@article{de_jong_lets_2023,

title = {Let's talk evidence \textendash The case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction},

author = {Ton de Jong and Ard W. Lazonder and Clark A. Chinn and Frank Fischer and Janice Gobert and Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver and Ken R. Koedinger and Joseph S. Krajcik and Eleni A. Kyza and Marcia C. Linn and Margus Pedaste and Katharina Scheiter and Zacharias C. Zacharia},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X23000295},

doi = {10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100536},

issn = {1747-938X},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-05-01},

urldate = {2023-05-01},

journal = {Educational Research Review},

volume = {39},

pages = {100536},

abstract = {Many studies investigating inquiry learning in science domains have appeared over the years. Throughout this period, inquiry learning has been regularly criticized by scholars who favor direct instruction over inquiry learning. In this vein, Zhang, Kirschner, Cobern, and Sweller (2022) recently asserted that direct instruction is overall superior to inquiry-based instruction and reproached policy makers for ignoring this fact. In the current article we reply to this assertion and the premises on which it is based. We review the evidence and argue that a more complete and correct interpretation of the literature demonstrates that inquiry-based instruction produces better overall results for acquiring conceptual knowledge than does direct instruction. We show that this conclusion holds for controlled, correlational, and program-based studies. We subsequently argue that inquiry-based and direct instruction each have their specific virtues and disadvantages and that the effectiveness of each approach depends on moderating factors such as the learning goal, the domain involved, and students' prior knowledge and other student characteristics. Furthermore, inquiry-based instruction is most effective when supplemented with guidance that can be personalized based on these moderating factors and can even involve providing direct instruction. Therefore, we posit that a combination of inquiry and direct instruction may often be the best approach to support student learning. We conclude that policy makers rightfully advocate inquiry-based instruction, particularly when students’ investigations are supplemented with direct instruction at appropriate junctures.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{obaid_using_2023,

title = {Using optimized clustering to identify students' science learning paths to knowledge integration textbar STEM Education Review},

author = {Teeba Obaid and Hosein Aghajani and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://www.hksmp.com/journals/stemer/article/view/354},

doi = {10.54844/stemer.2023.0354},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-04-01},

urldate = {2023-05-12},

journal = {STEM Education Review},

volume = {1},

abstract = {Background: This study captured students' repertoire of science ideas and determined the varied paths students take to integrate their disconnected ideas as they studied a web-based Genetic Inheritance unit. Method: We analyzed 6th graders' responses to embedded items and activities to establish progress in knowledge integration in two different learning conditions: revisiting and critiquing. Learning paths were established by measuring students' idea dissimilarities using Levenshtein edit distance, clustering using silhouette coefficient and K-means, and determining the most representative path via generalized median method. Results: Four learning paths emerged from the revisit condition (isolated links, partial links, valid links, integrated links) and three learning paths emerged from the critique condition (isolated links, partial links, and integrated links). Conclusion: We found that by providing opportunities for students to revisit or critique ideas, the curriculum supported them to follow multiple paths in building their repertoire of ideas and integrating initial and new information.},

keywords = {STRIDES},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_students_2023,

title = {Students’ perceptions of the impacts of peer ideas in inquiry learning},

author = {Camillia Matuk and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-022-09607-3},

doi = {10.1007/s11251-022-09607-3},

issn = {1573-1952},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-02-01},

urldate = {2023-05-12},

journal = {Instructional Science},

volume = {51},

number = {1},

pages = {65\textendash102},

abstract = {Peer ideas can be valuable contributions to scientific inquiry. Divergent peer ideas can enrich students' thinking and encourage curiosity. Meanwhile, similar peer ideas can promote convergent thinking that can reinforce understanding. However, students need guidance in critically evaluating peer ideas in relation to their own, and in recognizing the influence of peers’ ideas. Guided by the Knowledge Integration framework, we explore whether students’ perceptions of the impact of peers’ ideas align with the revisions made to their written explanations. In a technology-rich, classroom-based inquiry unit on cancer cell division, Grade 7 students (N = 144) investigated the effects of different cancer treatments on cell division, and developed explanations for a recommended treatment. We prompted one group of students to visit a class repository to seek peer ideas similar to their own, and another to seek ideas different from their own. Both groups then revised their recommendations. Based on analyses of students' reflections, initial and revised explanations, and pre and posttests, we found that students prompted to seek divergent ideas perceived peers’ ideas to be more impactful, even though both groups of students revised at the same rate and made similar pre to posttest gains. This study suggests a need to attend to students’ perceptions of the roles of their peers, particularly in environments designed to reflect authentic processes of the social construction of scientific knowledge.},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{bradford_incorporating_2023,

title = {Incorporating investigations of environmental racism into middle school science},

author = {Allison Bradford and Libby Gerard and Erika Tate and Rui Li and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/sce.21824},

doi = {10.1002/sce.21824},

issn = {1098-237X},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-01-01},

urldate = {2023-09-29},

journal = {Science Education},

volume = {n/a},

number = {n/a},

abstract = {To promote a justice-oriented approach to science education, we formed a research-practice partnership between middle school science teachers, their students, curriculum designers, learning scientists, and experts in social justice to co-design and test an environmental justice unit for middle school instruction. We examine teacher perspectives on the challenges and possibilities of integrating social justice into their standards-aligned science teaching as they participate in co-design and teach the unit. The unit supports students to investigate racially disparate rates of asthma in their community by examining pollution maps and historical redlining maps. We analyze interviews and co-design artifacts from two teachers who participated in the co-design and taught the unit in their classrooms. Our findings point to the benefits of a shared pedagogical framework and an initial unit featuring local historical content to structure co-design. Findings also reveal that teachers can share similar goals for empowering students to use science knowledge for civic action while framing the local socio-political factors contributing to the injustice differently, due in part to different institutional supports and constraints. Student interviews and a pre/postassessment illustrate how the unit facilitated students' progress in connecting socio-political and science ideas to explain the impacts of particulate matter pollution and who is impacted most. Analyses illuminate how teachers' pedagogical choices may influence whether and how students discuss the impact of systemic racism in their explanations. The findings inform refinement of the unit and suggest supports needed for co-design partnerships focused on integrating social justice and science.},

note = {_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/sce.21824},

keywords = {ARISE},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{wiley_human-centred_2023,

title = {A human-centred learning analytics approach for developing contextually scalable K-12 teacher dashboards},

author = {Korah Wiley and Yannis Dimitriadis and Marcia Linn},

url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bjet.13383},

doi = {10.1111/bjet.13383},

issn = {1467-8535},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-01-01},

urldate = {2023-09-29},

journal = {British Journal of Educational Technology},

volume = {n/a},

number = {n/a},

abstract = {This paper describes a Human-Centred Learning Analytics (HCLA) design approach for developing learning analytics (LA) dashboards for K-12 classrooms that maintain both contextual relevance and scalability\textemdashtwo goals that are often in competition. Using mixed methods, we collected observational and interview data from teacher partners and assessment data from their students' engagement with the lesson materials. This DBR-based, human-centred design process resulted in a dashboard that supported teachers in addressing their students' learning needs. To develop the dashboard features that could support teachers, we found that a design refinement process that drew on the insights of teachers with varying teaching experience, philosophies and teaching contexts strengthened the resulting outcome. The versatile nature of the approach, in terms of student learning outcomes, makes it useful for HCLA design efforts across diverse K-12 educational contexts. Practitioner notes What is already known about this topic Learning analytics that are aligned to both a learning theory and learning design support student learning. LA dashboards that support users to understand the associated learning analytics data provide actionable insight. Design-based research is a promising methodology for Human-Centred Learning Analytics design, particularly in the K-12 educational context. What this paper adds Leveraging a longstanding, yet fluid, research-practice partnership is an effective design-based research adaptation for addressing the high variation in instructional practices that characterize K-12 education. Using both quantitative and qualitative data that reflects students' developing knowledge effectively supports teachers' inquiry into student learning. Teachers' use of learning analytics dashboards is heavily influenced by their perspectives on teaching and learning. Implications for practice and/or policy Impact on student learning outcomes, alongside usability and feasibility, should be included as a necessary metric for the effectiveness of LA design. LA dashboard developers should both leverage learning data that reflect students' developing knowledge and position teachers to take responsive pedagogical action to support student learning. LA researchers and developers should utilize a long-term, yet fluid, research-practice partnership to form a multi-stakeholder, multidisciplinary design team for Human-Centred Learning Analytics design.},

note = {_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/bjet.13383},

keywords = {STRIDES},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_supporting_2022,

title = {Supporting Teachers to Customize Curriculum for Self-Directed Learning},

author = {Libby Gerard and Allison Bradford and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09985-w},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-022-09985-w},

issn = {1573-1839},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-08-01},

urldate = {2022-08-26},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

abstract = {Guiding teachers to customize curriculum has shown to improve science instruction when guided effectively. We explore how teachers use student data to customize a web-based science unit on plate tectonics. We study the implications for teacher learning along with the impact on student self-directed learning. During a professional development workshop, four 7th grade teachers reviewed logs of their students’ explanations and revisions. They used a curriculum visualization tool that revealed the pedagogy behind the unit to plan their customizations. To promote self-directed learning, the teachers decided to customize the guidance for explanation revision by giving students a choice among guidance options. They took advantage of the web-based unit to randomly assign students (N = 479) to either a guidance Choice or a no-choice condition. We analyzed logged student explanation revisions on embedded and pre-test/post-test assessments and teacher and student written reflections and interviews. Students in the guidance Choice condition reported that the guidance was more useful than those in the no-choice condition and made more progress on their revisions. Teachers valued the opportunity to review student work, use the visualization tool to align their customization with the knowledge integration pedagogy, and investigate the choice option empirically. These findings suggest that the teachers’ decision to offer choice among guidance options promoted aspects of self-directed learning.},

keywords = {POWER, STRIDES},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_cultivating_2022,

title = {Cultivating Teacher Efficacy for Social Justice in Science},

author = {Libby Gerard and Allison Bradford and Angela DeBarger and Korah Wiley and Marcia C. Linn},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-06-01},

journal = {Science Scope},

volume = {45},

number = {5},

pages = {40--48},

keywords = {ARISE},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_self-directed_2022,

title = {Self-directed Science Learning During COVID-19 and Beyond},

author = {Libby Gerard and Korah Wiley and Angela Haydel Debarger and Sarah Bichler and Allison Bradford and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09953-w},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-021-09953-w},

issn = {1573-1839},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-04-01},

urldate = {2022-07-22},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {31},

number = {2},

pages = {258--271},

abstract = {Prompted by the sudden shift to remote instruction in March 2020 brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic, teachers explored online resources to support their students learning from home. We report on how twelve teachers identified and creatively leveraged open educational resources (OERs) and practices to facilitate self-directed science learning. Based on interviews and logged data, we illustrate how teachers’ use of OER starkly differed from the typical uses of technology for transmitting information or increasing productivity. These experiences provide insights into ways teachers and professional developers can take advantage of OER to promote self-directed learning when in-person instruction resumes.},

keywords = {POWER, STRIDES},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_computer-based_2022,

title = {Computer-based guidance to support students’ revision of their science explanations},

author = {Libby Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131521002281},

doi = {10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104351},

issn = {0360-1315},

year  = {2022},

date = {2022-01-01},

urldate = {2022-04-13},

journal = {Computers \& Education},

volume = {176},

pages = {104351},

abstract = {As they encounter new ideas, students need to make integrated revisions to their science explanations, a key aspect of science learning. This involves filling gaps, resolving inconsistencies with evidence, and strengthening connections among ideas. Rather than making integrated revisions, even after automated, adaptive guidance, students typically add disconnected ideas or fix mechanical errors. The knowledge integration framework, supported by new technologies including natural language processing, guided the design of the Annotator, a tool that models the revision process for students’ written explanations. This research investigates the added value of the Annotator compared to automated, adaptive guidance to support students to make integrated revisions to their science explanations and to strengthen knowledge integration. 798 6th and 7th-grade students from 4 schools participated in a study featuring pretests, posttests, embedded student explanations, student interviews and observations. Students using the Annotator who initially displayed unintegrated ideas were more likely to make integrated revisions to their explanations, than students receiving automated, adaptive guidance. These students also made greater knowledge integration revisions on the posttest one week later. Thus, modeling revision with the Annotator strengthened the ability of students who started with unintegrated ideas to explain scientific phenomena.},

keywords = {CLASS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{brondfield_cognitive_2021-1,

title = {The Cognitive Load of Inpatient Consults: Development of the Consult Cognitive Load Instrument and Initial Validity Evidence},

author = {Sam Brondfield and Alexander Mario Blum and Kewchang Lee and Marcia C. Linn and Patricia S. O’Sullivan},

url = {https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Fulltext/2021/12000/The_Cognitive_Load_of_Inpatient_Consults_.36.aspx},

doi = {10.1097/ACM.0000000000004178},

issn = {1040-2446},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-12-01},

urldate = {2022-07-22},

journal = {Academic Medicine},

volume = {96},

number = {12},

pages = {1732--1741},

abstract = {Purpose 

 Fellows and residents provide inpatient consultations. Though consults vary considerably, measuring the associated cognitive load (CL) is key to guiding faculty on how to optimize learning during consults. However, existing CL instruments, such as the unidimensional Paas scale, cannot separate the 3 components of CL and may miss the nuances of consult CL. Therefore, the authors developed the Consult Cognitive Load (CCL) instrument to measure the 3 CL components during consults. 

 Method 

 In 2018\textendash2019, the authors developed the CCL at the University of California, San Francisco, using Wilson’s constructive approach to measurement. To generate content and response process validity evidence, the authors consulted the literature and experts to generate construct maps, items, and a scoring rubric and conducted cognitive interviews. They administered the CCL to internal medicine and psychiatry trainees across 5 University of California campuses and used Rasch family and linear regression models to assess internal structure validity and relationships to key predictor variables. They compared the CCL with the Paas scale using Wright maps and used latent correlations to support separating CL into 3 components. 

 Results 

 Analysis revealed appropriate fit statistics, appropriate mean respondent location increases across all levels, threshold banding, and expected relationships with key predictor variables. The CCL provided more coverage of the 3 CL components compared with the Paas scale. Correlations among the 3 CL components were not strong, suggesting that the CCL offers more nuance than a unidimensional measure of CL in the context of consults. 

 Conclusions 

 This study generated initial validity evidence to support the CCL’s use as a measure of consult CL and supports measuring the 3 CL components separately rather than as a single construct in the context of consults. Learners and faculty could compare learner CCL scores with reference scores to promote reflection, metacognition, and coaching.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{bichler_designing_2021,

title = {Designing a remote professional development course to support teacher customization in science},

author = {Sarah Bichler and Libby Gerard and Allison Bradford and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563221001370},

doi = {10.1016/j.chb.2021.106814},

issn = {0747-5632},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-10-01},

urldate = {2022-01-04},

journal = {Computers in Human Behavior},

volume = {123, 106814},

abstract = {This study reports on the design, implementation, and impact of a remote professional development (PD) course for secondary school teachers who were transitioning to remote instruction during the COVID-19 pandemic. We designed technology innovations to strengthen the previously successful in-person course. The innovations support teachers to customize an instructional unit by setting and revising goals based on evidence from their students’ prior work on the unit. A Curriculum Visualizer makes the pedagogy of the unit visible and guides planning for customization. Carefully curated small group activities using Zoom breakout rooms ensure that each teacher could share their thoughts, ideas, and impressions with other teachers. Participants were 23 science teachers from 12 different schools in a western U.S. state. We developed rubrics to code customization goals, plans, and moves using bottom-up methods and iterative refinement. Reflections on student work and use of the Curriculum Visualizer enabled teachers to set and refine customization goals and make evidence-based and pedagogy-aligned customization decisions that enhanced the interactive learning opportunities for their students. Our results reinforce the C-b model proposed by Sailer et al. (this issue) by illustrating the value of using technology to support collaborative, interactive PD activities.},

keywords = {ARISE, POWER, STRIDES},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{brondfield_cognitive_2021,

title = {The Cognitive Load of Inpatient Consults: Development of the Consult Cognitive Load Instrument and Initial Validity Evidence},

author = {Sam Brondfield and Alexander Blum and Kewchang Lee and Marcia Linn and Patricia S. O’Sullivan},

url = {https://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/abstract/9000/the_cognitive_load_of_inpatient_consults_.96679.aspx},

doi = {10.1097/ACM.0000000000004178},

issn = {1040-2446},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-06-01},

urldate = {2021-06-07},

journal = {Academic Medicine},

volume = {Publish Ahead of Print},

abstract = {Purpose: 

 Fellows and residents provide inpatient consultations. Though consults vary considerably, measuring the associated cognitive load (CL) is key to guiding faculty on how to optimize learning during consults. However, existing CL instruments, such as the unidimensional Paas scale, cannot separate the 3 components of CL and may miss the nuances of consult CL. Therefore, the authors developed the Consult Cognitive Load (CCL) instrument to measure the 3 CL components during consults. 

 Method: 

 In 2018\textendash2019, the authors developed the CCL at the University of California, San Francisco, using Wilson’s constructive approach to measurement. To generate content and response process validity evidence, the authors consulted the literature and experts to generate construct maps, items, and a scoring rubric and conducted cognitive interviews. They administered the CCL to internal medicine and psychiatry trainees across 5 University of California campuses and used Rasch family and linear regression models to assess internal structure validity and relationships to key predictor variables. They compared the CCL with the Paas scale using Wright maps and used latent correlations to support separating CL into 3 components. 

 Results: 

 Analysis revealed appropriate fit statistics, appropriate mean respondent location increases across all levels, threshold banding, and expected relationships with key predictor variables. The CCL provided more coverage of the 3 CL components compared to the Paas scale. Correlations among the 3 CL components were not strong, suggesting that the CCL offers more nuance than a unidimensional measure of CL in the context of consults. 

 Conclusions: 

 This study generated initial validity evidence to support the CCL’s use as a measure of consult CL and supports measuring the 3 CL components separately rather than as a single construct in the context of consults. Learners and faculty could compare learner CCL scores to reference scores to promote reflection, metacognition, and coaching.},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{kucirkova_designing_2021,

title = {Designing personalised instruction: A research and design framework},

author = {Natalia Kucirkova and Libby Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bjet.13119},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13119},

issn = {1467-8535},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-05-01},

urldate = {2021-05-24},

journal = {British Journal of Educational Technology},

abstract = {Advances in technology have increased the opportunities for designers to personalise instruction based on student actions. We conducted semi-structured interviews with an international sample of educational professionals including researchers, teachers and designers, and reviewed interdisciplinary literature on personalisation to propose a framework for personalisation research and design. Thematic analysis of the interviews revealed that professionals value each type of personalisation opportunity (eg, customising for age-appropriate content, supports for student choice, automated guidance based on learner responses) and identify challenges (eg, trade-offs between adaptive and standardised instruction). Three research/design dilemmas emerged: individualisation and equity; group customisation and individual benefit; and adaptation and validity of measurement. We discuss these dilemmas in relation to three categories of personalisation: customisation by designers or teachers to support a specific audience (grade level, course, community); individualisation to support user choice (of book to read, project topic); and adaptation of instructional activities based on automated analysis of logged user performance (performance metrics, natural language processing, cumulative indicators). We suggest some guiding questions for a generative agenda for future research on personalised instruction. Practitioner notes What is already known about this topic Personalised learning is popular among educational professionals. Personalised design has multiple and inconsistent definitions. A shared framework for personalised instruction would facilitate research and design. What this paper adds A succinct but comprehensive definition of personalised education. Perspectives on personalisation from an international group of practitioners and designers. A framework including three dilemmas to guide future research on the design and practice of personalised instruction. Implications for practice and/or policy A shared definition of personalisation can support communication across diverse stakeholders. The framework can guide future design and instruction with personalised educational technology. The framework identifies dilemmas that illustrate ethical pathways for policy-makers responsible for personalised education.},

note = {_eprint: https://bera-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/bjet.13119},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{linn_for_2021,

title = {For The Future of Education - Technology Matters},

author = {Marcia C. Linn and Elizabeth McBride and Libby Gerard and Ady Kidron},

url = {http://ibe-infocus.org/articles/for-the-future-of-education/},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-02-01},

urldate = {2021-05-07},

journal = {In Focus \textemdash Magazine of the UNESCO International Bureau of Education},

abstract = {Self-directed learning often demands that the learner interpret conflicting information, seek clarification, and make informed decisions about personal dilemmas. How can technology help students develop the knowledge and skills to self-direct their learning throughout life?},

keywords = {GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{boda_longitudinal_2021,

title = {Longitudinal impact of interactive science activities: Developing, implementing, and validating a graphing integration inventory},

author = {Phillip A. Boda and Shruti Bathia and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/tea.21653},

doi = {https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21653},

issn = {1098-2736},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-01},

urldate = {2021-05-07},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {58},

number = {2},

pages = {225--248},

abstract = {Integrating sophisticated graphical analysis skills as they learn science is essential for K-12 students and emphasized in current standards. In this study, we iteratively designed a Graphing Integration Inventory (GII) over a three-year period, while also supporting students to develop their capabilities to use graphs to learn science content in complex ways through interactive curriculum materials implemented on a novel technology enhanced curriculum platform. We applied the Knowledge Integration framework to design the curriculum, the assessments, and the rubrics for scoring student explanations. The framework delineates ways to promote links among graphs and science ideas. The rubrics award students higher scores on their explanations based on the level of complexity of their connections between science concepts and, in this research, graphs. The GII and the aligned curriculum were implemented by over 300 middle school students (Grades 6\textendash8) across a 3-year period. We investigated the impact of the designed curriculum on the integration of graphing and science while also studying the psychometric properties of the GII to validate it for use in future studies. Findings suggest both that the curriculum used to support these students improved their Knowledge Integration capabilities significantly and that the GII instrument is suitable for use with populations across gender and native English language status demographics in Grades 6\textendash8. Implications are discussed around using graphs to learn complex science ideas, as well as the affordances of technology enhanced platforms to support this type of learning and assessment.},

note = {_eprint: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/tea.21653},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{billings_improving_2021,

title = {Improving Teacher Noticing of Students’ Science Ideas with a Dashboard},

author = {Kelly Billings and Libby Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

editor = {E. Vries and Y. Hod and J. Ahn},

url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10286919-improving-teacher-noticing-students-science-ideas-dashboard},

year  = {2021},

date = {2021-01-01},

urldate = {2022-09-01},

journal = {Computersupported collaborative learning},

abstract = {We explore how a Teacher Action Planner (TAP) that synthesizes student ideas impacts teacher noticing. The TAP uses Natural Language Processing (NLP) to detect student ideas in written explanations. We compared teacher noticing while using the TAP to noticing when reviewing student explanations. The TAP helped teachers deepen their analysis of student ideas. We did not see any impact on immediate instructional practice. We propose redesigns to the TAP to better connect noticing to instruction.},

keywords = {STRIDES},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{pea_personal_2020,

title = {Personal Perspectives on the Emergence of the Learning Sciences: 1970s\textendash2005},

author = {Roy Pea and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feduc.2020.00130},

doi = {10.3389/feduc.2020.00130},

issn = {2504-284X},

year  = {2020},

date = {2020-01-01},

urldate = {2021-08-13},

journal = {Frontiers in Education},

volume = {5},

pages = {130},

abstract = {We describe the emergence of the interdisciplinary learning sciences field and its consequential transformations, drawing on experiences that brought us together. Starting with our undergraduate years, the account culminates with the formation of the International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS). We identify six themes shaping the emergence of the learning sciences and our own trajectories: (a) broadening the community and incorporating new disciplinary perspectives; (b) appropriating and developing new methods; (c) reconceptualizing challenges; (d) creating artifacts; (e) developing abstractions; and (f) developing people. We intend this personal account to stimulate new initiatives and deepening insights as the journey of the learning sciences continues.},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS, PLANS, POWER, STRIDES},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_guiding_2019,

title = {Guiding collaborative revision of science explanations},

author = {Libby Gerard and Ady Kidron and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-019-09298-y},

doi = {10.1007/s11412-019-09298-y},

issn = {1556-1615},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-05-01},

urldate = {2019-12-06},

journal = {International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning},

abstract = {This paper illustrates how the combination of teacher and computer guidance can strengthen collaborative revision and identifies opportunities for teacher guidance in a computer-supported collaborative learning environment. We took advantage of natural language processing tools embedded in an online, collaborative environment to automatically score student responses using human-designed knowledge integration rubrics. We used the automated explanation scores to assign adaptive guidance to the students and to provide real-time information to the teacher on students’ learning. We study how one teacher customizes the automated guidance tools and incorporates it with her in-class monitoring system to guide 98 student pairs in meaningful revision of two science explanations embedded in an online plate tectonics unit. Our study draws on video and audio recordings of teacher-student interactions during instruction as well as on student responses to pretest, embedded and posttest assessments. The findings reveal five distinct strategies the teacher used to guide student pairs in collaborative revision. The teacher’s strategies draw on the automated guidance to personalize guidance of student ideas. The teacher’s guidance system supported all pairs to engage in two rounds of revision for the two explanations in the unit. Students made more substantial revisions on posttest than on pretest yet the percentage of students who engaged in revision overall remained small. Results can inform the design of teacher professional development for guiding student pairs in collaborative revision in a computer-supported environment.},

keywords = {PLANS, STRIDES},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vitale_coordinating_2019,

title = {Coordinating between Graphs and Science Concepts: Density and Buoyancy},

author = {Jonathan M. Vitale and Lauren Applebaum and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/07370008.2018.1539736},

doi = {10.1080/07370008.2018.1539736},

issn = {0737-0008},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

urldate = {2019-05-10},

journal = {Cognition and Instruction},

volume = {37},

number = {1},

pages = {38--72},

abstract = {Graphs illustrating complex scientific relationships require students to integrate multiple concepts and visual features into a coherent understanding. We investigate ways to support students in integrating their understanding of density concepts through a graph that is linked to a simulation depicting the relationship between mass, volume, and density. We randomly assigned 325 8th-grade students to 1 of 2 graphing activities. In the analyze condition, students plotted a set of data points selected to help clarify the relationship between mass, volume, and buoyancy, and then interacted with a guided simulation to improve their plotting accuracy. In the generate condition, students chose their own data points, and then interacted with a guided simulation to test and revise their choices. We found that, although analyze participants were more likely to construct accurate graphs, generate participants were more likely to develop a coherent understanding of density and buoyancy. Analyses of process data and interviews suggest that generate participants grappled with the mass-volume ratio by deliberately testing points and identifying patterns as they updated their understanding of science concepts. In contrast, analyze participants displayed less deliberate exploration of the graph space. We discuss how activities that integrate graph interpretation and concept refinement can deepen science learning.},

keywords = {GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_qualitative_2019,

title = {Qualitative graphing in an authentic inquiry context: How construction and critique help middle school students to reason about cancer},

author = {Camillia Matuk and Jiayuan Zhang and Irina Uk and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/tea.21533},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21533},

issn = {1098-2736},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

urldate = {2019-09-23},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {56},

number = {7},

pages = {905--936},

abstract = {Inquiry instruction often neglects graphing. It gives students few opportunities to develop the knowledge and skills necessary to take advantage of graphs, and which are called for by current science education standards. Yet, it is not well known how to support graphing skills, particularly within middle school science inquiry contexts. Using qualitative graphs is a promising, but underexplored approach. In contrast to quantitative graphs, which can lead students to focus too narrowly on the mechanics of plotting points, qualitative graphs can encourage students to relate graphical representations to their conceptual meaning. Guided by the Knowledge Integration framework, which recognizes and guides students in integrating their diverse ideas about science, we incorporated qualitative graphing activities into a seventh grade web-based inquiry unit about cell division and cancer treatment. In Study 1, we characterized the kinds of graphs students generated in terms of their integration of graphical and scientific knowledge. We also found that students (n = 30) using the unit made significant learning gains based on their pretest to post-test scores. In Study 2, we compared students' performance in two versions of the same unit: One that had students construct, and second that had them critique qualitative graphs. Results showed that both activities had distinct benefits, and improved students' (n = 117) integrated understanding of graphs and science. Specifically, critiquing graphs helped students improve their scientific explanations within the unit, while constructing graphs led students to link key science ideas within both their in-unit and post-unit explanations. We discuss the relative affordances and constraints of critique and construction activities, and observe students' common misunderstandings of graphs. In all, this study offers a critical exploration of how to design instruction that simultaneously supports students' science and graph understanding within complex inquiry contexts.},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{teasley_mid-career_2019,

title = {Mid-career workshop: 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning - A Wide Lens: Combining Embodied, Enactive, Extended, and Embedded Learning in Collaborative Settings, CSCL 2019},

author = {Stephanie D. Teasley and Carol Chan and Susan R. Goldman and Kimberley Gomez and Janet L. Kolodner and Marcia C. Linn and Nichole Pinkard and Nikol Rummel},

editor = {Kristine Lund and Gerald P. Niccolai and Elise Lavoue and Cindy Hmelo-Silver and Gahgene Gweon and Michael Baker},

url = {http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85073340516\&partnerID=8YFLogxK},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

urldate = {2021-12-08},

journal = {A Wide Lens},

series = {Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, CSCL},

note = {Publisher: International Society of the Learning Sciences (ISLS)},

keywords = {},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{harrison_revision_2019,

title = {Revision Analysis of Students’ Position-Time Graphs},

author = {E. Harrison},

url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10181648-revision-analysis-students-position-time-graphs},

year  = {2019},

date = {2019-01-01},

urldate = {2021-05-24},

journal = {Computersupported collaborative learning},

volume = {2},

pages = {927--928},

abstract = {We investigated a constructive and an example-based scaffold when learning from dynamic visualizations about climate change. Learners collaboratively or individually generated a diagram that represented energy flow (constructive scaffold) or observed a peer learner generating the diagram (example-based scaffold). We hypothesized that collaborative learners would benefit more from the constructive than the example-based scaffold, but that the opposite would be the case for individual learners. Seventy-one university students were randomly allocated to conditions in the 2X2 between-subjects design. Climate change understanding was measured at pre- and posttest. Preliminary results supported our hypothesis. We conclude that the constructive scaffold elicited questions that led to deep engagement in the collaborative condition, resulting in better understanding. Individual learners possibly failed to recognize crucial concepts in the constructive condition because they had questions but nobody to discuss with. They profited more from the example-based scaffold which emphasized central concepts of climate change.},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_why_2018,

title = {Why and how do middle school students exchange ideas during science inquiry?},

author = {Camillia Matuk and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9282-1},

doi = {10.1007/s11412-018-9282-1},

issn = {1556-1615},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-09-01},

urldate = {2019-05-10},

journal = {International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning},

volume = {13},

number = {3},

pages = {263--299},

abstract = {Science is increasingly characterized by participation in knowledge communities. To meaningfully engage in science inquiry, students must be able to evaluate diverse sources of information, articulate informed ideas, and share ideas with peers. This study explores how technology can support idea exchanges in ways that value individuals’ prior ideas, and allow students to use these ideas to benefit their own and their peers’ learning. We used the Idea Manager, a curriculum-integrated tool that enables students to collect and exchange ideas during science inquiry projects. We investigated how students exchanged ideas, how these exchanges impacted the explanations they ultimately produced, and how the tool impacted teachers’ instruction. We implemented the tool with 297 grade 7 students, who were studying a web-based unit on cancer and cell division. Among other results, we found a relationship between the diversity of students’ ideas, and the sources of those ideas (i.e., whether they came from the students themselves or from their peers), and the quality of students’ scientific explanations. Specifically, students who collected more unique ideas (i.e., ideas not already represented in their private idea collections) as opposed to redundant ideas (i.e., ideas that reiterated ideas already present in their private idea collections) tended to write poorer explanations; and students who generated their own redundant ideas, as opposed to choosing peers’ ideas that were redundant, tended to write better explanations. We discuss implications for formative assessment, and for the role of technology in supporting students to engage more meaningfully with peers’ ideas.},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_why_2018-1,

title = {Why and how do middle school students exchange ideas during science inquiry?},

author = {Camillia Matuk and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-018-9282-1},

doi = {10.1007/s11412-018-9282-1},

issn = {1556-1615},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-09-01},

urldate = {2019-05-10},

journal = {International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning},

volume = {13},

number = {3},

pages = {263--299},

abstract = {Science is increasingly characterized by participation in knowledge communities. To meaningfully engage in science inquiry, students must be able to evaluate diverse sources of information, articulate informed ideas, and share ideas with peers. This study explores how technology can support idea exchanges in ways that value individuals’ prior ideas, and allow students to use these ideas to benefit their own and their peers’ learning. We used the Idea Manager, a curriculum-integrated tool that enables students to collect and exchange ideas during science inquiry projects. We investigated how students exchanged ideas, how these exchanges impacted the explanations they ultimately produced, and how the tool impacted teachers’ instruction. We implemented the tool with 297 grade 7 students, who were studying a web-based unit on cancer and cell division. Among other results, we found a relationship between the diversity of students’ ideas, and the sources of those ideas (i.e., whether they came from the students themselves or from their peers), and the quality of students’ scientific explanations. Specifically, students who collected more unique ideas (i.e., ideas not already represented in their private idea collections) as opposed to redundant ideas (i.e., ideas that reiterated ideas already present in their private idea collections) tended to write poorer explanations; and students who generated their own redundant ideas, as opposed to choosing peers’ ideas that were redundant, tended to write better explanations. We discuss implications for formative assessment, and for the role of technology in supporting students to engage more meaningfully with peers’ ideas.},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{svihla_distributed_2018,

title = {Distributed practice in classroom inquiry science learning},

author = {Vanessa Svihla and Michael J. Wester and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/23735082.2017.1371321},

doi = {10.1080/23735082.2017.1371321},

issn = {2373-5082},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-07-01},

urldate = {2019-05-09},

journal = {Learning: Research and Practice},

volume = {4},

number = {2},

pages = {180--202},

abstract = {This study is inspired by laboratory studies demonstrating that distributing study sessions over time better supports learning and retention than clustering sessions. We compare two implementations of a multi-day inquiry science unit: in the clustered instruction condition, students completed an inquiry unit in five consecutive class periods. In the distributed instruction condition, students completed one activity per week for five weeks. Both conditions resulted in significant and similar gains in understanding and retention overall. Students’ self-directed revisits to previously studied materials differed by condition, with students in the clustered condition tending to visit materials studied on previous days. These distal revisits explained variance in delayed post-test scores as an interaction effect with condition. Students in the clustered condition who revisited distal materials tended to score higher on the delayed post-test, whereas those in the distributed condition who did so tended to score lower. Our findings illustrate the complexity of realising laboratory findings in classrooms under real-world conditions.},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{mcbride_learning_2018,

title = {Learning Design Through Science vs. Science Through Design},

author = {Elizabeth McBride and Jonathan Vitale and Marcia Linn},

url = {https://repository.isls.org//handle/1/474},

year  = {2018},

date = {2018-07-01},

urldate = {2019-05-10},

keywords = {GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{tansomboon_designing_2017,

title = {Designing Automated Guidance to Promote Productive Revision of Science Explanations},

author = {Charissa Tansomboon and Libby F. Gerard and Jonathan M. Vitale and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40593-017-0145-0},

doi = {10.1007/s40593-017-0145-0},

issn = {1560-4292, 1560-4306},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education},

volume = {27},

number = {4},

pages = {729--757},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{tansomboon_designing_2017-1,

title = {Designing Automated Guidance to Promote Productive Revision of Science Explanations},

author = {Charissa Tansomboon and Libby F. Gerard and Jonathan M. Vitale and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0145-0},

doi = {10.1007/s40593-017-0145-0},

issn = {1560-4306},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-12-01},

urldate = {2019-05-10},

journal = {International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education},

volume = {27},

number = {4},

pages = {729--757},

abstract = {Supporting students to revise their written explanations in science can help students to integrate disparate ideas and develop a coherent, generative account of complex scientific topics. Using natural language processing to analyze student written work, we compare forms of automated guidance designed to motivate productive revision and help students integrate their understanding of science. Research shows the benefit of providing timely, transparent guidance to students and identifies some challenges. Specifically, (a) students often believe online guidance is generic rather than adapted to their response; and (b) students do not always engage effortfully with online guidance to improve their written responses. We conducted two studies to address these challenges. In Study 1, we created transparent guidance that clarified how the computer personalizes guidance based on the student response. We hypothesized that transparent guidance would be especially valuable for low prior knowledge students who might expect the computer guidance to be too difficult. We found that transparent guidance had a greater impact than typical guidance on low prior knowledge student revisions, suggesting that student beliefs about how guidance is designed influence their performance. In Study 2, implemented in six schools, we compared two specific guidance strategies: revisiting evidence and planning writing changes. We found that both revisiting and planning guidance resulted in significant improvement in student knowledge integration, although neither guidance strategy showed a significant advantage over the other. In addition, we found that the form of guidance interacted with school, suggesting that teacher practices could reinforce a specific guidance strategy. These results illustrate ways to design guidance to strengthen student understanding of science. They raise important questions about when to encourage revisiting, how to design instruction focused on planning, and how to instill a lifelong practice of engaging in iterative refinement of scientific explanations.},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{tansomboon_designing_2017-2,

title = {Designing Automated Guidance to Promote Productive Revision of Science Explanations},

author = {Charissa Tansomboon and Libby F. Gerard and Jonathan M. Vitale and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0145-0},

doi = {10.1007/s40593-017-0145-0},

issn = {1560-4306},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-12-01},

urldate = {2019-05-09},

journal = {International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education},

volume = {27},

number = {4},

pages = {729--757},

abstract = {Supporting students to revise their written explanations in science can help students to integrate disparate ideas and develop a coherent, generative account of complex scientific topics. Using natural language processing to analyze student written work, we compare forms of automated guidance designed to motivate productive revision and help students integrate their understanding of science. Research shows the benefit of providing timely, transparent guidance to students and identifies some challenges. Specifically, (a) students often believe online guidance is generic rather than adapted to their response; and (b) students do not always engage effortfully with online guidance to improve their written responses. We conducted two studies to address these challenges. In Study 1, we created transparent guidance that clarified how the computer personalizes guidance based on the student response. We hypothesized that transparent guidance would be especially valuable for low prior knowledge students who might expect the computer guidance to be too difficult. We found that transparent guidance had a greater impact than typical guidance on low prior knowledge student revisions, suggesting that student beliefs about how guidance is designed influence their performance. In Study 2, implemented in six schools, we compared two specific guidance strategies: revisiting evidence and planning writing changes. We found that both revisiting and planning guidance resulted in significant improvement in student knowledge integration, although neither guidance strategy showed a significant advantage over the other. In addition, we found that the form of guidance interacted with school, suggesting that teacher practices could reinforce a specific guidance strategy. These results illustrate ways to design guidance to strengthen student understanding of science. They raise important questions about when to encourage revisiting, how to design instruction focused on planning, and how to instill a lifelong practice of engaging in iterative refinement of scientific explanations.},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{zertuche_how_2017,

title = {How do openers contribute to student learning?},

author = {Amber Zertuche and Libby Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://www.iejee.com/index.php/IEJEE/article/view/11},

issn = {1307-9298},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-07-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education},

volume = {5},

number = {1},

pages = {79--92},

abstract = {Openers, or brief activities that initiate a class, routinely take up classroom time each day yet little isknown about how to design these activities so they contribute to student learning. This study usestechnology-enhanced learning environments to explore new opportunities to transform Openersfrom potentially busy work to knowledge generating activities. This study compares the impact ofteacher-designed Openers, Opener designs based on recent research emphasizing knowledgeintegration, and no Opener for an 8th grade technology-enhanced inquiry science investigation.Results suggest that students who participate in a researcher-designed Opener are more likely torevisit and refine their work, and to make significant learning gains, than students who do notparticipate in an Opener. Students make the greatest gains when they revisit key evidence in thetechnology-enhanced curriculum unit prior to revision. Engaging students in processes that promoteknowledge integration during the Opener motivate students to revise their ideas. The results suggestdesign principles for Openers in technology-enhanced instruction.},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{applebaum_comparing_2017-1,

title = {Comparing Design Constraints to Support Learning in Technology-guided Inquiry Projects},

author = {L. R. Applebaum and J. M. Vitale and Libby F. Gerard and M. C. Linn},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

journal = {Educational Technology \& Society},

volume = {20},

number = {4},

pages = {179--190},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{applebaum_comparing_2017,

title = {Comparing Design Constraints to Support Learning in Technology-guided Inquiry Projects},

author = {Lauren R. Applebaum and Jonathan M. Vitale and Elizabeth Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://www.jstor.org/stable/26229216},

issn = {1176-3647},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

urldate = {2019-05-10},

journal = {Journal of Educational Technology \& Society},

volume = {20},

number = {4},

pages = {179--190},

abstract = {Physical design projects are a way to motivate and engage students in authentic science and engineering practices. Web-based tools can support design projects to ensure that students address and reflect upon critical science concepts during the course of the project. In addition, by specifying challenging design goals that require students to consider potential trade-offs between features, web-based tools may promote more deliberative scientific inquiry than open-ended or feature maximization goals. To study the role of web-supported projects, we developed an online curriculum that guides students through the planning, building, and analysis of self-propelled vehicles. To address content related to energy transformation we incorporated virtual models that display dynamic graphs of energy levels as a virtual scooter travels along a path. We compared two design goals for the project with different constraints. In the target version students are prompted to build virtual and physical scooters to reach a specific position. In the distance version students are prompted to maximize the distance the scooter travels. Our results indicate that students learned energy concepts from both versions; however, students with the target version did refer to the virtual model in their posttest responses to a greater degree than those with the distance version.},

keywords = {GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{chiu_supporting_2017,

title = {Supporting informed engineering design across formal and informal contexts with WIS engineering},

author = {J Chiu and Amanda Gonczi and X Fu and M. D. Burghardt},

year  = {2017},

date = {2017-01-01},

volume = {33},

pages = {371--381},

abstract = {This paper describes the design of WISEngineering, a computer-based engineering design environment focused on helping learners in formal and informal settings engage in informed engineering design activities. This paper compares and contrasts results of implementing WISEngineering projects in both formal and informal learning settings. In particular, this paper reports on insights gleaned from implementing WISEngineering middle school science and math classrooms as well as in after-school settings with Boys and Girls Clubs. We discuss design principles guiding the development of WISEngineering for school settings and how these principles were adapted and refined for youth and facilitators in informal learning contexts. We provide implications for the design of technology-enhanced engineering learning environments across school and out-of-school time settings.},

keywords = {GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{donnelly_enhancing_2016,

title = {Enhancing student explanations of evolution: Comparing elaborating and competing theory prompts: ENHANCING EXPLANATIONS OF EVOLUTION},

author = {Dermot F. Donnelly and Bahadir Namdar and Jonathan M. Vitale and Kevin Lai and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21331},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21331},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-11-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {9},

pages = {1341--1363},

keywords = {GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ryoo_designing_2016,

title = {Designing automated guidance for concept diagrams in inquiry instruction: Designing Automated Guidance For Inquiry Learning},

author = {Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21321},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21321},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-09-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {7},

pages = {1003--1035},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ryoo_designing_2016-1,

title = {Designing automated guidance for concept diagrams in inquiry instruction: Designing Automated Guidance For Inquiry Learning},

author = {Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21321},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21321},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-09-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {7},

pages = {1003--1035},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ryoo_designing_2016-2,

title = {Designing automated guidance for concept diagrams in inquiry instruction: Designing Automated Guidance For Inquiry Learning},

author = {Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21321},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21321},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-09-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {7},

pages = {1003--1035},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{petra_supporting_2016,

title = {Supporting students to become autonomous learners: the role of web-based learning},

author = {Siti Fatimah Petra and Jainatul Halida Jaidin and JSH Quintus Perera and Marcia Linn},

url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/IJILT-05-2016-0017},

doi = {10.1108/IJILT-05-2016-0017},

issn = {2056-4880},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-08-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {International Journal of Information and Learning Technology},

volume = {33},

number = {4},

pages = {263--275},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{lai_measuring_2016,

title = {Measuring Graph Comprehension, Critique, and Construction in Science},

author = {Kevin Lai and Julio Cabrera and Jonathan M. Vitale and Jacquie Madhok and Robert Tinker and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-016-9621-9},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-016-9621-9},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-08-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {25},

number = {4},

pages = {665--681},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{petra_supporting_2016-1,

title = {Supporting students to become autonomous learners: the role of web-based learning},

author = {Siti Fatimah Petra and Jainatul Halida Jaidin and JSH Quintus Perera and Marcia Linn},

url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/IJILT-05-2016-0017},

doi = {10.1108/IJILT-05-2016-0017},

issn = {2056-4880},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-08-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {International Journal of Information and Learning Technology},

volume = {33},

number = {4},

pages = {263--275},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{lai_measuring_2016-1,

title = {Measuring Graph Comprehension, Critique, and Construction in Science},

author = {Kevin Lai and Julio Cabrera and Jonathan M. Vitale and Jacquie Madhok and Robert Tinker and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-016-9621-9},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-016-9621-9},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-08-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {25},

number = {4},

pages = {665--681},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{lai_measuring_2016-2,

title = {Measuring Graph Comprehension, Critique, and Construction in Science},

author = {Kevin Lai and Julio Cabrera and Jonathan M. Vitale and Jacquie Madhok and Robert Tinker and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-016-9621-9},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-016-9621-9},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-08-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {25},

number = {4},

pages = {665--681},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{petra_supporting_2016-2,

title = {Supporting students to become autonomous learners: the role of web-based learning},

author = {Siti Fatimah Petra and Jainatul Halida Jaidin and JSH Quintus Perera and Marcia Linn},

url = {http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/10.1108/IJILT-05-2016-0017},

doi = {10.1108/IJILT-05-2016-0017},

issn = {2056-4880},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-08-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {International Journal of Information and Learning Technology},

volume = {33},

number = {4},

pages = {263--275},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_iteratively_2016,

title = {Iteratively Refining a Science Explanation Tool Through Classroom Implementation and Stakeholder Partnerships},

author = {Camillia Matuk and Kevin W. McElhaney and Jennifer King Chen and Jonathan Lim-Breitbart and Douglas Kirkpatrick and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/ijdl/article/view/20203},

doi = {10.14434/ijdl.v7i2.20203},

issn = {2159-449X},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-06-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {International Journal of Designs for Learning},

volume = {7},

number = {2},

abstract = {Science inquiry challenges students to synthesize various ideas about complex phenomena into coherent explanations. It also challenges teachers, who must guide their diverse students’ developing understanding during student-paced investigations. We describe the Idea Manager, a suite of web-based, curriculum-integrated tools that (a) guides students’ knowledge integration as they generate, distinguish, and reconcile their ideas; and (b) provides means for teachers to monitor learning over the course of technology-enhanced science inquiry units. With the Idea Manager tool, students document short, text-based ideas, tag and sort them along various attributes, and exchange them with classmates. At culminating points of their investigations, students graphically organize their ideas to prepare written scientific explanations. Meanwhile, logs of idea entries, revisions, and meta-data inform teachers’ and researchers’ decisions about instruction and design.This paper offers an account of the design moves made in refining the Idea Manager, and highlights the importance of teacher-researcher partnerships and classroom implementations. Through designers’ artifacts, classroom research findings, and teachers’ and researchers’ reflections, we illustrate the tool’s origins; our strategies for testing new features and eliciting stakeholders’ feedback, and how middle and high school classroom implementations inform the tool’s continued iterations. Based on learning theory and on our own 40+ collective years of classroom teaching experience, we explain our design decisions and describe how new features and patterns for the tool’s use emerged from a community of researchers. Finally, we reflect on the process of iteration that advances both theory and design, and on the value of pedagogically-driven technology design.},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vitale_distinguishing_2016,

title = {Distinguishing complex ideas about climate change: knowledge integration vs. specific guidance},

author = {Jonathan M. Vitale and Elizabeth McBride and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09500693.2016.1198969},

doi = {10.1080/09500693.2016.1198969},

issn = {0950-0693, 1464-5289},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-06-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {International Journal of Science Education},

volume = {38},

number = {9},

pages = {1548--1569},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{linn_science_2016,

title = {Science Education: From Separation to Integration},

author = {Marcia C. Linn and Libby Gerard and Camillia Matuk and Kevin W. McElhaney},

url = {http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0091732X16680788},

doi = {10.3102/0091732X16680788},

issn = {0091-732X},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-03-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Review of Research in Education},

volume = {40},

number = {1},

pages = {529--587},

abstract = {Advances in technology, science, and learning sciences research over the past 100 years have reshaped science education. This chapter focuses on how investigators from varied fields of inquiry who initially worked separately began to interact, eventually formed partnerships, and recently integrated their perspectives to strengthen science education. Advances depended on the broadening of the participants in science education research, starting with psychologists, science discipline experts, and science educators; adding science teachers, psychometricians, computer scientists, and sociologists; and eventually including leaders in cultural studies, linguistics, and neuroscience. This process depended on renegotiating power structures, deliberate funding decisions by the National Science Foundation and others, and sustained, creative teamwork. It reflects a growing commitment to ensure that all learners are respected and that all students learn to address the complex scientific dilemmas they face in their lives. This chapter traces the evolution of research on science education in the United States with a focus on 5- to 17-year-olds. It highlights trends in the view of the learner, the design of instruction, the role of professional development, and the impact of technology. The chapter closes with recommendations designed to realize the full potential of these advances.},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{liu_validation_2016-1,

title = {Validation of automated scoring of science assessments: AUTOMATED SCORING OF SCIENCE ASSESSMENT},

author = {Ou Lydia Liu and Joseph A. Rios and Michael Heilman and Libby Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21299},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21299},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {2},

pages = {215--233},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_using_2016,

title = {Using Automated Scores of Student Essays to Support Teacher Guidance in Classroom Inquiry},

author = {Libby F. Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10972-016-9455-6},

doi = {10.1007/s10972-016-9455-6},

issn = {1046-560X, 1573-1847},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Teacher Education},

volume = {27},

number = {1},

pages = {111--129},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_technology_2016,

title = {Technology as Inquiry Teaching Partner},

author = {Libby Gerard and Camillia Matuk and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10972-016-9457-4},

doi = {10.1007/s10972-016-9457-4},

issn = {1046-560X, 1573-1847},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Teacher Education},

volume = {27},

number = {1},

pages = {1--9},

abstract = {No Abstract available for this article.},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_using_2016-1,

title = {Using Automated Scores of Student Essays to Support Teacher Guidance in Classroom Inquiry},

author = {Libby F. Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10972-016-9455-6},

doi = {10.1007/s10972-016-9455-6},

issn = {1046-560X, 1573-1847},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Teacher Education},

volume = {27},

number = {1},

pages = {111--129},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_using_2016-2,

title = {Using Automated Scores of Student Essays to Support Teacher Guidance in Classroom Inquiry},

author = {Libby F. Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10972-016-9455-6},

doi = {10.1007/s10972-016-9455-6},

issn = {1046-560X, 1573-1847},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

urldate = {2017-11-17},

journal = {Journal of Science Teacher Education},

volume = {27},

number = {1},

pages = {111--129},

abstract = {Computer scoring of student written essays about an inquiry topic can be used to diagnose student progress both to alert teachers to struggling students and to generate automated guidance. We identify promising ways for teachers to add value to automated guidance to improve student learning. Three teachers from two schools and their 386 students participated. We draw on evidence from student progress, observations of how teachers interact with students, and reactions of teachers. The findings suggest that alerts for teachers prompted rich teacher\textendashstudent conversations about energy in photosynthesis. In one school, the combination of the automated guidance plus teacher guidance was more effective for student science learning than two rounds of personalized, automated guidance. In the other school, both approaches resulted in equal learning gains. These findings suggest optimal combinations of automated guidance and teacher guidance to support students to revise explanations during inquiry and build integrated understanding of science.},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{liu_validation_2016-2,

title = {Validation of automated scoring of science assessments},

author = {Ou Lydia Liu and Joseph A. Rios and Michael Heilman and Libby Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tea.21299/abstract},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21299},

issn = {1098-2736},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

urldate = {2017-11-17},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {2},

pages = {215--233},

abstract = {Constructed response items can both measure the coherence of student ideas and serve as reflective experiences to strengthen instruction. We report on new automated scoring technologies that can reduce the cost and complexity of scoring constructed-response items. This study explored the accuracy of c-rater-ML, an automated scoring engine developed by Educational Testing Service, for scoring eight science inquiry items that require students to use evidence to explain complex phenomena. Automated scoring showed satisfactory agreement with human scoring for all test takers as well as specific subgroups. These findings suggest that c-rater-ML offers a promising solution to scoring constructed-response science items and has the potential to increase the use of these items in both instruction and assessment. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 53: 215\textendash233, 2016.},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_gathering_2016,

title = {Gathering Requirements for Teacher Tools: Strategies for Empowering Teachers Through Co-Design},

author = {Camillia Matuk and Libby Gerard and Jonathan Lim-Breitbart and Marcia Linn},

url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-016-9459-2},

doi = {10.1007/s10972-016-9459-2},

issn = {1573-1847},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

urldate = {2019-09-23},

journal = {Journal of Science Teacher Education},

volume = {27},

number = {1},

pages = {79--110},

abstract = {Technology can enhance teachers’ practice in multiple ways. It can help them better understand patterns in their students’ thinking, manage class progress at individual and group levels, and obtain evidence to inform modifications to curriculum and instruction. Such technology is most effective when it is aligned with teachers’ goals and expectations. Participatory methods, which involve teachers closely in the design process, are widely recommended for establishing accurate design requirements that address users’ needs. By collaborating with researchers, teachers can contribute their professional expertise to shape the tools of their practice, and ultimately ensure their sustained use. However, there is little guidance available for maintaining effective teacher\textendashresearcher design partnerships. We describe four strategies for engaging teachers in designing tools intended to support and enhance their practice within a web-based science learning environment: discussing physical artifacts, reacting to scenarios, customizing prototypes, and writing user stories. Using design artifacts and documents of teachers’ reflections, we illustrate how we applied these techniques over 5 years of annual professional development workshops, and examine their affordances for eliciting teachers’ ideas. We reflect on how these approaches have helped inform technology refinements and innovations. We moreover discuss the further benefits these strategies have had in encouraging teachers to reflect on their own practice and on the roles of technology in supporting it; and in allowing researchers to gain a deeper understanding of the relationship between technology, teaching, and design.},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{liu_validation_2016,

title = {Validation of automated scoring of science assessments},

author = {Ou Lydia Liu and Joseph A. Rios and Michael Heilman and Libby Gerard and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21299},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21299},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-02-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {2},

pages = {215--233},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_automated_2016,

title = {Automated guidance for student inquiry.},

author = {Libby F. Gerard and Kihyun Ryoo and Kevin W. McElhaney and Ou Lydia Liu and Anna N. Rafferty and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/edu0000052},

doi = {10.1037/edu0000052},

issn = {1939-2176, 0022-0663},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Educational Psychology},

volume = {108},

number = {1},

pages = {60--81},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_automated_2016-1,

title = {Automated guidance for student inquiry.},

author = {Libby F. Gerard and Kihyun Ryoo and Kevin W. McElhaney and Ou Lydia Liu and Anna N. Rafferty and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/edu0000052},

doi = {10.1037/edu0000052},

issn = {1939-2176, 0022-0663},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Educational Psychology},

volume = {108},

number = {1},

pages = {60--81},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gonczi_wisengineering_2016,

title = {WISEngineering Hydroponics: A Technology-Enhanced, Life Science Engineering Design Unit},

author = {Amanda Gonczi and Jennifer Chiu},

doi = {10.2505/4/ss16_039_09_19},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

journal = {Science Scope},

volume = {39},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_automated_2016-2,

title = {Automated guidance for student inquiry.},

author = {Libby F. Gerard and Kihyun Ryoo and Kevin W. McElhaney and Ou Lydia Liu and Anna N. Rafferty and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.apa.org/getdoi.cfm?doi=10.1037/edu0000052},

doi = {10.1037/edu0000052},

issn = {1939-2176, 0022-0663},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Educational Psychology},

volume = {108},

number = {1},

pages = {60--81},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{schwendimann_comparing_2016-2,

title = {Comparing two forms of concept map critique activities to facilitate knowledge integration processes in evolution education: COMPARING TWO FORMS OF CONCEPT MAP CRITIQUE ACTIVITIES},

author = {Beat A. Schwendimann and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21244},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21244},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {1},

pages = {70--94},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{schwendimann_comparing_2016,

title = {Comparing two forms of concept map critique activities to facilitate knowledge integration processes in evolution education},

author = {Beat A. Schwendimann and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/tea.21244},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21244},

issn = {1098-2736},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

urldate = {2019-05-10},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {1},

pages = {70--94},

abstract = {Concept map activities often lack a subsequent revision step that facilitates knowledge integration. This study compares two collaborative critique activities using a Knowledge Integration Map (KIM), a form of concept map. Four classes of high school biology students (n = 81) using an online inquiry-based learning unit on evolution were assigned to one of two conditions. Student dyads in one condition compared their concept maps against an expert map while dyads in the other condition conducted a peer-review. Analysis of the concept maps suggests that students in both conditions improved their understanding of evolution from pretest to posttest. However, the two conditions lead to different criteria: Students in the expert-map condition focused mostly on concept-focused criteria like concept classification while students in the peer-review condition used more link-focused criteria like link labels and missing connections. This paper suggests that both forms of KIM critique activities can be beneficial for constructing more coherent connections across different topics in evolution education. These results support the value of collaborative KIM critique activities and help clarify the forms of collaborative activities that are most likely to be effective to facilitate knowledge integration processes. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach 53: 70\textendash94, 2016.},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{schwendimann_comparing_2016-1,

title = {Comparing two forms of concept map critique activities to facilitate knowledge integration processes in evolution education: COMPARING TWO FORMS OF CONCEPT MAP CRITIQUE ACTIVITIES},

author = {Beat A. Schwendimann and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21244},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21244},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2016},

date = {2016-01-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {53},

number = {1},

pages = {70--94},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{svihla_revisiting_2015,

title = {Revisiting for retention: An analytic for inquiry science learning.},

author = {Vanessa Svihla and Michael J. Wester and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/JLA/article/view/4267},

doi = {10.18608/jla.2015.22.7},

issn = {19297750},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Learning Analytics},

volume = {2},

number = {2},

pages = {75--101},

keywords = {PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vitale_taking_2015-2,

title = {Taking advantage of automated assessment of student-constructed graphs in science: AUTO ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT GRAPHS},

author = {Jonathan M. Vitale and Kevin Lai and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21241},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21241},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {52},

number = {10},

pages = {1426--1450},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{svihla_revisiting_2015-1,

title = {Revisiting for retention: An analytic for inquiry science learning.},

author = {Vanessa Svihla and Michael J. Wester and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/JLA/article/view/4267},

doi = {10.18608/jla.2015.22.7},

issn = {19297750},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Learning Analytics},

volume = {2},

number = {2},

pages = {75--101},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{donnelly_automated_2015-1,

title = {Automated Guidance for Thermodynamics Essays: Critiquing Versus Revisiting},

author = {Dermot F. Donnelly and Jonathan M. Vitale and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-015-9569-1},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-015-9569-1},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {24},

number = {6},

pages = {861--874},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vitale_taking_2015,

title = {Taking advantage of automated assessment of student-constructed graphs in science: AUTO ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT GRAPHS},

author = {Jonathan M. Vitale and Kevin Lai and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21241},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21241},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {52},

number = {10},

pages = {1426--1450},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{svihla_distributed_2015,

title = {Distributed Revisiting: an Analytic for Retention of Coherent Science Learning},

author = {Vanessa Svihla and Michael J. Wester and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/JLA/article/view/4267},

doi = {10.18608/jla.2015.22.7},

issn = {1929-7750},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2019-09-23},

journal = {Journal of Learning Analytics},

volume = {2},

number = {2},

pages = {75--101},

keywords = {CLASS, GRIDS, PLANS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{svihla_revisiting_2015-2,

title = {Revisiting for retention: An analytic for inquiry science learning.},

author = {Vanessa Svihla and Michael J. Wester and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/JLA/article/view/4267},

doi = {10.18608/jla.2015.22.7},

issn = {19297750},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Learning Analytics},

volume = {2},

number = {2},

pages = {75--101},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{donnelly_automated_2015-2,

title = {Automated Guidance for Thermodynamics Essays: Critiquing Versus Revisiting},

author = {Dermot F. Donnelly and Jonathan M. Vitale and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-015-9569-1},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-015-9569-1},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {24},

number = {6},

pages = {861--874},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{vitale_taking_2015-1,

title = {Taking advantage of automated assessment of student-constructed graphs in science: AUTO ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT GRAPHS},

author = {Jonathan M. Vitale and Kevin Lai and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tea.21241},

doi = {10.1002/tea.21241},

issn = {00224308},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {Journal of Research in Science Teaching},

volume = {52},

number = {10},

pages = {1426--1450},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{donnelly_automated_2015,

title = {Automated Guidance for Thermodynamics Essays: Critiquing Versus Revisiting},

author = {Dermot F. Donnelly and Jonathan M. Vitale and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-015-9569-1},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-015-9569-1},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-12-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {24},

number = {6},

pages = {861--874},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ryoo_designing_2015-1,

title = {Designing and Validating Assessments of Complex Thinking in Science},

author = {Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00405841.2015.1044374},

doi = {10.1080/00405841.2015.1044374},

issn = {0040-5841, 1543-0421},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-07-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Theory Into Practice},

volume = {54},

number = {3},

pages = {238--254},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ryoo_designing_2015-2,

title = {Designing and Validating Assessments of Complex Thinking in Science},

author = {Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00405841.2015.1044374},

doi = {10.1080/00405841.2015.1044374},

issn = {0040-5841, 1543-0421},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-07-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Theory Into Practice},

volume = {54},

number = {3},

pages = {238--254},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{ryoo_designing_2015,

title = {Designing and Validating Assessments of Complex Thinking in Science},

author = {Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00405841.2015.1044374},

doi = {10.1080/00405841.2015.1044374},

issn = {0040-5841, 1543-0421},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-07-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {Theory Into Practice},

volume = {54},

number = {3},

pages = {238--254},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_automated_2015-2,

title = {Automated, adaptive guidance for K-12 education},

author = {Libby Gerard and Camillia Matuk and Kevin McElhaney and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1747938X15000238},

doi = {10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.001},

issn = {1747938X},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-06-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Educational Research Review},

volume = {15},

pages = {41--58},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_automated_2015,

title = {Automated, adaptive guidance for K-12 education},

author = {Libby Gerard and Camillia Matuk and Kevin McElhaney and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1747938X15000238},

doi = {10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.001},

issn = {1747938X},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-06-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Educational Research Review},

volume = {15},

pages = {41--58},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{gerard_automated_2015-1,

title = {Automated, adaptive guidance for K-12 education},

author = {Libby Gerard and Camillia Matuk and Kevin McElhaney and Marcia C. Linn},

url = {http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1747938X15000238},

doi = {10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.001},

issn = {1747938X},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-06-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {Educational Research Review},

volume = {15},

pages = {41--58},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{liu_measuring_2015-2,

title = {Measuring Knowledge Integration Learning of Energy Topics: A two-year longitudinal study},

author = {Ou Lydia Liu and Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn and Elissa Sato and Vanessa Svihla},

url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09500693.2015.1016470},

doi = {10.1080/09500693.2015.1016470},

issn = {0950-0693, 1464-5289},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-05-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {International Journal of Science Education},

volume = {37},

number = {7},

pages = {1044--1066},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{liu_measuring_2015,

title = {Measuring Knowledge Integration Learning of Energy Topics: A two-year longitudinal study},

author = {Ou Lydia Liu and Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn and Elissa Sato and Vanessa Svihla},

url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09500693.2015.1016470},

doi = {10.1080/09500693.2015.1016470},

issn = {0950-0693, 1464-5289},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-05-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {International Journal of Science Education},

volume = {37},

number = {7},

pages = {1044--1066},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{liu_measuring_2015-1,

title = {Measuring Knowledge Integration Learning of Energy Topics: A two-year longitudinal study},

author = {Ou Lydia Liu and Kihyun Ryoo and Marcia C. Linn and Elissa Sato and Vanessa Svihla},

url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09500693.2015.1016470},

doi = {10.1080/09500693.2015.1016470},

issn = {0950-0693, 1464-5289},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-05-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {International Journal of Science Education},

volume = {37},

number = {7},

pages = {1044--1066},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{visintainer_sixth-grade_2015-2,

title = {Sixth-Grade Students’ Progress in Understanding the Mechanisms of Global Climate Change},

author = {Tammie Visintainer and Marcia Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-014-9538-0},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-014-9538-0},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-04-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {24},

number = {2-3},

pages = {287--310},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{visintainer_sixth-grade_2015,

title = {Sixth-Grade Students’ Progress in Understanding the Mechanisms of Global Climate Change},

author = {Tammie Visintainer and Marcia Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-014-9538-0},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-014-9538-0},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-04-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {24},

number = {2-3},

pages = {287--310},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{visintainer_sixth-grade_2015-1,

title = {Sixth-Grade Students’ Progress in Understanding the Mechanisms of Global Climate Change},

author = {Tammie Visintainer and Marcia Linn},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10956-014-9538-0},

doi = {10.1007/s10956-014-9538-0},

issn = {1059-0145, 1573-1839},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-04-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {Journal of Science Education and Technology},

volume = {24},

number = {2-3},

pages = {287--310},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_technology_2015-1,

title = {Technology to support teachers using evidence from student work to customize technology-enhanced inquiry units},

author = {Camillia F. Matuk and Marcia C. Linn and Bat-Sheva Eylon},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11251-014-9338-1},

doi = {10.1007/s11251-014-9338-1},

issn = {0020-4277, 1573-1952},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-03-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Instructional Science},

volume = {43},

number = {2},

pages = {229--257},

keywords = {GRIDS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_technology_2015-2,

title = {Technology to support teachers using evidence from student work to customize technology-enhanced inquiry units},

author = {Camillia F. Matuk and Marcia C. Linn and Bat-Sheva Eylon},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11251-014-9338-1},

doi = {10.1007/s11251-014-9338-1},

issn = {0020-4277, 1573-1952},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-03-01},

urldate = {2017-11-16},

journal = {Instructional Science},

volume = {43},

number = {2},

pages = {229--257},

keywords = {CLASS},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{matuk_technology_2015,

title = {Technology to support teachers using evidence from student work to customize technology-enhanced inquiry units},

author = {Camillia F. Matuk and Marcia C. Linn and Bat-Sheva Eylon},

url = {http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11251-014-9338-1},

doi = {10.1007/s11251-014-9338-1},

issn = {0020-4277, 1573-1952},

year  = {2015},

date = {2015-03-01},

urldate = {2017-11-18},

journal = {Instructional Science},

volume = {43},

number = {2},

pages = {229--257},

keywords = {VISUAL},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}