A different kind of difference: Theoretical implications of using technology to overcome separation in remote laboratories

International Journal of Engineering Education

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 772-779

  Lindsay, Euan ^a,b   Naidu, Som ^a   Good, Malcolm ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

^b CURTIN UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Evaluation; Media; Presence; Remote laboratories; Transactional distance

Indexed keywords

EID: 34548623071     PISSN: 0949149X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. B. Aktan, C. A. Bohus, L. A. Crowl and M. H. Shor, Distance learning applied to control engineering laboratories, IEEE Transactions on Education, 39, 1996, pp. 320-326.
2. C. L. Enloe, W. A. Pakula, G. A. Finney and R. K. Haaland, Teleoperation in the undergraduate physics laboratory-teaching an old dog new tricks, IEEE Transactions on Education, 42, 1999, pp. 174-179.
3. E. Voelkl, L. F. Allard, J. Bruley and D. B. Williams, Undergraduate TEM instruction by telepresence microscopy over the Internet, Journal of Microscopy, 187, 1997, pp. 139-142.
4. H. H. Hahn and M. W. Spong, Remote laboratories for control education, presented at 39th IEEE Conference on Decision & Control, Sydney, 2000.
5. S. Gentil, IFAC Workshop on Internet Based Control Education IBCE '04, Grenoble, France, 2004.
6. LearNet, Lernen und Experimentieren an realen technischen Anlagen im Netz, 2004, LearNet, 2001.
7. E. Lindsay and M. Good, Effects of laboratory access modes upon learning outcomes, IEEE Transactions on Education, 48, 2005.
8. G. Rumble, On defining distance education, The American Journal of Distance Education, 3, 1989, pp. 8-21.
9. H. Perraton, A theory for distance education, in Distance Education: International perspectives, D. Sewart, D. Keegan and B. Holmberg (Eds), Routledge, New York, (1988) pp. 34-45.
10. J. Gorham and W. R. Zakahi, A comparison of teacher and student perceptions of immediacy and learning: monitoring process and product, Communication Education, 39, 1990, pp. 354-368.
11. N. Shin, Transactional presence as a critical predictor of success in distance learning, Distance Education, 2003, 24, pp. 69-86.
12. C. N. Gunawardena and F. J. Zittle, Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment, American Journal of Distance Education, 11, 1997, pp. 8-26.
13. S. R. Aragon, Creating social presence in online environments, New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 100, 2003, pp. 57-68.
14. A. Moore, J. T. Masterton, D. M. Christophel and K. A. Shea, College teacher immediacy and student ratings of instruction, Communications Education, 45, 1996, pp. 29-39.
15. J. C. Richardson and K. Swan, Examining Social presence in online courses in relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7, 2003, pp. 68-88.
16. M. Z. Hackman and K. B. Walker, Instructional communication in the televised classroom: the effects of system design and teacher immediacy on student learning and satisfaction, Communications Education, 39, 1990, pp. 196-209.
17. S. J. Messman and J. Jones-Corley, Effects of communication environment, immediacy, and communication apprehension on cognitive and affective learning, Communications Monographs, 68, 2001, pp. 184-200.
18. C. L. Spaulding, Teachers' psychological presence on students' writing-task engagement, Journal of Education Research, 88, 1995, pp. 210-219.
19. W. A. Ijsselsteijn, H. de Ridder, J. Freeman and S. E. Avons, Presence: concept, determinants and measurement, Proceedings of the SPIE 3959, 2000.
20. M. Lombard and T. Ditton, At the heart of it all: the concept of presence, Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 3, 1997.
21. M. G. Moore, Theory of transactional distance, in Theoretical Principles of Distance Education, D. Keegan (Ed.), Routledge, (1993) pp. 22-38.
22. I. Jung, Building a theoretical framework of web-based instruction in the context of distance education, British Journal of Educational Technology, 32, 2001, pp. 525-534.
23. F. Saba and R. L. Shearer, Verifying key theoretical concepts in a dynamic model of distance education, American Journal of Distance Education, 8, 1994, pp. 35-59.
24. N. Shin, Beyond interaction: the relational construct of 'Transactional Presence', Open Learning, 17, 2002, pp. 121-137.
25. R. Clark, Reconsidering research on learning from media, Review of Educational Research, 53, 1983, pp. 445-459.
26. M. D. Petkovich and R. Tennyson, Clark's learning from media : A critique, Educational Communications and Technology Journal, 32, 1984, pp. 233-241.
27. R. B. Kozma, Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate, presented at the International Meeting of the EARLI, Aix en Provence, 1993.
28. R. B. Kozma, Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate, Educational Technology Research & Development, 42, 1994, pp. 7-19.
29. R. Clark, Media will never influence learning, Educational Technology Research & Development, 42, 1994, pp. 21-29.
30. T. Bates, Theory and practice in the use of technology in distance education, in Theoretical Principles of Distance Education, D. Keegan (Ed.), Routledge, (1993) pp. 213-233.
31. M. McLuhan, Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, McGraw-Hill, New York, (1964).
32. D. H. Jonassen, J. P. Campbell and M. E. Davidson, Learning with media: restructuring the debate, Educational Technology Research & Development, 42, 1994, pp. 31-39.
33. R. A. Reiser, Clark's invitation to the dance: an instructional designer's response, Educational Technology Research & Development, 42, 1994, pp. 45-48.
34. K. S. Cennamo, Learning from video: factors influencing learners' preconceptions and invested mental effort, Educational Technology Research & Development, 41, 1993, pp. 33-45.
35. S. A. Shrock, The media influence debate: read the fine print, but don't lose sight of the big picture, Educational Technology Research & Development, 42, 1994, pp. 49-53.