Reviews of Biology and Mathematics APPs for Use by Science and Mathematics Teachers

Judith A Bazler^1, , Letty Graybill¹, Meta VanSickle², Kyle Seiverd³, Dorothy Varygiannes⁴, Erik Tiernan⁵ and Charles Volpi⁵

¹Science Education, Monmouth University, West Long Branch, NJ

²Science Education, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC

³Biology, Tom’s River North High School, Tom’s River, NJ

⁴Mathematics Education, Monmouth University, West Long Branch, NJ

⁵Monmouth University, West Long Branch, NJ

Cite this paper:
Judith A Bazler, Letty Graybill, Meta VanSickle, Kyle Seiverd, Dorothy Varygiannes, Erik Tiernan and Charles Volpi. Reviews of Biology and Mathematics APPs for Use by Science and Mathematics Teachers. American Journal of Educational Research. 2016; 4(1):40-46. doi: 10.12691/education-4-1-8

Abstract

In science education, the question about using technology to teach the content and concepts is enduring. The complexity of teaching content, concepts and practices is expressed at the same time that technology has “advanced” to multiple devices beyond the desktop or laptop forms of computers to devices that are hand-held and range from e-readers to iPads and beyond. Each device has applications (Apps) that range from transmission of content to learning tools. Because no formal evaluation of Ipad Apps exists, a method was developed and implemented for our research. Researchers in this study developed a method for reviewing science and mathematics Apps and provided a list of the “top” Apps in an alphabetical topic list found in a newly developed website.

Keywords:
review biology and mathematics APPs learning tools

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

References:

[1]	Banister, S. (2010). Integrating the iPod Touch in K-12 education: Visions and vices. Computers in the Schools, 27(2), 121-131.
[2]	Conrad, C. & Dunek, L. (2012). Cultivating inquiry-driven learners. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Edelson, D.C. (2001). Learning-for-use: A framework for the design of technology supported inquiry activities. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(3), 355-385.
[3]	Glasersfeld, E. (1989). Construction of knowledge. Salinas, CA: Intersystem Communications.
[4]	Gourova, E., Asenova, A., & Dulev, P. (2013) Integrated platform for mobile learning. In Sampson, D.G., Isaias, P., Ifenthaler, D., & Spector, M.J. (Eds.), Ubiquitous and mobile learning in the digital age (pp. 67-92). Retrieved from http://link.springer. com.nuncio.cofc.edu/book/10.1007/978-1-4614-3329-3/page/1#.
[5]	Hew, K.F. & Brush, T. (2006). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Education Technology Research Development, 223-252.
[6]	Kim, S.H., Holmes, K., & Mims, C. (2005). Mobile wireless technology use and implementation: Opening a dialogue on the new technologies in education. TechTrends, 49(3), 54-63.
[7]	Levine, M.H. & Santo, R. (2013). Upgrading afterschool: Common sense shifts in expanded learning for a digital age. In T.K. Peterson (Ed.), Expanding minds and opportunities: Leveraging the power of afterschool and summer learning for student success (pp. 115-120). Washington, DC: Collaborative Communications Group.
[8]	Mislter-Jackson, M. & Songer, N. (2000). Student motivation and internet technology: Are students empowered to learn science? Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(5), 459-479.
[9]	National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices and crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
[10]	Rodrigues, S. (2007). Pedagogic practice integrating primary science and elearning: The need for relevance, recognition, resource, reflection, readiness and risk. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 5(2), 175-189.
[11]	Russell, M., Bebell, D., O’Dwyer, L., & O’Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 297-310.
[12]	Sampson, D.G. & Zervas, P. (2013). Context-aware adaptive and personalized mobile learning systems. In Sampson, D.G., Isaias, P., Ifenthaler, D., & Spector, M.J. (Eds.), Ubiquitous and mobile learning in the digital age (pp. 3-17).
[13]	Sharples, M., Taylor, J., &Vavoula, G. (2007).A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Sage handbook of e-learning research (pp. 221-247). London, UK: Sage.
[14]	Sun, K., Lin, Y., & Yu, C. (2008). A study on learning effect among different learning styles in a web-based lab of science for elementary school students. Computers & Education, 50, 1411-1422.
[15]	Swan, K., van’t Hooft, M., Kratcoski, A., & Unger, D. (2005). Uses and effects of mobile computing devices in K-8 classrooms. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(1), 99-112.
[16]	Van’t Hooft, M. (2013). The potential of mobile technologies to connect teaching and Learning inside and outside the classroom. In Mouza, C. &Lavigne, N. (Eds.), Emerging technologies for the classroom (pp. 175-186).
[17]	Waight, N., & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2007). The impact of technology on the enactment of “inquiry” in a technology enthusiast’s sixth grade science classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 154-182.
[18]	Wegerif, R., Littleton, K., & Jones, A. (2003). Stand-alone computers supporting learning dialogues in primary classrooms. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 851-860.
[19]	Wise, B. & Schwartzbeck, T.D. (2013). Technology makes learning available 24/7: Digital learning in expanded learning spaces after school and during the summertime. In T.K. Peterson (Ed.), Expanding minds and opportunities: Leveraging the power of afterschool and summer learning for student success (pp. 110-114). Washington, DC: Collaborative Communications Group.