October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

This research is supported by the following projects: The Spanish CDTI project España Virtual within the Ingenio 2010 program. The Spanish project Learn3 (TIN2008-05163/TSI) within the Spanish “Plan Nacional de I+D+I”. The Madrid Regional Government project eMadrid (“Investigación y Desarrollo de tecnologías para el e-learning en la Comunidad de Madrid”), with grant No. S2009/TIC-1650. References Andreas, K., Tsiatsos, T., Terzidou, T., & Pomportsis, A. (2010). Fostering collaborative learning in Second Life: Metaphors and affordances. Computers & Education, 55(2), 603-615. Arnaud, R., & Barnes, M.C. (2006). COLLADA: sailing the gulf of 3D digital content creation. A K Peters, Ltd. Avatar Languages (2009). Avatar Languages-Virtual learning brought to life. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://www.avatarlanguages.com. Bell, M. (2008). Toward a Definition of “Virtual Worlds”. Journal of Virtual World Research, 1(1), Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://journals.tdl.org/jvwr/article/view/283/237. Boulos, M.N.K.; Hetherington, L. & Wheeler, S. (2007). Second Life: an overview of the potential of 3-D virtual worlds in medical and health education. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 24(4), 233–245. Callaghan, V., Gardner, M., Horan, B., Scott, J., Shen, L., & Wang, M. (2008). A Mixed Reality Teaching and Learning Environment. Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Hybrid Learning and Education, Berlin: Springer, 54-65. Calongne, C. M. (2008). Educational Frontiers: Learning in a VIRTUAL WORLD. Educause Review, 43(5), 36-48. Chittaro, L., & Ranon, R. (2007) Web3D Technologies in Learning, Education and Training: Motivations, Issues, Opportunities. Computers & Education, 49(1), 3-18. Clark, M.A. (2009). Genome Island: A Virtual Science Environment in Second Life. Journal of Online Education, 5 (6), Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol5_issue6/Genome_Island-__A_Virtual_ Science_ Environment_in_Second_Life.pdf. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row. Dalgarno, B., & Lee, M. J. W. (2010). What are the learning affordances of 3-D virtual environments? British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 10-32. Darwin Dimensions (2009). Evolver. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://www.evolver.com/. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: The Free Press. Dickey, M. D. (2005). Brave new (interactive) worlds: A review of the design affordances and constraints of two 3D virtual worlds as interactive learning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 13(1-2), 121-137. Dillenbourg, P., Schneider, D., & Synteta, P. (2002). Virtual Learning Environments. Communication, 8(6), 3-18. Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (1993). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 6(4), 50-70. Eschenbrenner, B., Nah, F. F.-H., & Siau, K. (2008). 3-D Virtual Worlds in Education: Applications, Benefits, Issues, and Opportunities. Journal of Database Management, 19, 91-110. Genesee, F. (1985). Second Language Learning Through Immersion: A Review of U.S. Programs. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 541-561. Girvan, C., & Savage, T. (2010). Identifying an appropriate pedagogy for virtual worlds: A Communal Constructivism case study. Computers & Education, 55(1), 342-349. Google (2010). Google SketchUp. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://sketchup.google.com/. Greenbush Education Service Center (2007). Edusim – 3D virtual words for the classroom interactive whiteboard. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://edusim3d.com/. Hendaoui, A., Limayem, M., & Thompson, C. W. (2008). 3D Social Virtual Worlds: Research Issues and Challenges. IEEE Internet Computing, 12(1), 88-92. Hinkel, E. (2006). Current Perspectives on Teaching the Four Skills. Tesol Quarterly, 40(1), 109-131. Holmes, J. (2007). Designing agents to support learning by explaining, Computers & Education, 48, 523-547. 9
Huang, H. M., Rauch, U., & Liaw, S. S. (2010). Investigating learner’s attitudes toward virtual reality learning environments: Based on a constructivist approach. Computers & Education, 55 (3), 1171-1182. Immersive Education (2009). Immersive Education Initiative. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://immersiveeducation.org/. Instituto Cervantes. (2002). Marco Común Europeo de Referencia para las Lenguas. Assessment. Subdirección General de Cooperación Internacional. Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Technology as cognitive tools: learners as designers. Retrieved from http://aurorem.free.fr/partiels/sem7/cours/textesprincipaux/ITForum_Paper1_jonassen.pdf. Kallonis, P., & Sampson, D. (2010). Implementing a 3D Virtual Classroom Simulation for Teachers’ Continuing Professional Development. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE 2010). Putrajaya, Malaysia. Kluge, S., & Riley, L. (2008). Teaching in Virtual Worlds: Opportunities and Challenges. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 5, 127-135. Koenraad, T. (2008). How Can 3D Virtual Worlds Contribute to Language Education? Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://3dles.com/documents/worldcall2008-koenraad-revised2.pdf. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 335-353. Lee, M. J. W. (2009). How Can 3d Virtual Worlds Be Used To Support Collaborative Learning? An Analysis of Cases From The Literature. Society, 5(1), 149-158. Linden Labs (2006). New Media Consortium Campus. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://slurl.com/secondlife/NMC%20Campus/138/225/43. Livingstone, D., & Kemp, J. (2008). Integrating Web-Based and 3D Learning Environments: Second Life Meets Moodle. The European Journal for the Informatics Professional, IX (3), 8-14. Nation, I.S.P., & Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL Listening and Speaking, London: Routledge. Nieminen, K. (2006). Aspects of Learning Foreign Languages and Learning WITH Foreign Languages: Language Immersion and CLIL. Development Project Report, Jyvaskyla, Finland: Jyvaskyla University of Applied Sciences. Open Wonderland Foundation (2010). Open Wonderland: Open source 3D virtual collaboration toolkit. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://openwonderland.org/. Perkins, D. (1992). Technology meets constructivism: Do they make a marriage. In T. Duffy & D. Jonassen (Eds.), Constructivism and the technology of instruction: A conversation. (pp. 45-56). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Program D (2009). Program D. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://aitools.org/Program_D. Rauch, U., Cohodas, M., & Wang, T. (2009). The Arts 3D VLE Metaverse as a Network of Imagination. Journal of Online Education, 5(6), Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://innovateonline.info/pdf/vol5_issue6/The_Arts_3D_VLE_ Metaverse_as_a_Network_of_Imagination.pdf. Shih, Y.C., & Yang, M.T. (2008). A Collaborative Virtual Environment for Situated Language Learning Using VEC3D. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 56-68. Smith, R.B., Horan, B., Daniels, J., & Cleal, D. (2006). Programming the world with sun SPOTs. Companion to the 21 st ACM SIGPLAN symposium on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications, New York: ACM, 706-707. SpheNet (2009). TTSReader overview. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://www.sphenet.com/TTSReader/index.html. Three Immersions (2008). 3j School-Chinese Language. Retrieved December 22, 2010, from http://www.3jlife.com/cnSchool/index.jsp. Vrasidas, C. (2000). Constructivism versus objectivism: Implications for interaction, course design and evaluation in distance education. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6(4), 339-362. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wilson, B. (1997). The postmodern paradigm. In C. R. Dills & A. Romiszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Educational Technology Publications, 297-309. Wright, M. (2005). Open Sound Control: an enabling technology for musical networking. Organised Sound, 10(3), 193-200. Zhang, Y. (2019). Cooperative Language Learning and Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(1), 81-83. 10
Page 1 and 2: October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4
Page 3 and 4: Supporting Organizations Centre for
Page 5 and 6: Time-Quality Tradeoff of Waiting St
Page 7 and 8: Ibáñez, M. B., García, J. J., Ga
Page 9 and 10: Situated learning. It states that k
Page 11 and 12: executed in the client, the server
Page 13: The participants were twelve non-na
Page 17 and 18: Theoretical background Feedback, is
Page 19 and 20: There are already a number of tools
Page 21 and 22: output used were blogs, written by
Page 23 and 24: Question Table 2: Perceived Relevan
Page 25 and 26: Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2009). Dev
Page 27 and 28: detection, and analysis of affectiv
Page 29 and 30: experience is a suitable method of
Page 31 and 32: Collins, 1998). The appraisal theor
Page 33 and 34: encompasses the finer shades of an
Page 35 and 36: and can also track faces with glass
Page 37 and 38: Acknowledgements This research was
Page 39 and 40: Merill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Traft
Page 41 and 42: to the above-discussed issues of th
Page 43 and 44: The annotation part of the SDM onto
Page 45 and 46: that enables the office users to ac
Page 47 and 48: Figure 4. Semantic document browser
Page 49 and 50: to the group’s shared semantic do
Page 51 and 52: participants performed less mouse c
Page 53 and 54: Bastili, V.R., Gianluigi, C., & Rom
Page 55 and 56: esource contribution, enabling conv
Page 57 and 58: Semantic Search In contrast to the
Page 59 and 60: Participation: P i i i NiVadd Vde
Page 61 and 62: and comment on each page as well. T
Page 63 and 64: Table 1. Questionnaire results (N=2
Page 65 and 66:
propose for him, as well as calenda
Page 67 and 68:
Discussion and Conclusion Collabora
Page 69 and 70:
Sampson, D. G., & Zervas, P. (2011)
Page 71 and 72:
Obtaining: the first step of the li
Page 73 and 74:
process (Palmer & Richardson, 2004)
Page 75 and 76:
and ratings (the use of star rating
Page 77 and 78:
(K1) is the number of non-reusable
Page 79 and 80:
Case 3: The process of reusing a se
Page 81 and 82:
Washizaki, H., Yamamoto, Y. & Fukaz
Page 83 and 84:
to examine determinants for pre-ser
Page 85 and 86:
Overview of the model The first res
Page 87 and 88:
significance of relationships. All
Page 89 and 90:
Discussion This study represents a
Page 91 and 92:
Davis, F., Bagozzi, R., & Warshaw,
Page 93 and 94:
Ko, C.-C., Chiang, C.-H., Lin, Y.-L
Page 95 and 96:
Interestingly, the Universal Design
Page 97 and 98:
Figure 1. Framework of the TriAcces
Page 99 and 100:
Experiment This experiment aimed to
Page 101 and 102:
Table 2. Descriptive statistics for
Page 103 and 104:
Foulds, R., & Camacho, C. (2003). T
Page 105 and 106:
answer. However, students can choos
Page 107 and 108:
Hartley & Collins-Brown, 1999; Morl
Page 109 and 110:
Subjects Figure 4. Partial misconce
Page 111 and 112:
correct for a four-option MC item i
Page 113 and 114:
from −3 to 3 for any four-option
Page 115 and 116:
Kansup, W. (1973). A comparison of
Page 117 and 118:
The theory of mental models explain
Page 119 and 120:
computer-mediated counter-arguments
Page 121 and 122:
Learning in this study refers to, w
Page 123 and 124:
the experiment process was anonymou
Page 125 and 126:
supported. However, significant dif
Page 127 and 128:
Cannon-Bowers, J. A., Salas, E., &
Page 129 and 130:
Lee, Y.-H., Hsieh, Y.-C., & Hsu, C.
Page 131 and 132:
Many researchers have conducted emp
Page 133 and 134:
Trialability Some studies have empi
Page 135 and 136:
Results Instrument validation Two c
Page 137 and 138:
In this study, Amos 6.0 was employe
Page 139 and 140:
Our results strongly supported the
Page 141 and 142:
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981
Page 143 and 144:
Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., & Cres
Page 145 and 146:
What becomes clear from this short
Page 147 and 148:
Figure 1. Distribution of informati
Page 149 and 150:
Results In order to test the hypoth
Page 151 and 152:
esults of the present study with th
Page 153 and 154:
Kolbitsch, J., & Maurer, H. (2006).
Page 155 and 156:
A conceptual framework of this stud
Page 157 and 158:
eveal positive effects on students
Page 159 and 160:
learning resources; and able to acc
Page 161 and 162:
Discussion This study suggests that
Page 163 and 164:
146). Also, role of constructivist
Page 165 and 166:
eform strategy, namely, the MOE-Int
Page 167 and 168:
McNaughton, S. (2002). Meeting of m
Page 169 and 170:
Wu, T.-T., Sung, T.-W., Huang, Y.-M
Page 171 and 172:
Ubiquitous English-Reading Learning
Page 173 and 174:
include the number of times and ran
Page 175 and 176:
initial value for the predetermined
Page 177 and 178:
The following Eq. (18) expresses th
Page 179 and 180:
Limitations This experiment adopted
Page 181 and 182:
Table 3 shows the analysis of the p
Page 183 and 184:
enhance learning outcomes, it impor
Page 185 and 186:
Ogata, H., & Yano, Y. (2004a). Cont
Page 187 and 188:
Communication seems to be more effe
Page 189 and 190:
the audience only listened, one whe
Page 191 and 192:
Step 5) Writing the story On the ba
Page 193 and 194:
As indicated in Table 2, the differ
Page 195 and 196:
References Armstrong, S. (2003). Th
Page 197 and 198:
Goh, T.-T. (2011). Exploring Gender
Page 199 and 200:
OPAC has been transformed into AirP
Page 201 and 202:
Perceived Self-Efficacy Figure 3. H
Page 203 and 204:
were asked to rate their confidence
Page 205 and 206:
(2001). The correlation table begin
Page 207 and 208:
Discussion and Implications Note. S
Page 209 and 210:
will become important to identify i
Page 211 and 212:
Parker, A. (2007). SMS - Its use in
Page 213 and 214:
Find the perimeter of the rectangle
Page 215 and 216:
Wait Time Management Issues related
Page 217 and 218:
Precision Reduced_Precision ( T T0
Page 219 and 220:
learning concept. If the Specialty
Page 221 and 222:
Two criteria have been adopted to e
Page 223 and 224:
Reduced Recall 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.04
Page 225 and 226:
In this work, both recall-oriented
Page 227 and 228:
Tsai, C.-C., Chuang, S.-C., Liang,
Page 229 and 230:
confidence and self-belief in their
Page 231 and 232:
Peng et al. (2006) To explore ISE &
Page 233 and 234:
Torkzadeh, Chang, and Demirhan (200
Page 235 and 236:
educational level, locus of control
Page 237 and 238:
Internet-based learning self-effica
Page 239 and 240:
Though Lee and Lee (2008) did not d
Page 241 and 242:
Regarding the category of ISE resea
Page 243 and 244:
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy:
Page 245 and 246:
Pintrich, P. R., & de Groot, E. V.
Page 247 and 248:
In formal learning, Safran, Helic,
Page 249 and 250:
that culture is essential when user
Page 251 and 252:
Table 3. Analysis of usage frequenc
Page 253 and 254:
7 1.16 137.73 0.25 0.29 0.25 Social
Page 255 and 256:
discussions freely. So Korean stude
Page 257 and 258:
Johnson, L., Levine, A., & Smith, R
Page 259 and 260:
Figure 1. The UE Faculty Web Portal
Page 261 and 262:
2006), and consistency (Sindhuja &
Page 263 and 264:
Independent Variables Dependent Var
Page 265 and 266:
Meanwhile, as shown in Table 4, Ava
Page 267 and 268:
design methods in the development o
Page 269 and 270:
Pearson, J. M., & Pearson, A. (2008
Page 271 and 272:
Clewley, N., Chen, S. Y., & Liu, X.
Page 273 and 274:
As shown in this Table, Holists wil
Page 275 and 276:
satisfaction or dissatisfaction wit
Page 277 and 278:
8 I would prefer to learn from huma
Page 279 and 280:
the examples need to be more practi
Page 281 and 282:
Brotherton, J. A,. & Abowd, G. D. (
Page 283 and 284:
Cobos, D. L. (2011). Book review: T
show all

October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?