Students’ Learning Strategies With Multiple Representations: Explanations of the Human Breathing Mechanism

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to understand how students utilized multiple representations to learn and explain science concepts, in this case the human breathing mechanism. The study was conducted with Grade 11 students in a human biology class. Semistructured interviews and a two‐tier diagnostic test were administered to evaluate students’ learning strategies of integrating multiple representations. The functions of multiple representations (complementary, constraining, and deeper understanding) suggested by Ainsworth () were adapted as the analytical framework to better describe the participating students’ learning strategies with multiple representations (access complementary information, apply one representation to interpret the other, and evaluate representations). The categorization of students’ learning strategies facilitated interpreting their diverse understanding in relation to the multiple representations. In addition to a summary of students’ learning strategies, three case examples are presented to show how the framework was applied in the analysis and to discuss how the learning strategies interacted with students’ understanding of the multiple representations and of the concept.

Exploring Emergent Features of Student Interaction within an Embodied Science Learning Simulation

“…Comparative work by Ainsworth and Loizou [37] and Ainsworth and Iacovides [38] found increased learning gains when students were asked to self-explain a concept while transferring across modalities (e.g., drawing a diagram based on text or writing a text based on a diagram). Promoting a student's self-expressive verbal representation of their learning has also shown to have benefits when combined with visual modalities such as diagrams or written text [39,40]. In this paper, we elaborate on the significance of embodied learning as a resource for sense-making in all forms of interactions that occur in interactive learning environments.…”

The development of students' justifications for their positions regarding two theoretical models: Electron cloud or sodium chloride crystal—After engaging in different learning activities

“…Thus, they are not exact copies of their targets. They range in their abstractness from concrete models, such as a physical globe for the Earth and a plastic model for the human skeleton, to abstract theoretical scientific models, such as electron clouds, photons, and mathematical models (Cokelez, ; Harrison & Treagust, ; Nichols, Ranasinghe, & Hanan, ; Schwarz & White, ; Won, Yoon, & Treagust, ).…”

“…In addition, multiple models can be designed to respond to complex phenomena and/or test different hypotheses (Krell et al, ; Nichols et al, ; Schwarz et al, ; Schwarz & White, ; Won et al, ). However, the sum of different models of the same phenomenon does not always equal the whole phenomenon because: (i) scientists have not yet understood the phenomenon fully; and/or (ii) the models overlap with each other.…”

“…Scientific models also serve as valuable teaching tools that facilitate students' understanding of scientific theories, laws, and principles (Coll, France, & Taylor, ; Crawford & Cullin, ; Harrison & Treagust, ; Hart, ; Schwarz et al, ; Treagust, Chittleborough, & Mamiala, ; Won et al, ). For students, on many occasions, models provide concrete structures that allow them to construct scientifically adequate meanings (Barab, Hay, Barnett, & Keating, ; Cokelez, ; Pluta et al, ).…”

“…Models are conceptual representations (Shen & Confrey, ; Won et al, ). To scientists, a scientific model is “a set of assumptions that include theoretical entities and relations among them that are designed to help them think about how to explain some aspect of reality” (Snir et al, , p. 797).…”