Adams, DM, & Clark, DB. (2014). Integrating self-explanation functionality into a complex game environment: Keeping gaming in motion. Computers and Education, 73, 149–159.
Article
Google Scholar
Amin, TG. (2009). Conceptual metaphor meets conceptual change. Human Development, 52(3), 165–197.
Article
Google Scholar
Annetta, LA, Minogue, J, Holmes, SY, & Cheng, M. (2009). Investigating the impact of video games on high school students' engagement and learning about genetics. Computers & Education, 53(1), 74–85.
Article
Google Scholar
Berger, AA. (2002). Video Games: A Popular Culture Phenomenon. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Google Scholar
Bielaczyc, K, Pirolli, P, & Brown, AL. (1995). Training in self-explanation and self-regulation strategies: Investigating the effects of knowledge acquisition activities on problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 13(2), 221–252.
Article
Google Scholar
Bransford, JD, & Schwartz, DL. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61–100.
Google Scholar
Champagne, AB, Klopfer, LE, & Gunstone, RF. (1982). Cognitive research and the design of science instruction. Educational Psychologist, 17(1), 31.
Article
Google Scholar
Chi, MTH, & VanLehn, KA. (1991). The content of physics self-explanations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 69–105.
Article
Google Scholar
Chi, MTH, Bassok, M, Lewis, MW, Reimann, P, & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13(2), 145–182.
Article
Google Scholar
Clark, DB. (2006). Longitudinal conceptual change in students’ understanding of thermal equilibrium: An examination of the process of conceptual restructuring. Cognition and Instruction, 24(4), 467–563.
Article
Google Scholar
Clark, DB, & Martinez-Garza, M. (2012). Prediction and explanation as design mechanics in conceptually-integrated digital games to help players articulate the tacit understandings they build through gameplay. In C Steinkuhler, K Squire, & S Barab (Eds.), Games, Learning, and Society: Learning and Meaning in the Digital Age (pp. 279–305). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Clark, DB, Nelson, B, Sengupta, P, & D’Angelo, CM. (2009). Rethinking science learning through digital games and simulations: Genres, examples, and evidence. Washington, DC: Paper commissioned for the National Research Council Workshop on Games and Simulations.
Google Scholar
Clark, DB, Nelson, B, Chang, H, D’Angelo, CM, Slack, K, & Martinez-Garza, M. (2011). Exploring Newtonian mechanics in a conceptually-integrated digital game: Comparison of learning and affective outcomes for students in Taiwan and the United States. Computers & Education, 57(3), 2178–2195. doi:16/j.compedu.2011.05.007.
Article
Google Scholar
Clark, DB, Martinez-Garza, M, Biswas, G, Luecht, RM, & Sengupta, P. (2012). Driving assessment of students’ explanations in game dialog using computer-adaptive testing and hidden Markov Modeling. In D Ifenthaler, D Eseryel, & G Xun (Eds.), Game-based Learning: Foundations, Innovations, and Perspectives (pp. 173–199). New York: Springer.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Clark, DB, Sengupta, P, Kinnebrew, J, Killingsworth, S, Krinks, K, Martinez-Garza, M, & Biswas, G. (2013). Enhancing Games with Assessment and Metacognitive Emphases. Washington, DC: Annual Report to the National Science Foundation.
Google Scholar
Clark, DB, Brady, C, Sengupta, P, Martinez-Garza, M, Adams, D, Killingsworth, S, & Van Eaton, G. (2014a). Evolving and balancing informal and formal representations. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Boulder, CO: ISLS.
Google Scholar
Clark, DB, Tanner-Smith, E, & Killingsworth, S. (2014). Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Report to The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Available at http://www.sri.com/work/projects/glasslab-research.
Collins, A. (2011). A study of expert theory formation: The role of model types and domain frameworks. In MS Khine & I Saleh (Eds.), Models and Modeling: Cognitive Tools for Scientific Enquiry (pp. 23–40). London: Springer.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Collins, A, & Ferguson, W. (1993). Epistemic forms and epistemic games. Educational Psychologist, 28, 25–42.
Article
Google Scholar
Council, NR. (2009). National Research Council Workshop on Games and Simulations. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Google Scholar
Crawford, C. (1984). The Art of Computer Game Design. Berkeley, CA: Osborne/McGraw-Hill.
Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper Perennial.
Google Scholar
D’Angelo, CM, Clark, DB, Nelson, BC, Slack, K, & Menekse, M. (2010). Connecting tacit understanding from video games to formalized vector concepts. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST) 2010 meeting.
Google Scholar
Dickes, AC, & Sengupta, P. (2013). Learning natural selection in 4th grade with multi-agent-based computational models. Research in Science Education, 43(3), 921–953.
Article
Google Scholar
diSessa, AA. (1983). Phenomenology and the evolution of intuition. In D Gentner & AL Stevens (Eds.), Mental Models (pp. 15–33). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Google Scholar
diSessa, AA. (1988). Knowledge in pieces. In G Forman & P Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the Computer Age (pp. 49–70). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Google Scholar
diSessa, AA. (1993). Toward an epistemology of physics. Cognition and Instruction, 10(2 & 3), 105–225.
Article
Google Scholar
diSessa, AA, Gillespie, NM, & Esterly, JB. (2004). Coherence versus fragmentation in the development of the concept of force. Cognitive Science, 28(6), 843–900.
Article
Google Scholar
Duschl, RA, Schweingruber, HA, & Shouse, AW. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8 (National Research Council Board on Science Education, Center for Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education). Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Google Scholar
Enyedy, N. (2005). Inventing mapping: creating cultural forms to solve collective problems. Cognition and Instruction, 23(4), 427–466.
Article
Google Scholar
Federation of American Scientists. (2006). Report: Summit on Educational Games: Harnessing the Power of Video Games for Learning. Washington, D.C: Federation of American Scientists.
Google Scholar
Fox-Keller, E. (1983). A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. New York: W.H. Freeman.
Google Scholar
Garris, R, Ahlers, R, & Driskell, JE. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research and practice model. Simulation & Gaming, 33(4), 441–467. doi:10.1177/1046878102238607.
Article
Google Scholar
Gee, JP. (1990). Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. London: Falmer Press.
Google Scholar
Gee, JP. (2007a). Good Video Games and Good Learning: Collected Essays on Video Games, Learning, and Literacy (New Literacies and Digital Epistemologies). New York: Peter Lang Pub Inc.
Google Scholar
Gee, JP. (2007b). What Video Games Have to Teach us About Learning and Literacy. Second Edition: Revised and Updated Edition (2nd ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar
Gee, JP. (2008). Learning and games. In K Salen (Ed.), The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning (pp. 21–40). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. doi:10.1162/dmal.9780262693646.021.
Google Scholar
Giere, RN. (1988). Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Book
Google Scholar
Gravemeijer, K, Cobb, P, Bowers, J, & Whitenack, J. (2000). Symbolizing, modeling, and instructional design. In P Cobb, E Yackel, & K McClain (Eds.), Symbolizing and Communicating in Mathematics Classrooms: Perspectives on Discourse, Tools, and Instructional Design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Google Scholar
Habgood, MPJ, & Ainsworth, SE. (2011). Motivating children to learn effectively: exploring the value of intrinsic integration in educational games. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20, 169–206.
Article
Google Scholar
Hall, R, & Stevens, R. (1995). Making space: A comparison of mathematical work in school and professional design practices. In SL Star (Ed.), The Cultures of Computing (pp. 118–145). London, UK: Basil Blackwell.
Google Scholar
Hammer, D. (1996). Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(2), 97–127.
Article
Google Scholar
Hammer, D, Redish, EF, Elby, A, & Scherr, RE. (2005). Resources, framing, and transfer. In J Mestre (Ed.), Transfer of Learning: Research and Perspectives (pp. 89–120). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing Inc.
Google Scholar
Hegedus, SJ, & Moreno-Armella, L. (2009). Intersecting representation and communication infrastructures. ZDM, 41(4), 399–412.
Article
Google Scholar
Hegedus, S, & Roschelle, J (Eds.). (2013). The SimCalc Vision and Contributions: Democratizing Access to Important Mathematics. New York, NY: Springer.
Google Scholar
Hesse, MB. (1974). The Structure of Scientific Inference. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Google Scholar
Hestenes, D. (1992). Modeling games in the Newtonian world. American Journal of Physics, 60, 732–748.
Article
Google Scholar
Hestenes, D. (1993). MODELING is the Name of the Game. Washington, DC: Presentation at the NSF Modeling Conference.
Google Scholar
Hestenes, D, & Halloun, I. (1995). Interpreting the force concept inventory: A response to March 1995 critique by Huffman and Heller. The Physics Teacher, 33(8), 502–506.
Article
Google Scholar
Hestenes, D, Wells, M, & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30(3), 141–158.
Article
Google Scholar
Hines, PJ, Jasny, BR, & Merris, J. (2009). Adding a T to the three R's. Science, 323, 53.
Article
Google Scholar
Honey, MA, & Hilton, M (Eds.). (2010). Learning Science through Computer Games and Simulations. National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Google Scholar
Jeppsson, F, Haglund, J, Amin, TG, & Strömdahl, H. (2013). Exploring the use of conceptual metaphors in solving problems on entropy. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(1), 70–120.
Article
Google Scholar
Kaput, J. (1994). Democratizing access to calculus: New routes to old roots. In A Schoenfeld (Ed.), Mathematical Thinking and Problem Solving (pp. 77–156). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Google Scholar
Kearney, M. (2004). Classroom use of multimedia-supported predict–observe–explain tasks in a social constructivist learning environment. Research in Science Education, 34(4), 427–453.
Article
Google Scholar
Kiili, K. (2005). On Educational Game Design: Building Blocks of Flow Experience. Tampere, Finland: Tampere University of Technology Press.
Google Scholar
Kiili, K, & Lainema, T. (2008). Foundation for measuring engagement in education games. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 19(3), 469–488.
Google Scholar
Kirsh, D, & Maglio, P. (1994). On the distinguishing epistemic from pragmatic action. Cognitive Science, 18, 513–549.
Article
Google Scholar
Koster, R. (2004). A Theory of Fun for Game Design. Scottsdale, AZ: Paraglyph Press.
Google Scholar
Krinks, KD, Sengupta, P, & Clark, DB. (2013). Conceptual Change in Physics through use of Digital Games. Paper presented at annual conference of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching. Puerto Rico: Rio Mar.
Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1990). Drawing things together. In M Lynch & S Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in Scientific Practice (pp. 19–68). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Lehrer, R. (2003). Developing understanding of measurement. In J Kilpatrick, WG Martin, & DE Schifter (Eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 179–192). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
Google Scholar
Lehrer, R. (2009). Designing to develop disciplinary dispositions: Modeling natural systems. American Psychologist, 64(8), 759–71. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.64.8.759.
Article
Google Scholar
Lehrer, R, & Pritchard, C. (2002). Symbolizing space into being. In K Gravemeijer, R Lehrer, B van Oers, & L Verschaffel (Eds.), Symbolization, Modeling and Tool use in Mathematics Education (pp. 59–86). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Press.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Lehrer, R, & Schauble, L. (2002). Symbolic communication in mathematics and science: Co-constituting inscription and thought. In E Amsel & J Byrnes (Eds.), The development of symbolic communication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Google Scholar
Lehrer, R, & Schauble, L. (2006a). Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education. In RK Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 371–388). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Lehrer, R, & Schauble, L. (2006b). Scientific thinking and science literacy: supporting development in learning in contexts. In W Damon, RM Lerner, KA Renninger, & IE Sigel (Eds.), Handbook of Child Psychology (6th ed., Vol. 4). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Google Scholar
Lehrer, R, & Schauble, L. (2010). What kind of explanation is a model? In MK Stein (Ed.), Instructional Explanations in the Disciplines (pp. 9–22). New York: Springer.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Lehrer, R, Schauble, L, Carpenter, S, & Penner, D. (2000). The inter-related development of inscriptions and conceptual understanding. In P Cobb, E Yackel, & K McClain (Eds.), Symbolizing and Communicating in Mathematics Classrooms: Perspectives on Discourse, Tools and Instructional Design (pp. 325–360). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Google Scholar
Lynch, M. (1990). The externalized retina: Selection and mathematization in the visual documentation of objects in the life sciences. In M Lynch & S Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in Scientific Practice (pp. 153–186). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Martinez-Garza, M, Clark, DB, & Nelson, B. (2013). Digital games and the US National Research Council's science proficiency goals. Studies in Science Education, 49, 170–208. doi:10.1080/03057267.2013.839372.
Article
Google Scholar
Mayer, RE. (2009). Multimedia Learning (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Book
Google Scholar
Mayer, RE, & Johnson, CI. (2010). Adding instructional features that promote learning in a game-like environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42(3), 241–265.
Article
Google Scholar
McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. New York: Penguin Press.
Google Scholar
Minstrell, J. (2001). Facets of students' thinking: Designing to cross the gap from research to standards-based practice. In K Crowley, CD Schunn, & T Okada (Eds.), Designing for Science: Implications for Professional, Instructional, and Everyday Science. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Google Scholar
Morrison, D, & Collins, A. (1995). Epistemic fluency and constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology, 35(5), 39–45.
Google Scholar
Munz, U, Schumm, P, Wiesebrock, A, & Allgower, F. (2007). Motivation and learning progress through educational games. Industrial Electronics, IEEE Transactions on, 54(6), 3141–3144. doi: 10.1109/TIE.2007.907030.
Article
Google Scholar
Nersessian, NJ. (1998). Modeling practices in conceptual change in science. In T Borsche, J Kreuzer, & C Strub (Eds.), Cognition and Imagination (pp. 149–168). Munich: Fink Verlag.
Google Scholar
Nersessian, NJ. (2002). The cognitive basis of model-based reasoning in science. In P Carruthers, S Stich, & M Siegal (Eds.), The Cognitive Basis of Science (pp. 133–155). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Nersessian, NJ. (2008). Creating Scientific Concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Pelletier, C. (2008). Gaming in context: How young people construct their gendered identities in playing and making games. In YB Kafai, C Heeter, J Denner, & JY Sun (Eds.), Beyond Barbie and Mortal Kombat: New Perspectives on Gender and Gaming. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Pickering, A. (1995). The Mangle of Practice: Time, Agency, and Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Book
Google Scholar
Rapp, DN, & Sengupta, P. (2012). Models and modeling in science learning. Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning (pp. 2320–2322). New York: Springer.
Google Scholar
Rochelle, J, & Kaput, J. (1996). Educational software architecture and systemic impact: The promise of component software. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14(3), 217–228.
Article
Google Scholar
Roy, M, & Chi, MTH. (2005). The self-explanation principle in multimedia learning. In RE Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 271–286). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chapter
Google Scholar
Rueda, MR, Fan, J, McCandliss, BD, Halparin, JD, Gruber, DB, Lercari, LP, & Posner, MI. (2004). Development of attentional networks in childhood. Neuropsychologia, 42(8), 1029–1040. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2003.12.012.
Article
Google Scholar
Salen, K, & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of Play: Game Design Fundamentals. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Schwartz, D, & Arena, D. (2013). Measuring What Matters Most: Choice-Based Assessments for the Digital Age. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Google Scholar
Scott, PH, Asoko, HM, & Driver, RH. (1992). Teaching for conceptual change: a review of strategies. In R Duit, F Goldberg, & H Niedderer (Eds.), Research in Physics Learning: Theoretical Issues and Empirical Studies (pp. 310–329). Kiel, Germany: Institute for Science Education at the University of Kiel.
Google Scholar
Sengupta, P, Clark, D, Krinks, K, Killingsworth, S, & Brady, C. (2014). Integrating Modeling with Games for Learning Newtonian Mechanics. In N. Holbert & D. Weintrop (Org), N. Holbert (Chair), and Y. Kafai (Discussant), Combining Video Games and Constructionist Design to Support Deep Learning in Play. In J. Poleman, E. Kyza, I. Tabak & K. O'Neill (Eds.), Proceedings of "Learning and Becoming in Practice," the 11th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2014), pp 1388 – 1395. University of Colorado at Boulder: ISLS.
Sherin, BL. (2001). How students understand physics equations. Cognition and Instruction, 19(4), 479–541.
Article
Google Scholar
Slack, K, Nelson, B, Clark, DB, & Martinez-Garza, M. (2010). Influence of Visual Cues on Learning and In-Game Performance in an Educational Physics Game Environment. Anaheim, California: Paper presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) 2010 meeting.
Google Scholar
Slack, K, Nelson, B, Clark, DB, & Martinez-Garza, M. (2011). Model-Based Thinking in the Scaffolding Understanding by Redesigning Games for Education (SURGE) Project. New Orleans, LA: Poster presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) 2011 meeting.
Google Scholar
Smith, JP, diSessa, A, & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: A constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115–163.
Article
Google Scholar
Squire, K. (2005). Changing the game: What happens when video games enter the classroom. Innovate, 1(6), 25–49.
Google Scholar
Squire, K. (2006). From content to context: Videogames as designed experience. Educational Researcher, 35(8), 19–29.
Article
Google Scholar
Squire, K. (2011). Video Games and Learning: Teaching and Participatory Culture in the Digital age. New York: Teachers College Press.
Google Scholar
Steinkuehler, D, & Duncan, S. (2008). Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(6), 530–543.
Article
Google Scholar
Tao, P-K, & Gunstone, RF. (1999). The process of conceptual change in force and motion during computer-supported physics instruction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(7), 859–882.
Article
Google Scholar
Team, G-t-T. (2003). Design principles of next-generation digital gaming for education. Educational Technology, 43(5), 17–33.
Google Scholar
Van Eaton, G, Clark, DB, & Beutel, D. (2013). Designing Digital Objects to Scaffold Learning. Memphis TN: Paper presented at the 16th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2013).
Google Scholar
White, B. (1984). Designing computer games to help physics students understand Newton's laws of motion. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 69–108.
Article
Google Scholar
White, B, & Frederiksen, J. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16(1), 3–118.
Article
Google Scholar
White, BY, & Frederiksen, JR. (2000). Metacognitive facilitation: An approach to making scientific inquiry accessible to all. In JA Minstrell & EH Van Zee (Eds.), Inquiring into Inquiry Learning and Teaching in Science (pp. 331–370). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Google Scholar
Wilensky, U, & Reisman, K. (2006). Thinking like a wolf, a sheep, or a firefly: Learning biology through constructing and testing computational theories—an embodied modeling approach. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 171–209.
Article
Google Scholar
Wouters, P, van Nimwegen, C, van Oostendorp, H, & van der Spek, ED. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105, 249–265. Doi: 10.1037/a0031311.
Wright, W. (2006). Dream machines. Wired, 14(4), 110–112.
Google Scholar