A design framework for an online english writing course

Learning and Instruction in the Digital Age

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 345-360

  Kim, Chanmin ^a   Mendenhall, Anne ^b   Johnson, Tristan E ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

English education; Mental models; Online learning; Peer review; Task centered approach

Indexed keywords

EID: 84892813556     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1551-1_21     Document Type: Chapter

References (39)

1. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (2000). How experts differ from novices. In How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (pp. 31-50). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
2. Bruning, R., & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to write. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 25-37.
3. Campbell, J., Smith, D., & Brooker, R. (1998). From conception to performance: how undergraduate students conceptualise and construct essays. Higher Education, 36, 449-469.
4. Carson, J. G., & Nelson, G. L. (1996). Chinese students' perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing, 5(1), 1-19.
5. Conrad, R.-M., & Donaldson, J. A. (2004). Engaging the online learner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6. Damashek, R. (2003). Six step process to helping students produce quality writing (Report No. CS 511 933). Whiting, Indiana:Calumet College of St. Joseph. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 475 206).
7. Dummer, P., & Ifenthaler, D. (2005). Planning and assessing navigation in model-centered learning environments. Why learners often do not follow the path laid out for them. In G. Chiazzese, M. Allegra, A. Chifari, & S. Ottaviano (Eds.), Methods and technologies for learning (pp. 327-334). Southampton, Boston: WIT Press.
8. Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 64(4), 50-72.
9. Fallahi, C. R., Wood, R. M., Austad, C. S., & Fallahi, H. (2006). A program for improving undergraduate psychology students' basic writing skills. Teaching of Psychology, 33(3), 171-175.
10. Friedman, E. D., Haefele, L., Keating, K. M., Mullen, M., Patrick, M., Plotkin, D., & Strenski, E. (1995). An electronic discussion list in an undergraduate writing course. Computers & Education, 24(3), 191-201.
11. Hansen, J. G., & Liu, J. (2005). Guiding principles for effective peer response. ELT Journal 2005, 59(1), 31-38; doi:10.1093/elt/cci004.
12. Ifenthaler, D. (2006). Diagnosis of the learning-dependent progression of mental models. Development of the SMD-Technology as a methodology for assessing individual models on relational, structural and semantic levels. Universitäts-Dissertation, Freiburg.
13. Johnson, T. E., & O'Connor, D. L. (2008). Assessment of group learning processes. In M. D. Merrill, J. van Merriënboer, J. M. Spector, & M. Driscoll (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 776-783). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Kim, C., & Keller, J. M. (2008). Effects of motivational and volitional email messages (MVEM) with personal messages on undergraduate students' motivation, study habits and achievement. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 36-51.
15. Kim, C., Mendenhall, A., & Johnson, T. (2008). The application of a task-centered approach to an online English writing course. In Kinshuk D. G. Sampson, J. M. Spector, P. Isaías, & D. Ifenthaler (Eds.), Proceedings of the IADIS international conference on cognition and exploratory learning in the digital age (pp. 207-214). IADIS: Freiburg, Germany.
16. Lepper, M. R., & Cordova, D. I. (1992). A desire to be taught: Instructional consequences of intrinsic motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 16(3), 187-208.
17. Lundstrom, K., & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: The benefits of peer review to the reviewer's own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 30-43; doi:10.1016/j.jsl2.2008.06.002.
18. Martens, R. L., Gulikers, J., & Bastiaens, T. (2004). The impact of intrinsic motivation on e-learning in authentic computer tasks. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 20, 368-376.
19. McCannon, M., & Crews, T. B. (1999). Most common grammatical and punctuation errors made by undergraduates as perceived by business communication professors. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, 41, 179-186.
20. McGroarty, M. E., & Zhu, W. (1997). Triangulation in classroom research: A study of peer revision. Language Learning, 47, 1-43.
21. Mendenhall, A., Buhanan, C. W., Suhaka, M., Mills, G., Gibson, G. V., & Merrill, M. D. (2006). A task-centered approach to entrepreneurship. TechTrends, 50(4), 84-89.
22. Merrill, M. D. (2007a). First principles of instruction: a synthesis. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and issues in instructional design and technology (pp. 62-71). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
23. Merrill, M. D. (2007b). A task-centered instructional strategy. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(1), 33-50.
24. Merrill, M. D. (2002). First principles of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43-59.
25. Merrill M. D., & Gilbert, C. G. (2008). Effective peer interaction in a problem-centered instructional strategy. Distance Education 29(2) 199-207.
26. Min, H.-T. (2006). The effects of trained peer review on EFL students' revision types and writing quality. Journal of Second Language Writing, 15, 118-141.
27. Min, H.-T. (2005). Training students to become successful peer reviewers. System, 33, 293-308.
28. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in a community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
29. Paulus, T. M. (1999). The effect of peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 265-289.
30. Rollinson, P. (2005). Using peer feedback in the ESL writing class. ELT, 59, 23-30.
31. Pugh, K. J., & Bergin, D. A. (2006). Motivation influences on transfer. Educational Psychologist, 41(3), 147-160
32. Seel, N. M. (1999). Educational diagnosis of mental models: Assessment problems and technology-based solutions. Journal of Structural Learning and Intelligent Systems, 14(2), 153-185.
33. Seel, N. M., Ifenthaler, D., & Pirnay-Dummer, P. (2006). Mental models and problem solving: technological solutions for measurement and assessment. In J. Strobel & D. Jonassen (Eds.) Learning by modelling systems. Mawah, NJ: Erlbaum
34. Spector, J. M., & Merrill, M. D. (Eds.). (2008). Effective, efficient and engaging (E3) learning in the digital age [Special issue]. Distance Education, 29(2).
35. Spector, J. M., & Koszalka, T. A. (2004). The DEEP methodology for assessing learning in complex domains. Final report to the national science foundation evaluative research and evaluation capacity building. Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY.
36. van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Kirschner, P. A. (2007). Ten steps to complex learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
37. Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The development of higher forms of attention in childhood. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 189-240). Armonk, NY:Sharpe.
38. Warfield, T., Johnstone, K., & Ashbaugh, H. (2002). Effects of repeated practice and contextual-writing experiences on college students' writing skills, Journal of Educational Psychology, 2(94), 305-315.
39. Weber, J. (2001). A concordance and genre-informed approach to EAP essay writing. ELT Journal, 55(1), 14-20.