Can students collaboratively use hypermedia to learn science? The dynamics of self-and other-regulatory processes in an ecology classroom

Journal of Educational Computing Research

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 215-245

  Azevedo, Roger ^a   Winters, Fielding I ^a   Moos, Daniel C ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 15944401414     PISSN: 07356331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2190/HFT6-8EB1-TN99-MJVQ     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Azevedo, R. (2002). Beyond intelligent tutoring systems: Computers as MetaCognitive tools to enhance learning? Instructional Science, 30(1), 31-45.
2. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students' ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 344-370.
3. Azevedo, R. Cromley, J. G., Winters, F. I., Xu, L., & Iny, D. (2003). Is strategy instruction effective in facilitating students' ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? In U. Hoppe, F. Verdejo, & J. Kay (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: Shaping the future of learning through intelligent technologies (pp. 193-200). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
4. Azevedo, R., Guthrie, J. T., & Seibert, D. (2004). The role of self-regulated learning in fostering students' conceptual understanding of complex systems with hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30, 87-111.
5. Azevedo, R., Verona, M. E., & Cromley, J. G. (2001). Fostering students' collaborative problem solving with RiverWeb. In J. D. Moore, C. L. Redfield, & W. L. Johnson (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: AI-ED in the wired and wireless future (pp. 166-175). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
6. Baylor, A. (2003). Evidence that multiple agents facilitate greater learning. In U. Hoppe, F. Verdejo, & J. Kay (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: Shaping the future of learning through intelligent technologies (pp. 377-379). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
7. Biswas G., Schwartz, D., Bransford, J., & CTGV. (2001). Technology support for complex problem solving: From SAD environments to AI. In K. Forbus & P. Feltovich (Eds.), Smart machines in education. Cambridge Press, MA: MIT Press.
8. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P., & Zeidner, M. (2000), Handbook of self-regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
9. Butler, D. (1998). The strategic content learning approach to promoting self-regulated learning: A report of three studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 682-697.
10. Butler, D. (2002). Individualizing instruction in self-regulated learning. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 81-92.
11. Clark, D., & Linn, M. (2003). Designing for knowledge integration: The impact of instructional time. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(4), 451-493.
12. Como, L., & Randi, J. (1999). A design theory for classroom instruction in self-regulated learning? In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II; pp. 293-318). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
13. Deny, S. J., & Lajoie, S. P. (1993). Computers as cognitive tools (1st ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Greene, B., & Land, S. (2000). A qualitative analysis of scaffolding use in a resource-based learning environment involving the World Wide Web. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(2), 151-179.
15. Hickey, D., Kindfield, A., Horowitz, P., & Christie, M. (2003). Integrating curriculum, instruction, assessment, and evaluation in a technology-supported genetics learning environment. American Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 495-538.
16. Jacobson, M., & Archodidou, A. (2000). The design of hypermedia tools for learning: Fostering conceptual change and transfer of complex scientific knowledge. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 149-199.
17. Jonassen, D. (1996). Computers as mind tools for schools. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
18. Kozma, R., Chin, E., Russell, J., & Marx, N. (2000). The roles of representations and tools in the chemistry laboratory and their implications for chemistry learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(2), 105-144.
19. Lajoie, S. P. (2000). Computers as cognitive tools II: No more walls: Theory change, paradigm shifts and their influence on the use of computers for instructional purposes. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20. Lajoie, S. P., & Azevedo, R. (2000). Cognitive tools for medical informatics. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools II: No more walls: Theory change, paradigm shifts and their influence on the use of computers for instructional purposes (pp. 247-271). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Lajoie, S. P., Guerrera, C., Munsie, S., & Lavigne, N. (2001). Constructing knowledge in the context of BioWorld. Instructional Science, 29(2), 155-186.
22. Mayer, R. (2003). Learning environments: The case for evidence-based practice and issue-driven research. Educational Psychology Review, 15(4), 359-366.
23. McCaslin, M., & Hickey, D. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: A Vygtoskian perspective. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 227-252). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Meyer, D. & Turner, J. (2002). Using instructional discourse analysis to study the scaffolding of student self-regulation. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 17-25.
25. Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36(2), 89-101.
26. Perry, N. (2002). Introduction: Using qualitative methods to enrich understandings of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 1-3.
27. Perry, N., VendeKamp, K., Mercer, L., & Nordby, C. (2002). Investigating teacher-student interactions that foster self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 37(1), 5-15.
28. Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
29. Rasku-Puttonen, H., Etelapelto, A., Arvaja, M., & Hakkinen, P. (2003). Is successful scaf-folding an illusion? Shifting patterns of responsibility and control in teacher-student interaction during a long-term learning project. Instructional Science, 31, 377-393.
30. Reiser, B., Tabak, I., Sandoval, W., Smith, B., Steinmuller, F., & Leone, A. (2001). BGuILE: Strategic and conceptual scaffolds for scientific inquiry in biology class-rooms. In S. Carver & D. Klahr (Eds.), Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress (pp. 263-306). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Schunk, D. (2001). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 125-152). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Shapiro, A., & Niederhauser, D. (2004). Learning from hypertext: Research issues and findings. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for education communications and technology (2nd ed). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
33. Slotta, J. D., & Linn, M. C. (2000). The knowledge integration environment: Helping students use the Internet effectively. In M. Jacobson & R. Kozma (Eds.), Learning the sciences of the 21st century. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
34. Suthers, D., & Hundhausen, C. (2003). An experimental study of the effects of representational guidance on collaborative learning processes. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(2), 183-218.
35. Vye, N., Schwartz, D., Bransford, J., Barren, B., Zech, L., & CTGV. (1998). SMART environments that support monitoring, reflection, and revision. In D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 305-346). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. White, B. Y., Shimoda, T. A., & Frederiksen, J. R. (2000). Facilitating students' inquiry learning and metacognitive development through modifiable software advisers. In S. P. Lajoie (Ed.), Computers as cognitive tools II: No more walls: Theory change, paradigm shifts and their influence on the use of computers for instructional purposes (pp. 97-132). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. Williams, M. (1996). Learner control and instructional technologies. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 957-983). New York: Scholastic.
38. Winne, P. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning viewed from models of information processing. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 153-189). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Winne, P., & Hadwin, A. (1998). Studying as self-regulated learning. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 277-304). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 531-566). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
41. Winne, P., & Stockley, D. (1998). Computing technologies as sites for developing self-regulated learning. In D. Schunk & B. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulated learning: From teaching to self-reflective practice (pp. 106-136). New York: Guilford.
42. Zimmerman, B. (2001). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. In B. Zimmerman & D. Schunk (Eds.), Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 1-37). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. Zimmerman, B., & Schunk, D. (Eds.). (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.