Home

Ph.D. Projects

Andreas Rapp

[Person] [Project]

---

Andreas Rapp, Dr.

Short Vita

1968: Born in Esslingen (Germany).

1989-1993: Teacher-education at the Colleges PH Schwäbisch Gmünd und Ludwigsburg. Work as a teacher at an elementary school in Esslingen.

1993-2000: Study of Psychology at the University of Heidelberg and the Arizona State University.

2000: Graduation in Psychology at the University of Heidelberg (Germany).

Apr. - Dec. 2000: PhD-student of the VGK (with scholarship).

Contact

Phone: +49-711-6376-300
email: andreas.rapp@ssa-s.kv.bwl.de
WWW: homepage

 

Schulpsychologische Beratungsstelle
Staatliches Schulamt Stuttgart
Bebelstrasse 48

D-70193 Stuttgart

---

Ph.D. Project

Topic: The influence of protocol-methods on knowledge acquisition in computer-based learning

Supervisors: Prof. Dr. P. Reimann (Heidelberg); Prof. Dr. H. Spada (Freiburg)

Start/End of the Ph.D. project: April - December 2000

Summary

Student's discovery learning with computer simulations is promising as an important aspect of science education (e.g., Reiser et al., 2001; Sandoval et al., 2000). For the investigation of scientific problems, it is necessary that students master discovery skills like the experimental method. However, there is a considerable body of research documenting students' difficulties in effectively applying this method (De Jong & Van Joolingen, 1998). For example, younger students often show resistance to disconfirming evidence and are unsystematic in the way that they design experiments (e.g. Klahr & Simon, 2000).

Kuhn (1989) explains students' difficulties in correctly applying a scientific method with an insufficient coordination between hypothesis (theory) and evidence - a central feature of scientific reasoning. Requirements for this coordination are (a) the encoding and representation of evidence separately from a representation of the theory and (b) the representation of the theory itself as an object of cognition.
Both aspects should be supported by using the metastrategy of protocolling hypotheses, experimental designs and evidence during experimental investigation. Externally represented hypotheses and evidence do not have to be encoded. The external representation might help to relate hypotheses and evidence in a reflective way. Thus, using a protocol-method should support the monitoring and management of the experimental method.

As an advantage of computer-based scientific discovery learning, the application of a protocol-method can be supported in various ways. One example is the presentation of frames in which different aspects (hypothesis, evidence) are filled in by the computer or can be inserted by the students themselves. In several computer-based science learning environments (e.g. BGuiLE; Reiser et al., 2001) a kind of protocol-method is integrated. However, an isolated and systematic research on the influence of using a protocol-method on students' experimentation and knowledge acquisition was not conducted, so far.

In my own research, I want to focus on following general questions:
Has the application of a protocol-method versus no protocol-method an influence on the performance of conducting experiments and on knowledge acquisition?
Does active (student-centered) and passive (computer-based) protocolling make a difference in the performance of conducting experiments?
Do children of different age-groups profit differently - if at all - from the opportunity of using a protocol-method?

Besides further reading, next steps in my project are the specification of my research questions, choosing a content-domain for the simulation environment and planning and constructing a computer-based simulation-environment.

References:
De Jong, T., & van Joolingen, W. R. (1998). Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68(2), 179-201.
Klahr, D., & Simon, H. A. (2000). Exploring Science: The Cognition and Development of Discovery Processes. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Kuhn, D. (1989). Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psychological Review, 96(4), 674-689.
Reiser, B. J., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W. A., Smith, B., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, T. J. (2001, in press). BGuILE: Strategic and Conceptual Scaffolds for Scientific Inquiry in Biology Classrooms. In S. M. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and Instruction: Twenty five years of progress. . Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.
Sandoval, W. A., Bell, P., Coleman, E., Enyedy, N., & Suthers, D. (2000). Designing knowledge representations for learning epistemic practices of science. Position paper for an interactive symposium of the same name, presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, April 25, 2000.

Publications

Rapp, A.F. (1999). Wie "gut" erinnern Kinder im Vorschulalter Ereignisse in Abhängigkeit von unterschiedlichen Interviewtechniken? Monatsschrift für Kriminologie und Strafrechtsreform, 3, 160-177.

[Top of Page] [Person] [Project] Andreas Rapp

Last update: 26 May 2009, vgk-webmaster@vgk.de
URL: www.vgk.de/projects/rapp/index.html