One student asked for a disciplinary explanation twelve times during a 53-minute problem-solving process without anyone clarifying it sufficiently¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · design r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2008 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? During the 53-minute protein-building problem, a student in the group of four repeatedly stepped out of the task to ask what the concepts meant, and her questions were never properly answered during the whole problem-solving process. → Krange 2008

Evidence¶

Krange 2008¶

Krange, I., & Ludvigsen, S. (2008). What does it mean? Students' procedural and conceptual problem solving in a CSCL environment designed within the field of science education. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3, 25-51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-007-9030-4

q2 · i? · design · r2

Report from the design experiment's video data on the second main problem (building an insulin-protein): "one of the students in a group of four asked for a disciplinary explanation of what they were actually doing 12 times". The analysis concludes her question was never properly answered during the whole process.

"during a problem solving process that lasted 53 min, one of the students in a group of four asked for a disciplinary explanation of what they were actually doing 12 times, without anyone clarifying this sufficiently"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Teacher and peer explanations of the scientific concepts during problem solving were at times scientifically misleading or wrong — related
• Design features of the CSCL environment — procedural-only educational inscriptions on the website and the storyline of the 3D model — pulled interactions toward procedural problem solving — a broader claim this one bears on
• Students' collective understanding during a physics tutorial alternates repeatedly between two distinct interpretations of tickertape distance rather than changing once — related