The evolution and redefining of 'CAL': A reflection on the interplay of theory and practice

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 4-17

  Hartley, R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Computer assisted learning; Developments; Review

Indexed keywords

EID: 74349096885     PISSN: 02664909     EISSN: 13652729     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00340.x     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Bavelas J.B. (1994) Gestures as part of speech: methodological implications. Research: Language and Social Interaction 27, 201 221.
2. Beaufils A. (2000) Tools and strategies for searching in hypermedia environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 16, 114 124.
3. Bork A. (1988) New structures for technology based courses. Education and Computing 4, 109 117.
4. Brown J.S. Burton R.R. (1974) SOPHIE: a pragmatic use of Artificial Intelligence in CAI. Proceedings ACM Conference 2, 571 579.
5. Brown J.S., Collins A. Duguid P. (1989) Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18, 32 42.
6. Chui C.-H. (2004) Evaluating system based strategies for managing conflict in collaborative concept mapping. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 20, 124 132.
7. Clancey W.J. (1983 GUIDON Journal of Computer Based Instruction 10, 8 14.
8. Collaud G., Gurtner J.L. Coen P.F. (2000) Design and use of a hypermedia system at the university level. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 16, 137 147.
9. Cooper B. Brna P. (2002) Supporting high quality interaction and motivation using ICT: the social and emotional learning and engagement in the NIMIS Project. Education, Communication and Information 2, 1 29.
10. Crook, C. (1994) Computers and the Collaborative Experience of Learning. Routledge, London.
11. Dillon, A. (1993) How collaborative is collaborative writing? An analysis of the production of two technical reports. In Computer Supported Collaborative Writing (ed. M. Sharples pp. 69 86. Springer Verlag, London.
12. Ellis R.A., Goodyear P., Prossert M. O'Hara A. (2006) How and what university students learn through online and face-to-face discussion: conceptions, intentions and approaches. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 22, 244 256.
13. Fetterman D.M. Wandersman A. (2004) Empowerment Evaluation Principles in Practice. Guilford Publications, New York.
14. Frohberg D., Goth C. Schwabe G. (2009) Mobile learning projects - a critical analysis of the state of the art. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25, 307 331.
15. Gagné R. (1965) The Conditions of Learning. Holt Reinhart and Winston, New York.
16. Ginns P. (2005) Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction 15, 313 331.
17. Gurlitt M. Renkl A. (2008) Are high-coherent concept maps better for prior knowledge activation? Differential effects of concept mapping tasks on high school v university students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 24, 407 419.
18. Gurlitt M., Renkl A., Motes M. Hauser S. (2006) How can we use concept maps for prior knowledge activation? - Different mapping tasks lead to different cognitive processes. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ed. J. Greer pp. 217 221. Erlbaum, New York.
19. Hartley R. (2003) An interactive computer based simulation environment for supporting and developing complex decision making. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Lifelong Learning 13, 212 231.
20. Hartley R., Elsayed A. Pesheva M. (2009) Presenting and representing knowledge to develop understanding. In Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ed. Kinshuk pp. 1072 1074. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA.
21. Hooper R. (1977) An introduction to the national development programme in computer assisted learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 8, 165 275.
22. Hoyles C. Sutherland R. (1987) Ways of learning in a computer based environment: some findings of the Logo Maths Project. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 3, 67 80.
23. Kendon A. (1994) Do gestures communicate? A review. Research on Language and Social Interaction 27, 175 200.
24. Kurland D.M. Pea R. (1985) Children's mental models of recursive Logo programs. Journal of Educational Computing Research 1, 235 243.
25. Laurillard D. (1993) Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology. Routledge, New York.
26. Laurillard D. (1998) A conversational framework for individual learning applied to the 'Learning Organisation' and the 'Learning Society Systems Research and Behavioural Science 16, 113 122.
27. Liber O. (2005) Learning objects: conditions for viability. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, 366 373.
28. Lighthill J. (1973) Artificial Intelligence: A General Survey; Artificial Intelligence: A Paper Symposium. Science Research Council, London.
29. Lu E.J.-L. Chen Y.-H. (2006) Design of a delegable SCORM conformant learning management system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 22, 423 436.
30. Luckin R., Clark W., Garnett F., Whitworth A., Akass J., Cook J., Day P., Ecclesfield N., Hamilton T.M. Robertson J. (forthcoming 2009) Learner generated contexts: a framework to support the effective use of technology to support learning. In Web 2.0-Based e-Learning: Applying Social Informatics for Tertiary Teaching (eds M.J.W. Lee C. McLoughlin). IGI Global, Hershey, PA. (in press)
31. MacDonald B. Stronach I. (1989) The independent policy evaluation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 5, 51 64.
32. Macdonal B., Jenkins D.R., Kemmis S. Tawney D.A. (1975) The programme at Two: A report of the independent educational evaluation of the national development programme in computer assisted learning. Centre for Applied Research in Education, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
33. McAlister S., Ravenscroft A. Scanlon E. (2004) Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous CMC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 20, 194 204.
34. McMahon H. O'Neill W. (1992) Computer mediated zones of engagement in learning. In Designing Environments for Constructive Learning (eds T.M. Duffy, J. Lowyck D.H. Jonassen pp. 29 50. Springer Verlag, New York.
35. Merrill M.D. (1983) Component display theory. In Instructional Design Theory and Models: An Overview of Their Current Status (ed. C.M. Reigeluth pp. 279 233. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.
36. Miller R. (1991) Why is science hard to learn? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 7, 66 74.
37. Moreno R. (2006 Does the modality principle hold for different media? A test of the method-effects learning hypothesis Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 22, 147 158.
38. Noss R. (1987) How do children do maths with Logo? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2, 2 12.
39. Novak J.D. Wandersee J. (1984) Learning How to Learn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
40. Novak J.D. Wandersee J. (1991) Co-editors, special issue on concept mapping. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 28, 10.
41. Ohlsson S. (1993) Impact of cognitive theory on the practice of courseware authoring. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 9, 194 221.
42. Papert S. (1980) Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, New York.
43. Papert S. (1993) The Children's Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. Basic Books, New York.
44. Parlett M. Hamilton D. (1972) Evaluation as illumination: a new approach to the study of innovatory programmes. Occasional Paper 9, Centre for Research in the Educational Sciences, University of Edinburgh. Pacific Soundings Press, Berkeley, CA.
45. Pask G. Scott B.C.E. (1973) CASTE: a system for exhibiting learning strategies and regulating uncertainties. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 5, 17 52.
46. Pea R.D. (1984) Symbol systems and thinking skills: Logo in context. Proceedings of the 1984 Logo Conference 55 61. Available as Technical Report-29. Bank Street College for Children and Technology, New York.
47. Pea R.D., Kurland D.M. Hawkins J. (1985) Logo and the development of thinking skills. In Children and Microcomputers: Formative Studies (eds M. Chen W. Paisley pp. 193 212. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, CA.
48. Ravenscroft A. (2007) Promoting thinking and conceptual change with digital dialogue games. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 23, 453 465.
49. Reigeluth C.M. (1979) In search of a better way to organise instruction: the elaboration theory. Journal of Instructional Development 2, 3 16.
50. Ridgeway J. (1986) Research needs in CAL. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2, 131 140.
51. Robbins Report (1963) Report of the Committee on Higher Education. Chaired by Lord Robbins, Commissioned by the British Government.
52. Scanlon E. Issoff K. (2005) Activity theory and higher education: evaluating learning technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, 430 439.
53. Self J.A. (1985) A perspective on intelligent computer assisted learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 1, 59 66.
54. Shaffer D.W. (2006) Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers and Education 46, 223 234.
55. Sharples M. Bruce B. (1996) Collaborative writing and technological change: implications for writing practice and system design. Computer Supported Cooperative Work 3, 225 228.
56. Skinner B.F. (1954) The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review 24, 86 97.
57. Skinner B.F. (1968) The Technology of Teaching. Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York.
58. Stahl G. (2005) Group cognition in computer assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, 79 90.
59. Stake R.E. (1980) Program evaluation, particularly responsive evaluation. In Rethinking Educational Research (eds W.B. Dockrell D. Hamilton pp. 72 87. Hodder and Stoughton, London.
60. Suppes P. (1979) Current trends in computer assisted instruction. In Advances in Computers (ed. M.C. Yovits pp. 18 32. Academic Press, New York.
61. Tait K. (1973) Feedback procedures in computer assisted arithmetic instruction. British Journal of Educational Psychology 43, 161 171.
62. Toulmin S. (1958) The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
63. Twigger D., Byard M.J., Draper S., Driver R., Hartley R., Hennessy S., Mallen C., Mohamed R., O'Malley C., O'Shea T. Scanlon E. (1991) The conceptual change in science project. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 2, 144 155.
64. Vygotsky L. (1986) Thought and Language. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
65. Wegerif R., Mercer N. Dawes L. (1999) From social interaction to individual reasoning: an empirical investigation of a possible socio-cultural model of cognitive development. Learning and Instruction 9, 493 516.
66. Wertsch J.V. Sohmer R. (1995) Vygotsky on learning and development. Human Development 38, 332 337.
67. Woo H.L. (2009) Designing multimedia learning environments using animated pedagogical agents: factors and issues. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25, 203 218.
68. Yelland N.J. (1994) The strategies and interactions of young children in Logo tasks. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 10, 33 49.