Download Complete Issue in PDF - Educational Technology & Society

More documents

Recommendations

Info

References AACTE (Ed.). (2008). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators. New York, NY: Routledge. Bliuc, A. M., Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., & Piggott, L. (2010). Learning through face-to-face and online discussions: Associations between students’ conceptions, approaches and academic performance in political science. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 512–524. Bliuc, A. M., Ellis, R. A., Goodyear, P., & Piggott, L. (2011). A blended learningapproach to teaching foreign policy: Student experiences of learning through face-to-face and online discussion and their relationship to academic performance. Computers & Education, 56(3), 856–864. Cross, N. (2007). Designerly ways of knowing. Boston, MA: Birkhauser. Hewitt, J. (2008). Reviewing the handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for educators. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 8(4), 355-360. Hewitt, J. (2008). Reviewing the handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK) for Educators. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education, 8(4), 355-360. Jonassen, D., Howland, J., Marra, R., & Crismond, D. (2008). Meaningful learning with technology (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Jonassen, D., Peck, D., & Wilson, B. (1999). Learning With Technology: A Constructivist Perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Lee, M.-H., Wu, Y.-T., & Tsai, C.-C. (2009). Research trends in science education from 2003 to 2007: A content analysis of publications in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 31(15), 1999-2020. Marton, F., Dall’Alba, G., & Beaty. E (1993). Conceptions of learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 19, 277– 300. Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge-creating company. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Paavola, S., Lipponen, L., & Hakkarainen, K. (2004). Models of innovative knowledge communities and three metaphors of learning. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 557-577. Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. Thompson, A., & Mishra, P. (2007–2008). Breaking news: TPCK becomes TPACK! Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 24(2), 38–6. Tsai, C.-C. (2007). Teachers’ scientific epistemological views: The coherence with instruction and students’ views. Science Education, 91, 222-243. Tsai, C.-C., Ho, H.-N., Liang, J.-C., & Lin, H.-M. (2011). Scientific epistemic beliefs, conceptions of learning science and selfefficacy of learning science among high school students. Learning and Instruction, 21(2), 757-769. Tsai, C.-C., & Wen, L. M. C. (2005). Research and trends in science education from 1998 to 2002: A content analysis of publication in selected journals. International Journal of Science Education, 27(1), 3-14. Yang, Y.-F., & Tsai, C.-C. (2010). Conceptions of and approaches to learning through online peer assessment. Learning and Instruction, 20(1), 72-83 References of the 74 reviewed TPACK papers Allan, W. C., Erickson, J. L., Brookhouse, P., & Johnson, J. L. (2010). Teacher professional development through a collaborative curriculum project- an example of TPACK in Maine. Techtrends, 54(6), 36-43. Akkoç, H. (2011). Investigating the development of prospective mathematics teachers' technological pedagogical content knowledge. Research in Mathematics Education, 13(1), 75-76. doi:10.1080/14794802.2011.550729 Almas, A., & Krumsvik, R. (2008). Teaching in technology-rich classrooms: Is there a gap between teachers' intentions and ICT practices? Research in Comparative and International Education, 3(2), 103-121. An, H., & Shin, S. (2010). The impact of urban district field experiences on four elementary preservice teacher's learning regarding technology integration. Journal of Technology Integration in the Classroom, 2(3), 101-107. 47
Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2005). Preservice elementary teachers as information and communication technology designers: An instructional systems design model based on an expanded view of pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4), 292–302. Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT-TPCK: Advances in Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK). Computers & Education, 52(1), 154-168. Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55(4), 1656-1662. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.009 Archambault, L., Wetzel, K., Foulger, T. S., & Williams, M. (2010). Professional development 2.0: Transforming teacher education pedagogy with 21 st century tools. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(1), 4-11. Banas, J. R. (2010). Teachers' attitudes toward technology: Considerations for designing preservice and practicing teacher instruction. Community & Junior College Libraries, 16(2), 114-127. Bowers, J. S., Stephens, B. (2011). Using technology to explore mathematical relationships: A framework for orienting mathematics courses for prospective teachers. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education,14(4) , 285-304. Brush, T., & Saye, J. W. (2009). Strategies for preparing preservice social studies teachers to integrate technology effectively: Models and practices. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 9(1), 46-59. Bull, G., Hammond, T., & Ferster, B. (2008). Developing Web 2.0 tools for support of historical inquiry in social studies. Computers in the Schools, 25(3-4), 275-287. Bull, G., Park, J., Searson, M., Thompson, A., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Knezek, G. (2007). Editorial: Developing technology policies for effective classroom practice. Contemporary Issues in Technology & Teacher Education, 7(3), 129-139. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., Tsai, C.-C. (2010). Facilitating preservice teachers' development of technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge (TPACK). Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(4), 63-73. Chai, C., Koh, J., Tsai, C., & Tan, L. (2011a). Modeling primary school pre-service teachers' Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) for meaningful learning with information and communication technology (ICT). Computers & Education, 57(1), 1184-1193. Chai, C. S., Koh, J. H. L., & Tsai, C.-C. (2011b). Exploring the factor structure of the constructs of technological, pedagogical, content knowledge (TPACK). The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 20(3), 607-615. Cox, S., & Graham, C. R. (2009). Diagramming TPACK in practice: Using an elaborated model of the TPACK framework to analyze and depict teacher knowledge. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 53(5), 60-69. doi:10.1007/s11528-009-0327-1 de Olviera, J. (2010). Pre-service teacher education enriched by technology-supported learning environments: A learning technology by design approach. Journal of Literacy & Technology, 11(1), 89-109. Doering, A., & Veletsianos, G. (2008). An investigation of the use of real-time, authentic geospatial data in the K-12 Classroom. Journal of Geography, 106(6), 217-225. Doering, A., Veletsianos, G., Scharber, C., & Miller, C. (2009). Using technological pedagogical content knowledge framework to design online environments and professional development. Journal of Educational Computing, 41(3), 319-346 Graham, C. R., Burgoyne, N., Cantrell, P., Smith, L., St. Clair, L., & Harris, R. (2009). TPACK development in science teaching: Measuring the TPACK confidence of inservice science teachers. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 53(5), 70-79. doi:10.1007/s11528-009-0328-0 Greenhow, C., Dexter, S., & Hughes, J. E. (2008). Teacher knowledge about technology integration: An examination of inservice and preservice teachers' instructional decision-making. Science Education International, 19(1), 9-25. Groth, R., Spickler, D., Bergner, J., & Bardzell, M. (2009). A qualitative approach to assessing technological pedagogical content knowledge. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 9(4), 392-411. Guerrero, S. (2010). Technological pedagogical content knowledge in the mathematics classroom. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 26(4), 132-139. Hammond, T. C., & Manfra, M. (2009a). Digital history with student-created multimedia: Understanding student perceptions. Social Studies Research & Practice, 4(3), 139-150. Hammond, T. C., & Manfra, M. (2009b). Giving, prompting, making: Aligning technology and pedagogy within TPACK for social studies instruction. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 9(2), 160-185. 48
Page 1 and 2: http://www.ifets.info ISSN: 1436-45
Page 3 and 4: Supporting Organizations Centre for
Page 5 and 6: Timely Diagnostic Feedback for Data
Page 7 and 8: Lim et al. addressed two gaps, a us
Page 9 and 10: The new found benefits of technolog
Page 11 and 12: analysis of all articles submitted
Page 13 and 14: Since some articles could not meet
Page 15 and 16: Table 2. Distribution of research t
Page 17 and 18: Research method Table 8 shows diffe
Page 19 and 20: authors concluded that mixed-method
Page 21 and 22: trends. Library and Information Sci
Page 23 and 24: Taylor, E. W. (2001). Adult Educati
Page 25 and 26: Zealand 10 paper 15 19 Using mutual
Page 27 and 28: impact on a variety of sectors arou
Page 29 and 30: Grand challenges These grand challe
Page 31 and 32: eport for details of competencies c
Page 33 and 34: learning repositories to use in con
Page 35 and 36: Acknowledgements This paper is base
Page 37 and 38: eliminating duplicates, a total of
Page 39 and 40: Findings of this review In the foll
Page 41 and 42: Table 2. Summary of empirical resea
Page 43 and 44: students’ conception of learning
Page 45 and 46: their creative capacity in designin
Page 47 and 48: which make it impossible to see how
Page 49 and 50: The content knowledge Table 3 depic
Page 51: The first revision we have made to
Page 55 and 56: Lee, H., & Hollebrands, K. (2008).
Page 57 and 58: Rushby, N. (2013). The Future of Le
Page 59 and 60: The top ten in the 2011 survey were
Page 61 and 62: My first vision of the future is on
Page 63 and 64: References Dienstag, J. (2006). Pes
Page 65 and 66: industries, new laws, and new areas
Page 67 and 68: or distractive effects of technolog
Page 69 and 70: This may be further complicated by
Page 71 and 72: espect, the literature about school
Page 73 and 74: Tondeur, J., Van Keer, H., van Braa
Page 75 and 76: Disruptive technology When mainfram
Page 77 and 78: with the physical environment, such
Page 79 and 80: mockups, and then embedded in compu
Page 81 and 82: the global marketplace. Students in
Page 83 and 84: games, and virtual worlds are domin
Page 85 and 86: Malone, T. W. & Lepper, M. R. (1987
Page 87 and 88: education reform. In the following
Page 89 and 90: error elimination and/or refutation
Page 91 and 92: In essence, as depicted in figure 1
Page 93 and 94: of our students, who are the future
Page 95 and 96: Simon, H. (1996). The Sciences of t
Page 97 and 98: 2010). Similar patterns can be obse
Page 99 and 100: To complement the literature search
Page 101 and 102: Figure 1. Domains of sustainable e-
Page 103 and 104:
Discussion and conclusions This sco
Page 105 and 106:
Baty, P. (2010, July 1). Global rep
Page 107 and 108:
Loewenberger, P., & Bull, J. (2003)
Page 109 and 110:
applied query expansion techniques
Page 111 and 112:
di, 1 ≤ i ≤ n , 0 < d i ≤ 1,
Page 113 and 114:
Procedure Figure 2 schematically de
Page 115 and 116:
Phase 3. Wiki-based revision Throug
Page 117 and 118:
Table 4. Comparison of the performa
Page 119 and 120:
materials manually by working alone
Page 121 and 122:
# Question 1 2 3 4 5 Table 7. Users
Page 123 and 124:
Kuo, Y. H., & Huang, Y. M. (2009).
Page 125 and 126:
Nevertheless, one of the major prob
Page 127 and 128:
Rlj indicates the answer of the l t
Page 129 and 130:
Relative weight Very low 5 ww , ∈
Page 131 and 132:
Experiment and evaluation Figure 7.
Page 133 and 134:
and CG (59.06 and 13.52). The resul
Page 135 and 136:
Expert 1 Expert 2 Expert 3 Correctn
Page 137 and 138:
The EFWA algorithm Appendix Defini
Page 139 and 140:
y the fourth student correctly is:
Page 141 and 142:
drA = − + − + − = 2 2 2 ( , M
Page 143 and 144:
students have achieved what they wa
Page 145 and 146:
environments. This gap can be bridg
Page 147 and 148:
can understand, as well as a vehicl
Page 149 and 150:
5. “Then move on to Loop 2.” Ea
Page 151 and 152:
fact that the students could not ge
Page 153 and 154:
conceptualization, and testing in n
Page 155 and 156:
Soloway, E., Norris, C., Blumenfeld
Page 157 and 158:
all image search queries result in
Page 159 and 160:
instance, not knowing how to naviga
Page 161 and 162:
displays in real time. The authors
Page 163 and 164:
Significance was not found for main
Page 165 and 166:
manifestation of visual literacy; a
Page 167 and 168:
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia lea
Page 169 and 170:
McMillen (1996) considered virtual
Page 171 and 172:
Learning of area concepts in elemen
Page 173 and 174:
shrink. changed. Hints and Show but
Page 175 and 176:
Based on teacher observations and c
Page 177 and 178:
Appendix 1. Sample items of BACT *I
Page 179 and 180:
Wong, L.-H., Hsu, C.-K., Sun, J., &
Page 181 and 182:
Johnson and Johnson (1994) identifi
Page 183 and 184:
Design of game-based learning activ
Page 185 and 186:
Findings The students exhibited hig
Page 187 and 188:
We take two instances of character
Page 189 and 190:
In designing Chinese-PP, we instead
Page 191 and 192:
Boticki, I., Looi, C.-K., & Wong, L
Page 193 and 194:
Hwang, G.-J., Sung, H.-Y., Hung, C.
Page 195 and 196:
2000). For example, Filippidis and
Page 197 and 198:
amount of information about the lea
Page 199 and 200:
The factors that affected the stude
Page 201 and 202:
Burguillo, J. C. (2010). Using game
Page 203 and 204:
Wong, L.-H. (2013). Analysis of Stu
Page 205 and 206:
Recognizing both the importance and
Page 207 and 208:
Student responses were coded based
Page 209 and 210:
English with the translations of th
Page 211 and 212:
With her mother’s support, Jane w
Page 213 and 214:
LGC that could occur in any physica
Page 215 and 216:
The significance of the reported st
Page 217 and 218:
Chen, Y.-L., Pan, P.-R., Sung, Y.-T
Page 219 and 220:
them develop new concepts to facili
Page 221 and 222:
Figure 1. Visualization of how mino
Page 223 and 224:
experimental group all the other le
Page 225 and 226:
Procedures All subjects in both gro
Page 227 and 228:
misconceptions corrected by a learn
Page 229 and 230:
exploration environment constructed
Page 231 and 232:
Küçüközer, H., & Kocakülah, S.
Page 233 and 234:
Lin, J.-W., Lai, Y.-C., & Chuang, Y
Page 235 and 236:
The related works Feedback should b
Page 237 and 238:
E 2 1 R 23 N E 5 R 15 E 1 R 13 E 3
Page 239 and 240:
Once the frequent itemsets have bee
Page 241 and 242:
The first phase generates a diagnos
Page 243 and 244:
To assure pretest validity and reli
Page 245 and 246:
Questionnaire and interviews To und
Page 247 and 248:
Maughan, S., Peet, D., & Willmott,
Page 249 and 250:
According to Angeli and Valanides (
Page 251 and 252:
description, objectives, and entry
Page 253 and 254:
TCK: For the fourth activity, the g
Page 255 and 256:
A questionnaire focusing on Instruc
Page 257 and 258:
eing aware of the importance of sel
Page 259 and 260:
References Airasian, P. W., & Walsh
Page 261 and 262:
Instructional Technology Instructio
Page 263 and 264:
and He (2006) revealed that technol
Page 265 and 266:
Model and hypothesis development Sa
Page 267 and 268:
Table 1. Student profile Gender: Ma
Page 269 and 270:
H3 Student satisfaction has positiv
Page 271 and 272:
Conclusions Addressing four PRS iss
Page 273 and 274:
Tao, Y.-H., & Yeh, R. C. (2009, Jul
Page 275 and 276:
My overall experience of PRS is abs
Page 277 and 278:
skills can move to the next learnin
Page 279 and 280:
were divided into an experimental g
Page 281 and 282:
illustrates the Monopoly gameplay m
Page 283 and 284:
Comparison of monopoly and instruct
Page 285 and 286:
Guskey, T. R., & Gates, S. L. (1986
Page 287 and 288:
Yang, C.-C., Tseng, S.-S., Liao, A.
Page 289 and 290:
text only because learners are able
Page 291 and 292:
Figure 2. Structure of poetry multi
Page 293 and 294:
time period. Bandwidth is measured
Page 295 and 296:
Participants and experimental proce
Page 297 and 298:
owses multimedia resources. Fewer p
Page 299 and 300:
the other approach. Meanwhile, the
Page 301 and 302:
Wang, Y.-H., Young, S. S.-C., & Jan
Page 303 and 304:
mistakes in front of the teacher an
Page 305 and 306:
Basic English learning materials we
Page 307 and 308:
The instructor also showed positive
Page 309 and 310:
H.L, M = 38.11) which occurred in b
Page 311 and 312:
Discussions Tangible learning compa
Page 313 and 314:
We can conclude from the current st
Page 315 and 316:
Joo, Y. J., Joung, S., & Kim, E. K.
Page 317 and 318:
on 506 students registered for cybe
Page 319 and 320:
and management systems, learning se
Page 321 and 322:
multivariate normal distribution as
Page 323 and 324:
Structural model examination Table
Page 325 and 326:
Direct effect Flow ← Satisfaction
Page 327 and 328:
Second, the results of this study c
Page 329 and 330:
Kim, H. S. (2008). The effects of t
Page 331 and 332:
language accurately, or product-ori
Page 333 and 334:
Thailand 5 Vietnam 25 Total 208 Res
Page 335 and 336:
Procedures of data collection Figur
Page 337 and 338:
discussions. From Brian’s log fil
Page 339 and 340:
universities. There were 259 studen
Page 341 and 342:
and he provided his arguments and r
Page 343 and 344:
Within groups Total Test 4 Between
Page 345 and 346:
Crooks, B. (2003). The combined use
Page 347 and 348:
Appendix A 342
Page 349:
teenager. Chapter four, “Identity
show all

Download Complete Issue in PDF - Educational Technology & Society

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?