Issues in component computing: A synthetic review

Interactive Learning Environments

Volumn 12, Issue 1-2, 2004, Pages 109-159

  diSessa, Andrea A ^a   Azevedo, Flavio S ^a   Parnafes, Orit ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33746388323     PISSN: 10494820     EISSN: 17445191     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/1049482042000300913     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Azevedo, F.S. (2001). Educational Object Economy Profile. Web-posted technical report. University of California, Berkeley: The Boxer Project. ftp://soe.berkeley.edu/pub/boxer/Distribution/EOE_Profile.pdf
2. Azevedo, F.S. (in press). Personal excursions: Investigating the structure and dynamics of student engagement. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning.
3. Bijker, W.E., & Law, J. (2000). General introduction. In W.E. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 1-14). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Clements, P., & Northrop, L. (2002). Software product lines: Practices and patterns. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
5. diSessa, A.A. (1995). The many faces of a computational medium. In A. diSessa, C. Hoyles, R. Noss, & L. Edwards (Eds.), Computers and exploratory learning (pp. 337-359). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
6. diSessa, A.A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. diSessa, A.A. (2001a). Overview of component project profiles. Web-posted technical report. University of California, Berkeley: The Boxer Project. ftp://soe.berkeley.edu/pub/boxer/Distribution/ Overview_of_Profiles.pdf
8. diSessa, A.A. (2001b). Boxer profile: Component computing within a computational medium. Web-posted technical report. University of California, Berkeley: The Boxer Project. ftp://soe.berkeley.edu/pub/ boxer/Distribution/Boxer_Profile.pdf
9. diSessa, A.A. (in press). Meta-representation: Native competence and targets for instruction. Cognition and Instruction.
10. EOE (undated). The EOE Info Pages. http://www.eoe.org/foundation/ info.htm.
11. Friedman, J., & diSessa, A.A. (1999). What should students know about technology? The case of scientific visualization. International Journal of Technology and Science Education, 9(3), 175-196.
12. Hoyles, C., Noss, R., & Sutherland, R. (1991). Final report of the microworlds project: 1986-1989. London: Institute of Education, University of London.
13. Kynigos, C. (2002). Generating cultures for mathematical microworld development in a multi-organisational context. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1-2, 183-209.
14. Kynigos, C., & Friedman, J. (2001). E-Slate Profile. Web-posted technical report. University of California, Berkeley: The Boxer Project. ftp://soe.berkeley.edu/pub/boxer/Distribution/E-Slate_Profile.pdf
15. Kynigos, C., Koutlis, M., & Hadzilakos, T. (1997). Mathematics with component-oriented exploratory software. Journal for Computers and Mathematical Learning, 2, 229-250.
16. Kynigos, C., Trouki, E., & Yiannoutsou, N. (2002). Generating communities of practice for educational innovation: Experience from an institutionally distributed integrated authoring community. Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on communication and information technologies in education (pp. 191-202). Rhodes, Greece: University of the Aegean (Kataniotis).
17. Kynigos, C., & Yiannoutsou, N. (2002). Seven year olds negotiating spatial concepts and representations to construct a map. Proceedings of the 26th psychology of mathematics education conference (Vol. 3, pp. 177-184). Norwitch, England: University of East Anglia.
18. McLaughlin, M.W., & Talbert, J.E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19. Nard, B. (1993). A small matter of programming: Perspectives on end user computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. NY: Basic Books.
21. Parnafes, O., & diSessa, A. (2001). ESCOT Profile. Web-posted technical report. University of California, Berkeley: The Boxer Project. ftp://soe.berkeley.edu/pub/boxer/Distribution/ESCOT_Profile.pdf
22. Picciotto, H. (1997). The turtle in the age of the mouse: Why I still teach programming. http://www.picciotto.org/math-ed/t-and-m/ turtle-and-mouse.html.
23. Roschelle, J., DiGiano, C., Koutlis, M., Repenning, A., Phillips, J., Jackiw, N., & Suthers, D. (1999). Developing educational software components. IEEE Computer, 32(9), 50-58.
24. Roschelle, J., Pea, R., DiGiano, C., & Kaput, J. (1999). Educational software components of tomorrow. In M/SET 99 Proceedings [CD ROM], Charlottesville, VA: American Association for Computers in Education. Available at http://www.escot.org/escot/External/MSET_ESCOT.html.
25. Sherin, B. (2001). A comparison of programming and algebraic notation as expressive languages for physics. International Journal of Computers for Mathematics Learning, 6(1), 1-61.
26. Sherin, B. (2002). Representing geometric constructions as programs. International Journal of Computers for Mathematics Learning, 7(1), 101-115.
27. Spalter, A. (2002). Problems with using components in educational software. In Proceedings of ACM SIGGRAPH 2002.
28. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.