The teacher as action researcher: Using technology to capture pedagogic form

Studies in Higher Education

Volumn 33, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 139-154

  Laurillard, Diana ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 40849134060     PISSN: 03075079     EISSN: 1470174X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03075070801915908     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Boyer, E.L. 1990. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
2. Conole, G., A. Littlejohn, I. Falconer, and A. Jeffery. 2005. Pedagogical review of learning activities and use cases. LADIE Project Report. JISC e-Learning Programme.
3. Cousin, G., and F. Deepwell. 2005. Designs for network learning: A communities of practice perspective. Studies in Higher Education 30, no. 1: 57-66.
4. Dalziel, J., R. Philip, and J. Clare. 2005. The COLIS Project: Collaborative Online Learning and Information Services. NSW 2109, Australia: Macquarie University E-learning Centre of Excellence.
5. Edwards, S. 2006. Panning for gold: Information literacy and the net lenses model. Blackwood, South Australia: Auslib Press.
6. Goodyear, P. 2005. Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 21, no. 1: 82-101.
7. Green, S., R. Jones, E. Pearson, and S. Gkatzidou. 2006. Accessibility and adaptability of learning objects: Responding to metadata, learning patterns and profiles of needs and preferences. ALT-J, 14, no. 1: 117-29.
8. Knight, P., J. Tait, and M. Yorke. 2006. The professional learning of teachers in higher education. Studies in Higher Education 31, no. 3: 319-39.
9. Kreber, C. 2005. Charting a critical course on the scholarship of university teaching movement. Studies in Higher Education 30, no. 4: 389-405.
10. Laurillard, D. 2002a. Rethinking university teaching: A Conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. 2nd ed. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
11. _. 2002b. Rethinking teaching for the knowledge society. Educause Review.
12. Laurillard, D., and P. McAndrew. 2003. Reusable educational software: A basis for generic learning activities. In Reusing online resources: A sustainable approach to e-learning, ed. A. Littlejohn. London: Kogan Page.
13. Lave, J., and E. Wenger. 1991. Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14. Masterman, L., and S. Lee. 2005. Evaluation of the practitioner trial of LAMS: Final Report: Learning Technologies Group, University of Oxford.http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/LAMS%20Final%20Report.pdf
15. Mor, Y., N. Winters, M. Cerulli, and S. Björk. 2006. Learning patterns for the design and deployment of mathematical games: Literature review: Kaleidoscope Project, London Knowedge Lab, Institute of Education, University of London, http://lp.noe-kaleidoscope.org/outcomes/
16. Noffke, S. 1994. Action research: Towards the next generation. Educational Action Research 2, no. 1: 9-21.
17. Oliver, R., B. Harper, J. Hedberg, S. Wills, and S. Agostinho. 2002. Formalising the description of learning designs. In Quality conversations: Research and development in higher education, ed. A. Goody, J. Herrington and M. Northcote, vol. 25: 496-504. Jamison, ACT: Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia.
18. Schön, D.A. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
19. Trigwell, K., E. Martin, J. Benjamin, and M. Presser. 2000. Scholarship of teaching: A model. Higher Education Research and Development 19, no. 2: 155-68.
20. Wenger, E. 1999. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Young, P., and Z. Irving. 2005. Integrity of practice in lecturers' accounts of teaching decisions. Studies in Higher Education 30, no. 4: 459-72.