Adapting a face-to-face role-playing simulation for online play

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 54, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 493-521

  Bos, Nathan ^a   Shami, N Sadat ^b  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY APPLIED PHYSICS LABORATORY   (United States)

^b Social Dynamics Laboratory   (United States)

Author keywords

E learning; Interactive role playing; Online learning; Online play

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749581555     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-006-0130-z     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Allen, E. I., & Seaman, J. (2003). Sizing the opportunity: The quality and extent of online education in the United States, 2002 and 2003. Sloan Consortium. Retrieved September 2004 http://www.aln.org/resources/ sizing_opportunity.pdf.
2. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves: An inquiry into the nature and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court.
3. Bonk, C. J., Angeli, C., Malikowski, S., & Supplee, L. (2001, August). Holy COW: Scaffolding case-based "Conferencing on the Web" with preservice teachers. Education at a Distance, United States. Distance Learning Association. [for an electronic copy of the article, see http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/AUG01_Issue/article01.html].
4. Bonk, C. J., & Cunningham, D. J. (1998). Searching for learner-centered, constructivist, and sociocultural components of collaborative educational learning tools. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 25-50). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Bos, N. D., Olson, J. S., Gergle, D., Olson, G. M., & Wright, Z. (2002) Effects of four computer-mediated communications channels on trust development. In Proceedings of CHI02. New York: ACM Press.
6. Bos, N. D., Shami, N. S., & Naab, S. (2006). A globalization simulation to teach corporate social responsibility: Design features and analysis of student reasoning. Simulation and Gaming 38, 56-72.
7. Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (2001). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. Review of Research in Education, 24, 61-100. AERA Review of Research Award Winner 2001. http://canvas.ltc. vanderbilt.edu/transfer/.
8. Carr, S. (1995).
9. Carr, S. (2000). As distance education comes of age, the challenge is keeping the students. Chronicle of Higher Education, 46(23), 39A-41. February 11, 2000. Retrieved Online September 2004 http://chronicle.com/free/v46/i23/ 23a00101.htm.
10. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt. (1997). The Jasper project: Lessons in curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development. Mahwah, NJ: LEA.
11. Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1-35.
12. Friedman, T. L. (2000). The Lexus and the olive tree: Understanding globalization. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
13. Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
14. Gottlieb, D. (1997). The Jack principles of the interactive conversation interface. Jellyvision, inc. Retrieved January 2004, http://www.jellyvision.com/ ici/jp/index.php.
15. Gutwin, C., & Greenberg, S. (1999). The effects of workspace awareness support on the usability of real-time distributed groupware. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, (TOCHI) 6(3), 243-281.
16. Hollan, J., & Stornetta, S. (1992) Beyond being there. Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI-92, 119-126.
17. Hsi, S., & Hoadley, C. (1997). Productive discussion in science: Gender equity through electronic discourse. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 6(1), 23-36.
18. Jarvenpaa, S., Knoll, K., & Leidner, D. (1998) "Is anybody out there?" The antecedents of trust in global virtual teams." Journal of Management Information Systems.
19. Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J.-W., Kreijns, K., & Beers, P. J. (2004). Designing electronic collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52,(3), 47-67.
20. Land, S. M., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2003). Scaffolding reflection and articulation of scientific explanations in a data-rich, project-based learning environment: An investigation of progress portfolio. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(4); 65-85.
21. Lin, X., Hmelo, C., Kinzer, C. K., & Secules, T. J. (1999). Designing technology to support reflection. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(3), 43-63.
22. Loewenstein, J., Thompson, L., & Centner, D. (2003). Anological learning in negotiation teams: comparing cases promotes learning and transfer. Academy of Management Learning & Education 2(2), 119-127.
23. Loh, B., Radinsky, J., Reiser, B., Gomez, L., Edelson, D., & Russell, L. (1997). The progress portfolio: Promoting reflective inquiry in complex investigation environments. In R. Hall, N. Miyake, & N. Enyedy (Eds.) Proceedings of CSCL '97, the Second International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning. [on-line]. http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/cscl/ plenary.html.
24. Norman, D. (1988). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
25. Parker, A. (1995). Distance education attrition. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(4), 389-406. Retrieved Online September 2004 http://dl.aace.org/9281.
26. Parker, A. (1999). A study of variables that predict dropout from distance education. International Journal of Educational Technology, 1(2).
27. Program on negotiation clearinghouse. (2004). Retrieved Online, September 2004 http://www.pon.org.
28. Rieber, L. P. (1996). Seriously considering play: Designing interactive learning environments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(2), 43-58
29. Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. D. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C. O'Malley (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning (pp. 69-97). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
30. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37-68.
31. Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., & Lamon, M. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into World 3. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 157-187.
33. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1986) Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communication. Management Science, 32, 1492-1512.
34. Stevens, R., Vendlinki, T., Palacio-Cayetano, J., Underdahl, J., Paek, P., Sprang, M., & Simpson, E. (2001). Tracing the development, transfer, and persistence of problem solving skills. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. ED 454280
35. Thompson, L., & Nadler, J. (2002). Negotiating via information technology: Theory and application. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 109-124.
36. Visser, L., Plomp, T., Amirault, R. J., & Kuiper, W. (2002). Motivating students at a distance: The case of an international audience. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2), 94-121.
37. Webb, N. M., & Palincsar. A. S. (1996). Group processes in the classroom. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee, (Eds.) Handbook of educational psychology. New York: Macmillan.
38. Whipp, J. L., & Chiarelli, S. (2004). Self-Regulation in a Web-based course: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 5-23.
39. Wilson, Brent G. (2004). Designing e-learning environments for flexible activity and instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52,(4), 77-85.