ANALYSIS OF THE SCIENCE LEARNING OBJECTS OF THE GREEK DIGITAL LEARNING OBJECT REPOSITORY FROM A LEARNING ACTIVITIES PERSPECTIVE

Authors

  • Efthymia Saltidou University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece
  • Michael Skoumios University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.1338

Keywords:

question analysis, learning objects, science teaching, learning activities

Abstract

In recent years, learning objects have been playing a crucial role in the teaching process. However, research focused on the analysis of science learning objects is particularly limited. The present study aims to analyze the science learning objects of the Greek Digital Learning Object Repository that are intended for primary school from a learning activities perspective. A total of 178 learning objects were analyzed. The analysis of learning objects from the perspective of the learning activities (cognitive and metacognitive) they activate in the students was carried out in line with the analysis framework of Overman, Vermunt, Meijer, Bulte and Brekelmans (2013). The analysis of learning objects showed that they are dominated by low level cognitive learning activities, while the learning objects that activate high level cognitive learning activities are limited. Finally, no learning objects activating metacognitive learning activities in the students were detected. 

Author Biographies

  • Efthymia Saltidou, University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece

    Efthymia Saltidou: Primary school teacher Efthymia Saltidou obtained a bachelor degree in education from the University of Aegean in 2015 and a master degree in education with the use of new technologies from the Univesity of Aegean in 2017. Her research interests include teaching science in primary schools and integrating technology in education. She is currently working as a Junior Pedagogical Officer at the Future Classroom Lab of European Schoolnet.

  • Michael Skoumios, University of the Aegean, Rhodes, Greece

    Michael Skoumios: Assistant Professor Michael Skoumios obtained a first degree in physics from the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens in 1987, a second degree in education from the University of Aegean in 1992, and his PhD in science education from the Hellenic Open University in 2005. His research interests include science concept learning and teaching science in primary and secondary schools. He is currently teaching science education in the Department of Primary Education of the University of the Aegean.

References

Anderson R, Kulhavy R, Andre T, 1971. Feedback procedures in programmed instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology 62: 148-156.

Bloom BS, Krathwohl DR, 1956. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. New York: Longmans Green.

Braswell JS, Lutkus AD, Grigg WS, Santapau SL, TayLim B, Johnson M, 2011. The Nation’s Report Card: Mathematics 2000, Washington, D. C.: National Center for Education Statistics. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2001517

Chiappe A, Segovia Y, Rincón Y, 2007. Toward an instructional design model based on learning objects. Educational Technology Research and Development 55(6): 671–681.

Costa A, 1985. Teacher Behaviors That Enable Student Thinking in Developing Minds. In A. L. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Davila K, Talanquer V, 2010. Classifying end-of-chapter questions and problems for selected general chemistry textbooks used in the United States. Chemical Education Research 87(1): 97–101.

Friesen N, 2001. What are Educational Objects? Interactive Learning Environments 9(3): 219-230.

Gilbert JK, Bulte AMW, Pilot A, 2011. Concept development and transfer in contextbased science education. International Journal of Science Education 33(6): 817–837.

Giordan A, De Vecchi G, 1996. As origens do saber: das concepções dos aprendentes aos conceitos científicos. Porto Alegre, Brazil: Artes Médicas.

Holliday W, Whittaker H, Loose K, 1984. Differential effects of verbal aptitude and study questions on comprehension of science concepts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 21: 140-143.

IEEE Learning Technology Standards Committee, 2002. Draft standard for learning object metadata. http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg12/files/LOM_1484_12_1_v1_Final_Draft.pdf

Kahveci A, 2010. Quantitative analysis of science and chemistry textbooks for indicators of reform: A complementary perspective. International Journal of Science Education 32(11): 1495–1519.

Kay RH, Knaack L, 2009. Assessing Learning, Quality and Engagement in Learning Objects: The Learning Object Evaluation Scale for Students (LOES-S). Education Technology Research and Development 57(2), 147-168.

Nakiboglu C, Yildirir HE, 2011. Analysis of Turkish high school chemistry textbooks and teacher-generated questions about gas laws. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 9(5): 1047–1071.

Nesbit JC, Li J, 2004. Web-Based Tools for Learning Object Evaluation. Elearning 2: 3-8.

Overman Μ, Vermunt D, Meijer P, Bulte B and Brekelmans M, 2013. Textbook Questions in Context-Based and Traditional Chemistry Curricula Analysed from a Content Perspective and a Learning Activities Perspective. International Journal of Science Education 35(17): 2954–2978.

Pizzini EL, Shepardson DP, Abell SK, 1992. The questioning level of select middle school science textbooks. School Science and Mathematics 92(2): 74–79.

Reyes R, Reys B, Lapan R, Holliday G, 2003. Assessing the Impact of Standards-Based Middle Grades Mathematics Curriculum Materials on Student Achievement. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education 34(1): 74-95.

Shepardson DP, Pizzini EL, 1991. Questioning levels of junior high schools science textbooks and their implications for learning textual information. Science Education 75(6): 673–682.

Sinclair J, Joy M, Yau JYK, Hagan S, 2013. A Practice-Oriented Review of Learning Objects. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 6(2): 177–192.

Skoumios M, Diakos N, 2015. Questioning Levels of Greek Middle School Chemistry Textbooks from a Learning Activities Perspective. The International Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Learning 22(3): 15-30.

Vargo J, Nesbit JC, Belfer K, Archambault A, 2003. Learning object evaluation: Computer mediated collaboration and inter-rater reliability. International Journal of Computers and Applications 25(3): 198–205.

Vasconcelos C, Torres J, Dourado LGP, Leite L, 2012. Questions in science textbooks: do they prompt students' inquiry and problem-based learning? In C. Bruguière, A. Tiberghien & P. Clément (Eds.), E-Book Proceedings of the ESERA 2011 Conference: Science learning and Citizenship. Part [6] (co-ed. Manuela Welzel-Breuer and Conxita Marquez) (pp. 102-107) Lyon, France: European Science Education Research Association. ISBN: 978-9963-700-44-8.

Vermunt JD, 1996. Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and strategies: A phenomenographic analysis. Higher Education 31: 25–50.

Vermunt JD, Verloop N, 1999. Congruence and friction between learning and teaching. Learning and Instruction 9: 257–280.

Wiley D, 2002. Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects (pp. 3–24). Bloomington, IN: Agency for Instructional Technology.

Wixson K, 1983. Postreading questions: Answer interactions and children’s learning from text. Journal of Educational Psychology 30: 413-423.

Downloads

Published

2018-01-01

Issue

Vol 3, No 12 (2017)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).