July 23, 2007
Musings: Educational Theories and there place: Impact and design
In current academic practice we are able to adapt and utilise a vast array of theory and practical expertise to enable us to engage with the learner. An almost knowingly eclectic theoretical methodology is taken to achieve a practical solution with regard to teaching and learning. Choosing elements of Behaviourism, Instructional Design, Constructivism (and its variants ), Cognitivism, to purpose a module or programme. This does even begin to touch upon actual instances of practical methodologies in use; problem-based or inquiry led learning, co-operative learning, discussion based scenarios, case study work, simple ‘active’ engagement etc. It is a relative rarity to find a particular programme embracing and proclaiming a certain theoretical ethos as its mandate, however one would acknowledge that constructivism is the current vogue, and is perceptible in many a programme design, whether this was an explicit rationale may be another matter altogether. Though many academics espouse a certain way of practice, not all would be fully cogniscent of the intricacies of any given theoretical slant. With the advent of educational technologies many individuals have surreptiously signed up to a variety of theoretical leanings and practices unwittingly. The use of the virtual learning environment Moodle being one case in particular, this application is firmly set in a socio-constructivist frameset that allows for individuals to work within such parameters. Facilitators provide content and resources in a structure that engenders the social development and interaction of individuals, in so doing initial navigability of the system (finding the resources within) may take some time to familiarise one self with. Other VLE vendors have applied key instructional design principals to aid in the design and implementation of their packages, often assuming that a particular ‘route’ of learning will be taken on behalf of the end-user, these sometimes end up as effective ‘training tools’ but lacking some what in providing a sense of knowledge exploration and collaborative endeavour.
Musings: E-learning realities
The fundamental nature of education has scarcely changed over the last number of decades to any great degree, what has occurred however is a realisation of the shear amount of technical possibilities apparent to our everyday teaching and learning needs. This reality has been brought to the fore by talk of the ‘Net Generation’ entering our schools and universities. Where once we thought of students as ‘Play-Station’ aficionados looking for more and more ‘quick fixes’ in their learning processes – we even attempted to account for such a vague predilection by talking of ‘chunking’ information into bite-size elements in an attempt to cater for their ‘limited attention’ spans. The term the Net Generation brings a rather more mature concept, it includes an outlook akin to many of the socio influenced theories that pervade our teaching in line with an innate sense and ability to integrate current technologies into every day existence.
It is this seamlessness, of technology and purpose, that has evaded education, in the majority, when implementing e-learning. In what may appear a circular argument this chapter will aim to introduce the current practices with regard to technology in learning (we will talk in more detail about the terminology of ‘technology in learning’ below), it will point to an initial well meaning, but misguided attempt to integrate technical solutions into education, that failed (and is failing) to make the most of the available solutions – simply because it was the technology that implicitly led the way in which implementations were sourced and created.
The theoretical frameworks that are used in current practice derive from a myriad of psychological and sociological ideologies that are explicit in ‘traditional’ teaching and have been re-purposed (like an ideal re-usable e-resource) for the educational community to ‘pad’ the rationale of use in the practice of e-learning. We will examine the hereditary of these theories and attempt to map a taxonomy of development that accounts for present day practices.
The core argument of this chapter revolves around the issue that it is now time to make the technology explicit in practice and empower the teacher and learner in a way that reflects the needs of our ‘information and knowledge society’ in the way we utilise both technology and information seamlessly – as an integrated whole that serves the purpose of life-long learning.
In the current educational vogue we purport to offer accountability, from the educator, the learner, the institute and its wider geo-political contexts – such as Europe’s Bologna agreement.
Before we begin let us take a perambulation into the term of e-learning. A legal case taken by one of the larger virtual learning environment (VLE) vendors is proving quite contentious... Blackboard Vs Desire2Learn.
E-learning is an often used and perhaps misplaced term. Invariably it stands for one of two things: electronic learning or (the more politically correct) enhanced learning. From this we might assume that as learning implies the ‘act of or experience of one that learns’ then it must be so via electronic means for the term e-learning.
What systems are in place for the novice academic, the old hand and the individual aiming to up skill or simply integrate some minor technological features into their traditional teaching.
Much had been made of the need for inductions to technology on campus, increasing support and training for new tools and the ability of institutions to offer a strategically aligned top down approach to the integration of such technologies across the campus. Rather large sums of money have been spent on purchasing proprietary packages or even writing and creating software solutions in house to enable some formal deployment of e-learning or technology enhanced learning.
It is this seamlessness, of technology and purpose, that has evaded education, in the majority, when implementing e-learning. In what may appear a circular argument this chapter will aim to introduce the current practices with regard to technology in learning (we will talk in more detail about the terminology of ‘technology in learning’ below), it will point to an initial well meaning, but misguided attempt to integrate technical solutions into education, that failed (and is failing) to make the most of the available solutions – simply because it was the technology that implicitly led the way in which implementations were sourced and created.
The theoretical frameworks that are used in current practice derive from a myriad of psychological and sociological ideologies that are explicit in ‘traditional’ teaching and have been re-purposed (like an ideal re-usable e-resource) for the educational community to ‘pad’ the rationale of use in the practice of e-learning. We will examine the hereditary of these theories and attempt to map a taxonomy of development that accounts for present day practices.
The core argument of this chapter revolves around the issue that it is now time to make the technology explicit in practice and empower the teacher and learner in a way that reflects the needs of our ‘information and knowledge society’ in the way we utilise both technology and information seamlessly – as an integrated whole that serves the purpose of life-long learning.
In the current educational vogue we purport to offer accountability, from the educator, the learner, the institute and its wider geo-political contexts – such as Europe’s Bologna agreement.
Before we begin let us take a perambulation into the term of e-learning. A legal case taken by one of the larger virtual learning environment (VLE) vendors is proving quite contentious... Blackboard Vs Desire2Learn.
E-learning is an often used and perhaps misplaced term. Invariably it stands for one of two things: electronic learning or (the more politically correct) enhanced learning. From this we might assume that as learning implies the ‘act of or experience of one that learns’ then it must be so via electronic means for the term e-learning.
What systems are in place for the novice academic, the old hand and the individual aiming to up skill or simply integrate some minor technological features into their traditional teaching.
Much had been made of the need for inductions to technology on campus, increasing support and training for new tools and the ability of institutions to offer a strategically aligned top down approach to the integration of such technologies across the campus. Rather large sums of money have been spent on purchasing proprietary packages or even writing and creating software solutions in house to enable some formal deployment of e-learning or technology enhanced learning.
Publications
Reusable Learning Object Development Guidelines and Initiatives. White Paper. David Jennings & Catherine Bruen for the National Digital Learning Repository (http://www.learningcontent.edu.ie/)
A Problem and an Opportunity: E-Learning a case for collaboration, Chapter. David Jennings in Savin-Baden M. and Wilkie K (Eds) (2006) Virtually possible? Using Problem-based Learning Online
“E-Learning A Medium For Collaboration: A Case Study Of Shared Cognitive Development” Paper. IADIS International Conference Proceedings, On Cognition And Exploratory Learning In Digital Age (Celda 2005)
Virtually Effective: The Measure Of A Learning Environment, Chapter. David Jennings in
O’Neill, G., Moore, S. and McMullin, B. (Eds.) (2005) Emerging Issues in the Practice of University Learning and Teaching. Dublin: AISHE.
‘Virtually Effective.’ Article. October 2004 Prelimimary Paper in BbMatters http://www.bbmatters.net/bbmattersproject/default.asp
A Problem and an Opportunity: E-Learning a case for collaboration, Chapter. David Jennings in Savin-Baden M. and Wilkie K (Eds) (2006) Virtually possible? Using Problem-based Learning Online
“E-Learning A Medium For Collaboration: A Case Study Of Shared Cognitive Development” Paper. IADIS International Conference Proceedings, On Cognition And Exploratory Learning In Digital Age (Celda 2005)
Virtually Effective: The Measure Of A Learning Environment, Chapter. David Jennings in
O’Neill, G., Moore, S. and McMullin, B. (Eds.) (2005) Emerging Issues in the Practice of University Learning and Teaching. Dublin: AISHE.
‘Virtually Effective.’ Article. October 2004 Prelimimary Paper in BbMatters http://www.bbmatters.net/bbmattersproject/default.asp
Research Areas & Conference Papers
“e-learning Interventions: The Impact Of The Educational Technologist And Their Role In Curriculum Development”
David Jennings & Diane Cashman. IADIS International Conference e-Society 2007
*“An Exploration of e-learning Interventions: A Case study of the Impact Of Educational Technologists In Curriculum Development”
David Jennings & Diane Cashman, ALT-C Beyond Control Learning Technology for the social network generation, 2007.
“Case Study: Vet BioEn CoP - The NDLR License Work Flow”
David Jennings & Diane Cashman. Liability Licenses and the Law: The impact of digital repositories on institutional e-strategies. An NDLR Conference. October 19th 2006.
“Adduction and Semantics: The Evolution of Personalisation.”
Developing a Framework for e-Learning. 7th Annual Conference of the ICS HE Academy, Trinity College Dublin, 29th - 31st August 2006.
“LEIDDing the way... A Guide to the Life Cycle of Reusable Learning Resource Development for the NDLR” EdTech 2006, Sligo, Annual Conference of the Irish Learning Technology Association.
Panel Discussion: "Controlling eLearning costs – A Philosophical/Historical Perspective" EdTech 2006, Sligo, Annual Conference of the Irish Learning Technology Association.
“E-Learning A Medium For Collaboration: A Case Study Of Shared Cognitive Development”
IADIS International Conference, Porto, 14-16 Dec 2005, On Cognition And Exploratory Learning In Digital Age (Celda 2005)
‘The Challenge for Educationalists - Reaching the Learners”
Assessment Tomorrow, 21st Century Techniques and Technologies to Measure Skills and Knowledge: Dublin 13th October 2005.
“The Student, The Computer & Assessment.”
Forum On Teaching And Learning, September 2005, Conway Institute, UCD.
E-Learning a Medium for Collaboration: A Case Study of Shared Cognitive Development.
European Conference of Educational Researchers 2005, Dublin.
Evaluation of the Blackboard VLE (within UCD): A Reflection on Organisational Change and the Effects on Student Learning.
Joint Study completed by Computing Services and the Centre for Teaching and Learning.
Design of an Evaluation Tool to Aid and Assess the Effective Use and Integration of E-Learning into the Curriculum.
Developed in light of research on the usage of Blackboard.
Pedagogic Advantages Offered by E-Learning, AFANet International Workshop ‘Design and Implementation of Case Studies in Animal Ethics’, June 2004.
‘Virtually Effective: The Measure of a learning environment’ Presented at ALT-C 2004. http://www.alt.ac.uk/altc2004/timetable/abstract.php?abstract_id=169
David Jennings & Diane Cashman. IADIS International Conference e-Society 2007
*“An Exploration of e-learning Interventions: A Case study of the Impact Of Educational Technologists In Curriculum Development”
David Jennings & Diane Cashman, ALT-C Beyond Control Learning Technology for the social network generation, 2007.
“Case Study: Vet BioEn CoP - The NDLR License Work Flow”
David Jennings & Diane Cashman. Liability Licenses and the Law: The impact of digital repositories on institutional e-strategies. An NDLR Conference. October 19th 2006.
“Adduction and Semantics: The Evolution of Personalisation.”
Developing a Framework for e-Learning. 7th Annual Conference of the ICS HE Academy, Trinity College Dublin, 29th - 31st August 2006.
“LEIDDing the way... A Guide to the Life Cycle of Reusable Learning Resource Development for the NDLR” EdTech 2006, Sligo, Annual Conference of the Irish Learning Technology Association.
Panel Discussion: "Controlling eLearning costs – A Philosophical/Historical Perspective" EdTech 2006, Sligo, Annual Conference of the Irish Learning Technology Association.
“E-Learning A Medium For Collaboration: A Case Study Of Shared Cognitive Development”
IADIS International Conference, Porto, 14-16 Dec 2005, On Cognition And Exploratory Learning In Digital Age (Celda 2005)
‘The Challenge for Educationalists - Reaching the Learners”
Assessment Tomorrow, 21st Century Techniques and Technologies to Measure Skills and Knowledge: Dublin 13th October 2005.
“The Student, The Computer & Assessment.”
Forum On Teaching And Learning, September 2005, Conway Institute, UCD.
E-Learning a Medium for Collaboration: A Case Study of Shared Cognitive Development.
European Conference of Educational Researchers 2005, Dublin.
Evaluation of the Blackboard VLE (within UCD): A Reflection on Organisational Change and the Effects on Student Learning.
Joint Study completed by Computing Services and the Centre for Teaching and Learning.
Design of an Evaluation Tool to Aid and Assess the Effective Use and Integration of E-Learning into the Curriculum.
Developed in light of research on the usage of Blackboard.
Pedagogic Advantages Offered by E-Learning, AFANet International Workshop ‘Design and Implementation of Case Studies in Animal Ethics’, June 2004.
‘Virtually Effective: The Measure of a learning environment’ Presented at ALT-C 2004. http://www.alt.ac.uk/altc2004/timetable/abstract.php?abstract_id=169
June 20, 2006
Upcoming Paper
“Adduction and Semantics: The Evolution of Personalisation.”
Developing a Framework for e-Learning. 7th Annual Conference of the ICS HE Academy, Trinity College Dublin, 29th - 31st August 2006.
This paper explores the current use of educational technology and the realm of e-learning in particular in the light of the perceived challenges and threats of rationalisation and globalisation and proposes that their is a fundamental mis-representation of e-learning and its ability to change
the methodologies of teaching and learning in current practice.
Developing a Framework for e-Learning. 7th Annual Conference of the ICS HE Academy, Trinity College Dublin, 29th - 31st August 2006.
This paper explores the current use of educational technology and the realm of e-learning in particular in the light of the perceived challenges and threats of rationalisation and globalisation and proposes that their is a fundamental mis-representation of e-learning and its ability to change
the methodologies of teaching and learning in current practice.
May 23, 2006
The Proposal, a note or two
Below find references and rationale behind PhD, as always am re-writing, fine tuning and throwing yet another lense to the issues at hand.
Interestingly enough I appear to be a: being very philosophical or b: about to be a trouble maker! ... time will tell.
The title itself
An Epistemological Exploration of the Taxonomy Of E-Learning Models: Theoretical Foundations and the Implications for Future Practice
tells a few tales and will inevitably lead me down a few circuitous routes before even that is locked down. However I believe I have a defnitive track in mind, further writings will make this clear to the outside reader
D
Interestingly enough I appear to be a: being very philosophical or b: about to be a trouble maker! ... time will tell.
The title itself
An Epistemological Exploration of the Taxonomy Of E-Learning Models: Theoretical Foundations and the Implications for Future Practice
tells a few tales and will inevitably lead me down a few circuitous routes before even that is locked down. However I believe I have a defnitive track in mind, further writings will make this clear to the outside reader
D
PhD Proposal: References And Preliminary Biography
Atherton, J S (2003). Learning and Teaching: Learning index [On-line] UK: Available: http://www.learningandteaching.info/ Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Avouris, N., Dimitracopoulou A, & Komis V., 2003. On analysis of collaborative problem solving: An object – oriented approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 147-167
BECTA ICT Research, 2003. A Review Of The Research Literature On The Use Of Managed Learning Environments And Virtual Learning Environments In Education, And A Consideration Of The Implications For Schools In The United Kingdom.
www.becta.org.uk/page_documents/research/VLE_report.pdf Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Biggs, J. B. 1999. Teaching for quality learning. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Biggs, J. B. 1999. What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 18, No.1 p 57-75.
Billet, S. 1996 Situated learning: Bridging socio-cultural and cognitive theorising. Learning and Instruction, 6, 263-280.
Cooke, R and Sheeran, P. 2004. Moderation of cognition – intention and cognition – behaviour relations: A meta-analysis of properties of variables from the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology (2004), 43, 159–186.
Dillenbourg P. 1999. What do you mean by collaborative learning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed) Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. (pp.1-19). Oxford: Elsevier
Doise, W. ,& Mugny, G. 1984. The social development of the intellect. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Doise, W., & Mugny, G. 1979. Individual and collective conflicts of centrations in cognitive development. European Journal of Psychology, 9, 105-198.
Dolmans, D. H. J. M., De Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P., & Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M. 2005. Problem-based Learning: future challenges for educational practice and research. Medical Education 39: 732-741.
Entwistle, N., McCune, V. & Hounsell, J. 2002. Approaches to Studying and Perceptions of University Teaching-Learning Environments: Concepts, Measures and Preliminary findings. Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments in Undergraduate Courses Project. http://www.ed.ac.uk/etl Accessed 22.07.05
Entwistle, N.J. (1998). Improving teaching through research on student learning. In J.J.F. Forest, (ed.), University Teaching: International Perspectives. New York: Garland.
Evans, C.J, Kirby, J.R and Fabrigar, L.R. 2003. Approaches to learning, need for cognition, and strategic flexibility among university students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 507–528.
Garrison, D.R. & Anderson, T. 2003. E-Learning in the 21st Century. A Framework for Research and Practice. RoutledgeFalmer, London.
Harvey, J., Evaluation Cookbook, Learning Technology Dissemination Initiative, 1998, http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Johnson D. J., Suriya C., Won Yoon S., Berrett J.V & La Fleur J., 2002. Team development and group processes of virtual learning teams. In Computers & Education 39, 379–393.
Kearsley, G. 1994b. ‘Social Development Theory (L. Vygotsky)’. Explorations in Learning & Instruction: The Theory Into Practice Database. http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/vygotsky.html Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Knowles, M., & Knowles, H. 1959. Introduction to group dynamics. New York: Associated Press.
Kolb D A (1984) Experiential Learning: experience as the source of learning and development New Jersey: Prentice-Hall (0 13 295261 0)
Land, R. a. B., S., Ed. (2005). Education in Cyberspace. Oxon, RoutledgeFalmer.
Laurillard, D. 2002. Rethinking University Teaching: a framework for the effective use of educational technology (2nd edition) London; RoutledgeFalmer
LoBiondo-Wood, G & Haber, 1994. Nursing Research (3rd Edition) St Louis Mosby.
McGrath, J. E., & Hollingshead, A. E. 1994. Group interacting with technologies: ideas, evidence, issues, and agenda. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mainemelis, C., Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. 2002. Learning Styles and Adaptive Flexibility Testing Experiential Learning Theory. Management Learning Copyright 2002 Sage Publications London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi Vol. 33(1): 5-33
Mayes, J.T. (1995). Learning Technology and Groundhog Day. In: Strang, W., Simpson, V.,Slater, D., (eds.). Hypermedia at work: Practice and Theory in Higher Education. Canterbury:University of Kent Press.
Mayes, T. D. F., S (2005). Review Of E-Learning Theories, Frameworks And Models. Jisc E-Learning Models Desk Study. Jisc.
Mason, R. 1998. Models of Online Courses, ALN Magazine, Vol 2, issue 2 www.aln.org/alnweb/magazine/vol2_issue2/Masonfinal.htm Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Norris, D. M., Mason, J., Robson, R. Paul Lefrere, P. &Geoff Collier, G. 2003. A revolution in knowledge sharing. Educause Review, 38 (5), 15-26. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0350.pdf Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Nielsen. J, 2002. Top Ten Guidelines for Homepage Usability. Alertbox, http://www.useit.com/alertbox Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Olivera, F., & Straus, S. G. 2004. Group-to-individual transfer of learning: Cognitive and social factors, Small Group Research, 445-465
Palloff, R.M., and Pratt, K. 1999. Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. Josey-Bass Inc., San Francisco.
Paulus, T. 2005 Collaboration or Cooperation? Analysing Small Group Interactions in Educational Environments. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education. Ed Roberts, T.S. Idea Group Publishing, London.
The personal learning environments blog
http://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/ple
Resnick, L. B., Levine, J.M., Teasley, S.D. Eds. 1991. Perspectives On Socially Shared Cognition. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Roschelle, J. & Pea, R. 1999. Trajectories from today’s WWW to a powerful educational infrastructure. Educational Researcher, June-July, 22-25.
Salmon, G. 2000. E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. London, Kogan Page.
Salmon, G. 2003. E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. Kogan Page.
Salomon, G. 1993. Distributed cognitions. Psychological and educational considerations (pp.111-138) Cambridge, USA: Cambridge University Press
Savin-Baden, M. & Wilkie, K. Eds. 2004. Challenging Research in Problem-based Learning. Bell & Bain Ltd, Glasgow.
Schoenfeld, A. H. 1987. What’s all the fuss about metacognition? In A.H.Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp 189-215. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schon, D. A. 1983. The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Schmidt, H. G. 1993. Foundation of problem based learning: some explanatory notes. Medical Education 27, 422-432.
Soloman, B., A. & Felder, R. 1991. Index of Learning Styles. http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSpage.html Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Strijbos, Jan-Willem. 2004. "The effect of roles on computer-supported collaborative learning (Het effect van rollen op computerondersteund samenwerkend leren) http://e-learning.surf.nl/e-learning/onderzoek/2627 Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Strijbos, JW., Kirschner, P. A. & Martens, R. L., Eds 2004. What We Know about CSCL and Implementing it in Higher Education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
Thomas, T. 2002. Critical Thinking And Deep Cognitive Processing By Structured Discussion Board Activities. http://www.celt.lsu.edu/CFD/E-Proceedings/ Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Tuckman, B. W. 1965. Development sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 348–399.
van Boxtel, C., van der Linden, J. & Kanselaar, G 2000. Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction 10. 311-330.
von Glasserfeld, E. 1988. Cognition, construction of knowledge and Teaching (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED294 754.)
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (Original work published 1930).
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice. Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Wenger, E. 2004. Communities of Practice: a brief introduction Wenger, E. 2004. Communities of Practice: a brief introduction. http://www.ewenger.com Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Avouris, N., Dimitracopoulou A, & Komis V., 2003. On analysis of collaborative problem solving: An object – oriented approach. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 147-167
BECTA ICT Research, 2003. A Review Of The Research Literature On The Use Of Managed Learning Environments And Virtual Learning Environments In Education, And A Consideration Of The Implications For Schools In The United Kingdom.
www.becta.org.uk/page_documents/research/VLE_report.pdf Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Biggs, J. B. 1999. Teaching for quality learning. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Biggs, J. B. 1999. What the student does: teaching for enhanced learning. Higher Education Research and Development, Vol. 18, No.1 p 57-75.
Billet, S. 1996 Situated learning: Bridging socio-cultural and cognitive theorising. Learning and Instruction, 6, 263-280.
Cooke, R and Sheeran, P. 2004. Moderation of cognition – intention and cognition – behaviour relations: A meta-analysis of properties of variables from the theory of planned behaviour. British Journal of Social Psychology (2004), 43, 159–186.
Dillenbourg P. 1999. What do you mean by collaborative learning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed) Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. (pp.1-19). Oxford: Elsevier
Doise, W. ,& Mugny, G. 1984. The social development of the intellect. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Doise, W., & Mugny, G. 1979. Individual and collective conflicts of centrations in cognitive development. European Journal of Psychology, 9, 105-198.
Dolmans, D. H. J. M., De Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I. H. A. P., & Van Der Vleuten, C. P. M. 2005. Problem-based Learning: future challenges for educational practice and research. Medical Education 39: 732-741.
Entwistle, N., McCune, V. & Hounsell, J. 2002. Approaches to Studying and Perceptions of University Teaching-Learning Environments: Concepts, Measures and Preliminary findings. Enhancing Teaching-Learning Environments in Undergraduate Courses Project. http://www.ed.ac.uk/etl Accessed 22.07.05
Entwistle, N.J. (1998). Improving teaching through research on student learning. In J.J.F. Forest, (ed.), University Teaching: International Perspectives. New York: Garland.
Evans, C.J, Kirby, J.R and Fabrigar, L.R. 2003. Approaches to learning, need for cognition, and strategic flexibility among university students. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 507–528.
Garrison, D.R. & Anderson, T. 2003. E-Learning in the 21st Century. A Framework for Research and Practice. RoutledgeFalmer, London.
Harvey, J., Evaluation Cookbook, Learning Technology Dissemination Initiative, 1998, http://www.icbl.hw.ac.uk/ltdi Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Johnson D. J., Suriya C., Won Yoon S., Berrett J.V & La Fleur J., 2002. Team development and group processes of virtual learning teams. In Computers & Education 39, 379–393.
Kearsley, G. 1994b. ‘Social Development Theory (L. Vygotsky)’. Explorations in Learning & Instruction: The Theory Into Practice Database. http://www.gwu.edu/~tip/vygotsky.html Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Knowles, M., & Knowles, H. 1959. Introduction to group dynamics. New York: Associated Press.
Kolb D A (1984) Experiential Learning: experience as the source of learning and development New Jersey: Prentice-Hall (0 13 295261 0)
Land, R. a. B., S., Ed. (2005). Education in Cyberspace. Oxon, RoutledgeFalmer.
Laurillard, D. 2002. Rethinking University Teaching: a framework for the effective use of educational technology (2nd edition) London; RoutledgeFalmer
LoBiondo-Wood, G & Haber, 1994. Nursing Research (3rd Edition) St Louis Mosby.
McGrath, J. E., & Hollingshead, A. E. 1994. Group interacting with technologies: ideas, evidence, issues, and agenda. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Mainemelis, C., Boyatzis, R.E. and Kolb, D.A. 2002. Learning Styles and Adaptive Flexibility Testing Experiential Learning Theory. Management Learning Copyright 2002 Sage Publications London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi Vol. 33(1): 5-33
Mayes, J.T. (1995). Learning Technology and Groundhog Day. In: Strang, W., Simpson, V.,Slater, D., (eds.). Hypermedia at work: Practice and Theory in Higher Education. Canterbury:University of Kent Press.
Mayes, T. D. F., S (2005). Review Of E-Learning Theories, Frameworks And Models. Jisc E-Learning Models Desk Study. Jisc.
Mason, R. 1998. Models of Online Courses, ALN Magazine, Vol 2, issue 2 www.aln.org/alnweb/magazine/vol2_issue2/Masonfinal.htm Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Norris, D. M., Mason, J., Robson, R. Paul Lefrere, P. &Geoff Collier, G. 2003. A revolution in knowledge sharing. Educause Review, 38 (5), 15-26. http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erm0350.pdf Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Nielsen. J, 2002. Top Ten Guidelines for Homepage Usability. Alertbox, http://www.useit.com/alertbox Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Olivera, F., & Straus, S. G. 2004. Group-to-individual transfer of learning: Cognitive and social factors, Small Group Research, 445-465
Palloff, R.M., and Pratt, K. 1999. Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. Josey-Bass Inc., San Francisco.
Paulus, T. 2005 Collaboration or Cooperation? Analysing Small Group Interactions in Educational Environments. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education. Ed Roberts, T.S. Idea Group Publishing, London.
The personal learning environments blog
http://www.cetis.ac.uk/members/ple
Resnick, L. B., Levine, J.M., Teasley, S.D. Eds. 1991. Perspectives On Socially Shared Cognition. Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Roschelle, J. & Pea, R. 1999. Trajectories from today’s WWW to a powerful educational infrastructure. Educational Researcher, June-July, 22-25.
Salmon, G. 2000. E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. London, Kogan Page.
Salmon, G. 2003. E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. Kogan Page.
Salomon, G. 1993. Distributed cognitions. Psychological and educational considerations (pp.111-138) Cambridge, USA: Cambridge University Press
Savin-Baden, M. & Wilkie, K. Eds. 2004. Challenging Research in Problem-based Learning. Bell & Bain Ltd, Glasgow.
Schoenfeld, A. H. 1987. What’s all the fuss about metacognition? In A.H.Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp 189-215. Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schon, D. A. 1983. The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
Schmidt, H. G. 1993. Foundation of problem based learning: some explanatory notes. Medical Education 27, 422-432.
Soloman, B., A. & Felder, R. 1991. Index of Learning Styles. http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSpage.html Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Strijbos, Jan-Willem. 2004. "The effect of roles on computer-supported collaborative learning (Het effect van rollen op computerondersteund samenwerkend leren) http://e-learning.surf.nl/e-learning/onderzoek/2627 Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Strijbos, JW., Kirschner, P. A. & Martens, R. L., Eds 2004. What We Know about CSCL and Implementing it in Higher Education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands.
Thomas, T. 2002. Critical Thinking And Deep Cognitive Processing By Structured Discussion Board Activities. http://www.celt.lsu.edu/CFD/E-Proceedings/ Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Tuckman, B. W. 1965. Development sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63, 348–399.
van Boxtel, C., van der Linden, J. & Kanselaar, G 2000. Collaborative learning tasks and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and Instruction 10. 311-330.
von Glasserfeld, E. 1988. Cognition, construction of knowledge and Teaching (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED294 754.)
Vygotsky, L. S. 1978. Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (Original work published 1930).
Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice. Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Wenger, E. 2004. Communities of Practice: a brief introduction Wenger, E. 2004. Communities of Practice: a brief introduction. http://www.ewenger.com Last Accessed: 22.04.06
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)