University of Twente Student Theses

Login

De vergelijking van twee soorten ondersteuning bij onderzoekend leren op een basisschool: het geven van domeininformatie vs. het geven van hypotheses.

Aitink, C.M.J. (2013) De vergelijking van twee soorten ondersteuning bij onderzoekend leren op een basisschool: het geven van domeininformatie vs. het geven van hypotheses.

[img]
Preview
PDF
248kB
Abstract:In this research, two kinds of scaffolding for inquiry learning are compared. This research is done on a elementary school. There are three skills needed to perform inquiry learning: hypotheses making, experimenting, and evaluation. The Scientific Discovery of Dual Search model is a model which describes these skills. Two spaces are defined: the hypothesis space and the experimental space. The hypothesis space includes knowledge of the domain. Hypotheses are generated from this knowledge. The experimental space includes all the possible experiments with the available materials. Scientific research exists of cycles of making hypotheses, exercising experiments, and evaluating. After the evaluation, the hypotheses can be changed and the cycle starts all over again. Two kinds of researchers are distinguished: theorists and experimenters. Theorists start with hypotheses and test these with experiments. Experimenters perform experiments to generate ideas. From different researches can be concluded that the approach of the theorists is the most effective. In this research, two kinds of scaffolding are compared: giving domain information (I), and giving hypotheses (H). There was also a control condition (C). The respondents were 58 children from class 6 and 7 of an elementary school. At first, they had to make a pretest. Then, they went to work with the computer. There they worked with a simulation of a seesaw, and had to perform 15 experiments. They had to write the experiments on a worksheet. On this worksheet they also had to answer a few questions. At the end they had to make a posttest. Expected was that the children of H will behave the most as theorists (hypothesis 1). Because of this, they should also show the best learning results (hypothesis 2). Besides that, expected is that the children of I perform better that the children of C (hypothesis 3). The learning results are measured by the pretest and the posttest. In general, the results are positive, but there were no differences between the conditions. Second, the amount of hypotheses tested was measured. But also here, there were no differences between the conditions. Finally, this researched looked if the children used the scaffold. There was looked at the kind of tests the children performed. There were no significant high points found. Therefore, the children did not use the scaffold. None of the hypothesis was confirmed. There were a few things in this research did not go well. In practice, 15 tests were a lot to come up with. Also, the scaffold was not used. Finally, the method of measuring the hypothesis were also effecting other things. The children all produced more hypothesis than expected. That could be a result of the questions they had to answer on the working sheet.
Item Type:Essay (Bachelor)
Faculty:BMS: Behavioural, Management and Social Sciences
Subject:77 psychology
Programme:Psychology BSc (56604)
Link to this item:http://purl.utwente.nl/essays/63178
Export this item as:BibTeX
EndNote
HTML Citation
Reference Manager

 

Repository Staff Only: item control page