Co-Designing collaborative smart classroom curriculum for secondary school science

Journal of Universal Computer Science

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 327-352

  Tissenbaum, Mike ^a   Lui, Michelle ^a   Slotta, James D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Collaborative inquiry; Future classrooms; Physics; Science education

Indexed keywords

EID: 84859826990     PISSN: 0958695X     EISSN: 09486968     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (90)

1. Alexander, B. (2006). Web 2.0: A new wave of innovation for teaching and learning. Educause Review, 41(2), 32-44.
2. Al-khalifa, H., & Davis, H. (2006). FolksAnnotation: A semantic metadata tool for annotating learning resources using folksonomies and domain ontologies. 2006 Innovations in Information Technology, 1-5.
3. Andersen, P. (2007). What is web 2.0?: Ideas, technologies and implications for education, JISC Technology and Standards Watch; Citeseer.
4. Anderson, T., & Whitelock, D. M. (2004). The educational semantic web: Visioning and practicing the future of education. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2004(1), 1-15.
5. Ash, S. L., Clayton, P. H., & Atkinson, M. P. (2005). Integrating reflection and assessment to capture and improve student learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 11(2), 49-60.
6. Baird, J. R., Fensham, P. J., Gunstone, R. F., & White, R. T. (1991). The importance of reflection in improving science teaching and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 28(2), 163-182.
7. Barab, S. A., & Kirshner, D. (2001). Guest editors' introduction: Rethinking methodology in the learning sciences. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(1), 5-15.
8. Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (2005). Beyond bloom's taxonomy: Rethinking knowledge for the knowledge age. Fundamental Change, 5-22.
9. Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: A reconceptualization of educational practice. Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A New Paradigm of Instructional Theory, 2, 269-292.
10. Bielaczyc, K., & Collins, A. (2006). Fostering knowledge-creating communities. Collaborative Learning, Reasoning, and Technology, 37-60.
11. Borgman, C., Abelson, H., Dirks, L., & Johnson, R. (2008). Fostering learning in the networked world: The cyberlearning opportunity and challenge. National Science Foundation Task Force on Cyberlearning,
12. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and schooling National Academy Press.
13. Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments. Environments, 289-325.
14. Brown, A. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.
15. Buckingham, D. (2007). Beyond technology: Children's learning in the age of digital culture Polity Press.
16. Chi, M. T. H. (2005). Commonsense conceptions of emergent processes: Why some misconceptions are robust. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 161-199.
17. Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5(2), 121-152.
18. Design Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8.
19. Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon, & T. O'Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22) Bolt Beranek Newman; Springer-Verlag.
20. Collins, A., & Halverson, R. (2010). The second educational revolution: Rethinking education in the age of technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(1), 18-27.
21. Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15-42.
22. Crouch, C. H., & Mazur, E. (2001). Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics, 69(9), 970.
23. Crouch, C. H., Watkins, J., Fagen, A. P., & Mazur, E. (2007). Peer instruction: Engaging students one-on-one, all at once. Physics, 1.
24. Davis, E. A. (1998). Scaffolding students' reflection for science learning. University of California; University of California, Berkeley).
25. De Wever B., Van Keer H., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2009). Structuring asynchronous discussion groups: The impact of role assignment and selfassessment on students' levels of knowledge construction through social negotiation. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(2), 177-188.
26. Dillenbourg, P., Jarvela, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. Jong, A. Lazonder & S. Barnes (Eds.), Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 3-19). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
27. Dillenbourg, P., & Jermann, P. (2007). Designing integrative scripts. Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 275-301.
28. DiSessa, A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning, and literacy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
29. DiSessa, A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77-103.
30. Engestrom, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
31. Garrison, D. R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice and Direction, 4, 47-58.
32. Gray, J., & Szalay, A. (2007). Science - A transformed scientific method. Mountain View: Presentation to the Computer Science and Technology Board of the National Research Council.
33. Guy, M., & Tonkin, E. (2006). Folksonomies tidying up tags, DLib Magazine, 1-17.
34. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A sixthousand- student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64-74.
35. Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Emergence of progressive-inquiry culture in computer-supported collaborative learning. Learning Environments Research, 6(2), 199.
36. Hakkinen, P., & Makitalo-Siegl, K. (2007). Educational perspectives on scripting CSCL. In F. Fischer, I. Kollar, M, H. l & J. M. Haake (Eds.), Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning (pp. 263-271) Springer.
37. Hargreaves, A. (2003). Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity Teachers College Press.
38. Hayman, S., & Lothian, N. (2007). Taxonomy directed folksonomies: Integrating user tagging and controlled vocabularies for australian education networks. World Library and Information Congress: 73RD IFLA General Conference and Council, (August) 1-27.
39. Hestenes, D., Wells, M., & Swackhamer, G. (1992). Force concept inventory. The Physics Teacher, 30(3), 141.
40. Hoadley, C. P. (2002). Creating context: Design-based research in creating and understanding CSCL. Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning: Foundations for a CSCL Community, 453-462.
41. Hsieh, W., Lai, W., & Chou, S. T. (2006). A collaborative tagging system for learning resources sharing. Current Developments in Technology-Assisted Education, 1364-1368.
42. Ito, M., Baumer, S., Bittanti, M., Boyd, D., Cody, R., Herr-Stephenson, B., et al. (2009). Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out: Kids living and learning with new media (john D. and catherine T. MacArthur foundation series on digital media and learning) (1st ed.) The MIT Press.
43. Johnson, S. D., & Aragon, S. R. (2003). An instructional strategy framework for online learning environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2003(100), 31-43.
44. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Marx, R. W. (1998). Instructional, curricular, and technological supports for inquiry in science classrooms. In J. Minstrell, & {Van Zee E. (Eds.), Inquiring into inquiry: Science learning and teaching (pp. 283-315). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science Press.
45. Krajcik, J., Slotta, J. D., McNeill, K. L., & Reiser, B. J. (2008). Designing learning environments to support students' integrated understanding. In Y. Kali, M. C. Linn & J. E. Roseman (Eds.), Designing coherent science education (pp. 39-64) Teachers College Press
46. Laurillard, J. (2002). Rethinking teaching for the knowledge society. Educase Review, 37(1), 16-35.
47. Lemke, J. L. (2000). Across the scales of time: Artifacts, activities, and meanings in ecosocial systems. Mind, Culture and Activity, 7(4), 273-290.
48. Linn, M. C., Husic, F., Slotta, J. D., & Tinker, R. (2007). Technology enhanced learning in science (TELS): Research program. Educational Technology, 46(3), 54-68.
49. Linn, M. C., & Eylon, B. (2006). Science education: Integrating views of learning and instruction. Handbook of Educational Psychology, 511-544.
50. Livingstone, S. (2008). Internet literacy: Young people's negotiation of new online opportunities. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning, 101-122.
51. Lui, M., Tissenbaum, M., & Slotta, J. D. (2011). Scripting collaborative learning in smart classrooms: Towards building knowledge communities. Annual Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning
52. Marinho, L. B., Buza, K., & Schmidt-Thieme, L. (2008). Folksonomy-based collabulary learning. The Semantic Web-ISWC, 261-276.
53. Mathes, A. (2004). Folksonomies - cooperative classification and communication through shared metadata. Computer Mediated Communication, 1-13.
54. Mazur, E. (1997). Peer instruction: A user's manual Prentice Hall.
55. Nicol, D. J., & Boyle, J. T. (2003). Peer instruction versus class-wide discussion in large classes: A comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom. Studies in Higher Education, 28(4), 457-473.
56. Nokes, T., Schunn, C., & Chi, M. T. H. (2010). Problem solving and human expertise. International Encyclopedia of Education, 5, 265-272.
57. O'Donnell, A. M., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted cooperation in student dyads: A method for analyzing and enhancing academic learning and performance. In R. Hertz-Lazarowitz, & N. Miller (Eds.), Interaction in cooperative groups the theoretical anatomy of group learning (pp. 120-141) Cambridge University Press.
58. Penuel, W. R., Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2007). Teachers: An analysis of the co-desing process. Learning, 2(1), 51-74.
59. Peters, V. L., & Slotta, J. D. (2008). Co-designing a knowledge building activity with secondary school biology teachers. Ikit.Org
60. Peters, V. L., & Slotta, J. D. (2010). Scaffolding knowlege communities in the classroom: New opportunities in the web 2.0 era. In M. J. Jacobson, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Designings for learning enviornments of the future international perspectives from the learning sciences (pp. 205-232) Springer US.
61. Plangprasopchok, A., Lerman, K., & Getoor, L. (2010). Growing a tree in the forest: Constructing folksonomies by integrating structured metadata. Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 949-958.
62. Priest, A., & Lindsay, R. (1992). New light on novice - expert differences in physics problem solving. British Journal of Psychology, 3, 389-405.
63. Reiner, M., Slotta, J. D., Chi, M. T. H., & Resnick, L. (2000). Naive physics reasoning: A commitment to substance-based conceptions. Cognition and Instruction, 18(1), 1-34.
64. Rodriguez, P., Nussbaum, M., Lopez, X., & Sepulveda, M. (2010). A monitoring and evaluation scheme for an ICT-supported education program in schools. Educational Technology \& Society, 13(2), 166-179.
65. Roschelle, J., Penuel, W. R., & Shechtman, N. (2006). Co-design of innovations with teachers: Definition and dynamics. Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences, 606-612.
66. Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007). Tutor learning: The role of explaining and responding to questions. Instructional Science, 36(4), 321-350.
67. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. Teacher, (4), 67-98.
68. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Adaptation and understanding: A case for new cultures of schooling. International perspectives on the design of TechnologySupported learning environments (pp. 149-163) Lawrence Erlbaum ssociates.
69. Shirley, M. L., Irving, K. E., Sanalan, V. A. J S., & Owens, D. T. (2011). The practicality of implementing connected classroom technology in secondary mathematics and science classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, (9), 459-481.
70. Slotta, J. D. (2007). Supporting collaborative inquiry: New architectures, new opportunities. Proceedings of the Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, 21-25.
71. Slotta, J. D. (2010). Evolving the classrooms of the future: The interplay of pedagogy, technology and community. In K. M\{a}kitalo-Siegl, F. Kaplan, J. Zottmann & F. Fischer (Eds.), The classroom of the future orchestrating collaborative learning spaces (pp. 215-242). Rotterdam: SensePublisher.
72. Slotta, J. D., & Aleahmad, T. (2009). WISE technology lessons: Moving from a local proprietary system to a global open source framework. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(2), 169-189.
73. Slotta, J. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2006). Helping students understand challenging topics in science through ontology training. Cognition and Instruction, 24(2), 261-289.
74. Slotta, J. D., Chi, M. T. H., & Joram, E. (1995). Assessing students' misclassifications of physics concepts: An ontological basis for conceptual change. Cognition and Instruction, 13(3), 373-400.
75. Slotta, J. D., & Linn, M. C. (2009). WISE science: Web-based inquiry in the classroom Teachers College Press.
76. Slotta, J. D., & Najafi, H. (2010). Technology and learning â€" supports for student collaboration. Cognition, 189-196.
77. Slotta, J. D., Tissenbaum, M., & Lui, M. (2011). SAIL smart space: Orchestrating collective inquiry for knowledge communities. Proceedings of the Ninth International Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, 1082-1083.
78. Slotta, J., & Peters, V. (2008). A blended model for knowledge communities: Embedded scaffolded inquiry.
79. Sorensen, E. K. (1999). Intellectual amplification through reflection and didactic change in distributed collaborative learning. Proceedings of the 1999 Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning - CSCL '99, 71-es.
80. Tatar, D., Roschelle, J., Vahey, P., & Penuel, W. R. (2003). Handhelds go to school. Computer, 36(9), 30-37.
81. Tissenbaum, M., & Slotta, J. D. (2009). Co-designing curriculum for smart classes. 2009 Canadian Society for Studies in Education Conference
82. Trowbridge, D. E., & McDermott, J. (1980). Investigation of student understanding of the concept of velocity in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 48(12), 1020-1028.
83. Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering towards utopia: A century of public school reform Harvard University Press.
84. Ullrich, C., Borau, K., Luo, H., & Tan, X. (2008). Why web 2.0 is good for learning and for research: Principles and prototypes. International Conference on World Wide Web, 705-714.
85. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society (pp. 52-57) Harvard University Press.
86. Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research \& Development, 53(4), 5-23.
87. Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1-30.
88. Wiley, D. A. (2000). Connecting learning objects to instructional design theory: A definition, a metaphor, and a taxonomy. Learning Technology, 2830(435), 1-35.
89. Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine: The future of work and power Basic Books.
90. Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2004). Computer supported collaborative learning using wirelessly interconnected handheld computers. Computers \& Education, 42(3), 289-314.