Examining the effect of the computational models on learning performance, scientific reasoning, epistemic beliefs and argumentation: An implication for the STEM agenda
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Simulation-based learning enables structured 'what-if' exploration and interpretation of outputs, but its learning value depends on whether assessment prompts require students to articulate governing principles and justify decisions rather than only operating the tool.
“In classroom settings, SBL enables structured ‘what-if’ exploration and interpretation of outputs (e.g., trend plots and computed variables), but its learning value depends on whether assessment prompts require students to articulate governing principles and justify decisions rather than only operating the tool [21].”
From Comparing predictive, simulation-based and hybrid assessments in undergraduate process engineering (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
Simulation-supported learning presents a risk that students may rely on simulator outputs without sufficiently articulating the governing principles, assumptions, and causal mechanisms underlying those outputs.
“However, simulation-supported learning also presents a well-recognized risk: students may rely on simulator outputs without sufficiently articulating the governing principles, assumptions, and causal mechanisms underlying those outputs.”
From Comparing predictive, simulation-based and hybrid assessments in undergraduate process engineering (2026) · cites this paper as [21]
Cites
Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992) · The Physics Teacher · doi:10.1119/1.2343497 · Cited by 3,235 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A meta-analytic review of the relationship between epistemic cognition and academic achievement.
Greene, J. A., Cartiff, B. M., & Duke, R. F. (2018) · Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1037/edu0000263 · Cited by 150 · see citing works
Comparing predictive, simulation-based and hybrid assessments in undergraduate process engineering
Jafary, T., Pheiffer, L., Al Maqbali, H., Yeneneh, A. M., & Benayoune, A. (2026) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-026-01525-7
- Authors
- Psycharis, S.
- Affiliations
- School of Pedagogical and Technological Education (GR)
- Corresponding author
- Psycharis, Sarantos
- ORCID
- Psycharis, Sarantos
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-10
- Volume
- 68
- Pages
- 253-265
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2027915460
- Cited by
- 34
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 8.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
- Social Sciences › Education › Educational Methods and Outcomes
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Keywords
- numerical experiments, mathematical modeling, inquiry-based science teaching, scientific reasoning, epistemological beliefs, argumentation, pre-service primary teachers, physics education, problem solving, argument-driven inquiry, STEM education, conceptual understanding
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