<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><rdf:Description rdf:about="https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/IzpisGradiva.php?id=111886"><dc:title>Analysis of ISLE based activity with included engineering elements</dc:title><dc:creator>Jurkovič,	Jan	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Planinšič,	Gorazd	(Mentor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Etkina,	Eugenia	(Komentor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>Investigative Science Learning Environment (ISLE)</dc:subject><dc:subject>Engineering design</dc:subject><dc:subject>case study</dc:subject><dc:subject>video analysis</dc:subject><dc:subject>conductive thread</dc:subject><dc:subject>motivation</dc:subject><dc:subject>scientific practices</dc:subject><dc:subject>engineering practices</dc:subject><dc:subject>group work</dc:subject><dc:description>"Mysteries of the conductive thread" is an activity, which engages students in scientific and engineering practices. It follows the steps of the process called Investigative Science Learning environment (ISLE), a framework for science inquiry learning, that mirrors the work of an expert. Research in this thesis investigates how the reasoning in the activity "Mysteries of the conductive thread" of electrical engineering students differs from the reasoning those of physics students, how the reasoning of traditionally taught students differ from students that are familiar with ISLE process and wether a motivational introduction affects students success in problem solving.

We compared eight case studies. All of the case studies were conducted with groups of three students, who were videotaped while solving tasks of the given activity. With analyzing the videos we found out that physics students observed and explained more patterns, used more representations and tested the explanations to the higher degree, but also that electrical engineering students developed a better feeling for the quantities throughout their studies. We observed that mostly only ISLE students predicted the outcomes of the testing experiments and tested an explanation with multiple testing experiments. They were also the only ones that proposed multiple explanations for a single phenomenon. Furthermore, we observed that there was no difference in the success of problem solving between the students with and without the motivational introduction and also that students were all equally successful in proposing applications of the conductive thread, no matter whether they learned about the physics of the conductive thread through their own investigation or were given an explanation about it in a traditional lecture.</dc:description><dc:date>2019</dc:date><dc:date>2019-10-17 07:45:02</dc:date><dc:type>Magistrsko delo/naloga</dc:type><dc:identifier>111886</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
