Scaffolding novice instructional designers' problem-solving processes using question prompts in a Web-based learning environment

Journal of Educational Computing Research

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 219-248

  Ge, Xun ^a   Chen, Ching Huei ^a   Davis, Kendrick A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33745035002     PISSN: 07356331     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2190/5F6J-HHVF-2U2B-8T3G     Document Type: Review

References (47)

1. 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.
2. Chi, M., Bassok, M., Lewis, M., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13,145-182.
3. Chi, M. T. H., & Glaser, R. (1985). Problem solving ability. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Human abilities: An information processing approach (pp. 227-250). New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
4. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1990). Anchored instruction and its relationship to situated cognition. Educational Researcher, 19, 2-10.
5. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1993). Designing learning environments that support thinking: The Jasper series as a case study. In T. M. Duffy, J. Lowyck, & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Designing environments for constructive learning (pp. 9-36). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
6. Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. (2000). Scaffolding students' knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 819-837.
7. Dick, W. O., Carey, L., & Carey, J. O. (2001). The systematic design of instruction (5th ed.). NY: Longman.
8. Dijkstra, S. (2001). The design space for solving instructional-design problems. Instructional Science, 29,275-290.
9. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1996). The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective. Instructional Science, 24, 1-24.
10. Feltovich, P. J., Spiro, R. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1989). The nature of conceptual understanding in biomedicine: The deep structure of complex ideas and the development of misconceptions. In D. A. Evans & V. L. Patel (Eds.), Cognitive science in medicine: Biochemical modeling (pp. 111-172). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Feltovich, P. J., Spiro, R. J., Coulson, R. L., & Feltovich, J. (1996). Collaboration within and among minds: Mastering complexity, individually and in groups. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 25-44). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12. Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students' problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 21-38.
13. Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2004). A conceptual framework of scaffolding ill-structured problem solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2), 5-22.
14. Gick, M. L. (1986). Problem solving strategies. Educational Psychologist, 21(1&2), 99-120.
15. Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12, 306-355.
16. Greene, B. A., & Land, S. M. (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), 151-180.
17. Gustafson, K. L., & Branch, R. M. (2002). What is instructional design? In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 16-25). New York: Merrill.
18. Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65-94.
19. Jonassen, D. H. (1999a). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: Vol. II. A new paradigm of instructional theory, (pp. 215-239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Jonassen, D. (1999b). Forward. In P. A. Ertmer & J. Quinn (Eds.), The ID CaseBook: Case studies in instructional design (pp. v-vi). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
21. Jonassen, D. H., Beissner, K., & Yacci, M. (1993). Structural knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22. Kauffman, D. F. (2004). Self-regulated learning in Web-based environments: Instructional tools designed to facilitate cognitive strategy use, metacognitive processing, and motivational beliefs. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(1&2), 139-161.
23. King, A. (1991). Effects of training in strategic questioning on children's problem-solving performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83(3), 307-317.
24. King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generated questioning. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 111-126.
25. King, A. (12994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368.
26. Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemistic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development, 26, 222-232.
27. Kluwe, R. H., & Friedrichsen, G. (1985). Mechanism of control and regulation in problem solving. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action control: From cognition to behavior. New York: Springer-Verlag.
28. Koschmann, T., Kelson, A. C., Feltovich, P. J., & Barrows, H. S. (1996). Computer-supported problem-based learning: A principled approach to the use of computers in collaborative learning. In T. Koschmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm (pp. 83-124). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29. Lin, X., & Lehman, J. D. (1999). Supporting learning of variable control in a computer-based biology environment: Effects of prompting college students to reflect on their own thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(7), 837-848.
30. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (Eds.). (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
31. Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 2, 117-175.
32. Perez, R. S., & Emery, C. D. (1995). Designer thinking: How novices and experts think about instructional design. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 8(3), 80-95.
33. Reigeluth, C. M. (1999). What is instructional-design theory and how is it changing? In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: Vol. II. A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 5-29). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1992). The use of scaffolds for teaching higher-level cognitive strategies. Educational Leadership, 4, 26-33.
35. Rosenshine, B., Meister, C., & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66(2), 181-221.
36. Salomon, G., Globerson, T., & Guterman, E. (1989). The computer as a zone of proximal development: Internalizing reading-related metacognitions from a reading partner. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(4), 620-627.
37. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1985). Fostering the development of self-regulation in children's knowledge processing. In S. F. Chipman, J. W. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.), thinking and learning skills: Research and open questions (Vol. 2, pp. 563-577). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
38. Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Steinbach, R. (1984). Teachability of reflective processes in written composition. Cognitive Science, 8(2), 173-190.
39. Shoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem-solving. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
40. Sinnott, J. D. (1989). A model for solution of ill-structured problems: Implications for everyday and abstract problem solving. In J. D. Sinnott (Ed.), Everyday problem solving: Theory and application (pp. 72-99). New York: Praeger.
41. Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 435-454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
42. van den Boom, G., Paas, F., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & van Gog, T. (2004). Reflection prompts and tutor feedback in a web-based learning environment: Effects of students' self-regulated learning competence. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 551-567.
43. van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner's mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 5-13.
44. Voss, J. F., & Post,T. A. (1988). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Fair (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 261-285). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
45. Voss, J. F., Wolfe, C. R., Lawrence, J. A., & Engle, R. A. (1991). From representation to decision: An analysis of problem solving in international relations. In R. J. Sternberg & P. A. Frensch (Eds.), Complex problem solving: Principles and mechanisms. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46. Yin, R. K. (2002). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
47. Zellermayer, M., Salomon, G., Globerson, T., & Givon, H. (1991). Enhancing writing-related metacognitions through a computerized writing partner. American Educational Research Journal, 28(2), 373-391.