Exploring the use of individualized, reflective guidance in an educational multi-user virtual environment

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 83-97

  Nelson, Brian C ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Guidance; Inquiry; Multi user virtual environment; MUVE; Scaffolding; Science

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247217308     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-006-9039-x     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. American Association of University Women, (2000), Tech-savvy: Educating Girls in the New Computer Age, DC, Washington.
2. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A., Koedinger, K.. R., and Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: lessons learned. Journal of the Learning Sciences 4(2): 167-207.
3. Barab, S., Arici, A., and Jackson, C. (2005a). Eat your vegetables and do your homework: a design-based investigation of enjoyment and meaning in learning. Educational Technology 45(1): 15-20.
4. Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Carteaux, R., and Tuzan, H. (2005b). Making learning fun: Quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educational Technology Research & Development 53(1): 86-107.
5. Barab, S., Sadler, T., Heiselt, C., Hickey, D., and Zuiker, S. (this issue) Relating narrative, inquiry, and inscriptions: supporting consequential play. Journal of Science Education and Technology.
6. Baylor, A. (2000). Beyond butlers: Intelligent agents as mentors. Journal of Educational Computing Research 22(4): 373-382.
7. Bers, M. U. (1999). Zora: a Graphical Multi-user Environment to Share Stories about the Self. Paper presented at the Computer Support for Collaborative' Learning (CSCL'99).
8. Bers, M. U., and Cassell, J. (1998). Interactive storytelling systems for children: Using technology to explore language and identity. Journal of Interactive Learning Research 9(2): 183-215.
9. Bielaczyc, K., and Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: a reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory (pp. 269-292).2 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
10. Bowers, A. (1987). Creative C.O.W. or a Moo Is Worth a Thousand Words. Pointer 32(1): 9-13.
11. Brdicka, B. (1999). Multl User Virtual Environment and Its Possible Use in Education. Retrieved 9/28, 2003, from http://it.pedf.cuni.cz/-bobr/ MUVE/muveen.htm.
12. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18: 32.
13. Bruckman, A. (1994). Programming for Fun: MUDs as a Context for Collaborative Learning. Paper presented at the Recreating the Revolution. Proceedings of the Annual National Educational Computing Conference (15th, Boston, Massachusetts, June 13-15, 1994); see IR 017 841.
14. Bruckman, A. (1996). Finding one's own space in Cyberspace. Technology Review 99(1): 48-54.
15. Bruckman, A. (2000) Uneven Achievement in a Constructivist Learning Environment. Paper presented at the International Conference on Learning Sciences, Ann Arbor, MI.
16. Bruckman, A., Jensen, C., and DeBonte, A. (2002), Gender and Programming Achievement in a CSCL Environment. Paper presented at the CSCL 2002, Boulder, CO.
17. Brush, T., and Saye, J. (2000). Implementation and Evaluation of a Student-Centered Learning Unit: A Case Study. Educational Technology Research & Development 48(3): 79-100.
18. Clarke, J., Dede, C., Ketelhut, D. J., and Nelson, B. (2006). A design-based research strategy to promote scalability for educational innovations. Educational Technology 46(3): 27-36.
19. Corbit, M. and DeVarco, B. (2000). SciCentr and BioLearn: Two 3D Implementations of CVE Science Museums. Paper presented at the The Third International Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments, San Francisco.
20. Dalgarno, B. (2001). Interpretations of constructivism and consequences for Computer Assisted Learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 32(2): 183-194.
21. Dede, C., Ketelhut, D. J., and Reuss, K. (2003) Motivation, Usability, and Learning Outcomes in a Prototype Museum-based Multi-User Virtual Environment, Paper presented at the Fifth International Conference of the Learning Sciences.
22. Dede, C., Nelson, B., and Ketelhut, D. J. (2004) Design-Based Research on Gendr, Class, Race, and Ethnicity in a Multi-User Virtual Environment. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
23. Dennen, V. P. (2003). Cognitive apprenticeship in educational practice: research on scaffolding, modeling, mentoring, and coaching as instructional strategies. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Inc.
24. Falsetti, J. (1995) What the Heck is a MOO? And What's the. Story with All Those Cows? Paper presented at the Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages (29th, Long Beach, CA, March 26-April 1, 1995).
25. Fanderclai, T. L. (1995). MUDs in education: New environments, new pedagogies. Computer Mediated Education Magazine 2(1): 8.
26. Fraser, B. (1981). TORSA; Test of Science Related Attitudes, Australian Council for Educational Research, Hawthorne, VIC.
27. Hannafin, M. J., Hannafin, K. M., Land, S. M., and Oliver, K. (1997). Grounded practice and the design of constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development 45(3): 101-117.
28. Hickey, D. T., Kindfield, A. C. H. (1999). Assessing learning in a technology-supported genetics environment: evidential and systemic validity issues. Educational Assessment 6(3): 155-196.
29. Horwitz, P., and Christie, M. (1999). Hypermodels: embedding curriculum and assessment in computer-based manipulatives. Journal of Education 181(2): 1-23.
30. Horwitz, P., and Christie, M. (2000). Computer-based manipulatives for teaching scientific reasoning: An example. In R. B. Kozma (Ed.), Learning the Sciences of the Twenty-First Century: Theory, Research, and the Design of Advanced Technology learning environments Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum & Associates.
31. Johnson, W. L., Rickel, J., Stiles, R., and Munro, A. (1998). Integrating Pedagogical Agents into Virtual Environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 7(6): 523-546.
32. Johnson, W. L., Rickel, J. W., and Lester, J. C. (2000). Animated Pedagogical Agents: Face-to-Face Interaction in Interactive Learning Environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 11: 47-78.
33. Jonassen, D. H. (1991). Objectivism versus Constructivism: Do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educational Technology Research & Development 39(3): 5-14.
34. Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Thinking technology: toward a constructivist design model. Educational Technology 34(4): 34-37.
35. Jonassen, D. H. (1999a). Designing constructivist learning environments. In Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory (pp. 217-239).2 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
36. Jonassen, D. H. (1999b). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory (pp. 217-240).2 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
37. Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K. L., and Wilson, B. G. (1999). Learning With Technology: a Constructivist Perspective, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
38. Jonassen, D. H., Wilson, B. G., Wang, S., and Grabinger, R. S. (1993). Constructivist Uses of Expert Systems to Support Learning. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction 20(3): 86-94.
39. Ketelhut, D. J. (2004). Assessing Science Self-Efficacy in a Virtual Environment: A Measurement Pilot. Unpublished Qualifying Paper, Harvard, Cambridge, MA.
40. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., and Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist 41(2): 75-86.
41. Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge University Press, New York.
42. Luck, M., and Aylett, R. (2000). Applying artificial intelligence to virtual reality: Intelligent virtual environments. Applied Artificial Intelligence 14: 3-32.
43. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. Educational Psychologist 59: 14-19.
44. Mory, E. H. (2003). Feedback research revisited. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, Inc.
45. Midgley, C., Maehr, M. L., Hruda, L. Z., Anderman, E., Anderman, L., Freeman, K. E., Gheen, M., Kaplan, A., Kumar, R., Middleton, M. J., Nelson, J., Roeser, R., and Urdan, T. (2000). Manual for the Patterns of Adaptive Learning Scales (PALS), University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
46. Nelson, B., Ketelhut, D. J., Clarke, J., Bowman, C., and Dede, C. (2005). Design-based research strategies for developing a scientific inquiry curriculum in a multi-user virtual environment, Educational Technology 45(1): 21-27.
47. Nelson, L. M. (1999). Collaborative problem solving. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory (pp. 241-268).2 Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
48. Perkins, D. N. (1991). Technology meets constructivism: do they make a marriage? Educational Technology 31(5): 18-23.
49. Puntambekar, S., and Hubscher, R. (2005). Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: what have we gained and what have we missed?. Educational Psychologist 40(1): 1-12.
50. Rickel, J. and Johnson, W. L. (1997) Integrating pedagogical agents capabilities in a virtual environment agent. Paper presented at the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents.
51. Rickel, J., and Johnson, W. L. (1999), Animated agents for procedural training in virtual reality: perception, cognition, and motor control. Applied Artificial Intelligence 13: 343-382.
52. Scardamalia, M., and 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.
53. Scardamalia, M., and Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences 3: 265-283.
54. Shute, V. J., and Psotka, J (1996). Intelligent tutoring systems: past, present, and future. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology New York: MacMillan Library Reference USA.
55. Slator, B. M., Hill, C., and Val, D.Del (2004). Teaching Computer Science With Virtual Worlds. IEEE Transactions on Education 47(2): 269-275.
56. Socially-Responsive Design Group (2004). Creating a Socially-Responsive Play Space for Learning: Something for Girls and Boys. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
57. Subrahmanyam, K., and Grecnfleld, P. M. (1998). Computer games for girls: what makes them play? In J. Cassell, & H. Jenkins (Eds), From Barbie to Mortal Kombat: Gender and Computer Games (pp. 46-71). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
58. Tuzan, H. (2004). Motivating Learners in Educational Computer Games, Indiana University, Bloomington.
59. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind In Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.