Designing a learning curriculum and technology's role in it

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 55, Issue 5, 2007, Pages 461-478

  Gerber, Sue ^a   Scott, Logan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

Author keywords

Mobile technology; Research education; Social constructivism; Technological determinism

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548477909     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-006-9005-6     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Achtenhagen, F. (2003). Problems of authentic instruction and learning. Technology, Instruction, Cognition, and Learning, 1, 253-273.
2. Beyer, H., & Holtzblatt, K. (1997). Contextual design: Defining customer-centered systems. San. Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
3. Bijker, W. E., & Law, J. (Eds.). (1992). Shaping technology/building society: Studies in socio-technical change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Bober, M. J., & Dennen, V. P. (2001). Intersubjectivity: Facilitating knowledge construction in online environments. Education Media International, 38, 241-250.
5. Bonk, C. J., & Kling, R. S. (Eds.). (1998). Electronic collaborators. Learner-centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Associates.
6. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
7. Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
8. Cho, K. L., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 5-22.
9. Cizek, G. J. (1996). The hegemony of the narrative: Reflections on the contours of social science research. Review of Higher Education, 19, 227-236.
10. Constas, M. A. (1998). The changing nature of educational research and a critique of postmodernism. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 26-33.
11. Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc.
12. Esser, J. K. (1998). Alive and well after 25 years: A review of groupthink research. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 116-141.
13. Gee, J. P. (1991). Discourse systems and aspirin bottles: On literacy. In C. Mitchell, & K. Weiler (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 123-138). New York: Bergin, Garvey.
14. Goad, L. (2005, May 6). Google introduces mobile blogging. Eweek, from http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1813770,00.asp.
15. Green, R. G., Bretzin, A., Leininger, C., & Stauffer, R. (2001). Research learning attributes of graduate students in social work, psychology, and business. Journal of Social Work Education, 37, 333-341.
16. Hara, N., Bonk, C. J., & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analyses of on-line discussion in an. applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115-152.
17. Herring, S., Scheidt, L., Wright, E., & Bonus, S. (2003, October) Beyond the unusual: Weblogs as genre. Paper presented at the Association of Internet Researchers Broadening the Band Conference, Toronto, Canada.
18. Hewitt, J. (2003). How habitual online practices affect the development of asynchronous discussion threads. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 28, 31-45.
19. Howe, K. R. (1985). Two dogmas of educational research. Educational Researcher, 14(8), 10-18.
20. Hung, D., & Chen, D. T. (2003). A proposed framework for the design of a CMC learning environment: Facilitating the emergence of authenticity. Education Media International, 40, 7-13.
21. Jackson, P. W. (1990). The functions of educational research. Educational Researcher, 19(7), 3-9.
22. Jonassen, D. H., Campbell, J. P., & Davidson, M. E. (1994). Learning with media: Restructuring the debate. Educational Technology Research & Development, 42(2), 31-39.
23. Jonassen, D. H., & Marra, R. M. (2001). Limitations of online courses for supporting constructive learning. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 2, 303-317.
24. Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (1998). Online social interchange, discord, and knowledge construction. Journal of Distance Education, 13, 57-74.
25. Khine, M. S., Yeap, L. L., & Lok, A. T. C. (2003). The quality of message ideas, thinking and interaction in an asynchronous CMC environment. Education Media International, 40, 115-125.
26. Kling, R., Crawford, H., Rosenbaum, H., Sawyer, S., & Weisband, S. (2000). Information technologies in human contexts: Learning from organizational and social informatics. Center for Social Informatics, Indiana University: Bloomington, IN.
27. Kozma, R. (2000). The relationship between technology and design in educational technology research and development: A reply to Richey. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(1), 19-21.
28. Laurier, E. (2001). Why people say where they are during mobile phone calls. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 19, 485-504.
29. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. NY: Cambridge University Press.
30. Lee, A. Y. (1996). Media technology perspectives and the curriculum implications for media education. Canadian Journal of Educational Communication, 25(3), 209-237.
31. Lock, J. V. (2002). Laying the groundwork for the development of learning communities within online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3, 395-408.
32. Löwgren, J., & Stolterman, E. (2004). Thoughtful interaction design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59.
34. Metz, M. H. (2001). Intellectual border crossing in. graduate education: A report from the field. Educational Researcher, 30(5), 12-18.
35. Metz, M. H., & Page, R. N. (2002). The uses of practitioner research and status issues in educational research: Reply to Gary Anderson. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 26-27.
36. Molenda, M. (1997). Historical and philosophical foundations of instructional design: A North. American view. In R. D. Tennyson, F. Schott, N. M. Seel & S. Dijkstra (Eds.), Instructional design: International perspectives (Vol. 1, pp. 41-53). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. Naidu, S. (1997). Collaborative reflective practice: An instructional design architecture for the internet. Distance Education, 18, 257-283.
38. Nardi, B. A., Schiano, D. J., & Gumbrecht, M. (2004). Blogging as social activity, or, would you let 900 million people read your diary? Paper presented at the ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work.
39. Pallas, A. M. (2001). Preparing education doctoral students for epistemological diversity. Educational Researcher, 30(5), 6-11.
40. Pannabecker, J. R. (1991). Technological impacts and determinism in technology education: Alternative metaphors from social constructivism. Journal of Technology Education, 3(1). Retreived, August 31, 2006, from. http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v3n1/html/pannabecker.html.
41. Paul, J. L., & Marfo, K. (2001). Preparation of educational researchers in philosophical foundations of inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 71, 525-547.
42. Petraglia, J. (1998a). The real world on a short leash: The (mis)application of constructivism to the design of educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(3), 53-65.
43. Petraglia, J. (1998b). Reality by design: The rhetoric and technology of authenticity in education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
44. Pincas, A. (1998). Successful online course design: Virtual frameworks for discourse construction. Educational Technology & Society, 1, 14-25.
45. Reeves, T. C. (2000). Enhancing the worth of instructional technology research through "design experiments" and other development research strategies. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
46. Reigeluth, C. M., & Joseph, R. (2002). Beyond technology integration: The case for technology transformation. Educational Technology, 42(4), 9-13.
47. Richey, R. C. (2000). Reflections on. the state of educational technology research and development: A response to Kozma. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(1), 16-18.
48. Riel, M., & Fulton, K. (2001). The role of technology in supporting learning communities. Phi Delta Kappan, 82, 518-523.
49. Salomon, G. (2002). Technology and pedagogy: Why don't we see the promised revolution? Educational Technology, 42(2), 71-75.
50. Salomon, G., & Almog, T. (1998). Educational psychology and technology: A matter of reciprocal relations. Teachers College Record, 100(1), 222-241.
51. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1999). The core, the canon, and the development of research skills: Issues in. the preparation, of education researchers. In E. C. Lagemann, & L. S. Shulman (Eds.), Issues in education research: Problems and possibilities (pp. 166-202). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
52. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York, NY: Basic Books.
53. Shrock, S. A. (1994). The media influence debate: Read the fine print, but don't lose sight of the big picture. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 49-53.
54. Thomas, M. J. W. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 351-366.
55. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
56. Winn, W. (2002). Current trends in educational technology research: The study of learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 331-351.
57. Winn, W. (2003). Beyond constructivism: A return to science-based research and practice in educational technology. Educational Technology, 43(6), 5-14.
58. Wu, A. (2003). Supporting electronic discourse; principles of design from a social constructivist perspective. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 14, 167-184.
59. Young, L. J. (2001). Border crossings and other journeys: Re-envisioning the doctoral preparation of education researchers. Educational Researcher, 30(5), 3-5.