The science achievement of third graders using visual, symbolic, and manipulative instructional treatments

Fuller, Ellen W.; May, David; Butts, David P.

doi:10.1002/tea.3660160205

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…First, researchers have studied hands-on learning in a variety of domains, such as mathematics, physics, biology, and chemistry (Fuller et al, 1979;Gabel & Shenvood, 1980;Selman, Sell, Michael, & Martois, 1976;Siegler, 1976). However, the results in one of these domains may not necessarily generalize to another.…”

Section: Effects Of Media On Learning Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Third, media are presented to students in a variety of learning situations (Fuller et al, 1979;Glasson, 1989;Selman et al, 1976). Often the instructional medium is confounded with the other aspects of the learning situation, such as the specific classroom and style of teaching or the particular learning activities that students engage in (e.g., hands-on vs. textbook, discovery vs. directed learning).…”

Section: Effects Of Media On Learning Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Learning With Real Machines or Diagrams: Application of Knowledge to Real-World Problems

Ferguson¹,

Hegarty²

1995

Cognition and Instruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Effects Of Media On Learning Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Effects Of Media On Learning Outcomesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning With Real Machines or Diagrams: Application of Knowledge to Real-World Problems

Ferguson¹,

Hegarty²

1995

Cognition and Instruction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Clements (1999) discussed the need to redefine "concrete" manipulatives to include digital manipulatives that preserve many of these features of physical manipulatives. In fact, many studies confound the comparison of physical materials with these other potentially influential factors (Baxter, 1995;Char, 1991;Ferguson & Hegerty, 1995;Fuller, May, & Butts, 1979;Gabel & Sherwood, 1980;Glasson, 1989;Moore, 1993;Richardson, Montello, & Hegarty, 1999;Riley, 1979;Thompson, 1992). Thus, the question remains about whether each of those methods would be equally effective if instantiated by virtual rather than physical materials.…”

Section: Theoretical Perspectivesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Point and Click or Grab and Heft: Comparing the Influence of Physical and Virtual Instructional Materials on Elementary School Students' Ability to Design Experiments

Triona¹,

Klahr²

2003

Cognition and Instruction

194

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The widespread availability of computers in elementary schools makes them an appealing option for presenting instructional materials in laboratory science. However, there are neither theoretical nor empirical grounds for predicting whether virtual or physical presentation of instructional materials will be more effective. The definition of "active manipulation" is poorly specified and there are few studies that directly compare the two approaches unaccompanied by other potential confounds. In this study, 4th-and 5th-grade children were taught how to design simple unconfounded experiments using 1 of 2 instructional methods differing only in whether children manipulated physical or virtual materials. The 2 types of materials were equally effective in achieving several instructional objectives, including the design of unconfounded experiments, the derivation of correct predictions from them, and explicit reference to the need for experiments to be unconfounded.

show abstract

“…Several investigators in recent years have contrasted the teaching of science content at the elementary level, using particular aspects of activity-based approaches, with more traditional methods, outside the context of specific science programs. In general, they have found that the activity-based methods produced greater science content learning (Davis, 1978;Marlins, 1973;Voelker, 1975;Vongchusiri, 1974) or had no differential effects (Benson, 1968;Fuller, 1977;Kemp, 1978). _ The mean effect sizes for affective outcomes are generally small (ES = .28 for 15 studies) but consistent with those reported for other meta-analyses of innovative classroom practices.…”

Section: Overall Effects Of Program Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis

Bredderman

1983

Review of Educational Research

153

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, meta-analysis techniques were used to synthesize research on the effectiveness of three major activity-based elementary science programs (ESS, SAPA, and SCIS), which were developed with federal support. In 57 controlled studies, outcomes were measured in over 900 classrooms; the overall mean effect size for all outcome areas was .35. The mean effect size was .52 for science process tests, .16 for science content, and .28 for affective outcomes. On the average, gains also were realized in creativity, intelligence, language, and mathematics. Only 3 of 14 coded study features were related to reported effects: Disadvantaged students derived greater benefits than other students; tests not biased in favor of the activity-based programs resulted in positive but lower effects than those favoring the activity-based approach; and published reports had higher effects than unpublished reports. The effects of particular programs reflect their relative curricular emphases. In three followup studies, student groups that had had activity-based programs in elementary school and had later experienced traditional science programs during middle school years could not be consistently distinguished from control groups.Various aspects of the science curriculum reform period have been examined by reviewers over the years. Lockard (1963)(1964)(1965)(1966)(1967)(1968)(1969)(1970)(1971)(1972)(1973)(1974)(1975)(1976)(1977) cataloged the appearance and disappearance of curriculum projects. Welch (1979) chronologized its history. Weiss (1978), through surveys, andStake &Easley (1978), through case studies, documented the use of programs and the reactions of school personnel and on-site observers. Many researchers, especially doctoral students, investigated effects of implementation and teacher training efforts and effects of the new programs on students and teachers. Smith (1969) and Gallagher (1972) presented early narrative reviews of this work. In addition, periodically, the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) at Ohio State and the journal, Science Education, have published summaries of studies of the programs. Most recently meta-analyses of studies evaluating the effects of the reform programs on teaching practices and

show abstract

The science achievement of third graders using visual, symbolic, and manipulative instructional treatments

Cited by 3 publications

References 1 publication

Learning With Real Machines or Diagrams: Application of Knowledge to Real-World Problems

Learning With Real Machines or Diagrams: Application of Knowledge to Real-World Problems

Point and Click or Grab and Heft: Comparing the Influence of Physical and Virtual Instructional Materials on Elementary School Students' Ability to Design Experiments

Effects of Activity-based Elementary Science on Student Outcomes: A Quantitative Synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About