October 2006 Volume 9 Number 4

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Horwitz, P. & Christie, M. (2000). Computer-based manipulation for teaching scientific reasoning: An example. In Jacobson, M. & Kozma, R. B.(Eds.) Innovations in Science and Mathematics Education: Advanced Designs for Technologies and Learning, New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Howland, D. & Becker, M. L. (2002). GLOBE- The science behind launching an international environmental education program. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 11 (3), 199-210. Hsu, P. (2004). A Case Study of the Change Process of Integrating Technology into An Elementary Science Methods Course from 1997 to 2003, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University. International Society for Technology in Education. (2002). NETS for teachers – Preparing teachers to use technology, Eugene, OR: ISTE. International Society for Technology in Education. (2005). The new national education technology plan, Eugene, OR: ISTE. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P., Starr, M. L., Palincsar, A., Coppola, B. & Soloway, E. (1993). Integrating knowledge bases: An upper-elementary teacher preparation program emphasizing the teaching of science. In Rubba, P., Campbell, L. & Dana, T. (Eds.) Excellencing Educating Teachers of Science, Aubum, AL: Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. Land, S. M. & Zembal-Saul, C. (2003). Scaffolding reflection and articulation of scientific explanations in a data-rich, project-based learning environment: An investigation of progress portfolio. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (4), 65-84. Lin, X., Hmelo, C., Kinzer, C. K., & Secules, T. J. (1999). Designing technology to support reflection. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47 (3), 43-62. Linn, M. C. (2003). Technology and science education: starting points, research programs, and trends. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (6), 727-758. Lyon, N. (1998). Portfolios and their consequences: developing as a reflective practitioner. In Lyons, N. (Ed.) With Portfolio in Hand: Validating the New Teacher Professionalism, New York: Teachers College Press, 247- 264. McKinney, M. (1998). Preservice teachers’ electronic portfolios: Integrating technology, self-assessment, and reflection. Teacher Education Quarterly, 85-103. Morris, J. & Buckland, H. (2000). Electronic portfolios for learning and assessment. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education conference, San Diego, CA. Nakhlen, M. B. (1994). A review of microcomputer-based labs: How have they affected science learning? Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 13 (4), 368-381. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2001a). Educating Teachers of Science, Mathematics, and Technology: New Practices for the New Millennium, Washington, DC: National Academy Press. National Research Council. (2001b). Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Nesbit, C. R., DiBiase, W. J., Miller, A. S. & Wallace, J. D. (2001). In their own words: what science and mathematics teacher leaders say are important aspects of professional development, Chapel Hill, NC: Mathematics and Science Education Network, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 183
Nonis, A. S., & O’Bannon, B. (2002). A field-based initiative for integrating technology in the content areas: Using a team approach to preparing preservice teachers to use technology. Paper presented at the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Nashville, TN. Royuk, B. & Brooks, D. W. (2003). Cookbook procedures in MBL physics exercises. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 12 (3), 317-324. Russel, D. W., Lucas, K. B. & McRobbie, C. (2003). The role of the microcomputer-based laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in kinematics. Research in Science Education, 33 (2), 217- 243. Schon, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner, New York: Basic Books. Shulman, L. S. (1988). A union of insufficiencies: strategies for teacher assessment in a period of education reform. Educational Leadership, 46, 36-41. Skinner, N. C. & Preece, P. F. (2003). The use of information and communications technology to support the teaching of science in primary schools. International Journal of Science Education, 25 (2), 205-219. Spillane, J. P. Diamond, J. B., Walker, L. J., Halverson, R. & Jita, L. (2001). Urban school leadership for elementary science instruction: Identifying and activating resources in an undervalued school subject. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38 (8), 918-940. Spitulnik, M. W., Stratford, S. J., Krajcik, J. & Soloway, E. (1998). In Fraser, B. J., & Tobin, K. G. (Eds.) International Handbook of Science Education, Great Britain: Kluwer, 363-381. Taylor, N. & Wochenske, J. (2001). The San Diego Science Alliance. In Thorson, A. (Ed.), Partnerships with Business and the Community, Columbus, OH: Eisenhower National Clearing House for Mathematics and Science Education, 37-38. Trumper, R. & Gelbman, M. (2001). A microcomputer-based contribution to scientific and technological literacy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10 (3), 213-221. US Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. (1995). Teachers and Technology: Making the Connections (GPO # 052-003-01409-2), Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Watkins, S. (1996). World Wide Web authoring in the portfolio-assessed, (inter)networked composition course. Computers and Composition, 13 (2), 219-230. Whetstone, L. & Carr-Chellman, A. A. (2001). Preparing preservice teachers to use technology: Survey results. Tech Trends, 45 (4), 11-17. White, P. J. (2001). Finding Prospective Partners. In Thorson, A. (Ed.) Partnerships with Business and the Community, Columbus: OH: Eisenhower National Clearing House for Mathematics and Science Education, 27- 29. White, B. S. & Branch, R. M. (2001). Systematic pilot testing as a step in the instructional design process of corporate training and development. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 14 (3), 75-94. Windschitl, M. (2000). Supporting the development of science inquiry skills with special classes of software. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 48 (2), 81-95. You, A. (2001). Guidelines for effective partnerships. In Thorson, A.(Ed.) Partnerships with Business and the Community, Columbus, OH: Eisenhower National Clearing House for Mathematics and Science Education, 21- 23. Zembal-Saul, C., Munford, D. & Friedrichsen, P. (2002). Technology tools for supporting scientific inquiry: A preservice science education course. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers of Science, Charlotte, NC. 184
Page 1 and 2:
October 2006 Volume 9 Number 4
Page 3 and 4:
Guidelines for authors Submissions
Page 5 and 6:
How Does Educational Technology Ben
Page 7 and 8:
Adaptivity is one of the most impor
Page 9 and 10:
3. Ease of editing and updating: wh
Page 11 and 12:
Accessible and personalized Learnin
Page 13 and 14:
From this definition, we figured ou
Page 15 and 16:
Verifying contents Figure 3. The pa
Page 17 and 18:
Figure 7. The ISA on line interface
Page 19 and 20:
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre
Page 21 and 22:
World Wide Web Consortium (1999a).
Page 23 and 24:
guiding and supporting environment
Page 25 and 26:
As an example, to improve the acces
Page 27 and 28:
option). Although this finding migh
Page 29 and 30:
of eLearning content and enhance th
Page 31 and 32:
Hodgings, W. & Duval, E. (2002). IE
Page 33 and 34:
the entire course of study. This sy
Page 35 and 36:
information useful for the contextu
Page 37 and 38:
Nr of student 25 20 15 10 5 0 a - w
Page 39 and 40:
Vincenzo, a second year student, ne
Page 41 and 42:
Evaluation Recently embodied conver
Page 43 and 44:
The interaction may be performed on
Page 45 and 46:
Poggi, I., Pelachaud, C., & de Rosi
Page 47 and 48:
Lanzilotti, R., Ardito, C., & Costa
Page 49 and 50:
quality in use, which is measured b
Page 51 and 52:
process of designing high quality c
Page 53 and 54:
eLSE methodology Designers and eval
Page 55 and 56:
Execution phase Execution phase act
Page 57 and 58:
on the inspection process and, cons
Page 59 and 60:
Piccinini, N., & Scollo, G. (2006).
Page 61 and 62:
Answers and reinforcement A.1: Use
Page 63 and 64:
potential project ideas (from pure
Page 65 and 66:
For each column in Table 2, the sum
Page 67 and 68:
educational goals and the various r
Page 69 and 70:
A new computerized Records Manageme
Page 71 and 72:
eflected in artifacts and other str
Page 73 and 74:
any distributed community include b
Page 75 and 76:
message in order to obtain a respon
Page 77 and 78:
Figure 3. Social network after intr
Page 79 and 80:
increased face-to-face collaboratio
Page 81 and 82:
References Bogenrieder, I. (2002).
Page 83 and 84:
Donoghue, S. L. (2006). Institution
Page 85 and 86:
contemplate part-time, rather than
Page 87 and 88:
espective institutions. The primary
Page 89 and 90:
greater flexibility in course selec
Page 91 and 92:
Cost-benefit One distinct benefit o
Page 93 and 94:
Resources The development of online
Page 95 and 96:
courses where it is has little pote
Page 97 and 98:
A fellowship programme, such as the
Page 99 and 100:
Moore, M.G. (1998). Introduction. I
Page 101 and 102:
Software reuse has two dimensions,
Page 103 and 104:
Courseware development process mode
Page 105 and 106:
Didactics analysis This phase consi
Page 107 and 108:
Process didactics design We focus o
Page 109 and 110:
The repository is organized into co
Page 111 and 112:
the analysis and the design phase o
Page 113 and 114:
Figure 12. Weaving content and dida
Page 115 and 116:
complete user-specific (author, ins
Page 117 and 118:
References ADL (Advanced Distribute
Page 119 and 120:
Bender, D. M., & Vredevoogd, J. D.
Page 121 and 122:
(see Figure 2). The incorporation o
Page 123 and 124:
Figure 4: Example of Summary Image
Page 125 and 126:
The competitive nature of design cl
Page 127 and 128:
Dias, L. B. (1999, November). Integ
Page 129 and 130:
materials built into the system. Th
Page 131 and 132:
This theory of multimedia learning
Page 133 and 134:
E-Tutor (with video). Two weeks aft
Page 135 and 136:
empirically tested in TML environme
Page 137 and 138: Rieber, L. P., (1990). Animation in
Page 139 and 140: Appendix B The following 44 items r
Page 141 and 142: Appendix C A Sample of Exam Questio
Page 143 and 144: Appendix D Perceived Usefulness Que
Page 145 and 146: Kirkpatrick, and Peck (2001) have a
Page 147 and 148: 2001). The system thus aims to assi
Page 149 and 150: a strong agreement between the two
Page 151 and 152: of the dynasty. 3. Information on
Page 153 and 154: Comparing works designed using the
Page 155 and 156: Tselios, N., Stoica, A., Maragoudak
Page 157 and 158: strategies during their interaction
Page 159 and 160: P(B|D) is the probability of a netw
Page 161 and 162: Online help adaptation using Bayesi
Page 163 and 164: AUSM that will return the most prob
Page 165 and 166: direct experimentation with a new s
Page 167 and 168: Figure 7. An example of use of the
Page 169 and 170: Cooper, J. & Herskovits, E. (1992).
Page 171 and 172: Goldberg, A. K., & Riemer, F. J. (2
Page 173 and 174: In addition to convenience, propone
Page 175 and 176: members increased flexibility. They
Page 177 and 178: Oppenheimer, T. (1997, July). The c
Page 179 and 180: The basis of reform in science educ
Page 181 and 182: technology and are not confident in
Page 183 and 184: participants that learning as a gro
Page 185 and 186: A hierarchy of Systems Identifying
Page 187: the change agents to recognize the
Page 191 and 192: maintaining the interest levels of
Page 193 and 194: Focus group interviews with our stu
Page 195 and 196: course and again at the end of the
Page 197 and 198: second phase of valuing, commitment
Page 199 and 200: Kinzie, M. B., Whitaker, S. D., Nee
Page 201 and 202: Although this work is based on a st
Page 203 and 204: Website Design The MTP website (www
Page 205 and 206: Researchers, for review and coding
Page 207 and 208: quality that are the focus of the M
Page 209 and 210: Kelley, M. A., Whitaker, S. D., Nee
Page 211 and 212: or underserved populations. For exa
Page 213 and 214: 2004 Baruch College Computer Center
Page 215 and 216: professional-level tools and resour
Page 217 and 218: Third, with the exception of the Om
Page 219 and 220: Hepp, P., Hinostroza, E., Laval, E.
Page 221 and 222: The AccessForAll strategy complemen
Page 223 and 224: of people with special needs, or di
Page 225 and 226: (including where their search for r
Page 227 and 228: international standard. The ISO pro
Page 229 and 230: information will be expressed using
Page 231 and 232: DC Metadata Terms: http://dublincor
Page 233 and 234: Choquet, C., & Corbière, A. (2006)
Page 235 and 236: TEL Standards, Specifications and P
Page 237 and 238: The Resources Management Process ma
Page 239 and 240:
Step 1: Instantiation of the enterp
Page 241 and 242:
Step 5: Instantiation of the techno
Page 243 and 244:
correlation of the different viewpo
Page 245 and 246:
Hummel, H., Manderveld, J., Tatters
Page 247 and 248:
Karagiannidis, C. (2006). Book revi
Page 249 and 250:
Glenn, L. (2006). Book review: Visu
show all

October 2006 Volume 9 Number 4

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?