New millennium research for educational technology: A call for a national research agenda

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 60-71

  Roblyer, M D ^a   Knezek, Gerald A ^b  

^a University of Maryland University College   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NORTH TEXAS   (United States)

Author keywords

Educational technology; Educational technology research; Instructional technology; Research agenda; Research methods; Technology impact studies

Indexed keywords

EID: 84961537338     PISSN: 15391523     EISSN: 19450818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2003.10782403     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. Archer, J. (1998, October 1). The link to higher scores. Education Week, 25(5), 10-21.
2. Berliner, D. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 3/(8), 18-20.
3. Brown, J., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32-41.
4. Carroll, T. (2000). If we didn’t have the schools we have today, would we create the schools we have today? Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 7(1), 117-140.
5. Chisholm, I., Carey, J., & Hernandez, A. (2002). Information technology skills in a pluralistic society: Is the playing field level? Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(1), 58-79.
6. Clark, R. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53(4), 445-459.
7. Clark, R. (1985). Evidence for confounding in computer-based instruction studies: Analyzing the meta-analyses. Educational Communications and Technology fournal, 33(4), 249-262.
8. Clark, R. (1991). When researchers swim upstream: Reflections on an unpopular argument about learning from media. Educational Technology, 31(2), 34-40.
9. Clark, R. E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.
10. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1991). Technology and the design of generative learning environments. Educational Technology, 31(5), 34-40.
11. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1993). The Jasper experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development 40(\), 65-80.
12. Cradler, J. (2003). Technologys impact on teaching and learning. Learning and Leading with Technology, 30(7), 54-57.
13. Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research fournal, 38(4), 813-834.
14. Doty, D., Popplewell, S., & Byers, G. (2001). Interactive CD-ROM storybooks and young readers’ reading comprehension, Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(4), 374-382.
15. Funkhouser, C. (2002-2003). The effects of computer-augmented geometry instruction on student performance and attitudes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(2), 163-175.
16. Harris, J., & Jones, G. (1999). A descriptive study of telementoring among students, subject matter experts, and teachers: Message flow and function patterns. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32(1), 36-53.
17. Hoffman, D., & Novak, T. (1998). Bridging the digital divide: The impact of race on Internet access and computer usage. Report sponsored by the Markle Foundation. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University, Owen Graduate School of Management.
18. Kaestle, C. (1993). The awful reputation of educational research. Educational Researcher, 22(1), 23-3C.
19. Kozma, R. (1991). Learning with media. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 179-211.
20. Mioduser, D., Nachmias, R., Lahav, O., & Oren, A. (2000). Web-based learning environments: Current pedagogical and technological state. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(1), 55-76.
21. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002)
22. Overbaugh, R. (2002). Undergraduate education major’s discourse on an electronic mailing list. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35(1), 117-138.
23. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
24. Richey, R. C. (1997). Agenda-building and its implications for theory construction in instructional technology. Educational Technology, 37(1), 5-11.
25. Ringstaff, C., & Kelley, L. (2002). The learning return on our technology investment: A review of findings from research. San Francisco: WestEd RTEC. Available: www.westedrtec.org.
26. Roblyer, M. D., & Schrum, L. (2003). Relative advantage as technology integration rationale: A summary of insights and evidence. Manuscript in preparation.
27. Roblyer, M. D. (1997). Technology and the oops! effect: Finding a bias against word processing. Learning and Leading With Technology, 24(7), 14-16.
28. Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. New York: The Freeman Press.
29. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Computer support for knowledge- building communities. In T. Kotchmann (Ed.), CSCL: Theory and practice of an emerging paradigm. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
30. Solomon, D. L. (2000). Toward a post-modern agenda in instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 5-20.