanding.
Learn Instruction 13:205–226. doi:10.1016/S0959-
4752(02)00021-X
Kozma RB, Russell J (1997) Multimedia and understanding: expert
and novice responses to different representations of chemical
phenomena. J Res Sci Teach 34(9):949–968. doi:10.1002/(SICI)
1098-2736(199711)34:9\949::AID-TEA7[3.0.CO;2-U
Kozma R, Russell J (2007) Students becoming chemists: developing
representational competence. In: Gilbert J (ed) Visualization in
science education. Kluwer, London, pp 121–146
Marks GH (1982) Computer simulations in science teaching: an
introduction. J Comput Math Sci Teach 1(4):18–20
Mayer RE, Sims VK (1994) For whom is a picture worth a thousand
words? Extensions of a dual-coding theory of multimedia
learning. J Educ Psychol 86(3):389–401. doi:10.1037/0022-
0663.86.3.389
Njoo M, de Jong T (1993) Exploratory learning with a computer
simulation for control theory: learning processes and
 instructional support. J s Papers presented at the Sanger MJ, Greenbowe TJ
Res Sci Teach i Annual Meeting of the (1997a) Common student
30(8):821–844. doi: t Association for misconceptions in
1 y Educational electrochemistry: galvanic,
0 Communications and electrolytic, and
. Technology, Dallas, TX concentration cells. J Res
P
1 Rieber LP (1994) Computers, Sci Teach 34(4):377–398.
r
0 graphics and learning. WCB doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-
e
0 Brown & 2736(199704)34:4\377::AI
s
2 B D-TEA7[3.0.CO;2-O
s
/ e Sanger MJ, Greenbowe TJ
,
t n (1997b) Students’
e c misconceptions in
a N h electrochemistry: current
. e m flow in electrolyte
3 w a solutions and the salt
6 r bridge. J Chem Educ
6 Y k 74(7):819–823
0 o , Sanger MJ, Greenbowe TJ
3 r (2000) Addressing student
0 k M misconceptions
0 Penuel WR, Abrahamson AL, a concerning electron flow
8 Roschelle J (2006) d in aqueous solutions with
0 Theorizing the i instruction including
3 transformed classroom: A s computer animations and
Noh T, Scharmann LC (1997) sociocultural o conceptual change
Instructional influence of interpretation of the n strategies. Int J Sci Educ
a molecular- level effects of audience , 22(5):521–537.
pictorial presentation of response systems in higher doi:10.1080/09500690028
matter on students’ education. In: Banks D 9769
conceptions and problem- W
(ed) Audience response Sanger MJ, Brecheisen DM,
solving ability. J Res Sci I
systems in higher Hynek BM (2001) Can
Teach 34(2):199–217. Roschelle J, Teasley SD (1995)
education: applications computer animations
doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098- Construction of shared
and cases. Information affect college biology
2736(199702)34:2\199:: knowledge in
Science Publishing, students’ conceptions
AID-TEA6[ collaborative problem
Hershey, PA, pp 187–208 about diffusion and
3 solving. In: O’Malley C
Peters HJ, Daiker KC (1982) osmosis? Am Biol
. (ed) Computer- supported
Graphics and animation as Teach 63(2):104–109.
0 collaborative learning.
instructional tools: a case doi:
. Springer-Verlag, New
study. Pipeline 7(1):11–13 10.1662/0002-
C York, NJ
Piaget J (1964) The early 7685(2001)063[0104:CCA
O growth of logic in the ACB]2.0.CO;2
; child. Harper & Row, New Saunders AC (1994) Graphics
2 York and how they
- Pickering M (1990) Further communicate. In: Dwyer
O studies on concept FM, Moore DM (eds)
Otero VK, Johnson A, learning versus problem Visual literacy: a spectrum
Goldberg F (1999) How solving. J Chem Educ of visual learning.
does the computer 67(3):254–255 Educational Technology
facilitate the development Renk JM, Branch RC, Chang Publications, Englewood
of physics knowledge by E (1993) Visual Cliffs, NJ, pp 183–192
prospective elementary information strategies in Strauss AL, Corbin JM
teachers? J Educ mental model (1990) Basics of qualitative
181(2):57–89 development. In: Braden research:
Paivio A (1986) Mental D, Clark-Baca J (eds) grounded theory
representations: a dual coding Visual literacy in the procedures and
approach. digital age: selected techniques. Sage,
O readings of the 25th Newbury
x annual conference of the Park, CA
f International Visual Strauss A, Corbin J (1998)
o Literacy Associ- ation. Basics of qualitative
r International Visual research: techniques and
d Literacy Association, procedures for developing
Rochester, NY, pp 81–91 grounded theory, 2nd ed
U Rieber LP (1989, February). edn. Sage, Thousand
n A review of animation Oaks, CA
i research in Webb NM, Troper JD, Fall R
v computer-based (1995) Constructive
e instruction. In Proceedings activity and learning in
r of Selected Research collaborative small groups.
 J Educ Psychol 87(3):406–
423. doi:
10.1037/0022-
0663.87.3.406
White BY, Frederiksen JR
(1998) Inquiry, modeling,
and metacog- nition:
making science
accessible to all
students. Cogn Instr
16(1):3–118.
doi:10.1207/s1532690xci16
01_2
Wu H-K, Krajcik JS, Soloway
E (2001) Promoting
understanding of chemical
representations: students’
use of a visualization tool
in the classroom. J Res
Sci Teach 38(7):821–
842. doi:10.1002/
tea.1033