Research

Here we will list some of our favourite papers, books, and other research-based reports dealing with technology-enhanced mathematics and science teaching and learning:

  1. Milner‐Bolotin, M., & Milner, V. (2025). Increasing student science, technology, engineering and mathematics engagement through phyphox activities: Three practical examples. Future in Educational Research, 3(1), 111-126. CLICK HERE 
  2. Milner-Bolotin, M. (2025). From TV to AI: Evolving Challenges and Enduring Questions in STEM Education [Commentary]. Canadian Journal of Science Mathematics and Technology Education, 1-10. CLICK HERE
  3. Milner-Bolotin, M., & Martinovic, D. (2025). Creative approaches for 21st-century Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics teacher education: From theory to practice to policy. Future in Education Research, 3(1), 5-12. CLICK HERE
  4. Liu, Y., Odic, D., Tang, X., Ma, A., Laricheva, M., Chen, G., Wu, S., Niu, M., Guo, Y., & Milner-Bolotin, M. (2023). Effects of Robotics Education on Young Children’s Cognitive Development: a Pilot Study with Eye-Tracking. Journal of Science Education and Technology. CLICK HERE
  5. Milner-Bolotin, M., & Milner, V. (2023). Breaking the vicious circle of secondary science education with twenty-first-century technology: Smartphone physics labs. In Challenges in science education: Global perspectives for the future (pp. 177-199). Cham: Springer International Publishing. CLICK HERE
  6. Milner-Bolotin, M. (2012). Increasing Interactivity and Authenticity of Chemistry Instruction through Data Acquisition Systems and Other Technologies. Journal of Chemical Education, 89(4), 477-481. CLICK HERE.
  7. Moll, R., & Milner-Bolotin, M. (2009). The Effect of Interactive Lecture Experiments on Student Academic Achievement and Attitudes towards Physics. Canadian Journal of Physics, 87(8), 917-924. CLICK HERE.
  8. Milner-Bolotin, M., & Moll, R. F. (2008). Physics Exam Problems Reconsidered: Using Logger Pro Technology to Evaluate Student Understanding of Physics. The Physics Teacher, 46(8), 494-500. CLICK HERE.
  9. Hoyles, C., & Noss, R. (2008). Next steps in implementing Kaput’s research programme. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(2), 85-97. CLICK HERE.
  10. Lasry, N. (2008). Clickers or Flashcards: Is There Really a Difference? The Physics Teacher, 46(May), 242-244. CLICK HERE.
  11. Milner-Bolotin, M., Kotlicki, A., & Rieger, G. (2007). Can Students Learn from Lecture Demonstrations: The Role and Place of Interactive Lecture Experiments in Large Introductory Science Courses. Journal of College Science Teaching, 36(4), 45-49. CLICK HERE.
  12. Perkins, K., Adams, W., Dubson, M., Finkelstein, N., Reid, S., Wieman, C., et al. (2006). PhET: Interactive Simulations for Teaching and Learning Physics. The Physics Teacher, 44(January 2006), 18-23. CLICK HERE.
  13. Wieman, C., & Perkins, K. (2005). Transforming Physics Education Physics Today, 58(11), 36-42. CLICK HERE or Download PDF
  14. Healy, L., & Hoyles, C. (1999). Visual and Symbolic Reasoning in Mathematics: Making Connections With Computers? Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1(1), 59-84. CLICK HERE.
  15. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers. CLICK HERE.