The DOI matches its Crossref record; 25 of the 25 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children
Open accessAbstract
“Hands‐on” activities play an important, but controversial, role in early science education. In this study we attempt to clarify some of the issues surrounding the controversy by calling attention to distinctions between: (a) type of instruction (direct or discovery); (b) type of knowledge to be acquired (domain‐general or domain‐specific); and (c) type of materials that are used (physical or virtual). We then describe an empirical study that investigates the relative effectiveness of the physical–virtual dimension. In the present study, seventh and eighth grade students assembled and tested mousetrap cars with the goal of designing a car that would go the farthest. Children were assigned to four different conditions, depending on whether they manipulated physical or virtual materials, and whether they had a fixed number of cars they could construct or a fixed amount of time in which to construct them. All four conditions were equally effective in producing significant gains in learners' knowledge about causal factors, in their ability to design optimal cars, and in their confidence in their knowledge. Girls' performance, knowledge, and effort were equal to boys' in all conditions, but girls' confidence remained below boys' throughout. Given the fact that, on several different measures, children were able to learn as well with virtual as with physical materials, the inherent pragmatic advantages of virtual materials in science may make them the preferred instructional medium in many hands‐on contexts. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Res Sci Teach
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Handbook of research on science teaching and learning
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.32-4019 · Cited by 2,062
National Center for Educational Statistics
(2007) · Reference Reviews · doi:10.1108/09504120710838778 · Cited by 2,030
Intelligent Tutoring Goes To School in the Big City
Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., Hadley, W. H., & Mark, M. A. (2018) · doi:10.1184/r1/6470153 · Cited by 1,105
Klahr, D., & Nigam, M. (2004) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00737.x · Cited by 977 · cited 2×
“For example , Cells A and B were compared in a series of investigations by Klahr and colleagues ( Chen & Klahr , 1999 ; Klahr & Nigam , 2004 ; Toth , Klahr , & Chen , 2000 ) using physical hands - on materials ( physical ramps , springs , and sinking objects ) .”
MethodSelf-citationAll Other Things Being Equal: Acquisition and Transfer of the Control of Variables Strategy
Chen, Z., & Klahr, D. (1999) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00081 · Cited by 736
Self-citationDesigning to Learn About Complex Systems
Hmelo, C. E., Holton, D. L., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000) · Journal of the Learning Sciences · doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0903_2 · Cited by 577
Women's self-confidence in achievement settings.
Lenney, E. (1977) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037//0033-2909.84.1.1 · Cited by 568
Gender differences in the accuracy of self-evaluations of performance.
Beyer, S. (1990) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.59.5.960 · Cited by 528
The Development of Scientific Reasoning Skills
Zimmerman, C. (2000) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1006/drev.1999.0497 · Cited by 503
Laboratory work as scientific method: three decades of confusion and distortion
Hodson, D. (1996) · Journal of Curriculum Studies · doi:10.1080/0022027980280201 · Cited by 320
Concrete Manipulatives, Concrete Ideas
Clements, D. H. (2000) · Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood · doi:10.2304/ciec.2000.1.1.7 · Cited by 282 · cited 1×
“There are a few exceptions to this tendency to confound changes in medium with curricular changes, such as the study by Johnson-Gentile, Clements, and Battista (1994) comparing the effectiveness of physical manipulatives and LOGO programs for teaching geometric motion and Marshall’s (2005) comparison of physical and v…”
BackgroundTriona, L. M., & Klahr, D. (2003) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci2102_02 · Cited by 268
Self-citationCross-Domain Development of Scientific Reasoning
Kuhn, D., Schauble, L., & Garcia-Mila, M. (1992) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci0904_1 · Cited by 267
Huxley, T., & Seeger, R. J. (1965) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1971118 · Cited by 237
What is Scientific Thinking and How Does It Develop?
Kuhn, D. (2002) · Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development · doi:10.1002/9780470996652.ch17 · Cited by 219
Strip Mining for Gold: Research and Policy in Educational Technology—A Response to “Fool’s Gold”
Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. H. (2003) · AACE journal · Cited by 195
Scientific Thinking and Science Literacy
Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2007) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0405 · Cited by 172
The psychology of gender, 2nd ed.
Eagly, A. H., Beall, A. E., & Sternberg, R. J. (2004) · Cited by 115
The meanings of hands-on science
Flick, L. B. (1993) · Journal of Science Teacher Education · doi:10.1007/bf02628851 · Cited by 109
Erdosne Toth, E., Klahr, D., & Chen, Z. (2000) · Cognition and Instruction · doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1804_1 · Cited by 106 · cited 1×
“A few studies have attempted to isolate the factors included in Table 1. For example, Cells A and B were compared in a series of investigations by Klahr and colleagues (Chen & Klahr, 1999; Klahr & Nigam, 2004; Toth, Klahr, & Chen, 2000 ) using physical hands-on materials (physical ramps, springs, and sinking objects).”
MethodSelf-citationFrom Living to Virtual: Learning from Museum Objects
Eberbach, C., & Crowley, K. (2005) · Curator The Museum Journal · doi:10.1111/j.2151-6952.2005.tb00175.x · Cited by 86
Masnick, A. M., & Klahr, D. (2003) · Journal of Cognition and Development · doi:10.1080/15248372.2003.9669683 · Cited by 85
Self-citationApkan, J. P. (2002) · The Electronic Journal of Science Education · Cited by 45
Johnson-Gentile, K., Clements, D. H., & Battista, M. T. (1994) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.2190/49ee-8pxl-yy8c-a923 · Cited by 45
Tangibles in the balance: a comparison of physical and screen versions of the balance beam task
Marshall, P. (2005) · UCL Discovery (University College London) · Cited by 3
Cited by
Physical and Virtual Laboratories in Science and Engineering Education
de Jong, T., Linn, M. C., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1230579 · Cited by 1,083
Smetana, L. K., & Bell, R. L. (2012) · International Journal of Science Education · doi:10.1080/09500693.2011.605182 · Cited by 702
Do tangible interfaces enhance learning?
Marshall, P. (2007) · Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction · doi:10.1145/1226969.1227004 · Cited by 538
Riopel, M., Nenciovici, L., Potvin, P., Chastenay, P., Charland, P., Sarrasin, J. B., & Masson, S. (2019) · Studies in Science Education · doi:10.1080/03057267.2019.1722420 · Cited by 127
Matlen, B. J., & Klahr, D. (2013) · Instructional Science · doi:10.1007/s11251-012-9248-z · Cited by 96
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Klahr, D., Triona, L. M., & Williams, C.
- Venue
- Journal of Research in Science Teaching
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-11-28
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 183-203
- ISSN
- 0022-4308 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-2736
- OpenAlex
- W2132258527
- Cited by
- 357
- References
- 25
- FWCI
- 33.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
