Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 50, Issue 3, 2002, Pages 77-96

  Saye, John W ^a   Brush, Thomas ^a  

^a AUBURN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0036433189     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF02505026     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. Ashby, R., & Lee, P. (1987). Children's concepts of empathy and understanding in history. In C. Portal (Ed.), The history curriculum for teachers (pp. 62-88). London: Falmer Press.
2. Barba, S., Bowdish, B., & Lawless, K. (1997). Hypermedia navigation: Profiles of hypermedia users. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 23-41.
3. Barab, S., MaKinster, J., Moore, J., & Cunningham, D. (2001). Designing and building an on-line community: The struggle to support sociability in the Internet learning forum. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 71-96.
4. Barab, S., Young, M., & Wang, J. (1999). The effects of navigational and generative activities in hypertext learning on problem solving and comprehension. International Journal of Instructional Media 26(3), 282-309.
5. Berson, M.J. (1996). Effectiveness of computer technology in the social studies: A review of the literature. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 28(4), 486-499.
6. Brown, A.L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of Learning Sciences 2(2), 141-178.
7. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
8. Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2000). Implementation and evaluation of a student-centered learning unit: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 79-100.
9. Chi, M.T.H., Glaser, R., & Farr, M.J. (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10. Choi, J., & Hannafin, M. (1995). Situated cognition and learning environments: Roles, structures, and implications for design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(2), 53-69.
11. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1992). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 40(1), 65-80.
12. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33(3), 52-70.
13. Cuban, L. (1984). How teachers taught. New York: Longmans.
14. Doyle, W., & Ponder, G. (1977-78). The practicality ethic in teacher decision-making. Interchange, 8(3), 1-12.
15. Dwyer, D. (1994). Apple classrooms of tomorrow: What we've learned. Educational Leadership, 51(7), 4-10.
16. Ehman, L.H., Glenn, A.D., Johnson, V., & White, C.S. (1998). Using computer databases in student problem solving. In J.A. Braun, P. Fernlund, & C.S. White (Eds.), Technology tools in the social studies curriculum (pp. 164-187). Wilsonville, OR: Frankilin, Beedle.
17. Goetz, J., & LeCompte, M. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. San Diego: Academic Press.
18. Greene, S. (1994). Students as authors in the study of history. In G. Leinhardt, J. Beck, & C. Stainton (Eds.), Teaching and learning in history (pp. 137-170).
19. Hannafin, M., Hill, J., & Land, S. (1997). Student-centered learning and interactive multimedia: Status, issues, and implication. Contemporary Education, 68(2), 94-99.
20. Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models (Vol. II). Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Holt, T. (1990). Thinking historically: Narrative, imagination, and understanding. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
22. Hynd, C., Hubbard, B., Holschuh, J., Reinking, D., Jacobson, M. (2000). Reading like a historian: Critical reading of multiple texts in a hypertext environment. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans.
23. Jacobsen, M.J., Maouiri, C., Mishra, P., & Kolar, C. (1996). Learning with hypertext learning environments: Theory, design and research. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 5(3/4), 239-281.
24. Jacobson, M., & Spiro, R. (1994). A framework for the contextual analysis of technology-based learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 5(2), 3-32.
25. Jonassen, D. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65-94.
26. Kagan, D.M. (1993). Laura and Jim and what they taught me about the gap between educational theory and practice. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
27. Kinzie, M., & Sullivan, H. (1989). Continuing motivation, learner control, and CAI. Educational Technology Research and Development, 37(2), 5-14.
28. Kuhn, D. (1999). A developmental model of critical thinking. Educational Researcher, 28(2), 16-26, 46.
29. Land, S.M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning in open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(3), 61-78.
30. Land, S.M., & Hannafin, M. (1996). Patterns of understanding with open-ended learning environments: A qualitative study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(2), 47-73.
31. Linn, M. (1995). Designing computer learning environments for engineering and computer science: The scaffolded knowledge integration framework. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 4(2), 103-126.
32. Linn, M., Shear, L., Bell, P., & Slotta, J.D. (1999). Organizing principles for science education partnerships: Case studies of students' learning about 'rats in space' and 'deformed frogs.' Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(2), 61-84.
33. Loh, B., Reiser, B., Radinsky, J., Edelson, D., Gomez, L., & Marshall, S. (2001). Developing reflective inquiry practices: A case study of software, the teacher, and students. In K. Crowley, C. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
34. Lortie, D. (1975). School-teacher: A sociological study. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press.
35. NCSS. (1994). Expectations of excellence: Curriculum standards for the social studies. Washington: National Council for the Social Studies.
36. Newmann, F.M. (1990). A test of higher-order thinking in social studies: Persuasive writing on constitutional issues using the NAEP approach. Social Education, 54(6), 369.
37. Newmann, F.M. (1991). Higher order thinking in the teaching of social studies: Connections between theory and practice. In J. Voss, D. Perkins, & J. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 381-400). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
38. Newmann, F.M., Wehlage, G.G., & Lamborn, S.D. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In F. Newmann (Ed.), Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools (pp. 11-39). New York: Teachers College Press.
39. Oliver, K. (1999). Computer-based tools in support of Internet-based problem solving. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. St. Louis, MO.
40. Onosko, J. (1991). Barriers to the promotion of higher order thinking in social studies. Theory and Research in Social Education, 19(4), 341-366.
41. O'Reilly, K. (1998). What would you do? Social Education, 62(1), 48.
42. Palincsar, A. & Brown, A. (1984). Reciprocal teaching and comprehension-fostering and monitoring activities. Cognition & Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
43. Parker, W.C., Mueller, M., & Wendling, L. (1989). Critical reasoning on civic issues. Theory and Research in Social Education, 17(1), 7-32.
44. Patton, M.Q. (1987). How to use qualitative methods in evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
45. Perfetti, C.A., Britt, M.A., Van Dyke, J., & Gabrys, G. (1999). The sourcer's apprentice: A program of research and development in history instruction. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, Montreal.
46. Perkins, D.N., Allen, R., & Hafner, J. (1983). Difficulties in everyday reasoning. In W. Maxwell (Ed.), Thinking: The expanding frontier (pp. 177-189). Philadelphia: Franklin Institute.
47. Rossi, J.A. (1995). In-depth study in an issues-centered social studies classroom. Theory and Research in Social Education, 23(2), 87-120.
48. Rossi, J.A., & Pace, C.M. (1998). Issues-centered instruction with low achieving high school students: The dilemmas of two teachers. Theory and Research in Social Education, 26(3), 380-409.
49. Sandoval, W., & Reiser, B. (1997, March). Evolving explanations in high school biology. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
50. Savenye, W., Brush, T., Middleton, J., Blocher, M., and others. (2002, April). Improving teaching with technology: The "best practices" digital video project. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
51. Saye, J.W. (1997). Technology and educational empowerment: Students' perspectives. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(2), 5-26.
52. Saye, J.W. (1998). Technology in the classroom: The role of dispositions in teacher gatekeeping. Journal of Curriculum & Supervision, 13(3), 210-234.
53. Saye, J.W. & Brush, T. (1999). Student engagement with social issues in a multimedia-supported learning environment. Theory and Research in Social Education 27(4), 472-504.
54. Seheurman, G., & Newmann, F.M. (1998). Authentic intellectual work in social studies: putting performance before pedagogy. Social Education, 62(1), 21-35.
55. Shaver, J.P. (1996). The prospects for issues-centered education. In R.W. Evans & D.W. Saxe (Eds.), Hand-book on teaching social issues (pp. 380-386). Washington: National Council for the Social Studies.
56. Shaver, J.P., Davis, O.L., & Helburn, S.W. (1979). The status of social studies education: Impressions from three NSF studies. Social Education, 4(3), 150-153.
57. Shulman, L.S. & Carey, N.B. (1984). Psychology and the limitations of individual rationality: Implications for the study of reasoning and civility. Review of Educational Research, 54, 501-524.
58. Spiro, R.J., & Jehng, J.C. (1990). Cognitive flexibility and hy[ertext: Theory and technology for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In D. Nix & R. Spiro (Eds.), Cognition, education, and multimedia (pp. 163-205). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
59. Spoehr, K., & Spoehr, L. (1994). Learning to think historically. Educational Psychologist, 29(2), 71-77.
60. VanSickle, R.L., & Hoge, J.D. (1991). Higher cognitive thinking skills in social studies: Concepts and critiques. Theory and Research in Social Education, 19(2), 152-172.
61. Voss, J.F., Greene, T.R., Post, T.A., & Penner, B.C. (1983). Problem solving skill in the social sciences. The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory. New York: Academic.
62. Wineburg, S.S. (1991a). On the reading of historical texts: Notes on the breach between the school and academy. American Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 495-519.
63. Wineburg, S.S. (1991b). Historical problem solving: A study of cognitive processes used in the evaluation of documentary and pictorial evidence. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(1), 73-87.
64. Wineburg, S.S., & Wilson, S.M. (1991). Subject-matter knowledge in the teaching of history. Advances in Research on Teaching, Vol. 2, 305-347.