What Students Learn from Hands-On Activities

Autor/inn/en	Schwichow, Martin; Zimmerman, Corinne; Croker, Steve; Härtig, Hendrik
Titel	What Students Learn from Hands-On Activities
Quelle	In: Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 53 (2016) 7, S.980-1002 (23 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0022-4308
DOI	10.1002/tea.21320
Schlagwörter	Science Experiments; Scientific Methodology; Teaching Methods; Science Process Skills; Science Instruction; Hands on Science; Science Activities; Intervention; Grade 8; Academic Achievement; Student Projects; Meta Analysis + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Teaching of science; Science education; Natural sciences Lessons; Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht; School year 08; 8. Schuljahr; Schuljahr 08; Schulleistung; Schulprojekt; Meta-analysis; Metaanalyse
Abstract	The ability to design and interpret controlled experiments is an important scientific process skill and a common objective of science standards. Numerous intervention studies have investigated how the control-of-variables-strategy (CVS) can be introduced to students. However, a meta-analysis of 72 intervention studies found that the opportunity to train CVS skills with hands-on tasks (g = 0.59) did not lead to better acquisition of CVS relative to interventions without a hands-on component (g = 0.74). We conducted an intervention study in which we investigated the differential effects of hands-on and paper-and-pencil training tasks on 161 eighth-grade students' achievement. CVS was demonstrated to all students before they were grouped into a hands-on or a paper-and-pencil training condition. In both training conditions, students designed and interpreted experiments about which variables influence the force of electromagnets. Students in the hands-on group interacted with physical equipment while students in the paper-and-pencil group planned experiments using sketches and interpreted the outcome of experiments presented in photographs. We found no general advantage or disadvantage of hands-on tasks, as both groups did equally well on CVS and content knowledge tests. However, hands-on students outperformed paper-and-pencil students on a hands-on test identical to the training tasks, whereas the paper-and-pencil students outperformed hands-on students on a science fair poster evaluation task similar to the paper-and-pencil training. In summary, students learned task-specific procedural knowledge, but they did not acquire a deeper conceptual understanding of CVS or the content domain as a function of type of training. Implications for instruction and assessment are discussed. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Wiley-Blackwell. 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148. Tel: 800-835-6770; Tel: 781-388-8598; Fax: 781-388-8232; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01