Designing model-centered learning environments: Hocus-pocus or the focus must strictly be on locus

Innovations in Instructional Technology: Essays in Honor of M. David Merrill

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 65-90

  Seel, Norbert M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FREIBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865250163     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9781410613684     Document Type: Chapter

References (78)

1. Al-Diban, S. (2002). Diagnose mentaler Modelle. Hamburg: Kovac.
2. Alexander, P. A., White, C. S., Haensly, P. A., & Grimmins-Jeanes, M. (1987). Training in analogical reasoning. American Educational Research Journal, 24, 387-404.
3. Bandura, A. (1971). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press.
4. Bhatta, S. R., Goel, A. (1997). Learning generic mechanisms for innovative strategies in adaptive design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(4), 367-396.
5. Briggs, P. (1990). The role of the user model in learning as an internally and externally directed activity. In D. Ackermann & M. J. Tauber (Eds.), Mental models and human- computer interaction 1 (pp. 195-208). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
6. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7. Buss, A. R. (1979). A dialectical psychology. New York: Irvington.
8. Carlson, H. L. (1991). Learning style and program design in interactive multimedia. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(3), 41-48.
9. Casey, C. (1996). Incorporating cognitive apprenticeship in multimedia. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44(1), 71-84.
10. Catrambone, R. (1998). The subgoal learning model: Creating better examples so that students can solve novel problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127(4), 355-376.
11. Chee, Y. S. (1995). Cognitive apprenticeship and its application to the teaching of smalltalk in a multimedia interactive learning environment. Instructional Science, 23, 133-161.
12. Coleman, E. B. (1998). Using explanatory knowledge during collaborative problem solving in science. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 387-427.
13. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and instruction (pp. 453-494). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Craik, K. J.W. (1943). The nature of explanation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Doerr, H. M. (1996). Integrating the study of trigonometry, vectors, and force through modeling. School Science and Mathematics, 96, 407-418.
16. Duchastel, P. (1999). Instructional design in the information age. IFETS Forum. Paper presented and discussed on IFETS Forum, May 1999. Retrieved April 9, 2004, from http://gmd.de/discussionss/discuss_may99.html
17. Erickson, J., & Lehrer, R. (1998). The evolution of critical standards as students design hypermedia documents. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3 & 4), 351-386.
18. Farmer, J. A., Buckmaster, A., & Legrand, A. (1992). Cognitive apprenticeship: Implications for continuing professional education. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 55, 41-49.
19. Farnham-Diggory, S. (1972). Cognitive processes in education: A psychological preparation for teaching and curriculum development. New York: Harper & Row.
20. Gentner, D., & Stevens, A. L. (Eds.).(1983). Mental models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21. Gibbons, A. S. (1998, April). Model-centered instruction. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, San Diego, CA.
22. Glaser, R., Lesgold, A., & Lajoie, S. (1987). Toward a cognitive theory for the measurement of achievement. In R. R. Ronning, J. Glover, J. C. Conoley, J. C.Witt (Eds.), The influence of cognitive psychology on testing and measurement (pp. 41-85). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Gordon, I., & Zemke, R. (2000). The attack on ISD: Have we got instructional design all wrong? Training Magazine, 37, 43-53.
24. Gravemeijer, K., Cobb, P., Bowers, J., & Whitenack, J. (2000). Symbolizing, modeling, and instructional design. In P. Cobb, E. Yackel, & K. McClain (Eds.), Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms. Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design (pp. 225-273). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
25. Greeno, J. G. (1989). Situations, mental models, and generative knowledge. In D. Klahr & K. Kotovsky (Eds.), Complex information processing (pp. 285-318). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. Gustafson, K. L., Tillman, M. H., Childs, J.W. (1992). The future of instructional design. In L. J. Briggs, K. L. Gustafson, & M. H. Tillman (Eds.), Instructional design: Principles and applications (pp. 451-467). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
27. Hacker, W. (1977). Bedeutung und Analyse des Gedächtnisses für die Arbeits- und Ingenieurpsychologie-zu Gedächtnisanforderungen in der psychischen Regulation von Handlungen. In F. Klix H. Sydow(Eds.), Zur Psychologie des Gedächtnisses (pp. 150-174). Bern: Huber.
28. Hestenes, D. (1987). Toward a modeling theory of physics instruction. American Journal of Physics, 55(5), 440-454.
29. Hmelo, C. E., & Guzdial, M. (1996). Of black and glass boxes: Scaffolding for doing and learning. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Learning Sciences (pp. 128-133). Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computers in Education.
30. Holyoak, K. J., & Thagard, P. (1995). Mental leaps. Analogy in creative thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. Järvelä, S. (1995). The cognitive apprenticeship model in a technologically rich learning environment: Interpreting the learning interaction. Learning and Instruction, 5(3), 237-259.
32. Jenkins, J. J. (1979). Four points to remember: A tetrahedral model of memory experiments. In L. S. Cermak, & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.), Levels of processing in human memory (pp. 429-446). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
33. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models. Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1989). Mental models. In M. I. Posner (Ed.), Foundations of cognitive science (pp. 469-499). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
35. Jonassen, D. H., Tessmer, M.,& Hannum,W. H. (1999). Task analysis methods for instructional design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
36. Kaput, J. J. (1994). The representational roles of technology in connecting mathematics with authentic experience. In R. Biehler, R.W. Scholz, R. Sträβer, & B. Winkelmann (Eds.), Didactics of mathematics as a scientific discipline (pp. 379-397). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
37. Karplus, R. (1969). Introductory physics: A model approach. New York: Benjamins.
38. Kluwe, R. H., & Haider, H. (1990). Modelle zur internen Repräsentation komplexer technischer Systeme. Sprache & Kognition, 9(4), 173-192.
39. Lajoie, S. P., & Lesgold, A. (1989). Apprenticeship training in the workplace: Computer-coached practice environment as a new form of apprenticeship. Machine-Mediated Learning, 3, 7-28.
40. Lesh, R.,& Doerr, H. M. (2000). Symbolizing, communicating, and mathematizing:Key components of models and modeling. In P. Cobb, E. Yackel,& K. McClain (Eds.), Symbolizing and communicating in mathematics classrooms. Perspectives on discourse, tools, and instructional design (pp. 361-383). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
41. Markman, A. B. (1998). Knowledge representation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
42. Mayer, R. E. (1989). Models for understanding. Review of Educational Research, 59(1), 43-64.
43. Mayer, R. E., Moreno, R., Boire, M., Vagge, S. (1999). Maximizing constructivist learning from multimedia communication by minimizing cognitive load. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(4), 638-643.
44. Merrill, M. D. (1987). The new component design theory: Instructional design for courseware authoring. Instructional Science, 16, 19-34.
45. Merrill, M. D. (1994). Instructional design theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications.
46. Merrill, M. D. (2000). Knowledge objects and mental models. In D. A.Wiley (Ed.), The instructional use of learning objects. Retrieved April 9, 2004, fromhttp://reusability.org/read/chapters/merrill.doc
47. Moray, N. (1988). A lattice theory of mental models of complex systems. Urbana-Champaign: Engineering Psychology Research Laboratory, University of Illinois.
48. Myers, K. L. (1999). Is there a place for instructional design in the information age? Educational Technology, 39(6), 50-53.
49. Newby, T. J., Ertmer, P. A., & Stepich, D. A. (1995). Instructional analogies and the learning of concepts. Educational Technology Research and Development, 43(1), 5-18.
50. Norman, D. A. (1983). Some observations on mental models. In D. Gentner&A. L. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 7-14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51. Palincsar, A. S. (1986). The role of dialogue in providing scaffolded instruction. Educational Psychologist, 21(1 & 2), 73-98.
52. Penner, D. E. (2001). Cognition, computers, and synthetic science: Building knowledge and meaning through modeling. Review of Research in Education, 25, 1-35.
53. Penner, D. E., Lehrer, R. Schauble, L. (1998). From physical models to biomechanics:A design-based modeling approach. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 429-449.
54. Renkl, A., Stark, R., Gruber, H.,&Mandl, H. (1998). Learning fromworked-out examples: The effects of example variability and elicited self-explanations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 90-108.
55. Rickheit, G., & Habel, C. (Eds.). (1999). Mental models in discourse processing and reasoning. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
56. Riedel, K. (1973). Lehrhilfen zum entdeckenden Lernen. Ein experimenteller Beitrag zur Denkerziehung. Hannover: Schroedel.
57. Ritchie, D., & Earnest, J. (1999). The future of instructional design: Results of a Delphi study. Educational Technology, 39(6), 35-42.
58. Ross, B. H. (1989). Distinguishing types of superficial similarities: Different effects on the access and use of earlier problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 456-468.
59. Salomon, G. (1979). Interaction of media, cognition and learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
60. Sasse, M. (1991). How to t(r)ap users' mental models. In M. J. Tauber, & D. Ackermann (Eds.), Mental models and human-computer interaction (Vol. 2, pp. 59-79). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
61. Seel, N. M. (1991). Weltwissen und mentale Modelle. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
62. Seel, N. M. (1995). Mental models, knowledge transfer, and teaching strategies. Journal of Structural Learning, 12(3), 197-213.
63. Seel, N. M. (2001). Epistemology, situated cognition, and mental models: "Like a bridge over troubled water." Instructional Science, 29(4-5), 403-428.
64. Seel, N. M. (2003). Model-centered learning and instruction. Technology, Instruction, Cognition, and Learning, 1(1), 59-85.
65. Seel, N. M., Al-Diban, S., Blumschein, P. (2000). Mental models and instructional planning. In J. M. Spector, T. M. Anderson (Eds.), Integrated and holistic perspectives on learning, instruction and technology: Understanding complexity (pp. 129-158). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
66. Seel, N. M., Schenk, K. (2003). Multimedia environments as cognitive tools for enhancing model-based learning and problem solving: An evaluation report. Evaluation and Program Planning, 26(2), 215-224.
67. Smith, C., & Unger, C. (1997). What's in dots-per-box? Conceptual bootstrapping with stripped-down visual analogies. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(2), 143-181.
68. Stachowiak, H. (1973). Allgemeine Modelltheorie. Wien: Springer.
69. Steinbuch, K. (1961). Automat und Mensch. Über menschliche und maschinelle Intelligenz. Berlin: Springer.
70. Stewart, J., Hafner, R., Johnson, S., & Finkel, E. (1992). Science as model building: Computers and high-school genetics. Educational Psychologist, 27(3), 317-336.
71. Stolurow, L. M. (1973). Lernumwelten oder Gelegenheiten zum Nachdenken. In W. Edelstein, & D. Hopf (Eds.), Bedingungen des Bildungsprozesses. Psychologische und pädagogische Forschungen zum Lehren und Lernen in der Schule (pp. 351-398). Stuttgart: Klett.
72. Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, P., & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load as a factor in the structuring of technical material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 176-192.
73. van Merriënboer, J. J. G., Seel, N. M., & Kirschner, P. A. (2002). Mental models as a new foundation for instructional design. Educational Technology, 42(2), 60-66.
74. Veldhuyzen, W., & Stassen, H. G. (1977). The internal model concept: An application to modelling human control of large ships. Human Factors, 19, 367-380.
75. Volet, S. E. (1991). Modelling and coaching of relevant, metacognitive strategies for enhancing university student's learning. Learning and Instruction, 1(4), 319-336.
76. Weltner, K. (1970). Informationstheorie und Erziehungswissenschaft. Quickborn: Schnelle.
77. Wertheimer, M. (1959). Productive thinking (rev. ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
78. White, B. (1993). Thinker tools: Causal models, conceptual change, and science education. Cognition and Instruction, 10(1), 1-100.