Lessons learned: Findings from MIT initiatives in educational technology (2000-2005)

Journal of Science Education and Technology

Volumn 16, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 283-297

  Breslow, Lori ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Educational technology; Instruction; Learning; Learning environments

Indexed keywords

EID: 35148820297     PISSN: 10590145     EISSN: 15731839     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10956-007-9052-8     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Barak M. (2006). Transitions from traditional to ICT-enhanced learning environments in undergraduate chemistry courses Computers and Education 48(1):30-43
2. Barak M., Lipson A., Lerman S. (2006). Wireless laptops as means for promoting active learning in large lecture halls Journal of Research on Technology in Education 38(3): 245-264
3. Bates A. W., Poole G. (2003). Effective Teaching in Higher Education Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
4. Belcher, J. (2003). Improving student understanding with TEAL. The MIT Faculty Newsletter 16(2): 1, 8-11
5. Breslow, L. (1986). Media ecology: An interdisciplinary approach to the study of communication. Paper presented at the Association for Integrative Studies Conference, Bowling Green, Ohio
6. Breslow, L. (2002). Strategic assessment at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Proceedings of the e-Technologies in Engineering Education Conference, published online at http://www.coe.gatech.edu/eTEE
7. Brown, D. G. (Ed) (2000). Interactive Learning: Vignettes from America's Most Wired Campuses. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company
8. Clay, T. (2002). Overview report on MIT MetaMedia. Unpublished assessment report, the Teaching and Learning Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
9. Clay, T. (2004). XMAS: Evaluation of the cross media annotation system. Unpublished assessment report, the Teaching and Learning Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
10. Dori Y. J., Belcher J. (2005). How does technology-enabled active learning affect students' understanding of electromagnetic concepts? The Journal of the Learning Sciences 14(2): 243-279
11. Garvin, D. (2003). Making the case: Professional education for the world of practice. Harvard Magazine 56-65: 107
12. Greenberg J. E., Smith N. T., Newman J. H. (2003). Instructional module in Fourier spectral analysis, based on principles of how people learn Journal of Engineering Education 92(2): 155-164
13. Laurillard D. (2002). Rethinking University Teaching 2nd edition. RoutledgeFalmer, London
14. LeBon, L. E. (2003). Students petition against TEAL. The Tech 123(14): 1, 17
15. Lipson, A. (2000). An examination of student usage patterns and attitudes toward PIVoT: A pilot study. Unpublished assessment report, the Teaching and Learning Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
16. Lipson, A. (2002). A formative assessment of Mission 2005. Unpublished assessment report, the Teaching and Learning Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
17. Mitchell, R., Fischer, J., and del Alamo, J. A. (2006). A study of the impact of a MIT microelectronics online laboratory on student learning. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engineering Education, San Juan, Puerto Rico
18. Newman, J. (2002). 6.001 report on the outcomes of online learning. Unpublished assessment report, the Teaching and Learning Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
19. Nystrom, C. (1973). Towards a science of media ecology: The formulation of integrated conceptual paradigms for the study of human communication systems. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University
20. Pahl C. (2003). Managing evolution and change in web-based teaching and learning environments Computers and Education 40(2): 99-114
21. Postman N. (1985). Amusing Ourselves to Death Viking Penguin, Inc., New York
22. Scheker, H. P. (1998). Integration of experimenting and modeling by advanced educational technology: Examples from nuclear physics. In B. J. Fraser and K. J. Tobin (Eds), International Handbook of Science Education (pp. 383-398). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic, as cited in Dori and Belcher (2005)
23. Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., and Donovan, S. S. (1997). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Research Monograph No. 11, University of Wisconsin-National Institute for Science Education, Madison, WI
24. Tervalon, C. D., and Sarathy, R. (2002). Student views of 8.224: A qualitative case study. Unpublished assessment report, the Teaching and Learning Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
25. The New Media Consortium and the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (2006). The Horizon Report accessed 7/11/06 at: http://www.nmc.net/pdf/2006_Horizon Report. pdf