Re-envisioning instructional technology research in higher education environments: A content analysis of a grant program

Journal of Computing in Higher Education

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 164-181

  Paulus, Trena M ^a   Phipps, Gina ^b   Harrison, John ^c   Varga, Mary Alice ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE   (United States)

^b Aiken Technical College   (United States)

^c LINCOLN MEMORIAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Content analysis; Design based research; Faculty development; Instructional technology research; Media comparison; Research design

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873048649     PISSN: 10421726     EISSN: 18671233     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12528-012-9062-2     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Aspelmeier, J. E., & Pierce, T. W. (2009). SPSS: A user-friendly approach. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
2. Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 1-14.
3. Bauer, M. (2000). Classical content analysis: A review. In M. Bauer & G. Gaskell (Eds.), Qualitative researching with text, image and sound (pp. 131-151). London: Sage.
4. Bekele, T. A., & Menchaca, M. P. (2008). Research on internet-supported learning: A review. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9(4), 373-405.
5. Clark, R. E. (1983). Reconsidering the research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
6. Clark, R. E. (1994a). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.
7. Clark, R. E. (1994b). Media and method. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(3), 7-10.
8. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
9. Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Web 2. 0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246-259.
10. Hew, K. F., Kale, U., & Kim, N. (2007). Past research in instructional technology: Results of a content analysis of empirical studies published in three prominent instructional technology journals from the year 2000 through 2004. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(3), 269-300.
11. Higgins, N., Sullivan, H., Harper-Marinick, M., & Lopez, C. (1989). Perspectives on educational technology research and development. Educational Technology Research & Development, 37(1), 7-17.
12. Hrastinski, S., & Keller, C. (2007a). An examination of research approaches that underlie research on educational technology: A review from 2000 to 2004. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36(2), 175-190.
13. Hrastinski, S., & Keller, C. (2007b). Computer-mediated communication in education: A review of recent research. Educational Media International, 44(1), 61-77.
14. Hsieh, P.-H., Hsieh, Y.-P., Chung, W.-H., Acee, T., Thoman, G. D., Kim, H.-J., et al. (2005). Is educational intervention research on the decline? Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 523-529.
15. Kirby, J. A., Hoadley, C. M., & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2005). Instructional systems design and the learning sciences: A citation analysis. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 37-48.
16. Klein, D. J. (1997). ETR& D-Development: An analysis of content and survey of future direction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(3), 57-62.
17. Kozma, R. B. (1994a). Will media influence learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 7-19.
18. Kozma, R. B. (1994b). A reply: Media and methods. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(3), 11-14.
19. Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159-174.
20. National Research Council. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
21. Oh, E., & Reeves, T. C. (2010). The implications of the differences between design research and instructional systems design for educational technology researchers and practitioners. Educational Media International, 47(4), 263-275.
22. Reeves, T. C. (1995). Questioning the questions of instructional technology research. In M. R. Simonson & M. Anderson (Eds.), Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Research and Theory Division (pp. 459-470). Anaheim, CA.
23. Reeves, T. C. (2000). Enhancing the worth of instructional technology research through "design experiments" and other development research strategies. New Orleans, LA: Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association.
24. Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2005). Design research: A socially responsible approach to instructional technology research in higher education. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 16(2), 97-116.
25. Ross, S. M., & Morrison, G. R. (2004). Experimental research methods. In D. J. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 1021-1043). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
26. Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., Hannafin, R. D., Young, M., van den Akker, J., Kuiper, W., et al. (2008). Research designs. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. van Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 715-761). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Taylor & Francis Group.
27. Ross, S. M., Morrison, G. R., & Lowther, D. L. (2010). Educational technology research past and present: Balancing rigor and relevance to impact school learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 1(1), 17-35.
28. Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2009). Learning in communities of inquiry: A review of the literature. Journal of Distance Education, 23(1), 19-48.
29. Rourke, L. & Szabo, M. (2002). A content analysis of The Journal of Distance Education, 1986-2001. The Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 63-74. Retrieved from http://www. jofde. ca/index. php/jde/article/view/185/115.
30. Russell, T. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon: A comparative research annotated bibliography on technology for distance education. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina State University Press.
31. Schmid, R. F., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R., Abrami, P. C., Wade, A., et al. (2009). Technology's effect on achievement in higher education: A Stage I meta-analysis of classroom applications. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21, 95-109.
32. Shih, M., Feng, J., & Tsai, C. (2008). Research and trends in the field of e-learning from 2001 to 2005: A content analysis of cognitive studies in selected journals. Computers & Education, 51, 955-967.
33. Surry, D. W., & Ensminger, D. (2001). What's wrong with media comparison studies? Educational Technology, 31(4), 32-35.
34. Tamim, R., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: A second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research, 81, 4-28.
35. Warnick, B. R., & Burbules, N. C. (2007). Media comparison studies: Problems and possibilities. Teachers College Record, 109(11), 2483-2510.
36. Winn, W. (2002). Current trends in educational technology research: The study of learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 14(3), 331-351.
37. Wolff, W. I. (2008). "A chimera of sorts": Rethinking educational technology grant programs, courseware innovation, and the language of educational change. Computers & Education, 51, 1184-1197.