Skip to main content
×
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 2
  • Cited by
    This (lowercase (translateProductType product.productType)) has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Ramey, Kay E. and Uttal, David H. 2017. Making Sense of Space: Distributed Spatial Sensemaking in a Middle School Summer Engineering Camp. Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. 26, Issue. 2, p. 277.


    Cooper, Melanie M. 2015. Why Ask Why?. Journal of Chemical Education, Vol. 92, Issue. 8, p. 1273.


    ×
  • Print publication year: 2005
  • Online publication date: June 2012

15 - The Knowledge Integration Perspective on Learning and Instruction

Summary

The knowledge integration perspective emerged from studies of the conceptions of scientific phenomena that students bring to science class, from design studies refining science instruction, and from longitudinal studies of students' learning over weeks, months, and years. These studies stress that learners grapple with multiple, conflicting, and often confusing, ideas about scientific phenomena. They characterize learners as developing a repertoire of ideas, adding new ideas from instruction, experience, or social interactions, sorting out these ideas in varied contexts, making connections among ideas at multiple levels of analysis, developing more and more nuanced criteria for evaluating ideas, and formulating an increasingly linked set of views about any phenomenon.

The knowledge integration perspective capitalizes on the varied ideas held by students both individually and collectively to stimulate science learning. The knowledge integration perspective synthesizes recent investigations of science learning and instruction, culminating in a set of design patterns that promote coherent and cohesive understanding, and design principles that guide customization of patterns. This chapter describes the process of knowledge integration and how knowledge integration resonates with current research programs. It offers guidance to researchers and curriculum designers wishing to promote lifelong science learning.

Learning and Knowledge Integration

My colleagues and I conducted over forty case studies of middle school students who were studying thermodynamics (Clark & Linn, 2003; Linn & Hsi, 2000). These studies illustrate the typical process of knowledge integration. We found that students generate a repertoire of ideas about each concept they are learning and about the links between concepts.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences
  • Online ISBN: 9780511816833
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816833
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×
References
AAUW. (2000). Tech-savvy: Educating girls in the new computer age. Washington, DC: AAUW.
Aleven, V. A., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective metacognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26, 147–179.
Bell, P., & Linn, M. C. (2002). Beliefs about science: How does science instruction contribute? In Hofer, B. K. & Pintrich, P. R. (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 321–346). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bjork, R. A. (1999). Assessing our own competence: Heuristics and illusions. In Gopher, D. & Koriat, A. (Eds.), Attention and performance XVII. Cognitive regulation of performance: Interaction of theory and application (pp. 435–459). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Research Council.
Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In McGilly, K. (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp. 229–270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
Carey, S. (1992). The origin and evolution of everyday concepts. In Giere, R. N. (Ed.), Cognitive models of science (Vol. XV, pp. 89–128). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Case, R. (1985). Intellectual development: Birth to adulthood. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Chi, M. T. H. (1996). Constructing self-explanations and scaffolded explanations in tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, S33–S49.
Clancy, M., Titterton, N., Ryan, C., Slotta, J., & Linn, M. C. (2003). New roles for students, instructors, and computers in a lab-based introductory programming course. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 35(1), 132–136.
Clark, D. B., & Linn, M. C. (2003). Scaffolding knowledge integration through curricular depth. Journal of Learning Sciences, 12(4), 451–494.
Clement, J. (1993). Using bridging analogies and anchoring intuitions to deal with students' preconceptions in physics. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(10), 1241–1257.
Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1988). The computer as a tool for learning through reflection. In Mandl, H. & Lesgold, A. M. (Eds.), Learning issues for intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 1–18). Chicago: Springer-Verlag.
Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69, 970–977.
Davis, E. (2003). Knowledge integration in science teaching: Analysing teachers' knowledge development. Research in Science Education, 34(1), 21–53.
Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students' knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 819–837.
Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8.
diSessa, A. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In Forman, G. & Pufall, P. (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age (pp. 49–70). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
diSessa, A. A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
diSessa, A., Elby, A., & Hammer, D. (2002). J's epistemological stance and strategies. In Sinatra, G. M. & Pintrich, P. R. (Eds.), Intentional Conceptual Change (pp. 237–290). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
diSessa, A. A., Gillespie, N. M., & Esterly, J. B. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28, 843–900.
diSessa, A. A., & Minstrell, J. (1998). Cultivating conceptual change with benchmark lessons. In Greeno, J. G. & Goldman, S. (Eds.), Thinking practices (pp. 155–187). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Eylon, B. S., & Linn, M. C. (1988). Learning and instruction: An examination of four research perspectives in science education. Review of Educational Research, 58(3), 251–301.
Gopnik, A., & Wellman, H. M. (1994). The theory theory. In Hirschfeld, L. A. & Gelman, S. A. (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 257–293). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Greeno, J., Collins, A, and Resnick, L. (1996). Cognition and learning. In Calfee, D. B. a. R. (Ed.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15–46). New York: Macmillan.
Howe, C., Tolmie, A., Duchak-Tanner, V., & Rattray, C. (2000). Hypothesis testing in science: Group consensus and the acquisition of conceptual and procedural knowledge. Learning and Instruction, 10, 361–391.
Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958/1972). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence; An essay on the construction of formal operational structures. New York: Basic Books.
Kali, Y., Bos, N., Linn, M. C., Underwood, J., & Hewitt, J. (2002). Design principles for educational software. In Stahl, G. (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community (Proceedings of CSCL 2002) (pp. 679–680). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kali, Y., Orion, N., & Eylon, B. (2003). The effect of knowledge integration activities on students' perception of the earth's crust as a cyclic system. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(6), 415–442.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: a paradigm for cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Krajcik, J. S., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., & Soloway, E. (1999). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In Minstrell, J. & Zee, E. V. (Eds.), Inquiry into inquiry: Science learning and teaching. (pp. 283–315). Washington, DC: AAAS Press.
Lagemann, E. C. (2000). An elusive science: The troubling history of education research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lewis, E. L., & Linn, M. C. (1994). Heat energy and temperature concepts of adolescents, adults, and experts: Implications for curricular improvements. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(6), 657–677.
Linn, M. C. (1970). Effects of a training procedure on matrix performance and on transfer tasks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Linn, M. C. (1995). Designing computer learning environments for engineering and computer science: The Scaffolded Knowledge Integration framework. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(2), 103–126.
Linn, M. C. (2005). WISE design for lifelong learning-pivotal cases. In Gärdenfors, P. & Johannsson, P. (Eds.), Cognition, education and communication technology (pp. 223–256). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Linn, M. C., & Clancy, M. J. (1992). The case for case studies of programming problems. Communications of the ACM, 35(3), 121–132.
Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87, 517–538.
Linn, M. C., Clement, C., & Pulos, S. (1983). Is it formal if it's not physics? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(8), 755–770.
Linn, M. C., Davis, E. A., & Bell, P. (Eds.). (2004). Internet environments for science education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B.-S. (in press). Science education: Integrating views of learning and instruction. In Alexander, P. A. & Winne, P. H. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Linn, M. C., & Hsi, S. (2000). Computers, teachers, peers: Science learning partners. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Linn, M. C., & Slotta, J. D. (2006). Enabling participants in on-line forums to learn from each other. In Donnell, A. M. O', Hmelo-Silver,, C. E. & Erkens, G. (Eds.), Collaborative learning, reasoning, and technology. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Linn, M. C., Songer, N. B., & Eylon, B. S. (1996). Shifts and convergences in science learning and instruction. In Calfee, R. & Berliner, D. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 438–490). Riverside, NJ: Macmillan.
Masnick, A. M., & Klahr, D. (2003). Error matters: An initial exploration of elementary school children's understanding of experimental error. Journal of Cognition and Development, 4, 67–98.
Metz, K. (2000). Young children's inquiry in biology. Building the knowledge bases to empower independent inquiry. In Minstrell, J. & Zee, E. (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry learning and teaching in science (pp. 3–13). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Millar, R., & Driver, R. (1987). Beyond processes. Studies in Science Education, 14(9), 33–62.
Osborne, J. F., & Young, A. R. (1998). The biological effects of ultra-violet radiation: A model for contemporary science education. Journal of Biological Education, 33(1), 10–15.
Palinscar, A. S., Magnusson, S., & Cutter, J. (2001). Making science accessible to all: Results of a design experiment in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 15–32.
Pallant, A., & Tinker, R. (2004). Reasoning with atomic-scale molecular dynamic models. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(1), 51–66.
Pedone, R., Hummel, J. E., & Holyoak, K. J. (2001). The use of diagrams in analogical problem solving. Memory and Cognition, 29, 214–221.
Pfundt, H., & Duit, R. (1991). Students' alternative frameworks (3rd ed.). Federal Republic of Germany: Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel/Institut für die Pädagogik der Naturwissenschaften.
Piaget, J. (1970). Structuralism. New York: Basic Books.
Polman, J. L. (2000). Designing project-based science: Connecting learners through guided inquiry. New York: Teachers College Press.
Redish, E. F. (2003). Teaching physics with the physics suite. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Resnick, M. (1994). Turtles, termites, and traffic jams: Explorations in massively parallel microworlds. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Richland, L. E., Bjork, R. A., Finley, J. R., & Linn, M. C. (2005). Linking cognitive science to education: Generation and interleaving effects. In Bara, B. G., Barsalou, L. & Bucciarelli, M. (Eds.), Proceedings of the twenty-seventh annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge-building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1, 37–68.
Schofield, J. W. (1995). Computers and classroom culture. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (Eds.). (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Siegler, R. S. (1996). Emerging minds: The process of change in children's thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sisk-Hilton, S. (2002). We'll take the parts that make sense: The evolution of an inquiry-oriented professional development model. In Bell, P., Stevens, R. & Satwicz, T. (Eds.), Keeping learning complex: Proceedings of the fifth international conference of the learning sciences (ICLS). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Sokoloff, D. R., & Thornton, R. K. (2004). Interactive lecture demonstrations in introductory physics. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Songer, N. (1996). Exploring learning opportunities in coordinated network-enhanced classrooms – A case of kids as global scientists. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(4), 297–327.
Songer, N. B., & Linn, M. C. (1992). How do students' views of science influence knowledge integration? In Pearsall, M. K. (Ed.), Scope, sequence and coordination of secondary school science, Volume I: Relevant research (pp. 197–219). Washington, DC: The National Science Teachers Association.
Steele, C. M. (1999). Thin ice: “Stereotype threat” and black college students. Atlantic Monthly, 44–54.
Strike, K. A., & Posner, G. J. (1985). A conceptual change view of learning and understanding. In West, L. H. & Pines, A. L. (Eds.), Cognitive structure and conceptual change (pp. 211–231). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Thompson, P. W. (2002). Didactic objects and didactic models in radical constructivism. In Gravemeijer, K., Lehrer, R., Oers, B. v. & Verschaffel, L. (Eds.), Symbolizing and modeling in mathematics education (pp. 191–212). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Vosniadou, S., Ioannides, C., Dimitrakopoulou, A., & Papademetriou, E. (2001). Designing learning environments to promote conceptual change in science. Learning and Instruction, 11(4–5), 381–419.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.
White, R., & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing understanding. New York: Falmer Press.
Williams, M., Linn, M., Ammon, P., & Gearhart, M. (2004). Learning to teach inquiry science in a technology-based environment: A case study. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 13(2), 189–206.
Zimmerman, T. (2005). Promoting knowledge integration of scientific principles and environmental stewardship: Assessing an issue-based approach to teaching evolution and marine conservation. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.