Cognitive tools and student-centred learning: Rethinking tools, functions and applications;Les outils cognitifs et l’apprentissage centré sur l’étudiant: Une révision des outils, des fonctions et des applications;Kognitive Werkzeuge und studentenzentriertes Lernen: Das Überdenken von Werkzeugen, Funktionen und Bewerbungen

Educational Media International

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 281-296

  Iiyoshi, Toru ^a   Hannafin, Michael J ^b   Wang, Feng ^b  

^a Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 34250838131     PISSN: 09523987     EISSN: 14695790     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09523980500161346     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Akhras, F. N., and Self, J. A., 2002. Beyond intelligent tutoring systems: situations, interactions, processes and affordances. Instructional Science, 30(1): 1–30.
2. Aleven, V., Stahl, E., Schworm, S., Fischer, F., and Wallace, R., 2003. Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Review of Educational Research, 73(3): 277–320.
3. Brown, C., Hedberg, J., and Harper, B., 1994. Metacognition as a basis for learning support software. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 7: 3–26.
4. Cole, C., Mandelblatt, B., and Stevenson, J., 2002. Visualizing a high recall search strategy output for undergraduates in an exploration stage of researching a term paper. Information Processing and Management, 38(1): 37–54.
5. Crotty, M., 1998. The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research process, London: Sage.
6. Cuban, L., 2001. Oversold and underused: computers in the classroom, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Derry, S. J., Flexible cognitive tools for problem solving instruction. paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. April, Boston, MA.
8. Derry, S. J., 1992. “ Metacognitive models of learning and instructional systems design ”. In Adaptive learning environments: foundations and frontiers, Edited by: Jones, M., and Winne, P., 257–286. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
9. Driscoll, M. P., 1994. Psychology of learning for instruction, Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
10. Grabowski, B. L., 2003. “ Generative learning contributions to the design of instruction and learning ”. In Handbook of research for educational communications and technology, 2nd edn, Edited by: Jonassen, D. H., 719–743. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
11. Gräsel, C., Fischer, F., and Mandl, H., 2001. The use of additional information in problem oriented learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 3(3): 287–305.
12. Hannafin, M. J., and Land, S., 1997. The foundations and assumptions of technology-enhanced, student-centered learning environments. Instructional Science, 25: 167–202.
13. Hannafin, M. J., Land, S., and Oliver, K., 1999. “ Student-centered learning environments ”. In Instructional-design theories and models: a new paradigm of instructional theory, Edited by: Reigeluth, C. M., Vol. II, 115–140. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Harper, B., Hedberg, J., Corderoy, B., and Wright, R., 2000. “ Employing cognitive tools within interactive multimedia applications ”. In Computers as cognitive tools: no more walls, Edited by: Lajoie, S., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
15. Hatch, T., Bass, R., Iiyoshi, T., and Pointer, D., 2004. Building knowledge for teaching and learning: the promise of scholarship in a networked environment. Change, 36(5): 42–49.
16. Heo, M., and Hirtle, S. C., 2001. An empirical comparison of visualization tools to assist information retrieval on the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52(8): 666–675.
17. Hill, J. R., 1999. A conceptual framework for understanding information seeking in open-ended information systems. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1): 5–27.
18. Hill, J. R., and Land, S. M., 2004. “ Open-ended learning environments: an overview ”. In Educational technology: an encyclopedia, Edited by: Kovalchick, A., and Dawson, K., Vol. 2, Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO. J–Z
19. Hill, J. R., Wiley, D., Nelson, L. M., and Han, S., 2003. “ Exploring research on Internet-based learning: from infrastructure to interactions ”. In Handbook of research for educational communications and technology, 2nd edn, Edited by: Jonassen, D. H., 433–460. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Hooper, S., and Hannafin, M. J., 1991. Psychological perspectives on emerging instructional technologies: a critical analysis. Educational Psychologist, 26: 69–95.
21. Iiyoshi, T., 1999. Cognitive processing using cognitive tools on open-ended hypermedia learning environments, Tallahassee, FL: Florida State University. Ph.D. thesis
22. Iiyoshi, T., and Hannafin, M. J., Cognitive tools for open-ended learning environments: theoretical and implementation perspectives. paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. April, San Diego, CA.
23. Iiyoshi, T., and Kikue, K., Constructivistic learning environments: five principles of designing educational hypermedia. paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology. February, Indianapolis, IN.
24. Interactive Multimedia Learning Laboratory. 1996. Exploring the Nardoo: an imaginary inland river environment to investigate, maintain and improve, Belconnen: ACT, Interactive Multimedia.
25. Jonassen, D. H., 1992. “ What are cognitive tools? ”. In Cognitive tools for learning, Edited by: Kommers, P., Jonassen, D., and Mayes, J., Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
26. Jonassen, D., 1999. “ Designing constructivist learning environments ”. In Instructional-design theories and models: a new paradigm of instructional theory, Edited by: Reigeluth, C. M., Vol. II, 215–239. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27. Jonassen, D. H., 2000. Computers as mindtools for schools, 2nd edn, Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
28. Jonassen, D. H., and Carr, C. S., 2000. “ Mindtools: affording multiple knowledge representations for learning ”. In Computers as cognitive tools: no more walls, Edited by: Lajoie, S. P., Vol. 2, 165–196. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
29. Jonassen, D. H., and Grabinger, R. S., 1990. “ Problems and issues in designing hypertext/hypermedia for learning ”. In Designing hypermedia for learning, Edited by: Jonassen, D., and Mandl, H., Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
30. Jonassen, D. H., and Reeves, T. C., 1996. “ Learning with technology: using computers as cognitive tools ”. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, Edited by: Jonassen, D. H., 693–719. New York: Macmillan.
31. Kim, B., 2004. Rethinking cognitive tool: its concept, design, application and research, Athens, GA: University of Georgia. Ph.D. thesis
32. Lajoie, S. P., 2000. Computers as cognitive tools: no more walls, Vol. 2, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Lajoie, S. P., and Azevedo, R., 2000. “ Cognitive tools for medical informatics ”. In Computers as cognitive tools: no more walls, Edited by: Lajoie, S. P., Vol. 2, 247–271. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Land, S. M., and Hannafin, M. J., 1996. A conceptual framework for the development of theories-in-action with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development, 44(3): 37–53.
35. Land, S., and Hannafin, M. J., 1997. Patterns of understanding with open-ended learning environments: a qualitative study. Educational Technology Research & Development, 45(2): 47–73.
36. Lehrer, R., 1993. “ Author of knowledge: patterns of hypermedia design ”. In Computers as cognitive tools, Edited by: Lajoie, S., and Derry, S., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. Linn, M. C., Clark, D., and Slotta, J. D., 2003. WISE design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4): 517–538.
38. Norman, D. A., 1993. Things that make us smart: defending human attributes in the age of the machine, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
39. Oliver, K., and Hannafin, M. J., 2001. Developing and refining mental models in open-ended learning environments: a case study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4): 5–33.
40. Oren, T., 1990. “ Cognitive load in hypermedia: designing for the exploratory learner ”. In Learning with interactive multimedia: developing and using multimedia tools in education, Edited by: Ambron, S., and Hooper, K., Redwood, WA: Microsoft.
41. Park, I., and Hannafin, M., 1993. Empirically-based guidelines for the design of interactive multimedia. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(3): 63–85.
42. Pea, R. D., 1985. Beyond amplification: using the computer to reorganize mental functioning. Educational Psychologist, 20: 167–182.
43. Recker, M. M., and Wiley, D. A., 2001. A non-authoritative educational metadata ontology for filtering and recommending learning objects. Journal of Interactive Learning Environments, 9(3): 255–271.
44. Recker, M., Walker, A., and Lawless, K., 2003. What do you recommend? Implementation and analyses of collaborative information filtering of web resources for education. Instructional Science, 31(4/5): 299–316.
45. Reeves, T. C., and Okey, J. R., 1996. “ Alternative assessment for constructivist learning environments ”. In Constructivist learning environments: case studies in instructional design, Edited by: Wilson, B. G., 191–202. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
46. Roselli, T., 1991. Control of user disorientation in hypertext systems. Educational Technology, 31: 42–46.
47. Salomon, G., 1993. “ On the nature of pedagogic computer tools: the case of the writing partner ”. In Computers as cognitive tools, Edited by: Lajoie, S., and Derry, S., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
48. Salomon, G., Perkins, D. N., and Globerson, T., 1991. Partners in cognition: extending human intelligent technologies. Educational Researcher, 20: 2–9.
49. Shapiro, A., and Niederhauser, D., 2003. “ Learning from hypertext: research issues and findings ”. In Handbook of research for educational communications and technology, 2nd edn, Edited by: Jonassen, D. H., 605–620. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. Shute, V. J., Torreano, L. A., and Willis, R. E., 2000. “ DNA: toward an automated knowledge elicitation and organization tool ”. In Computers as cognitive tools: no more walls, Edited by: Lajoie, S. P., Vol. 2, 309–335. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51. Slotta, J. D., and Linn, M. C., 1999. “ The knowledge integration environment: helping students use the internet effectively ”. In Innovations in science and mathematics education, Edited by: Jacobson, M., and Kozma, R., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
52. Small, R. V., and Grabowski, B. L., 1992. An exploratory study of information-seeking behaviors and learning with hypermedia information system. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 1: 445–464.
53. Spiro, R. J., and Jehng, J., 1990. “ Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: theory and technology for the nonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter ”. In Cognition, education, and multimedia, Edited by: Nix, D., and Spiro, R., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
54. Wilson, B. G., 1996. “ Introduction: What is a constructivist learning environment? ”. In Constructivist learning environments: case studies in instructional design, Edited by: Wilson, B., 3–8. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
55. Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J. S., and Soloway, E., 2001. Promoting conceptual understanding of chemical representations: students’ use of a visualization tool in the classroom. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38(7): 821–842.