Using technology to foster meaningful learning environments

Enhancing the Quality of Learning: Dispositions, Instruction, and Learning Processes

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 228-250

  Schwartz, Neil H ^a   Schmid, Richard F ^b  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84925625119     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9781139048224.014     Document Type: Chapter

References (60)

1. Albion, P. R. (2001). Some factors in the development of self-efficacy beliefs for computer use among teacher education students. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9, 321–347.
2. Albion, P. R., & Ertmer, P. A. (2002). Beyond the foundations: The role of vision and belief in teachers’ preparation for integration of technology. Technology Trends, 43, 34–38.
3. Albirini, A. (2006). Teachers’ attitudes toward information and communication technologies: The case of Syrian EFL teachers. Computers & Education, 47, 373–398.
4. Al-Fudail, M., & Mellar, H. (2008). Investigating teacher stress when using technology. Computers & Education, 51, 1103–1110.
5. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (Eds.) (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing–A revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Boston, MA: Addison Wesley Longman.
6. Antonietti, A. & Giorgetti, M. (2006). Teachers’ beliefs about psychological aspects of learning through multimedia. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 267–282.
7. Baek, Y., Jung, J., & Kim, B. (2008). What makes teachers use technology in the classroom? Exploring the factors affecting facilitation of technology with a Korean sample. Computers & Education, 50, 224–234.
8. Barnes, R. (2005). Moving towards technology education: Factors that facilitated teachers’ implementation of a technology curriculum. Journal of Technology Education, 17, 6–18.
9. Baylor, A. L., & Ritchie, D. (2002). What factors facilitate teacher skill, teacher morale, and perceived student learning in technology-using classrooms? Computers and Education, 3, 395–414.
10. Becker, H. J. (2001). How are teachers using computers in instruction? Paper presented at t he annual meeting of the American Educational Researchers Association, April, Seattle, WA.
11. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., & Wozney, L. (2004). How does distance education compare to classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74, 379–439.
12. Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13. Christmann, E. P., & Badgett, J. L. (2000). The comparative effectiveness of CAI on collegiate a cademic performance. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 11, 91–103.
14. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42, 21–29.
15. Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational c onsiderations (pp. 1–46). New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies i n high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 38, 813–834.
18. Dede, C. (2000). Emerging influences of information technology on school curriculum. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 32, 281–303.
19. Demetriadis, S., Barbas, A., Molohides, A., Palaigeorgious, G., Psillos, D., Vlahavas, I., Tsoukalas, I., & Pombortsis, A. (2003). Culture in negotiation: Teachers’ acceptance/resistance attitudes considering the infusion of technology into schools. Computers and Education, 41, 19–37.
20. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
21. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Gray, L., homas, N., Lewis, L., & Tice, P. (2010). Teachers’ Use of Educational Technology i n U.S. Public Schools: 2009. National Center for Educational Statistics: U.S. Department of Education.
23. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning; A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London; Routledge.
24. Hermans, R., Tondeur, J., Van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2008). The impact of primary s chool teachers’ educational beliefs on the classroom use of computers. Computers i n Education, 51, 1499–1509.
25. Hutchins, E. L. (1995). How a cockpit remembers its speed. Cognitive Science, 19, 265–288.
26. International Society for Technology in Education (2007). The ISTE NETS and Performance Indicators for Students (NETS • S). Retrieved October 28, 2010 from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Student_2007_EN.sflb.ashx
27. International Society for Technology in Education (2008). The ISTE NETS and Performance Indicators for Teachers (NETS • T). Retrieved October 28, 2010 from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Teachers_2008_EN.sflb.ashx
28. International Society for Technology in Education (2009). The ISTE NETS and Performance Indicators for Administrators (NETS • A). Retrieved October 28, 2010 from http://www.iste.org/Libraries/PDFs/NETS_for_Administrators_2009_EN.sflb.ashx
29. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools: Engaging critical thinking (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
30. Jonassen, D. H., & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing c onstructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and D evelopment, 47, 61–79.
31. Kadijevich, D., & Haapasalo, L. (2008). Factors that influence student teacher’s interest to a chieve educational technology standards. Computers & Education, 50, 262–270.
32. Karasavvidis, I. (2009) Activity theory as a conceptual framework for understanding t eacher approaches to information and communication technologies. Computers & Education, 53, 436–444.
33. Kuiper, E., Volman, M., & Terwel, J. (2005, Fall). The web as an information resource i n K-12 education: Strategies for supporting students in searching and processing i nformation. Review of Educational Research, 75, 285–328.
34. Leont’ev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the development of the mind. Moscow: Progress.
35. Levin, T., & Wadmany, R. (2008). Teachers’ views on factors affecting effective integration of information technology in the classroom: Developmental scenery. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 16, 233–263.
36. Liao, Y. C. (1998). Effects of hypermedia versus traditional instruction on students’ achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30, 341–360.
37. Minsky, M. (1986). The society of mind. New York: Simon and Schuster.
38. Mueller, J., Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Ross, C., & Specht, J. (2008). Identifying discriminating v ariables between teachers who fully integrate computers and teachers with l imited integration. Computers & Education, 51, 1523–1537.
39. Onuoha, C. O. (2007). Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of computer-based laboratory versus traditional hands-on laboratory in college and pre-college science instructions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Capella University, Minnesota.
40. Owston, R. (2007). Contextual factors that sustain innovative pedagogical practice using t echnology: An international study. Journal of Educational Change, 8, 61–77.
41. Roblyer, M.D. (1988). The effectiveness of microcomputers in education: A review of the r esearch from 1980–1987. Technological Horizons in Education, 16, 85–89.
42. Rosen, Y., & Salomon, G. (2007). The differential learning achievements of constructivist t echnology-intensive learning environments as compared with traditional ones: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 36, 1–14.
43. Salomon, G. (Ed.) (1993a). Distributed cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.
44. Salomon, G. (1993b). On the nature of pedagogic computer tools. The case of the wiring partner. In S. P. LaJoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
45. Schmid, R. F., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Tamim, R., Abrami, P. C., Wade, C. A., Surkes, M. A., & Lowerison, G. (2009). Technology’s effect on achievement in h igher education: A Stage I meta-analysis of classroom applications. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 21, 95–109.
46. Schwartz, N. H. (2008). Exploiting the use of technology to teach: The value of distributed cognition. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40, 389–404.
47. Schwartz, N. H., & Ligorio, M. B. (2004). Understanding cognitive transactions in t eaching and learning in virtual communities. In C. Vrasidas, & G. V. Glass (Eds.), Current perspectives on applied information technologies: Online professional d evelopment of teachers (pp. 301–316). Greenwich, CT: Information Age P ublishing.
48. Shapley, K.S., Sheehan, D., Maloney, C., & Caranikas-Walker, F. (2010). Evaluating the i mplementation i delity of technology immersion and its relationship with student a chievement. Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 9. Retrieved September 24, 2010 from http://www.jtla.org
49. Sitzmann, T., Kraiger, K., Stewart, D., & Wisher, R. (2006). The comparative effectiveness of web-based and classroom instruction: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 59, 623–664.
50. Smeets, E. (2005). Does ICT contribute to powerful learning environments in primary education? Computers & Education, 44, 343–355.
51. Straub, E.T. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research, 79, 625–649.
52. Tamim, R. (2009). Effects of technology on students’ achievement: A second-order metaanalysis. Unpublished dissertation, Concordia University-Montr é al, Canada.
53. Timmerman, C. E., & Kruepke, K. A. (2006). Computer-assisted instruction, media r ichness, and college student performance. Communication Education, 55, 73–104.
54. Tondeur, J., Van Braak, J., & Valcke, M. (2006). Curricula and the use of ICT in education: Two worlds apart? British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 962–976.
55. Tuzzio, L. M. (2007). Factors that influence teachers’ proi ciency with and use of educational technology. Unpublished Dissertation, Central Connecticut State University.
56. Vannatta, R. A., & Fordham, N. (2004). Teacher dispositions as predictors of classroom t echnology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36, 253–271.
57. Watson, D. (2006). Understanding the relationship between ICT and education means e xploring innovation and change. Education and Information Technologies, 11, 199–216.
58. Wenglinsky, H. (2006). Technology and achievement: The bottom line. Educational L eadership, 63, 29–32.
59. Windschilt, M., & Sahl, K. (2002). Tracing teachers’ use of technology in a laptop computer s chool: The interplay of teacher beliefs, social dynamics, and institutional c ulture. American Educational Research Journal, 39, 165–205.
60. Zhao, Y. (2003). Recent developments in technology and language learning: A literature r eview and meta-analysis. CALICO Journal, 21, 7–27.