Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

Instructional Scaffolding in STEM Education: Strategies and Efficacy Evidence 1st ed. 2017 [Kõva köide]

  • Formaat: Hardback, 144 pages, kõrgus x laius: 235x155 mm, kaal: 3613 g, 10 Illustrations, black and white; XI, 144 p. 10 illus., 1 Hardback
  • Ilmumisaeg: 11-Oct-2016
  • Kirjastus: Springer International Publishing AG
  • ISBN-10: 3319025643
  • ISBN-13: 9783319025643
Teised raamatud teemal:
  • Kõva köide
  • Hind: 48,70 €*
  • * hind on lõplik, st. muud allahindlused enam ei rakendu
  • Tavahind: 57,29 €
  • Säästad 15%
  • Raamatu kohalejõudmiseks kirjastusest kulub orienteeruvalt 2-4 nädalat
  • Kogus:
  • Lisa ostukorvi
  • Tasuta tarne
  • Tellimisaeg 2-4 nädalat
  • Lisa soovinimekirja
Instructional Scaffolding in STEM Education: Strategies and Efficacy Evidence 1st ed. 2017Suurem pilt
  • Formaat: Hardback, 144 pages, kõrgus x laius: 235x155 mm, kaal: 3613 g, 10 Illustrations, black and white; XI, 144 p. 10 illus., 1 Hardback
  • Ilmumisaeg: 11-Oct-2016
  • Kirjastus: Springer International Publishing AG
  • ISBN-10: 3319025643
  • ISBN-13: 9783319025643
Teised raamatud teemal:
Püsilink: https://www.kriso.ee/db/9783319025643.html
Märksõnad:
? This book uses meta-analysis to synthesize research on scaffolding and scaffolding-related interventions in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education. Specifically, the volume examines the extent to which study quality, assessment type, and scaffolding characteristics (strategy, intended outcome, fading schedule, scaffolding intervention, and paired intervention) influence cognitive student outcomes. It includes detailed descriptions of the theoretical foundations of scaffolding, scaffolding strategies that have been proposed to meet different intended learning outcomes in STEM, and associated efficacy information. Furthermore, the book describes assessment strategies and study designs which can be used to evaluate the influence of scaffolding, and suggests new fields in which scaffolding strategies that have proven efficacious may be used.

Synthesizing research on scaffolding and scaffolding-related interventions in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education, this book uses meta-analysis to assess their effect, and includes detailed descriptions of the background theory.

Muu info

This is an open access book, the electronic versions are freely accessible online.
1 Introduction
1(16)
1.1 Why Write a Book on Computer-Based Scaffolding in STEM Education?
1(2)
1.2 What This Book Covers
3(1)
1.3 Problem-Centered Instructional Approaches and STEM
4(1)
1.4 Role of Scaffolding
5(1)
1.5 Central Premises Behind This Book
6(2)
1.6 Structure of the Book
8(9)
References
10(7)
2 Instructional Scaffolding: Foundations and Evolving Definition
17(38)
2.1 Historical Definition
17(2)
2.2 Scaffolding Elements
19(5)
2.2.1 Dynamic Assessment
19(2)
2.2.2 Providing Just the Right Amount of Support
21(2)
2.2.3 Intersubjectivity
23(1)
2.3 Scaffolding Forms
24(3)
2.3.1 One-to-One Scaffolding
24(1)
2.3.2 Peer Scaffolding
25(1)
2.3.3 Computer-Based Scaffolding
26(1)
2.4 Considerations as the Instructional Scaffolding Metaphor was Applied to Computer Tools
27(28)
2.4.1 Theoretical Bases of Computer-Based Scaffolding
28(1)
2.4.1.1 Activity Theory
28(4)
2.4.1.2 ACT-R
32(4)
2.4.1.3 Knowledge Integration
36(3)
2.4.1.4 Comparison of Theoretical Foundations
39(3)
2.4.2 Design of Computer-Based Scaffolding
42(1)
2.4.3 Interplay Between Computer-Based and One-to-One Scaffolding
43(1)
References
44(11)
3 Context of Use of Computer-Based Scaffolding
55(24)
3.1 Rationale for this
Chapter
55(2)
3.2 Grade Level
57(2)
3.2.1 Results from the Meta-Analysis
58(1)
3.3 STEM Discipline
59(1)
3.3.1 Results from the Meta-Analysis
60(1)
3.4 Student Demographics
60(2)
3.4.1 Results from the Meta-Analysis
61(1)
3.5 Instructional Model with Which Scaffolding is Used
62(17)
3.5.1 Problem-Based Learning
63(1)
3.5.2 Case-Based Learning
64(1)
3.5.3 Design-Based Learning
65(1)
3.5.4 Inquiry-Based Learning
66(1)
3.5.5 Project-Based Learning
67(1)
3.5.6 Other Instructional Approaches
68(1)
3.5.7 Results from the Meta-Analysis
68(2)
References
70(9)
4 Intended Learning Outcomes and Assessment of Computer-Based Scaffolding
79(28)
4.1 Rationale for this
Chapter
79(1)
4.2 Targeted Learning Outcomes of Scaffolding
80(15)
4.2.1 Higher-Order Thinking Skills
81(1)
4.2.1.1 III-Structured Problem-Solving Ability
81(1)
4.2.1.2 Argumentation Ability
82(1)
4.2.1.3 Self-Directed Learning Ability
83(1)
4.2.1.4 Alignment with NGSS
84(8)
4.2.2 Learning Content Deeply
92(1)
4.2.2.1 Alignment with STEM Education Goals
93(1)
4.2.3 Results from Meta-Analysis
94(1)
4.3 Assessment
95(12)
4.3.1 Results from Meta-Analysis
96(2)
References
98(9)
5 Computer-Based Scaffolding Strategy
107(20)
5.1 Rationale for
Chapter
107(2)
5.2 Scaffolding Function
109(5)
5.2.1 Conceptual Scaffolding
109(1)
5.2.2 Strategic Scaffolding
110(1)
5.2.3 Metacognitive Scaffolding
111(1)
5.2.4 Motivation Scaffolding
112(1)
5.2.5 Results from the Meta-Analysis
113(1)
5.3 Context Specificity
114(2)
5.3.1 What It Is
114(1)
5.3.2 Results from Meta-Analysis
115(1)
5.4 Customization Presence or Absence
116(2)
5.4.1 Results from Meta-Analysis
117(1)
5.5 Customization Basis
118(9)
5.5.1 Results from Meta-Analysis
119(2)
References
121(6)
6 Conclusion
127(16)
6.1 Overall Implications
127(2)
6.2 How the Meta-Analysis Responds to Persistent Debates in the Scaffolding and Problem-Centered Instruction Literature
129(4)
6.2.1 Scaffold Customization
130(1)
6.2.2 Problem-Centered Instruction and Content Learning
131(1)
6.2.3 Context Specificity
132(1)
6.2.4 Higher-Order Thinking Skills Versus Content Knowledge
132(1)
6.2.5 Scaffolding Strategy
133(1)
6.2.6 Summary
133(1)
6.3 Other Interesting Findings
133(1)
6.3.1 Scaffolding's Effectiveness in Different STEM Disciplines
133(1)
6.3.2 Scaffolding's Effectiveness by Grade Level
134(1)
6.4 Directions for Future Research
134(2)
6.5 Conclusion
136(7)
References
137(6)
Index 143
Brian R. Belland (brian.belland@usu.edu) is an Associate Professor of Instructional Technology and Learning Sciences at Utah State University. His research focuses on the use of technology to scaffold the development of argumentation skills among middle and high school students and is supported by a National Science Foundation Early CAREER grant and a National Science Foundation REESE grant. Dr. Belland is recipient of several national research awards including the 2007 Educational Technology Research and Development Young Scholar Award, the 2009 American Educational Research Association Instructional Technology Special Interest Group Best Paper Award, and the 2007 American Educational Research Association Problem-based Learning Special Interest Group Best Student Paper Award. He received his PhD in Educational Technology from Purdue University and his MA in French from The Ohio State University.