One digital library, two undergraduate classes, and four learning modules: Uses of a digital library in classrooms

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology

Volumn 57, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 1315-1325

  Pan, Bing ^a   Gay, Geri ^b   Saylor, John ^b   Hembrooke, Helene ^b  

^a Department of Teacher Education and Department of Sociology and Anthropology   (United States)

^b Cornell University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

KINEMATIC MODELS FOR DESIGN DIGITAL LIBRARY (KMODDL); LEARNING OUTCOMES; STEREOLITHOGRAPHIC FILES; TEXTUAL MATERIALS;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; EDUCATION; EDUCATION COMPUTING; JAVA PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; OPERATIONS RESEARCH;

DIGITAL LIBRARIES;

EID: 33746906674     PISSN: 15322882     EISSN: 15322890     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/asi.20449     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Bishop, A.P., Neumann, L.J., Star, S.L., Merkel, C., Ignacio, E., & Sandusky, R.J. (2000). Digital libraries: Situating use in changing information infrastructure. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51, 394-413.
2. Borgman, C.L. (2002). Challenges in building digital libraries for the 21st century. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2555, 1-13.
3. Carroll, J.M., Koenemann-Belliveau, J., Rosson, M.B., & Singley, M.K. (1993). Critical incidents and critical threads in empirical usability evaluation. In J. Ally, D. Diaper, & S.P. Guest (Eds.), People and Computers VIII: Proceedings of the HCI'93 Conference (pp. 279-292). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Ferguson, E.S. (1992). Engineering and the mind's eye. Cambridge: MIT Press.
5. Fox, E.A., & Urs, S.R. (2002). Digital libraries. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 36, 503-589.
6. Gay, G., & Hembrooke, H. (2004). Activity-centered design: An ecological approach to designing smart tools and usable systems. Cambridge: MIT Press.
7. Gibbs, G.R. (2002). Qualitative data analysis: Explorations with NVivo (Understanding social research). Berkshire: Open University Press.
8. Hassenzahl, M., Beu, A., & Burmester, M. (2001). Engineering joy. IEEE Software, 18, 70-76.
9. Henderson, D.W., & Taimina, D. (2001). Experiencing geometry: In Euclidean, spherical, and hyperbolic spaces. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
10. Jones, A., Scanlon, E., Tosunoglu, C., Morris, E., Ross, S., Butcher, P., et al. (1999). Contexts for evaluating educational software. Interacting with Computers, 11, 499-516.
11. Jones, A., Scanlon, E., Tosunoglu, C., Ross, S., Butcher, P., Murphy, P., et al. (1996). Evaluating CAL at the Open University: 15 years on. Computers & Education, 26(1-3), 5-15.
12. Jones, F.B. (1977). The Moore method. American Mathematical Monthly, 84, 273-278.
13. Kennedy, C. (1998). Reinventing teaching in the classroom of the future: The political science laboratory experience. Pennsylvania State University Web site. Retrieved March 28, 1999, from http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/c/l/ clk8/reinventteach.html
14. Marchionini, G., Plaisant, C., & Komlodi, A. (2003). The people in digital libraries: Multifaceted approaches to assessing needs and impact. In A.P. Bishop, N.A. Van House, & B. Buttenneid (Eds.), Digital library use: Social practice in design and evaluation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
15. Min, R. (1995). Simulation technology and parallelism in learning environments: Methods, concepts, models and systems. De Lier: Academic Book Center.
16. Nardi, B. (1995). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and Human-Computer Interaction. Cambridge: MIT Press.
17. Pan, B., Gay, G.K., Saylor, J., Hembrooke, H.A., & Henderson, D. (2004). Usability, learning, and subjective experience: User evaluation of KMODDL in an undergraduate class. In H. Chen, M. Christel, & E. Lim (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL' 04; pp. 188-189). New York: ACM.
18. Parker, D.L., Webb, J., & Dsouza, B. (1995). The value of critical incident analysis as an educational-tool and its relationship to experiential learning. Nurse Education Today, 15, 111-116.
19. Patton, M.Q. (2001). Qualitative research & evaluation methods. London: Sage.
20. Saylor, J. (2002). Kinematic models for design digital library (KMODDL): A proposal to the National Science Foundation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.
21. Spasser, M.A. (2003). The flora of North America project: Making the case [study] for social reality theory. In A.P. Bishop, N.A. Van House, & B. Buttenfield (Eds.), Digital library use: Social practice in design and evaluation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
22. Sumner, T., Marlino, M., & Butcher, K. (2003). Developing a strategy for evaluating the educational impact of NSDL. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation. Retrieved June 1, 2004, from http://eduimpact.comm.nsdl.org/ doc_tracker/docs_download.php?group_id=64id=104
23. Tata, K., Fadel, G.M., Bagchi, A., & Aziz, N. (1998). Efficient slicing for layered manufacturing. Rapid Prototyping Journal, 4(4), 151-167.
24. TechSmith. (2003). Camtasia studio documentation. Retrieved June 1, 2004, from http://wcarchive.cdrom.com/pub/bws/bws_48/studioug.pdf
25. Walker, K., Saylor, J., Moon, F.C., Henderson, D.W., Lipson, H., Taimina, D., et al. (2003). Building a digital library of kinematics. RLG DigiNews, 7(4). Retrieved June 1, 2004, from http://www.rlg.org/preserv/diginews/ v7_n4_feature1.html
26. Zia, L. (2001). Growing a national learning environments and resources network for science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education: Current issues and opportunities for the NSDL program. D-Lib Magazine, 11(7). Retrieved June 1, 2004, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march01/zia/03zia.html