Pedagogical plans as communication oriented objects

Computers and Education

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 476-488

  Olimpo, G ^a   Bottino, R M ^a   Earp, J ^a   Ott, M ^a   Pozzi, F ^a   Tavella, M ^a  

^a CNR   (Italy)

Author keywords

Communication; Flexible authoring; Hierarchies; Learning design; Pedagogical planning

Indexed keywords

ASSOCIATED TOOL; DISTINCTIVE FEATURES; EDUCATIONAL INNOVATIONS; FLEXIBLE AUTHORING; HIERARCHICAL NETWORK; HIERARCHICAL REPRESENTATION; HIERARCHIES; HUMAN COMMUNICATIONS; INTERNATIONAL RESEARCHES; LEARNING ACTIVITY; LEARNING DESIGNS; LEARNING PROCESS; PROTOTYPE TOOLS; STRUCTURAL MODELS; TOP-DOWN PROCESS;

ABSTRACTING; DESIGN; EDUCATION; MODEL STRUCTURES;

COMMUNICATION;

EID: 77953134897     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.011     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Bottino R.M., Artigue M., and Noss R. Building European collaboration in technology-enhanced learning in mathematics (2009), Springer, Nederlands
2. Bottino R., Earp J., Olimpo G., Ott M., Pozzi F., and Tavella M. Supporting the design of pilot learning activities with the pedagogical plan manager. In: Kendall M., and Samways B. (Eds). Learning to live in the knowledge society (2008), Springer, New York
3. Bottino R.M., Ott M., and Pozzi F. Taking up the challenge of evaluating research results in the field of technology enhanced learning. Lectures Notes in Artificial Intelligence 5736 (2009) 22-30
4. Britain S. In: Beetham H., and Sharpe R. (Eds). Learning design systems: current and future developments in rethinking pedagogy for a digital age (2007), Routledge, New York 103-115
5. Conole G., and Fill K. A learning design toolkit to create pedagogically effective learning activities. Available from. Journal of Interactive Media in Education (2005). jime.open.ac.uk/2005/08 (last access January 2010)
6. Cristea A. Authoring of adaptive hypermedia. Educational Technology & Society 8 3 (2005) 77-90
7. Dahl O.J., Dijkstra E.W., and Hoare C.A.R. Structured programming (1972), Academic Press, London
8. Dalziel J.R. Implementing learning design: The learning activity management system (LAMS) (2003), ASCILITE 2003, Adelaide, Australia. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/adelaide03/docs/pdf/593.pdf (last access January 2010)
9. Dantsin E., Eiter T., Gottlob G., and Voronkov A. Complexity and expressive power of logic programming. ACM Computing Surveys 33 3 (2001) 374-425
10. Earp J., and Pozzi F. Fostering reflection in ICT-based pedagogical planning. In: Philip R., Voerman A., and Dalziel J. (Eds). Proc. First Int. LAMS Conference 2006: Designing the future of learning (2006), LAMS Foundation, Sydney 35-44
11. Falconer I., Beetham H., Oliver R., Lockyer L., and Littlejohn A. Mod4L final report: Representing learning designs (2007). http://mod4l.com/tiki-download_file.php?fileId=7 (last access January 2010)
12. Gagné R.M. The conditions of learning (1965), Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York
13. Gagné R.M., Briggs L.J., and Wager W.W. Principles of instructional design. 4th ed. (1992), Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York
14. Hernández-Leo D., Villasclaras-Fernández E., Asensio-Pérez J., Dimitriadis Y., Jorrín-Abellán I., Ruiz-Requie I., et al. COLLAGE: a collaborative learning design editor based on patterns. Educational Technology & Society 9 1 (2006) 58-71
15. Janssen J., Berlanga A., Vogten H., and Koper R. Towards a learning path specification. International Journal of Continuing Engineering Education and Life Long Learning 18 1 (2008) 77-97
16. Jonassen D.H., Tessmer M., and Wallace H.H. Task analysis methods for instructional design (1999), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah
17. Jovanović J., Gašević D., Knight C., and Richards G. Ontologies for effective use of context in e-learning settings. Educational Technology & Society 10 3 (2007) 47-59
18. Kirschner P.A., Sweller J., and Clark R.E. Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based experiential and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist 41 2 (2006) 75-86. http://www.cogtech.usc.edu/publications/kirschner_Sweller_Clark.pdf (last access January 2010)
19. Klebl M. Usability of a runtime environment for the use of IMS learning design in mixed mode higher education. Educational Technology & Society 9 1 (2006) 146-157
20. Koper R. Current research in learning design. Educational Technology & Society 9 1 (2006) 13-22
21. Kynigos C., and Latsi M. Turtle's navigation and manipulation of geometrical figures constructed by variable processes in a 3D simulated space. Informatics in Education - An International Journal 6 2 (2007) 359-372
22. Lee Y. Review of the tools for the cognitive task analysis. Educational Technology & Society 7 1 (2004) 130-139
23. Martel C., Vignollet L., Ferraris C., and Durand G. LDL: a language to model collaborative learning activities (2006), EDMEDIA 2006, World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Orlando
24. McAndrew P., and Weller M. Applying learning design to supported open learning. In: Koper R., and Tattersall C. (Eds). Learning design: A handbook on modeling and delivering networked education and training (2005), Springer, New York 281-290
25. Pernin J.P., and Lejeune A. Models for the re-use of learning scenarios (2006), DSpace at Open Universiteit, Nederland. http://dspace.ou.nl/handle/1820/580 (last access January 2010)
26. Philip, R., & Dalziel, J. (2004), Designing activities for student learning using the Learning Activity Management System (LAMS), Proc. of International Conference on Computers in Education, Melbourne.
27. Schneider D.K. Sharing representations and flow in collaborative learning environments. In: Tokoro M., and Steels L. (Eds). The future of learning II (2004), IOS Press, Amsterdam
28. Strijbos J.W., Martens R.L., and Jochems W.M.G. Designing for interaction: six steps to designing computer supported group-based learning. Computers & Education 42 (2004) 403-424