I would like to work closely with you to refine my dissertation for completion in 30 to 60 days (my draft is 90 pages with references, when we add the final chapters, probably btw 100 to 125 pages.

My advisors would like me to focus on three of the 16 students (lowest, middle and highest performance on the tests and questionnaires and audio recordings) and do mini case studies of how they responded.

Research questions: How do students respond to different multi-dimensional learning materials in dissection activities?

Can virtual dissections/#D instruction enhance their engagement w/science dissections? (How they thought they took advantage of the different media in each condition with paper,live frog and virtual dissections?) Reframing: Can various forms of 3D instruction motivate / learning,

Add social learning theories of: Branford & Schwartz, Vygotsky on scaffolding, proximal development (3D theorists), Piaget on children and three dimensional learning, Howard Gardner, learning styles, spatial intelligence and children. Patty Greenfield, solo vs collaborative learning, Eleanor Duckworth, fun, learning and Grit

Data:

� Pre and post labeling exercise scores

� Gains from Pre and post

� Lab test scores

� Questionnaires for paper frog, dissection and visualization

Coding structure for open-ended questions

Coding differently?

Use some numerical comparisons for some

Correlate lab tests with�

About � wanted to learn on their own�didn�t want to do group thing.

3 of 16 got it on their own; other 13 stated that it was fun because I did it with the help of my classmates. 6-7 thought collaboration made it fun and allowed them to complete�

� had3D simulation experience before; � had origami experience, � had dissection

Only 2 (of 16) thought it wasn�t fun�.

� said yes they learned more with simulation; the rest said they learned more with the live dissection

The different versions intrigued them. The live dissection was most helpful (5-6 of 16) (touch it and move it). Virtual was more fun.

Matching scores with their self-reporting on difficulty they had.

1) How do you feel you learn best?

I would like to work closely with you to refine my dissertation for completion in 30 to 60 days (my draft is 90 pages with references, when we add the final chapters, probably btw 100 to 125 pages.

My advisors would like me to focus on three of the 16 students (lowest, middle and highest performance on the tests and questionnaires and audio recordings) and do mini case studies of how they responded.

Research questions: How do students respond to different multi-dimensional learning materials in dissection activities?

Can virtual dissections/#D instruction enhance their engagement w/science dissections? (How they thought they took advantage of the different media in each condition with paper,live frog and virtual dissections?) Reframing: Can various forms of 3D instruction motivate / learning,

Add social learning theories of: Branford & Schwartz, Vygotsky on scaffolding, proximal development (3D theorists), Piaget on children and three dimensional learning, Howard Gardner, learning styles, spatial intelligence and children. Patty Greenfield, solo vs collaborative learning, Eleanor Duckworth, fun, learning and Grit

Data:

� Pre and post labeling exercise scores

� Gains from Pre and post

� Lab test scores

� Questionnaires for paper frog, dissection and visualization

Coding structure for open-ended questions

Coding differently?

Use some numerical comparisons for some

Correlate lab tests with�

About � wanted to learn on their own�didn�t want to do group thing.

3 of 16 got it on their own; other 13 stated that it was fun because I did it with the help of my classmates. 6-7 thought collaboration made it fun and allowed them to complete�

� had3D simulation experience before; � had origami experience, � had dissection

Only 2 (of 16) thought it wasn�t fun�.

� said yes they learned more with simulation; the rest said they learned more with the live dissection

The different versions intrigued them. The live dissection was most helpful (5-6 of 16) (touch it and move it). Virtual was more fun.

Matching scores with their self-reporting on difficulty they had.

1) How do you feel you learn best?

I would like to work closely with you to refine my dissertation for completion in 30 to 60 days (my draft is 90 pages with references, when we add the final chapters, probably btw 100 to 125 pages.

My advisors would like me to focus on three of the 16 students (lowest, middle and highest performance on the tests and questionnaires and audio recordings) and do mini case studies of how they responded.

Research questions: How do students respond to different multi-dimensional learning materials in dissection activities?

Can virtual dissections/#D instruction enhance their engagement w/science dissections? (How they thought they took advantage of the different media in each condition with paper,live frog and virtual dissections?) Reframing: Can various forms of 3D instruction motivate / learning,

Add social learning theories of: Branford & Schwartz, Vygotsky on scaffolding, proximal development (3D theorists), Piaget on children and three dimensional learning, Howard Gardner, learning styles, spatial intelligence and children. Patty Greenfield, solo vs collaborative learning, Eleanor Duckworth, fun, learning and Grit

Data:

� Pre and post labeling exercise scores

� Gains from Pre and post

� Lab test scores

� Questionnaires for paper frog, dissection and visualization

Coding structure for open-ended questions

Coding differently?

Use some numerical comparisons for some

Correlate lab tests with�

About � wanted to learn on their own�didn�t want to do group thing.

3 of 16 got it on their own; other 13 stated that it was fun because I did it with the help of my classmates. 6-7 thought collaboration made it fun and allowed them to complete�

� had3D simulation experience before; � had origami experience, � had dissection

Only 2 (of 16) thought it wasn�t fun�.

� said yes they learned more with simulation; the rest said they learned more with the live dissection

The different versions intrigued them. The live dissection was most helpful (5-6 of 16) (touch it and move it). Virtual was more fun.

Matching scores with their self-reporting on difficulty they had.

1) How do you feel you learn best?

I would like to work closely with you to refine my dissertation for completion in 30 to 60 days (my draft is 90 pages with references, when we add the final chapters, probably btw 100 to 125 pages.

My advisors would like me to focus on three of the 16 students (lowest, middle and highest performance on the tests and questionnaires and audio recordings) and do mini case studies of how they responded.

Research questions: How do students respond to different multi-dimensional learning materials in dissection activities?

Can virtual dissections/#D instruction enhance their engagement w/science dissections? (How they thought they took advantage of the different media in each condition with paper,live frog and virtual dissections?) Reframing: Can various forms of 3D instruction motivate / learning,

Add social learning theories of: Branford & Schwartz, Vygotsky on scaffolding, proximal development (3D theorists), Piaget on children and three dimensional learning, Howard Gardner, learning styles, spatial intelligence and children. Patty Greenfield, solo vs collaborative learning, Eleanor Duckworth, fun, learning and Grit

Data:

� Pre and post labeling exercise scores

� Gains from Pre and post

� Lab test scores

� Questionnaires for paper frog, dissection and visualization

Coding structure for open-ended questions

Coding differently?

Use some numerical comparisons for some

Correlate lab tests with�

About � wanted to learn on their own�didn�t want to do group thing.

3 of 16 got it on their own; other 13 stated that it was fun because I did it with the help of my classmates. 6-7 thought collaboration made it fun and allowed them to complete�

� had3D simulation experience before; � had origami experience, � had dissection

Only 2 (of 16) thought it wasn�t fun�.

� said yes they learned more with simulation; the rest said they learned more with the live dissection

The different versions intrigued them. The live dissection was most helpful (5-6 of 16) (touch it and move it). Virtual was more fun.

Matching scores with their self-reporting on difficulty they had.

1) How do you feel you learn best?

I would like to work closely with you to refine my dissertation for completion in 30 to 60 days (my draft is 90 pages with references, when we add the final chapters, probably btw 100 to 125 pages.

My advisors would like me to focus on three of the 16 students (lowest, middle and highest performance on the tests and questionnaires and audio recordings) and do mini case studies of how they responded.

Research questions: How do students respond to different multi-dimensional learning materials in dissection activities?

Can virtual dissections/#D instruction enhance their engagement w/science dissections? (How they thought they took advantage of the different media in each condition with paper,live frog and virtual dissections?) Reframing: Can various forms of 3D instruction motivate / learning,

Add social learning theories of: Branford & Schwartz, Vygotsky on scaffolding, proximal development (3D theorists), Piaget on children and three dimensional learning, Howard Gardner, learning styles, spatial intelligence and children. Patty Greenfield, solo vs collaborative learning, Eleanor Duckworth, fun, learning and Grit

Data:

� Pre and post labeling exercise scores

� Gains from Pre and post

� Lab test scores

� Questionnaires for paper frog, dissection and visualization

Coding structure for open-ended questions

Coding differently?

Use some numerical comparisons for some

Correlate lab tests with�

About � wanted to learn on their own�didn�t want to do group thing.

3 of 16 got it on their own; other 13 stated that it was fun because I did it with the help of my classmates. 6-7 thought collaboration made it fun and allowed them to complete�

� had3D simulation experience before; � had origami experience, � had dissection

Only 2 (of 16) thought it wasn�t fun�.

� said yes they learned more with simulation; the rest said they learned more with the live dissection

The different versions intrigued them. The live dissection was most helpful (5-6 of 16) (touch it and move it). Virtual was more fun.

Matching scores with their self-reporting on difficulty they had.

1) How do you feel you learn best?

I would like to work closely with you to refine my dissertation for completion in 30 to 60 days (my draft is 90 pages with references, when we add the final chapters, probably btw 100 to 125 pages.

My advisors would like me to focus on three of the 16 students (lowest, middle and highest performance on the tests and questionnaires and audio recordings) and do mini case studies of how they responded.

Research questions: How do students respond to different multi-dimensional learning materials in dissection activities?

Can virtual dissections/#D instruction enhance their engagement w/science dissections? (How they thought they took advantage of the different media in each condition with paper,live frog and virtual dissections?) Reframing: Can various forms of 3D instruction motivate / learning,

Add social learning theories of: Branford & Schwartz, Vygotsky on scaffolding, proximal development (3D theorists), Piaget on children and three dimensional learning, Howard Gardner, learning styles, spatial intelligence and children. Patty Greenfield, solo vs collaborative learning, Eleanor Duckworth, fun, learning and Grit

Data:

� Pre and post labeling exercise scores

� Gains from Pre and post

� Lab test scores

� Questionnaires for paper frog, dissection and visualization

Coding structure for open-ended questions

Coding differently?

Use some numerical comparisons for some

Correlate lab tests with�

About � wanted to learn on their own�didn�t want to do group thing.

3 of 16 got it on their own; other 13 stated that it was fun because I did it with the help of my classmates. 6-7 thought collaboration made it fun and allowed them to complete�

� had3D simulation experience before; � had origami experience, � had dissection

Only 2 (of 16) thought it wasn�t fun�.

� said yes they learned more with simulation; the rest said they learned more with the live dissection

The different versions intrigued them. The live dissection was most helpful (5-6 of 16) (touch it and move it). Virtual was more fun.

Matching scores with their self-reporting on difficulty they had.

1) How do you feel you learn best?