Applying Distributed Learning Theory in Online Business Communication Courses

Business Communication Quarterly

Volumn 66, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 55-67

  Walker, Kristin ^a  

^a TENNESSEE TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

distance learning; Distributed learning; learning theory; online courses; social practice

Indexed keywords

EID: 84992803168     PISSN: 10805699     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/108056990306600205     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Arbaugh, J.B. (2001). How instructor immediacy behaviors affect student satisfaction and learning in web-based courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 64(4), 42-54.
2. Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. (1995). Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication: Cognition/Culture/Power Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
3. Cole, M., & Engestrom, Y. (1997). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1-46). New York: Cambridge University Press.
4. DeVoss, D., Jasken, J., & Hayden, D. (2002). Teaching intracultural and intercultural communication Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 16(1), 69-94.
5. Guffey, M.E. (2003). Essentials of Business Communication (6th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western/Thomson Learning.
6. Hartman, J., Lewis, J., & Powell, K. (2002). Inbox shock: A study of electronic message volume in a distance managerial communication course Business Communication Quarterly, 65(3), 9-28.
7. Hodges, D. (1998). Participation as dis-identification with/in a community of practice Mind, Culture, and Activity, 5, 272-290.
8. Lankshear, C., Peters, M., & Knobel, M. (2002). Information, knowledge, and learning: Some issues facing epistemology and education in a digital age In M. Lea & K. Nicoll (Eds.). Distributed learning: Social and cultural approaches to practice (pp. 16-37). London: Routledge/Falmer.
9. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1993). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation New York: Cambridge University Press.
10. Lea, M., & Nicoll, K. (2002). Introduction In M. Lea & K. Nicoll (Eds.). Distributed learning: Social and cultural approaches to practice (pp. 1-15). London: Routledge/Falmer.
11. Morgan, W., Russell, A., & Ryan, M. (2002). Informed opportunism: Teaching for learning in uncertain contexts of distributed education In M. Lea & K. Nicoll (Eds.). Distributed learning: Social and cultural approaches to practice (pp. 38-55). London: Routledge/Falmer.
12. Russell, D. (1997a). Rethinking genre in school and society Written Communication, 14, 504-554.
13. Russell, D. (1997b). Writing and genre in higher education and workplaces: A review of studies that use cultural-historical activity theory Mind, Culture, and Activity, 4, 224-237.
14. Russell, D. (2002). Looking beyond the interface: Activity theory and distributed learning In M. Lea & K. Nicoll (Eds.). Distributed learning: Social and cultural approaches to practice (pp. 64-82). London: Routledge/Falmer.
15. Salomon, G. (1997). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations New York: Cambridge University Press.
16. Salvo, M. (2002). Critical engagement with technology in the computer classroom Technical Communication Quarterly, 11(3), 317-337.
17. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. Walker, K. (2002). Theoretical foundations for website design courses Technical Communication Quarterly, 11(1), 61-83.
19. Winsor, D. (1996). Writing like an engineer: A rhetorical education Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20. Winsor, D. (1999). Genre and activity systems: The role of documentation in maintaining and changing engineering activity systems Written Communication, 16, 200-224.