The holistic model for blended learning: A new model for K-12 district-level cyber shools

International Journal of Information and Communication Technology Education

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 56-71

  Stone, Alex ^a  

^a VLN Partners Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

Blended learning; Cyber charter school; Learning management system (lms); Learning object; Learning object based instruction; Lobi; Nominalism; Pragmatism; The collaborative model for distance education

Indexed keywords

EID: 47649088926     PISSN: 15501876     EISSN: 15501337     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/jicte.2008010106     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (Eds.). (2007, in press). Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer, Publishing.
2. Carman, J. (2002). Blended learning design: Five key ingredients. Retrieved January 26, 2007 from, http://www.agilantlearning.com/ instructionaldesign.html
3. Chute, E. (2005, May 08). Cyber schools spring up in state. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
4. Downes, S. (2001). Learning objects: Resources for distance education worldwide. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 2(1), 29.
5. Friesen, N. (2001). What are educational objects? Interactive Learning Environments, 9(3).
6. Friesen, N. (2003). Three objections to learning objects and e-learning standards. In R. E. McGreal (Ed.), Online education using learning objects, pp. 59-70. London: Routledge.
7. Geary, G. (1991). Electronic performance support system (1st ed.). Tolland, MA: Gery Associates.
8. Godwin-Jones, R. (2004). Learning objects: Scorn or SCORM? Language Learning & Technology, 8(2), 7-12.
9. Hodas, S. (1993). Technology refusal and the organizational culture of schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 1(10).
10. Hickman, L. A. (2001). Philosophical tools for technological culture: Putting pragmatism to work. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
11. Knade, S.L. (2001). Cyber school litigation expands. Education Law Focus, 10(5), 1-4.
12. Merrill, M. D. (2000). Instructional transaction theory (ITT): Instructional design based on knowledge obj ects. In Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. NCES. (National Center for Educational Statistics). (2003). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2000-2001. Retrieved November 9, 2006 from, http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2003/2003017.pdf
14. Pepper, S. C. (1942). World hypotheses: A study in evidence: University of California Press.
15. Raffaele, M. (2004, June 21). Some districts resist paying for cyberschools. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
16. Reiser, R.A. (2001). A history of instructional design and technology, Part I: A history of instructional media. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 49(1), 53-64.
17. Rosenberg, M.J. (2001). e-Learning: Strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age. New York: McGraw Hill.
18. Shank, G. (2007). Personal communication. 03/19/2007.
19. Silver, J.D. (2007, March 18). Cyber-school empire under attack: Beaver County educator fighting grand juries, suits and legislators. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.
20. Smith, C. (2005, December 18). State-funded cyber school draws concern. The Pittsburgh
21. Tribune-Review.
22. Stone, A. (in press). Learning object based instruction (LOBI). Encyclopedia of Information Technology Curriculum Integration. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
23. Tomei, L. A. (2002). The technology facade: Overcoming barriers to effective instructional technology. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
24. Tripp, S., & Bichelmeyer, B. (1990). Rapid proto-typing: An alternative instructional design strategy. Educational Technology Research & Development, 38(1), 31-44.
25. US Department of Education (USDED). (2007). Effectiveness ofreading and mathematics software products: Findings from the first student cohort. Online version. Retrieved May 29, 2007 from, http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pdf/20074005.pdf
26. Welsch, E. (2002). SCORM: Clarity or calamity? Online Learning Magazine, 07(1), 4.
27. Wiley, D. A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. In D. A. Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects. Online version. Retrieved January 26, 2007 from, http://reusability.org/read/chapters/ wiley.doc
28. Wiley, D. (2003). Getting axiomatic about learning objects. Retrieved January 26, 2007 from, http://www.reusability.org/ axiomatic.pdf
29. Wilson, B. G. (1995). Situated instructional design: Blurring the distinctions between theory and practice, design and implementation, curriculum and instruction. Paper presented at the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Washington DC.
30. Verbert, K., & Duval, E. 2004). Towards a global architecture for learning objects: A comparative analysis of learning object content models. Retrieved May 24, 2007 from, http://www.cs.kuleuven.ac.be/ ~hmdb/publications/files/pdfversion/4131.5.pdf
31. Voos, R. (2003). Blended learning - What is it and where might it take us? Sloan-C View, 2(1), 3-5.
32. Zugner, L. C. (1987). A reappraisal of instructional television. ERIC Digest, 12(00), 1-6.