Grounded design of web-enhanced case-based activity

Educational Technology Research and Development

Volumn 56, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 161-179

  Kim, Hyeonjin ^a   Hannafin, Michael J ^b  

^a Korea Education and Research Information Service   (South Korea)

^b UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Case based reasoning; Grounded design; Technology enhanced learning environments

Indexed keywords

EID: 39749131602     PISSN: 10421629     EISSN: 15566501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11423-006-9010-9     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Aamodt, A., & Plaza, E. (1994). Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Communications, 7(1), 39-52.
2. Anderson, K. C., & Leinhardt, G. (2002). Maps as representations: Expert novice comparison of projection understanding. Cognition and Instruction, 20(3), 283-321.
3. Anzai, Y. (1991). Learning and use of representations for physics expertise. In K. A. Ericsson, & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 64-92). Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
4. Barrow, H. S. (1985). How to design a problem-based curriculum for the preclinical years. New York: Springer Pub. Co.
5. Brown, J. S., Collins, A. M., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-42.
6. Carter, K. (1989). Using cases to frame mentor-novice conversations about teaching. Theory Into Practice, 27(3), 214-222.
7. Carter, K. (1990). Meaning and metaphor: Case knowledge in teaching. Theory Into Practice, 29(2), 109-115.
8. Colaric, S. M., Turgeon, A. J., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002/2003). Development of a web-based case library. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 31(1), 63-70.
9. Collins, A. M., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. de Groot, A. D. (1978). Thought and choice in chess. Mouton: The Hague.
11. Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.
12. Ericsson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (1995). Long-term working memory. Psychological Review, 102(2), 211-245.
13. Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch-Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363-406.
14. Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence and maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 273.
15. Ericsson, K. A., & Smith, J. (1991). Prospectus and limits of the empirical study of expertise: An introduction. In K. A. Ericsson, & J. Smith (Eds.), Toward a general theory of expertise: Prospects and limits (pp. 1-38). Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47-61.
17. Ertmer, P. A., Conklin, D., Lewandowski, J., Osika, E., Selo, M., & Wignall, E. (2003). Increasing preservice teachers' capacity for technology integration through the use of electronic models. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(1), 95-112.
18. Feltovich, P. J., Johnson, P. E., Moller, J. H., & Swanson, D. B. (1984). LCS: The role and development of medical knowledge in diagnostic expertise. In W. J. Clancey, & E. H. Shortliffe (Eds.), Readings in medical artificial intelligence: The first decade. Readings, MA: Addison Wesley.
19. Hannafin, M. J., Hannafin, K. M., Land, S. M., & Oliver, K. (1997). Grounded practice and the design of constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 101-117.
20. Hannafin, M. J., Land, S. M., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 115-140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Kim, H. (2005). Situated learning with cases: Web-enhanced case-based reasoning in teacher education. Doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens.
22. Kim, H., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005a). Preservice teachers' case-based reasoning (CBR) and situational understanding in the web-enhanced CBR learning environment. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.
23. Kim, H., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005b). Supporting preservice teachers' authentic activity and learning in the web-enhanced case-based reasoning (CBR) learning environment: A case study. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology, Orlando, FL, USA.
24. Kim, H., Hannafin, M. J., & Kim, M. C. (2005). Online case-based learning: Components, applications, and assessment. Distance Learning, 1(5), 23-31.
25. Kim, H., Hannafin, M. J., & Thomas, G. (2004). Helping preservice teachers become experienced: Case-based reasoning (CBR) and grounded design of the web-enhanced learning environment. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
26. Kolodner, J. L. (1993). Case-based reasoning. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.
27. Kolodner, J. L., Hmelo, C. E., & Narayanan, N. H. (1996). Problem-based learning meets case-based reasoning. Paper presented at the International Conference on the Learning Sciences, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
28. Kolodner, J. L., & Guzdial, M. (2000). Theory and practice of case-based learning aids. In D. H. Jonassen, & S. M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 215-242). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
29. Kolodner, J. L., Owensby, J. N., & Guzdial, M. (2004). Case-based learning aids. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 829-861). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates.
30. Krueger, K., Boboc, M., Smaldino, S., Cornish, Y., & Callahan, W. (2004). INTIME impact report: What was INTIME effectiveness and impact on faculty and preservice teachers? Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(2), 185-210.
31. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32. Leinhardt, G., & Greeno, J. G. (1986). The cognitive skill of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(2), 75-95.
33. Masoner, M. (1988). An audit of the case study method. New York: Praeger.
34. Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). (1995). Teachers and technology: Making the connection (OTA-HER-616). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
35. Owensby, J. N., & Kolodner, J. L. (2002). Case application suite: Promoting collaborative case application in learning by design classrooms. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO.
36. Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 96-116.
37. Riesbeck, C. K. (1996). Case-based teaching and constructivism: Carpenters and tools. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 49-61). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
38. Russell, M., Bebell, D., O'Dwyer, L., & O'Connor, K. (2003). Examining teacher technology use: Implications for preservice and inservice teacher preparation. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 297-310.
39. Schank, R. C. (1993/1994). The design of goal-based scenarios. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(4), 305-345.
40. Schank, R. C. (1999). Dynamic memory revisited (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
41. Schank, R. C., Berman, T. R., & Macpherson, K. A. (1999). Learning by doing. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 161-181). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
42. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
43. Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J. H. Shulman (Ed.), Case methods in teacher education (pp. 1-30). New York: Teachers College Press.
44. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15, 4-14.
45. Spiro, R. J., Feltovich, P. J., Jacobson, M. J., & Coulson, R. L. (1992). Cognitive flexibility, constructivism, and hypertext: Random access instruction for advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. In T. M. Duffy, & D. H. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation (pp. 57-75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46. Stevens, A. L., Collins, A., & Goldin, S. E. (1982). Misconceptions in students' understanding. In D. Sleeman, & J. S. Brown (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 13-24). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
47. Turns, J. A., Newstetter, W., Allen, J., & Mistree, F. (1997). The reflective learner: Supporting the writing of learning essays that support the learning of engineering design through experience. Paper presented at the 1997 American Society of Engineering Educators Conference, Milwaukee, WI.
48. Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development, 53(4), 5-23.
49. Windschitl, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers' use of technology in a laptop computer school: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional culture. American Educational Research Journal, 39(1), 165-205.