posters

Natalia Spitha & Rüdiger Tiemann: Simulationsbasierte Lernaktivitäten für Chemiestudierende

• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Princeton Hall.
• Heublein, U., Schmelzer, R., & Sommer, D. (2008). Die Entwicklung der Studienabbruchquoten an den deutschen Hochschulen. Report. Hannover.
• Hosbein, K. N., & Barbera, J. (2020). Development and evaluation of novel science and chemistry identity measures. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(3), 852-877
• Schwedler, S., & Kaldewey, M. (2020). Linking the submicroscopic and symbolic level in physical chemistry: how voluntary simulation-based learning activities foster first-year university students’ conceptual understanding. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 21(4), 1132-1147.
• Thiry, H., Laursen, S. L., & Hunter, A. B. (2011). What experiences help students become scientists? A comparative study of research and other sources of personal and professional gains for STEM undergraduates. The Journal of Higher Education, 82(4), 357-388.

Lisa Bering & Rüdiger Tiemann: Model-Eliciting-Activities (MEA´s) im Chemieunterricht

• Zawojewski, J., Capobianco, B., & Hjalmarson, M. (2004). Model Eliciting Activities: An In Class Approach To Improving Interest And Persistence Of Women In Engineering. In 2004 Annual Conference (pp. 9-919). 
• Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A., Post, T., (2000) Principles for Developing Thought-Revealing Activities forStudents and Teachers. In A. Kelly, R. Lesh (Eds.), Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education. (pp. 591-646). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey.
• Vogel, F., Fischer, F. (2020). Computerunterstütztes kollaboratives Lernen. In: H. Niegemann, A. Weinberger (Eds.), Handbuch Bildungstechnologie. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

Christian Dictus-Christoph & Rüdiger Tiemann: MINT-Town - eine Lernumgebung zur Förderung von kritischem Denken im Chemieunterricht

• Bangor, A., Kortum, P. T., & Miller, J. T. (2008). An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 24(6), 574-594. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10447310802205776
• Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A 'quick and dirty' usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, I. L. McClelland, & B. Weerdmeester (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189-194). Taylor & Francis. 
• Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining "Gamification". Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, Tampere, Finland.
• Dictus, C., & Tiemann, R. (2021). Fostering Critical Thinking by a Gamification Approach. 11th International Conference – The  Future of Education (Virtual Edition), Firenze, Italy.
• Ennis, R. H. (2011). Critical Thinking: Reflection and Perspective - Part I. Inquiry - Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 26(1), 4-18. 
• EU. (2019). Key competencies for lifelong learning. In European Commission (Ed.), Education and Training (pp. 1-20). Luxembourg. 
• Iosup, A., & Epema, D. (2014). An experience report on using gamification in technical higher education. 45th ACM technical symposium on Computer science education, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. 
• Kim, J. T., & Lee, W. H. (2013). Dynamical model for gamification of learning (DMGL). Multimedia Tools and Applications (August 2013), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-013-1612-8 
• Kim, S., Song, K., Lockee, B., & Burton, J. (2018). Gamification in Learning and Education. Springer. https://doi.org/19.1007/978-3-319-47283-6 
• OECD. (2018). The Future of Education and Skills - Education 2030. OECD Publishing.

Yico Ying & Rüdiger Tiemann: Assessing collaborative problem-solving (CPS) skills in chemistry education research

• Avry, S., Chanel, G., Bétrancourt, M., & Molinari, G. (2020). Achievement appraisals, emotions and socio-cognitive processes: How they interplay in collaborative problem-solving?. Computers in Human Behavior, 107, 106267.
• Chang, C. J., Chang, M. H., Liu, C. C., Chiu, B. C., Fan Chiang, S. H., Wen, C. T., ... & Chai, C. S. (2017). An analysis of collaborative problem‐solving activities mediated by individual‐based and collaborative computer simulations. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 33(6), 649-662.
• Griffin, P., & Care, E. (Eds.). (2014). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Methods and approach. Springer.
• Heller, K. A., & Perleth, C. (2000). Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4. bis 12. Klassen, Revision: KFT 4-12+ R. Beltz-Test.
• Hendarwati, E., Nurlaela, L., Bachri, B., & Sa'ida, N. (2021). Collaborative Problem based learning integrated with online learning. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 16(13), 29-39.
• Krell, M. (2015). Evaluating an instrument to measure mental load and mental effort using Item Response Theory.
• Kuo, B. C., Liao, C. H., Pai, K. C., Shih, S. C., Li, C. H., & Mok, M. M. C. (2020). Computer-based collaborative problem-solving assessment in Taiwan. Educational Psychology, 40(9), 1164-1185.
• Minkley, N., Kärner, T., Jojart, A., Nobbe, L., & Krell, M. (2018). Students' mental load, stress, and performance when working with symbolic or symbolic–textual molecular representations. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(8), 1162-1187.
• OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 collaborative problem-solving framework. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20Collaborative%20Problem%20Solving%20Framework%20.pdf.
• O'Neil, H. F., Chuang, S. H., & Chung, G. K. (2003). Issues in the computer-based assessment of collaborative problem solving. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 10(3), 361-373.
• Rosen, Y. (2015). Computer-based assessment of collaborative problem solving: Exploring the feasibility of human-to-agent approach. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 25(3), 380-406.
• Rost, M. (2021). Modelle als Mittel der Erkenntnisgewinnung im Chemieunterricht der Sekundarstufe I: Entwicklung und quantitative Dimensionalitätsanalyse eines Testinstruments aus epistemologischer Perspektive. Logos Verlag Berlin.
• Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. The journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201-241.
• Slotta, J. D., & Linn, M. C. (2000). The knowledge integration environment: Helping students use the Internet effectively. Innovations in science and mathematics education: Advanced designs for technologies of learning, 193-226.
• Turcotte, S. (2012). Computer-supported collaborative inquiry on buoyancy: A discourse analysis supporting the “pieces” position on conceptual change. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21(6), 808-825.

Joachim Kranz & Rüdiger Tiemann: Modell des inklusive Chemieunterrichts - drei Schritte zur inklusiven Bildung

• Abels, S. & Markic, S. (2013). Umgang mit Vielfalt – Neue Perspektiven im Chemieunterricht. Naturwissenschaften im Unterricht – Chemie, S. 2–6.
• Frohn, J., Brodesser, E., Moser, V. & Pech, D. (2019). Inklusives Lehren und Lernen. Allgemein- und fachdidaktische Grundlagen. Bad Heilbrunn: Verlag Julius Klinkhardt, 209 S.
• Heimlich, U. & Kahlert, J. (2014). Inklusion in Schule und Unterricht. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer-Verlag
• Huwer, J. & Eilks, I. (2017). Multitouch Learning Books für schulische und außerschulische Bildung. In J. Messinger-Koppelt, S. Schanze & J.·Gross (Hg.), Lernprozesse mit digitalen Werkzeugen unterstützen. Perspektiven aus der Didaktik naturwissenschaftlicher Fächer (S. 81−94). Hamburg: J. Herz Stiftung.
• Kranz, J. & Tiemann, R. (2020). Inklusion und Problemlösen im Chemieunterricht − ein Modellansatz. In S. Habig (Hg.), Naturwissenschaftliche Kompetenzen in der Gesellschaft von morgen (S. 796−799). Gesellschaft für Didaktik der Chemie und Physik.
• Kranz, J. & Tiemann, R. (2021). Multitouch-Learning-Books im Chemieunterricht, MNU-Journal. 03.2021, 240-245. Neuss: Verlag Klaus Seeberger.
• Prediger, S. & Aufschnaiter, C. v. (2017). Umgang mit heterogenen Lernvoraussetzungen aus fachdidaktischer Perspektive. In Bohl, T., Budde, J. & Rieger-Ladich, M. (Hrsg.), Umgang mit Heterogenität in Schule und Unterricht. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt, 291-307.
• Puentedura, Ruben R. (2015): SAMR - A Brief Introduction. Abgerufen von: http://hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2015/10/SAMR_ABriefIntro.pdf, (09.11.2019)
• Ramseger, J. & Anders, Y. (2013). Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zur Arbeit der Stiftung „Haus der kleinen Forscher“. Schaffhausen: SCHUBI Lernmedien AG, Bd. 5.
• Rose, D. & Meyer, A. (2013). Universal Design for Learning: Theory and Practice. Wakefield: Cast Publishing.
• Reiners, C. & Groß, K. (2017). Aktuelle Herausforderungen im Chemieunterricht. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
• Seitz, S. (2018). Forschung zu inklusivem Sachunterricht – Bestandsaufnahme und Perspektiven. In: Pech, D., Schomaker, C. & Simon, T. (Hrsg.): Sachunterrichtsdidaktik & Inklusion. Ein Beitrag zur Entwicklung. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider, S. 96-111.
• Stäudel, L. (2009). Differenzieren im Chemieunterricht - Eine Herausforderung für Lehrkräfte, Lernende und das Selbstverständnis von Schule – In: Unterricht Chemie, Differenzieren - Heft 111/112, 20. Jg. S. 8-12.
• Stäudel, L. (2009). Aufgaben mit gestuften Hilfen – In: Unterricht Chemie, Differenzieren - Heft 111/112, 20. Jahrgang, S. 72-78.
• UNESCO (1994). Salamanca-Framework. World conference on special need education: acces and quality. In: http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_E.PDF. (25.08.2019).
• Wodzinski, R., Hänze, M. & Stäudel, L. (2005) Lernen von Physik und Chemie durch Aufgaben mit gestuften Lernhilfen. In: A. Pitton, Lehren und Lernen mit neuen Medien. Kassel: GdCP. Universität Kassel.

Christian Kressmann & Rüdiger Tiemann: Kreatives Denken und Problemlöser im Chemieunterricht

• Amabile, T. M. (1982). Social Psychology of Creativity: A Consensual Assessment Technique. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, (43), 997–1013.
• Arnold, K., Eberle, A., Fleischer, H., Hein, A., Kronabel, C., Lüttgens, U. et al. (2017). Fokus Chemie - 9./10. Schuljahr (Berlin, Brandenburg,1. Auflage, [Neubearbeitung]. Berlin: Cornelsen.
• Runco, M. A. (2014). Creativity. Theories and Themes: Research, Development, and Practice (2nd ed.). San Diego: Elsevier Science & Technology. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/kxp/detail.action?docID=1641933
• Treffinger, D. J., Selby, E. C. & Isaksen, S. G. (2008). Understanding individual problem-solving style: A key to learning and applying creative problem solving. Learning and Individual Differences, 18(4), 390–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2007.11.007

Adrian Schmidt, Rüdiger Tiemann & Gunnar Friege: Conditions of effective problem solving

• [1] Loibl, Katharina; Roll, Ido; Rummel, Nikol (2017): Towards a Theory of When and How Problem Solving Followed by Instruction Supports Learning. In: Educ Psychol Rev 29 (4), S. 693–715. DOI: 10.1007/s10648-016-9379-x.
• [2] Taconis, R.; Ferguson-Hessler, M.G.M.; Broekkamp, H. (2001): Teaching science problem solving: An overview of experimental work. In: J. Res. Sci. Teach. 38 (4), S. 442–468. DOI: 10.1002/tea.1013.
• [3] Hattie, John; Beywl, Wolfgang; Zierer, Klaus (2013): Lernen sichtbar machen: Schneider-Verl. Hohengehren.
• [4] Fischer, Frank; Kollar, Ingo; Ufer, Stefan; Sodian, Beate; Hussmann, Heinrich; Pekrun, Reinhard et al. (2014): Scientific Reasoning and Argumentation: Advancing an Interdisciplinary Research Agenda in Education. In: Frontline Learning Research 2 (3), 28-45. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1090940.
• [5] Heindl, Manuela (2019): Inquiry-Based Learning and the Pre-Requisite for Its Use in Science at School: A Meta-Analysis 3 (2), 52-61 (10 Seiten). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED597954.
• [6] Page, M. J.; McKenzie, J. E.; Bossuyt, P. M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T. C.; Mulrow, C. D. et al. (2021): The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. In: The BMJ 372. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71.

Christian Dictus-Christoph & Rüdiger Tiemann: Critical Thinking spielerisch lernen

• Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011, 28.-30.09). From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining "Gamification". Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, Tampere, Finland.
• Dictus, C., & Tiemann, R. (2021, 01.-02.07.). Fostering Critical Thinking by a Gamification Approach. 11th International Conference – The  Future of Education (Virtual Edition), Firenze, Italy.
• Ennis, R. H. (2011). Critical Thinking: Reflection and Perspective - Part I. Inquiry - Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 26(1), 4-18. 
• Ennis, R. H. & Millman J. (2005). Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level X, (5. Ed.). The Critical Thinking Co., 1991 Sherman Ave., Suite 200, North Bend. ISBN 978-0-89455-286-1
• EU. (2019). Key competencies for lifelong learning. In European Commission (Ed.), Education and Training (pp. 1-20). Luxembourg. 
• Heller, K. A. & Perleth, C. (2000). Kognitiver Fähigkeitstest für 4. bis 12. Klassen, Revision. Göttingen: Beltz.
• Krell, M. (2015). Evaluating an instrument to measure mental load and mental effort using Item Response Theory. Science Education Review Letters, Volume 2015, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.18452/8212
• OECD. (2018). The Future of Education and Skills - Education 2030. OECD Publishing.

Lisa Bering & Rüdiger Tiemann: Förderung der Modellierungskompetenz durch MEA´s

• Diefes-Dux, H., Follman, D., Imbrie, P. K., Zawojewski, J., Capobianco, B., & Hjalmarson, M. (2004). Model Eliciting Activities: An In Class Approach To Improving Interest And Persistence Of Women In Engineering. In 2004 Annual Conference (S. 9.919.1-9.919.15).
• Lesh, R., Hoover, M., Hole, B., Kelly, A., Post, T., (2000) Principles for Developing Thought-Revealing Activities forStudents and Teachers. In A. Kelly, R. Lesh (Hrsg.), Research Design in Mathematics and Science Education. (S. 591-646). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, New Jersey.
• Koch, S., Krell, M., & Krüger, D. (2015). Förderung von Modellkompetenz durch den Einsatz einer Blackbox. Erkenntnisweg Biologiedidaktik, 93–108.
• Fleige, J., Seegers, A., Upmeier zu Belzen, A. & Krüger, D. (2012a). Förderung von Modellkompetenz im Biologieunterricht. In: MNU 65(1), 19–28