All Journal Articles

1. Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E., Hostetler, A., Fradkin, A., & Polikov, V. (in press). Substantial integration of typical educational games into extended curricula. Journal of the Learning Sciences.

2. Kinnebrew, J., Killingsworth, S., Clark, D. B., Biswas, G., Sengupta, P., Minstrell, J., Martinez-Garza, M., & Krinks, K., (in press). Contextual markup and mining in digital games for science learning: Connecting player behaviors to learning goals. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies. 

3. Clark, D. B., Virk, S. S., Barnes, J., & Adams, D. M. (2016 online) Self-explanation and digital games: Adaptively increasing abstraction. Computers & Education, 103, 28-43. DOI 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.010

4. Clark, D. B., Tanner-Smith, E., & Killingsworth, S. (2016) Digital games, design, and learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 79-122. doi: 10.3102/003465431558206 http://rer.sagepub.com/content/86/1/79.full.pdf+html 

5. Clark, D. B., Virk, S. S.*, Sengupta, P., Brady, C., Martinez-Garza, M.*, Krinks, K.*, Killingsworth, S.*, Kinnebrew, J.*, Biswas, G., Barnes, J.*, Minstrell, J., Nelson, B., Slack, K.*, & D’Angelo, C. M.*(2016). SURGE’s evolution deeper into formal representations: The siren’s call of popular game-play mechanics. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 7(1), 107-146. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/journals/index.php/ijdl/article/view/19359

6. Sengupta, P. & Clark, D. B. (2016) Playing modeling games in the science classroom: The case for disciplinary integration. Educational Technology, 56,(3), 16-22.

7. Basu, S., Biswas, G., Sengupta, P., Dickes, A., Kinnebrew, J., & Clark, D. B. (2016). Identifying middle school students' challenges in computational thinking based science learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning. 11(1), 1-35. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s41039-016-0036-2

8.  Sengupta, P., Krinks, K., & Clark, D. B. (2015). Learning to deflect: Conceptual change in physics during digital game play. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 24(4), 638-674, DOI: 10.1080/10508406.2015.1082912.

9. Killingsworth, S., Clark, D. B., & Adams, D. (2015). Self-explanation and explanatory feedback in games: individual differences, gameplay, and learning. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology. 3(3), 162-186. http://ijemst.com/issues/3_3_1_Killingsworth_Clark_Adams.pdf

10. Virk, S. S., Clark, D. B., & Sengupta, P. (2015). Digital games as multirepresentational environments for science learning: Implications for theory, research, and design. Educational Psychologist. 50(4), 286-312. DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2015.1128331

11. Clark, D. B. & Martinez-Garza, M. (2015). Deep analysis of nuances and epistemic frames around argumentation and learning in informal learning spaces. Computers in Human Behavior, 53, 617-620. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.066

12. Clark, D. B., Sengupta, P., Brady, C., Martinez-Garza, M., & Killingsworth, S. (2015). Disciplinary integration in digital games for science learning. International STEM Education Journal, 2(2), 1-21. DOI: 10.1186/s40594-014-0014-4. http://www.stemeducationjournal.com/content/pdf/s40594-014-001404.pdf 

13. Schleigh, S. P., Clark, D. B., & Menekse, M. (2015). Constructed-response as an alternative to interviews in conceptual change studies: Students' explanations of force. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(1), 14-36. http://ijemst.com/issues/3.1.2.Schleigh_Clark_Menekse.pdf 

14. Van Eaton, G., Clark, D.B., & Smith, B.E. (2015). Patterns of physics reasoning in face-to-face and online forum collaboration around a digital game. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 3(1), 1-13. http://ijemst.com/issues/3.1.1.Van_Eaton_Clark_Smith.pdf

15. Clark, D. B., Menekse, M., Ozdemir, G., D’Angelo, C. M., & Schleigh, S. (2014). Exploring sources of variation in studies of knowledge structure coherence: Comparing force meanings and force meaning consistency across two Turkish cities. Science Education, 98(1), 143-181.

16. Adams, D. & Clark D. B. (2014). Integrating self-explanation functionality into a complex game environment: keeping gaming in motion. Computers and Education, 73, 149-159.

17. Martinez-Garza, M., Clark, D. B., & Nelson, B. (2013). Advances in assessment of students’ intuitive understanding of physics through gameplay data. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations, 5(4), 1-16.

18. Martinez-Garza, M., Clark, D. B., & Nelson, B., (2013). Digital games and the US National Research Council’s science proficiency goals. Studies in Science Education, 49(2), 170-208.

19. Sengupta, P., Kinnebrew, J., Basu, S., Biswas, G., & Clark, D. (2013). Integrating computational thinking with K12 science education using agent-based computation: A theoretical framework. Education & Information Technologies, 18(2), 351-380.

20. Clark, D. B., Touchman, S., Martinez-Garza, M., Ramirez-Marin, F., & Drews, C. S. (2012). Bilingual language supports in online science inquiry environments. Computers and Education, 58(4), 1207-1224.

21. Clark, D. B., D’Angelo, C. & Schleigh S. (2011). Comparison of students' knowledge structure coherence and understanding of force in the Philippines, Turkey, China, Mexico, and the United States. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(20), 207-261.

22. Clark, D. B., Nelson, B., Chang, H., D’Angelo, C. M., 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 and Education, 57(3), 2178-2195.

23. Sampson, V. D. & Clark, D. B. (2011). A Comparison of the collaborative scientific argumentation practices of two high and two low performing groups. Research in Science Education, 41(1), 63-97.

24. Clark, D. B., D’Angelo, C. M., & Menekse, M. (2009). Initial structuring of online discussions to improve learning and argumentation: Incorporating students' own explanations as seed comments versus an augmented-preset approach to seeding discussions. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18(4), 321-333.

25. Ozdemir, G. & Clark, D. B. (2009). Knowledge structure coherence in Turkish students’ understanding of force. Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 46(5), 570-596.

26. Sampson, V. D. & Clark, D. B. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science Education, 93(3), 448-484.

27. Clark, D. B., & Sampson, V. D. (2008). Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 293-321.

28. Sampson, V. D. & Clark, D. B. (2008). Assessment of the ways students generate arguments in science education: Current perspectives and recommendations for future directions. Science Education, 92(3), 447-72.

29. Clark, D. B., Reynolds, S., Lemanowski, V., Stiles, T., Yasar, S., Proctor, S., Lewis, E., Stromfors, C., & Corkins, J. (2008). University students' conceptualization and interpretation of topographic maps. International Journal of Science Education, 30(3), 377-408.

30. Clark, D., Sampson, V. D., Weinberger, A., & Erkens, G., (2007). Analytic frameworks for assessing dialogic argumentation in online learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 343-374.

31. Ozdemir, G. & Clark, D. B. (2007). An overview of conceptual change theories. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education, 3(4), 351-361.

32. Clark, D. B. & Sampson, V. D. (2007). Personally-Seeded Discussions to scaffold online argumentation. International Journal of Science Education 29(3), 253-277.

33. Weinberger, A., Clark, D., Häkkinen, P., Tamura, Y., & Fischer, F. (2007). Argumentative knowledge construction in online learning environments in and across different cultures: A collaboration script perspective. Research in Comparative and International Education 2(1), 68-79.

34. Medina-Jerez, W., Clark, D. B., & Ramirez-Marin, F. (2007). Science for ELL: Re-thinking our approach. The Science Teacher, 74(3), 52-56.

35. Sampson, V. D. & Clark, D. (2007). Incorporating scientific argumentation into inquiry-based activities with online personally-seeded discussions. The Science Scope, 30(6), 43-47.

36. Clark, D. B. (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.

37. Simons, K., & Clark, D. B. (2004). Supporting inquiry in science classrooms with the web. Computers in the Schools 3/4(21), 23-36.

38. Clark, D. B., & Jorde, D. (2004). Helping students revise disruptive experientially supported ideas about thermodynamics: Computer visualizations and tactile models. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 41(1), 1-23.

39. Clark, D. B. & Fischer, F. (2003). Learning through online collaborative discourse. The International Journal of Educational Policy, Research and Practice, IV(1), 11-16.

40. Clark, D. B., & Linn, M. C. (2003). Designing for knowledge integration: the impact of instructional time. Journal of Learning Sciences, 12(4), 451-493.

41. Clark, D. B., Weinberger, A., Jucks, I., Spitulnik, M., & Wallace, R. (2003). Designing effective science inquiry in text-based computer-supported collaborative learning environments. The International Journal of Educational Policy, Research and Practice, IV(1), 55-82.

42. Linn, M. C., Clark, D. B., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517-538.

43. Spitulnik, M., Bouillion, E., Rummel, N., Clark, D. B., Fischer, F. (2003). Collaborative online environments for lifelong learning: design issues from a situated learning perspective. The International Journal of Educational Policy, Research and Practice, IV(1), 83-116.

44. Clark, D. B., & Slotta, J. D. (2000). Evaluating media-enhancement and source authority on the internet: the Knowledge Integration Environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 859-871.

All Chapters in Books

1. Martinez-Garza, M. & Clark, D. B. (2016). Two systems, two stances: a novel theoretical framework for model-based learning in digital games. In P. Wouters and H. van Oostendorp (Eds.) Instructional Techniques to Facilitate Learning and Motivation of Serious Games (pp.37-58). Switzerland: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-39298-1_3

2. Clark, D. B., Sengupta, P. & Virk, S. S. (2016). Disciplinary-integrated games: Generalizing across domains and model types. Chapter in D. Russell and J. Laffey (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Gaming Trends in P-12 Education. (pp.178-194). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-9629-7

3. Martinez-Garza,M. Clark, D. B., Killingsworth, S, & Adams, D. M. (2016). Beyond fun: Pintrich, motivation to learn, and games for learning. Chapter in D. Russell and J. Laffey (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Gaming Trends in P-12 Education. (pp.1-32) Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-9629-7

4. Van Eaton, G., & Clark, D. B. (2016). Designing digital objects to scaffold learning. Chapter in D. Russell and J. Laffey (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Gaming Trends in P-12 Education (pp. 237-252). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi: 10.4018/978-1-4666-9629-7

5. Killingsworth, S., Adams, D., & Clark, D. B. (2016). Learning, cognition, and experimental control in an educational physics game. R. Lamb and D. McMahon (Eds.) Educational and Learning Games: New Research. (pp. 31-54) New York, NY: NOVA Publishing.

6. Clark, D. B., Sengupta, P. & Virk, S. (2016). Disciplinarily-integrated games: Generalizing across domains and model types. Chapter in D. Russell and J. Laffey (Eds.) Handbook of Research on Gaming Trends in P-12 Education. (pp. 178-194) Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-9629-7

7. Martinez-Garza, M., & Clark, D. B. (2015). Games for learning. In R. Gunstone (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Science Education (pp. 437-440). Dordrecht: Springer.

8. Clark, D. B. & Linn, M. C. (2013). The knowledge integration perspective: connections across research and education. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.) International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change (2nd Edition) (pp. 520-538). New York: Routledge.

9. Clark, D. B., & Sengupta, P. (2013). Argumentation and modeling: Integrating the products and practices of science to improve science education. In M. Khine & I. Saleh (Eds.), Approaches and Strategies in Next Generation Science Learning (pp. 85-105). Hershey, PA: IGI Global/Information Science References doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2809-0.ch005.

10. Ramirez-Marin, F. & Clark, D. B. (2013). Academic language in science for English learners. Arias, MB and Faltis, C. (Eds.), Academic Language in Second Language Learning (pp. 171-200). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

11. Martinez-Garza, M., & Clark, D. B. (2013). Teachers and teaching in game-based learning theory and practice. In M. Khine & I. Saleh (Eds.), Approaches and Strategies in Next Generation Science Learning (pp. 147-163). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2809-0.ch008.

12. Chinn, C., & Clark, D. B. (2013). Learning through collaborative argumentation. In Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Chinn, C. A., Chan, C. K. K., & O'Donnell, A. M. (Eds.) International Handbook of Collaborative Learning (pp. 314-332). New York: Routledge.

13. Clark, D. B., & 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.

14. Clark, D. B., Martinez-Garza, M., Biswas, G., Luecht, R. M., & 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.

15. Clark, D. B., Sampson, V. D., Chang, H., Zhang, H., Tate, E., & Schwendimann, B. (2011). Research on critique and argumentation from the Technology Enhanced Learning in Science Center. In M. Khine (Ed.) Perspectives on Scientific Argumentation: Theory, Practice and Research (pp. 157-200). The Netherlands: Springer.

16. Jeong, A., Clark, D. B., Sampson, V. D., & Menekse, M. (2010). Sequential analysis of scientific argumentation in asynchronous online discussion environments. S. Puntambekar, G. Erkens, & C. Hmelo-Silver (Eds.), Analyzing Interactions in CSCL (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series): Methods, Approaches and Issues (pp. 207-234). The Netherlands: Springer.

17. Clark, D. B., Sampson, V. D., Stegmann, K., Marttunen, M., Kollar, I., Janssen, J., Weinberger, A., Menekse, M., Erkens, G., & Laurinen, L. (2010). Online learning environments, scientific argumentation, and 21st century skills. In B. Ertl (Ed.) E-Collaborative Knowledge Construction: Learning from Computer-Supported and Virtual Environments (pp. 1-39). New York: IGI Global.

18. Clark, D. B., Varma, K., McElhaney, K., & Chiu, J. (2008). Design rationale within TELS projects to support knowledge integration. D. Robinson & G. Schraw (Eds.), Recent Innovations in Educational Technology that Facilitate Student Learning (pp. 157-193). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

19. Tate, E., Clark, D. B., Gallagher, J., & McLaughlin, D. (2008). Designing science instruction for diverse learners. In Y. Kali, M. C. Linn, & J. E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing Coherent Science Education (pp. 65-93). New York: Teachers College Press.

20. Clark, D. B. & Chaudury, S. R. (2008). Creating coherent inquiry projects to support student cognition and collaboration in physics. J. Luft, R. Bell, & J. Gess-Newsome (Eds.), Science as Inquiry in the Secondary Setting (pp. 65-77). Arlington, VA: National Science Teacher Association Press.

21. Clark, D. B., Stegmann, K., Weinberger, A., Menekse, M., & Erkens, G. (2008). Technology-enhanced learning environments to support students’ argumentation. In S. Erduran & M. P. Jiménez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from Classroom-based Research (pp. 217-243). Dordrecht: Springer.

22. D’Angelo, C. M., Touchman, S., & Clark, D. B. (2008). Overview of constructivism. In E. M. Anderman & L. H. Anderman (Eds.) Psychology of Classroom Learning: An Encyclopedia (Volume 1. pp. 262-267). New York: MacMillan Reference.

23. Baker, D., Piburn, M., & Clark, D. B. (2005). TEAMS: Working together to improve teacher education. In R. Yager (Ed.), Exemplary Science: Best Practices in Professional Development (pp. 35-44). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

24. Clark, D. B. (2004). Hands-on investigation in Internet environments: Teaching thermal equilibrium. In M. C. Linn, E. A. Davis., & P. Bell (Eds.), Internet Environments for Science Education (pp. 175-200). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

25. Clark, D. B., & Slotta, J. D. (2004). Web-based Inquiry Science Environment (WISE). In A. Kovalchick & K. Dawson (Eds.), Education & Technology: An Encyclopedia (Vol. 2, pp. 630-638). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.

26. Cuthbert, A. J., Clark, D. B., & Linn, M. C. (2002). WISE learning communities: Design considerations. In K.A. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.), Building Virtual Communities: Learning and Change in Cyberspace (pp. 215-246). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dissertation