Scaffolding for optimal challenge in k–12 problem-based learning

Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2019, Pages

  Kim, Nam Ju ^a   Belland, Brian R ^b   Axelrod, Daryl ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^b UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Optimal challenge; Problem based learning; Scaffoldin

Indexed keywords

EID: 85064747233     PISSN: None     EISSN: 15415015     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.7771/1541-5015.1712     Document Type: Article

References (163)

1. Aleven, V. A., & Koedinger, K. R. (2002). An effective meta-cognitive strategy: Learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science, 26(2), 147–179. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(02)00061-7
2. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2), 167–207. http://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0402_2
3. Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. N. (2012, July). Evaluating the role of collaboration scripts as group guiding tools in activities of educational robotics: Conclusions from three case studies. In Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on (pp. 298-302). IEEE.
4. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students’ ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(3), 344–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ced psych.2003.09.002
5. Barrows, H. S. (1994). Practice-based learning: Problem-based learning applied to medical education. Springfield, IL: Southern Illinois University, School of Medicine. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED395769
6. Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1996(68), 3–12.
7. Barrows, H. S., & Myers, A. C. (1993). Problem-based learning in secondary schools. Unpublished monograph. Springfield, IL: Problem-Based Learning Institute, Lanph-ier High School and Southern Illinois University Medical School.
8. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. New York, NY: Springer.
9. Beal, C. R., Arroyo, I., Cohen, P. R., Woolf, B. P., & Beal, C. R. (2010). Evaluation of AnimalWatch: An intelligent tutoring system for arithmetic and fractions. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(1), 64–77.
10. Belland, B. R. (2008). Supporting middle school students’ construction of evidence-based arguments: Impact of and student interactions with computer-based argumentation scaffolds (Order No. 3330215). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (304502316). Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/304502316?ac countid=14761
11. Belland, B. R. (2010). Portraits of middle school students constructing evidence-based arguments during problem-based learning: The impact of computer-based scaffolds. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(3), 285–309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-009-9139-4
12. Belland, B. R. (2014). Scaffolding: Definition, current debates, and future directions. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 505–518). New York, NY: Springer.
13. Belland, B. R., Glazewski, K. D., & Richardson, J. C. (2011). Problem-based learning and argumentation: Testing a scaffolding framework to support middle school stu-dents’ creation of evidence-based arguments. Instructional Science, 39(5), 667–694. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11 251-010-9148-z
14. Belland, B. R., Kim, C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2013). A framework for designing scaffolds that improve motivation and cognition. Educational Psychologist, 48(4), 243– 270. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.838920
15. Belland, B. R., Walker, A. E., Kim, N. J., & Lefler, M. (2017). Synthesizing results from empirical research on computer-based scaffolding in STEM education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309–344.
16. Benson, P. (1996). Concepts of autonomy in language learning. In R. Pemberton, E. Li, W. Or, & H. Pierson (Eds.), Taking control: Autonomy in language learning (pp. 27–34). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.
17. Benware, C. A., & Deci, E. L. (1984). Quality of learning with an active versus passive motivational set. American Educational Research Journal, 21(4), 755–765.
18. Bixler, B. A. (2007). The effects of scaffolding student’s problem-solving process via question prompts on problem solving and intrinsic motivation in an online learning environment. State College, PA: The Pennsylvania State University.
19. Bruner, J. S. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20. Carrico, A. R., & Riemer, M. (2011). Motivating energy conservation in the workplace: An evaluation of the use of group-level feedback and peer education. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.11.004
21. Cela, K., Sicilia, M.-Á., & Sánchez-Alonso, S. (2015). Influence of learning styles on social structures in online learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjet.12267/full
22. Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Chen, I. D. (2002). The effect of concept mapping to enhance text comprehension and summarization. Journal of Experimental Education, 71(1), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220970209602054
23. Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815–843.
24. Chirkov, V. I., & Ryan, R. M. (2001). Parent and teacher autonomy-support in Russian and US adolescents common effects on well-being and academic motivation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 32(5), 618–635.
25. Choi, I., Land, S. M., & Turgeon, A. J. (2005). Scaffolding peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during online small group discussion. Instructional Science, 33(5– 6), 483–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-1277-4
26. Clarebout, G., & Elen, J. (2006). Open learning environments and the impact of a pedagogical agent. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 35(3), 211–226. https://doi.org/10.2190/3UL1-4756-H837-2704
27. Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Newman, S. E. (1989). Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning and instruction. Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–494). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28. Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2015). Sources of evidence-of-learning: Learning and assessment in the era of big data. Open Review of Educational Research, 2(1), 194–217.
29. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
30. Dahlgren, M. A., & Dahlgren, L.-O. (2002). Portraits of PBL: Students’ experiences of the characteristics of problem-based learning in physiotherapy, computer engineering and psychology. Instructional Science, 30(2), 111–127.
31. Damon, W. (1984). Peer education: The untapped potential. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 5(4), 331– 343. https://doi.org/10.1016/0193-3973(84)90006-6
32. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627–668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627
33. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
34. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
35. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2010). Self-determination. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
36. Deci, E. L., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2004). Self-determination theory and basic need satisfaction: Understanding human development in positive psychology. Ricerche Di Psicolo-gia, 27, 17–34.
37. Delisle, R. (1997). How to use problem-based learning in the classroom? Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
38. Dolmans, D., & Gijbels, D. (2013). Research on problem-based learning: Future challenges. Medical Education, 47(2), 214–218.
39. Dolmans, D., Gijselaers, W., Moust, J. H., Grave, W. S. de, Wolfhagen, I. H., & Van der Vleuten. (2002). Trends in research on the tutor in problem-based learning: Conclusions and implications for educational practice and research. Medical Teacher, 24(2), 173–180.
40. Du, J., Ge, X., & Xu, J. (2015). Online collaborative learning activities: The perspectives of African American female students. Computers & Education, 82, 152–161.
41. Durik, A. M., Hulleman, C. S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2015). One size fits some: Instructional enhancements to promote interest. Interest in Mathematics and Science Learning, 49–62.
42. Durr, L. I. (2009). Optimal challenge: The impact of adventure experiences on subjective well-being. Journal of Experiential Education, 31(3), 451.
43. Erkens, M., Bodemer, D., & Hoppe, H. U. (2016). Improving collaborative learning in the classroom: Text mining based grouping and representing. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 11(4), 387–415.
44. Fan, Y.-C., & others. (2015). Fostering learner autonomy through a socio-cognitive model of reading comprehension instruction. British Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 9(2), 105–117.
45. Ferrer-Caja, E., & Weiss, M. R. (2000). Predictors of intrinsic motivation among adolescent students in physical education. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 71(3), 267–279.
46. Fletcher, J. D. (2003). Evidence for learning from technology-assisted instruction. Technology Applications in Education: A Learning View, 79–99.
47. Fretz, E. B., Wu, H.-K., Zhang, B., Davis, E. A., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2002). An investigation of software scaffolds supporting modeling practices. Research in Science Education, 32(4), 567–589. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022400817926
48. Gallagher, S. A., Sher, B. T., Stepien, W. J., & Workman, D. (1995). Implementing problem-based learning in science classrooms. School Science and Mathematics, 95(3), 136–146.
49. Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Bossche, P. V. den, & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational Research, 75(1), 27–61. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543075001027
50. Gillies, R. M. (2008). Teachers’ and students’ verbal behav-iours during cooperative learning. Teacher’s Role in Implementing Cooperative Learning in the Classroom, 238–257.
51. Girault, I., & d’Ham, C. (2014). Scaffolding a complex task of experimental design in chemistry with a computer environment. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 23(4), 514–526.
52. Gormley, D. K., Colella, C., & Shell, D. L. (2012). Motivating online learners using attention, relevance, confidence, satisfaction motivational theory and distributed scaffolding. Nurse Educator, 37(4), 177–180.
53. Guglielmino, L. M. (2008). Why self-directed learning. International Journal of Self-Directed Learning, 5(1), 1–14.
54. Hadwin, A. F., & Winne, P. H. (2001). CoNoteS2: A software tool for promoting selfregulation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(2–3), 313–334. https://doi.org/10.1076/edre.7.2.313.3868
55. Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open-ended learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: Volume II: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 115–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
56. Harter, S. (1978). Effectance motivation reconsidered. Toward a developmental model. Human Development, 21(1), 34–64.
57. Hmelo, C. E., & Lin, X. (2000). Becoming self-directed learners: Strategy development in problem-based learning. Problem-Based Learning: A Research Perspective on Learning Interactions, 227–250.
58. Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235–266. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3
59. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2015). Problem-based learning: Goals for learning and strategies for facilitating. In A. Walker, H. Leary, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & P. A. Ertmer (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows (pp. 69–84). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
60. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520701263368
61. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Eberbach, C. (2012). Learning theories and problem-based learning. In Problem-based learning in clinical education (pp. 3–17). Netherlands: Springer.
62. Hoffmann, B. O. B., & Ritchie, D. (1997). Using multimedia to overcome the problems with problem based learning. Instructional Science, 25(2), 97–115.
63. Hoffman, J. L., Wu, H.-K., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (2003). The nature of middle school learners’ science content understandings with the use of on-line resources. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(3), 323–346. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.10079
64. Hommes, J., Van den Bossche, P., de Grave, W., Bos, G., Schuwirth, L., & Scherpbier, A. (2014). Understanding the effects of time on collaborative learning processes in problem based learning: A mixed methods study. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 19(4), 541–563.
65. Huang, Y. M., & Chiu, P. S. (2015). The effectiveness of the meaningful learning-based evaluation for different achieving students in a ubiquitous learning context. Computers & Education, 87, 243–253.
66. Intel Teach Program. (2010) Fractions made visual unit plan. Retrieved from https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education/k12/teaching-idea-showcase.html
67. Jackson, S. L., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). The design of guided learner-adaptable scaffolding in interactive learning environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 187–194). ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=274672
68. Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collaborative learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 247–265.
69. Johnston, A. K., & Tinning, R. S. (2001). Meeting the challenge of problem-based learning: Developing the facilita-tors. Nurse Education Today, 21(3), 161–169.
70. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48(4), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500
71. Jonassen, D. H., & Hung, W. (2008). All problems are not equal: Implications for problem-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 2, 6–28.
72. Jonassen, D. H., & Reeves, T. (1996). Learning with technology: Using computers as cognitive tools. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 694–719). New York, NY: Macmillan.
73. Kaberman, Z., & Dori, Y. J. (2009). Question posing, inquiry, and modeling skills of chemistry students in the case-based computerized laboratory environment. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(3), 597–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9118-3
74. Kajamies, A., Vauras, M., & Kinnunen, R. (2010). Instructing low-achievers in mathematical word problem solving. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 54(4), 335–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2010.493341
75. Kaufman, D. B., Felder, R. M., & Fuller, H. (1999). Peer ratings in cooperative learning teams. In Proceedings of the 1999 Annual ASEE Meeting. Citeseer. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.193.23&rep=rep1&type=pdf
76. Kear, K. (2004). Peer learning using asynchronous discussion systems in distance education. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 19(2), 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268051042000224752
77. Kek, M. Y. C. A., & Huijser, H. (2011). The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. Higher Education Research & Development, 30(3), 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.5 01074
78. Kim, N. J., Belland, B. R., & Kim, Y. (2017). Data mining meta-analysis coding to develop smart learning systems that dynamically customize scaffolding. In Proceeding of the 2017 Annual Meeting of Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS).
79. Kim, N. J., Belland, B. R., & Walker, A. E. (2018). Effectiveness of computer-based scaffolding in the context of problem-based learning for STEM education: Bayesian meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 30(2), 397–429.
80. Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
81. Koh, G. C. H., Khoo, H. E., Wong, M. L., & Koh, D. (2008). The effects of problem based learning during medical school on physician competency: A systematic 185 review. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 178(1), 34–41. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.070565
82. Koedinger, K. R., & Aleven, V. (2007). Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 239–264. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9049-0
83. Koedinger, K. R., & Corbett, A. (2006). Cognitive tutors. The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 61–77.
84. Koenig, A. D. (2008). Exploring effective educational video game design: The interplay between narrative and game-schema construction. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A, 69.
85. Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006). Collaboration scripts—a conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159–185.
86. Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Vogel, F., Fischer, F., & Reiss, K. (2014). Effects of collaboration scripts and heuristic worked examples on the acquisition of mathematical argumentation skills of teacher students with different levels of prior achievement. Learning and Instruction, 32, 22–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.003
87. Kwon, K., Liu, Y. H., & Johnson, L. P. (2014). Group regulation and social-emotional interactions observed in computer supported collaborative learning: Comparison between good vs. poor collaborators. Computers & Education, 78, 185–200.
88. Leary, H., Walker, A., & Shelton, B. E. (2012). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning: A meta-analysis. Presented at the American Educational Research Association Conference. Retrieved from http://works.bepress.com/heatherleary/47
89. Leask, M., & Younie, S. (2001). Communal constructivist theory: Information and communications technology pedagogy and internationalisation of the curriculum. Journal of Information Techology for Teacher Education, 10(1–2), 117–134.
90. Lefever-Davis, S., & Pearman, C. J. (2015). Reading, writing and relevancy: Integrating 3R’s into STEM. Open Communication Journal, 9(1), 61–64.
91. Lee, C. H., Lee, G. G., Leu, Y., & others. (2008). Analysis on the adaptive scaffolding learning path and the learning performance of e-learning. WSEAS Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 5(4), 320–330.
92. Lin, X., & Lehman, J. D. (1999). Supporting learning of variable control in a computer-based biology environment: Effects of promting college students to reflect on their own thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(7), 837–858.
93. Liu, D., Li, X., & Santhanam, R. (2007). What makes game players want to play more? A mathematical and behavioral understanding of online game design. Human-Computer Interaction. HCI Applications and Services, 284–293.
94. Loyens, S. M. M., Magda, J., & Rikers, R. M. J. P. (2008). Self-directed learning in problem-based learning and its relationships with self-regulated learning. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 411–427. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-008-9082-7
95. Ma, W., Adesope, O. O., Nesbit, J. C., & Liu, Q. (2014). Intelligent tutoring systems and learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(4), 901–918.
96. Mackiewicz, J., & Thompson, I. (2014). Instruction, cognitive scaffolding, and motivational scaffolding in writing center tutoring. Composition Studies, 42(1), 54.
97. Madaio, M. A. (2015). Cybernetic autonomy: An analysis and critique of adaptive learning systems (Unpublished master dissertation). Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
98. Mandigo, J. L., & Holt, N. L. (2006). Elementary students’ accounts of optimal challenge in physical education. Physical Educator, 63(4), 170.
99. Martin, F., & Ndoye, A. (2016). Using learning analytics to assess student learning in online courses. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 13(3), 7.
100. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43–52.
101. McLoughlin, C., & Lee, M. J. (2010). Personalised and self regulated learning in the Web 2.0 era: International exemplars of innovative pedagogy using social software. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 28–43.
102. Mendicino, M., Razzaq, L., & Heffernan, N. T. (2009). A comparison of traditional homework to computer-supported homework. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41(3), 331–359.
103. Miller, M., & Hadwin, A. (2015). Scripting and awareness tools for regulating collaborative learning: Changing the landscape of support in CSCL. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 573–588.
104. Mills, J. E., Treagust, D. F., & others. (2003). Engineering education—Is problem-based or project-based learning the answer. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 3(2), 2–16.
105. Molenaar, I., Boxtel, C., & Sleegers, P. (2011). Metacogni-tive scaffolding in an innovative learning arrangement. Instructional Science, 39(6), 785–803. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-010-9154-1
106. Moos, D. C., & Azevedo, R. (2009). Learning with computer-based learning environments: A literature review of computer self-efficacy. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 576–600. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308326083
107. Müller, F. H., & Louw, J. (2004). Learning environment, motivation and interest: Perspectives on self-determination theory. South African Journal of Psychology, 34(2), 169–190.
108. Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2), 133–144.
109. Oh, S., & Jonassen, D. H. (2007). Scaffolding online argumentation during problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 95–110.
110. Okada, A. L. P. (2005). The collective building of knowledge in collaborative learning environments. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education, 1, 70–99.
111. Oliver, K., & Hannafin, M. J. (2000). Student management of web-based hypermedia resources during open-ended problem solving. Journal of Educational Research, 94(2), 75–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670009598746
112. Park, Y., & Jo, I. H. (2015). Development of the learning analytics dashboard to support students’ learning performance. J. UCS, 21(1), 110–133.
113. Pata, K., Lehtinen, E., & Sarapuu, T. (2006). Inter-relations of tutor’s and peers’ scaffolding and decision-making discourse acts. Instructional Science, 34(4), 313–341. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-3406-5
114. Pelletier, L. G., Fortier, M. S., Vallerand, R. J., Tuson, K. M., Briere, N. M., & Blais, M. R. (1995). Toward a new measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and amotivation in sports: The Sport Motivation Scale (SMS). Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 17, 35–35.
115. Plano, G. S. (2004). The effects of the cognitive tutor algebra on student attitudes and achievement in a 9th grade algebra course (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Seton Hall University. South Orange, NJ.
116. Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(2), 185–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20048
117. Rebolledo-Mendez, G., Boulay, B. du, & Luckin, R. (2006). Motivating the learner: An empirical evaluation. In M. Ikeda, K. D. Ashley, & T.-W. Chan (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 545–554). Berlin: Springer.
118. Reeve, J., Jang, H., Hardre, P., & Omura, M. (2002). Providing a rationale in an autonomy-supportive way as a strategy to motivate others during an uninteresting activity. Motivation and Emotion, 26(3), 183–207.
119. Reiser, B. J. (2004). Scaffolding complex learning: The mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2
120. Rheinberg, F., & Vollmeyer, R. (2003). Flow-experience in a computer game under experimentally controlled conditions. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 211, 161–170.
121. Renninger, K. A., & Hidi, S. (2015). The power of interest for motivation and engagement. New York, NY: Routledge.
122. Rieber, L. P. (1991). Effects of visual grouping strategies of computer-animated presentations on selective attention in science. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(4), 5–15.
123. Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M., & Koedinger, K. R. (2007). Designing for metacognition—applying cognitive tutor principles to the tutoring of help seeking. Metacognition & Learning, 2(2/3), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-007-9010-0
124. Rouinfar, A., Agra, E., Murray, J., Larson, A., Loschky, L. C., & Rebello, N. S. (2014). Influence of visual cueing on stu-dents’ eye movements while solving physics problems. In Proceedings of the symposium on eye tracking research and applications (pp. 191–194). New York, NY: ACM.
125. Ruzhitskaya, L. (2011). The effects of computer-supported inquiry-based learning methods and peer interaction on learning stellar parallax (Thesis). University of Missouri– Columbia, Columbia, MO.
126. Ryan, R. M., Connell, J. P., & Grolnick, W. S. (1992). When achievement is not intrinsically motivated: A theory of internalization and self-regulation in school. Achievement and Motivation: A Social-Developmental Perspective, 167(88), 167–88.
127. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
128. Saavedra, R., & Kwun, S. K. (1993). Peer evaluation in self-managing work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(3), 450–462. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.78.3.450
129. Salam, A., Mohamad, N., Siraj, H. H. H., Latif, A. A., Soe-laiman, I. N., Omar, B. H., … Moktar, N. (2009). Challenges of problem based learning. South-East Asian Journal of Medical Education, 3(2), 54–60.
130. Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 1(1), 3.
131. Savery, J. R. (2015). Overview of problem-based learning: Definitions and distinctions. In A. Walker, H. Leary, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, & P. A. Ertmer, P. A. (Eds.), Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows (pp. 5–15). West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press.
132. Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 77–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02505026
133. Schmidt, H. G., Rotgans, J. I., & Yew, E. H. (2011). The process of problem-based learning: What works and why. Medical Education, 45(8), 792–806. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04035.x
134. Shernoff, D. J. (2013). Optimal learning environments to promote student engagement. New York, NY: Springer.
135. Simons, K. D., & Klein, J. D. (2007). The impact of scaffolding and student achievement levels in a problem-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 35(1), 41–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-006-9002-5
136. Sit, C. H., Lam, J. W., McKenzie, T. L., Sit, C. H. P., Lam, J. W. K., & others. (2010). Direct observation of children’s preferences and activity levels during interactive and online electronic games. Journal of Physical Activity & Health, 7(4), 484.
137. Slavin, R. E. (1987). Cooperative learning: Where behavioral and humanistic approaches to classroom motivation meet. Elementary School Journal, 88(1), 29–37.
138. Smith, M., & Cook, K. (2012). Attendance and achievement in problem-based learning: The value of scaffolding. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 6(1), 8.
139. Soller, A., Goodman, B., Linton, F., & Gaimari, R. (1998). Promoting effective peer interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. In B. P. Goettl, H. M. Halff, C. L. Redfield, & V. J. Shute (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 186–195). Berlin: Springer.
140. Soltani, A., Roslan, S., Abdullah, M. C., & Jan, C. C. (2011). Effects of manipulating optimal challenge in a music intervention program on situational intrinsic motivation among people with intellectual disability. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 7(3), 487–501. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v7i3.145
141. Suh, S., Kim, S. W., & Kim, N. J. (2010). Effectiveness of MMORPG-based instruction in elementary English education in Korea. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(5), 370–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00353.x
142. Sungur, S., & Tekkaya, C. (2006). Effects of problem-based learning and traditional instruction on self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Research, 99(5), 307–320.
143. Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy: A complement to emerging patterns of distributed scaffolding. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 305–335. https://doi.org/10.1207/s153278 09jls1303_3
144. Torp, L., & Sage, S. (1998). Problems as possibilities: Problem-based learning for K–12 education. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
145. Tozman, T., Magdas, E. S., MacDougall, H. G., & Vollmeyer, R. (2015). Understanding the psychophysiology of flow: A driving simulator experiment to investigate the relationship between flow and heart rate variability. Computers in Human Behavior, 52, 408–418.
146. Trivedi, A., Kar, D. C., & Patterson-McNeill, H. (2003). Automatic assignment management and peer evaluation. J. Comput. Sci. Coll., 18(4), 30–37.
147. Tuckman, B. W. (2007). The effect of motivational scaffolding on procrastinators’ distance learning outcomes. Computers & Education, 49(2), 414–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.10.002
148. Tuckman, B. W., & Schouwenburg, H. C. (2004). Behavioral interventions for reducing procrastination among university students. In H. C. Schouwenburg, C. H. Lay, T. A. Pychyl, & J. R. Ferrari (Eds.), Counseling the procrastinator in academic settings (pp. 91–103). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
149. Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational Psychology Review, 22(3), 271–296.
150. VanLehn, K. (2008). Intelligent tutoring systems for continuous, embedded assessment. The Future of Assessment: Shaping Teaching and Learning, 113–138.
151. Vanlehn, K., Lynch, C., Schulze, K., Shapiro, J. A., Shelby, R., Taylor, L., Wintersgill, M. (2005). The Andes physics tutoring system: Lessons learned. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15(3), 147–204.
152. Verenikina, I. (2003). Understanding scaffolding and the ZPD in educational research. Paper presented at the International Education Research Conference AARE-NZARE, Auckland, New Zealand.
153. Vogel, F., Wecker, C., Kollar, I., & Fischer, F. (2016). Socio-cognitive scaffolding with computer-supported collaboration scripts: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 1–35.
154. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
155. West, D. M. (2012). Big data for education: Data mining, data analytics, and web dashboards. Washington, DC: Brook-ings Institution.
156. Wijnia, L., Loyens, S. M., Derous, E., & Schmidt, H. G. (2015). How important are student-selected versus instructor-selected literature resources for students’ learning and motivation in problem-based learning? Instructional Science, 43(1), 39–58.
157. Willingham, D. (2009). Why don’t students like school? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
158. Woo, C. W., Evens, M. W., Freedman, R., Glass, M., Shim, L. S., Zhang, Y., … Michael, J. (2006). An intelligent tutoring system that generates a natural language dialogue using dynamic multi-level planning. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 38(1), 25–46.
159. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
160. Wood, E. J. (2015). Problem-based learning: Exploiting knowledge of how people learn to promote effective learning. Bioscience Education, 3(5), 5–17.
161. Wu, H. L. (2010). Scaffolding in technology-enhanced science education (Doctoral dissertation). Texas A&M University, College Station, TX. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (Publication Number 3416373)
162. Wu, H. L., & Pedersen, S. (2011). Integrating computer-and teacher-based scaffolds in science inquiry. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2352–2363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.05.011
163. Zhang, M. (2013). Prompts-based scaffolding for online inquiry: Design intentions and classroom realities. Educational Technology & Society, 16(3), 140–151.