Views
5 years ago

January 2012 Volume 15 Number 1 - Educational Technology ...

January 2012 Volume 15 Number 1 - Educational Technology ...

January 2012 Volume 15 Number 1 - Educational Technology

January 2012 Volume 15 Number 1

  • Page 2 and 3: Educational Technology & Society An
  • Page 4 and 5: Journal of Educational Technology &
  • Page 6 and 7: Ifenthaler, D., Isaias, P., Kinshuk
  • Page 8 and 9: For ill-structured problems, the pr
  • Page 10 and 11: depending on one’s ability to sup
  • Page 12 and 13: Pearson r between the two ratings w
  • Page 14 and 15: Elaboration 1 Sup porting Reason n
  • Page 16 and 17: Inference Inference directly or per
  • Page 18 and 19: participants thought about the prob
  • Page 20 and 21: Panoutsopoulos, H., & Sampson, D. G
  • Page 22 and 23: As evidenced by the literature revi
  • Page 24 and 25: Game-supported educational design T
  • Page 26 and 27: Providing explanations for observed
  • Page 28 and 29: context of problem-based educationa
  • Page 30 and 31: Table 9. Results of the Wilcoxon te
  • Page 32 and 33: Robertson, D. and Miller, D. (2009)
  • Page 34 and 35: cutoff in a particular cell are jud
  • Page 36 and 37: esponses of “1” would fall to t
  • Page 38 and 39: Stability of Indices Figure 1. Esti
  • Page 40 and 41: 2 .56 .56 3 .64 .64 Note: a 10% abe
  • Page 42 and 43: Huang, T. W. (2007, July). Establis
  • Page 44 and 45: disadvantages with regard to analys
  • Page 46 and 47: Accordingly, the presentation of ge
  • Page 48 and 49: Metacognitive awareness inventory T
  • Page 50 and 51: Structural matching [STM] Structura
  • Page 52 and 53:

    those of the directed prompt group

  • Page 54 and 55:

    Third, findings for the semantic HI

  • Page 56 and 57:

    Ifenthaler, D., Masduki, I., & Seel

  • Page 58 and 59:

    Schifter, C. C., Ketelhut, D. J., &

  • Page 60 and 61:

    Witmer and Singer (1998) suggested

  • Page 62 and 63:

    help a farmer find evidence to supp

  • Page 64 and 65:

    Table 2. Survey results for use of

  • Page 66 and 67:

    “When you’re at Shoretown, ther

  • Page 68 and 69:

    Fromme, J. (2003). Computer games a

  • Page 70 and 71:

    to alert interacting parties of upd

  • Page 72 and 73:

    Figure 1. Real-name mode Figure 2.

  • Page 74 and 75:

    Environment Dimensions in the CCWLE

  • Page 76 and 77:

    of acquainted partners is valued, a

  • Page 78 and 79:

    competition in a networked gaming l

  • Page 80 and 81:

    Appendix B: Perception toward Asses

  • Page 82 and 83:

    Appendix D: Perception toward the E

  • Page 84 and 85:

    studies have found positive relatio

  • Page 86 and 87:

    interaction, and the number of mana

  • Page 88 and 89:

    The first canonical variable for ty

  • Page 90 and 91:

    Another discussion point is the dif

  • Page 92 and 93:

    cause inactivity in asynchronous on

  • Page 94 and 95:

    Poole, D. M. (2000). Student partic

  • Page 96 and 97:

    Chinese poetry instruction, unlike

  • Page 98 and 99:

    student, the teaching material for

  • Page 100 and 101:

    poetry appreciation activities in c

  • Page 102 and 103:

    7 I like to learn Chinese poetry ou

  • Page 104 and 105:

    flow: poem recommendation, sensory

  • Page 106 and 107:

    Lee, M. J. W. (2008). Mobile and pe

  • Page 108 and 109:

    variety of teaching/learning strate

  • Page 110 and 111:

    among important concepts and help s

  • Page 112 and 113:

    5. Receive comments on submissions.

  • Page 114 and 115:

    2 Drawing concept maps 6.71 (.000)

  • Page 116 and 117:

    Table 5. Test index of MANOVA analy

  • Page 118 and 119:

    Acknowledgements Funding for this r

  • Page 120 and 121:

    Appendix A: Survey of self-evaluati

  • Page 122 and 123:

    male students have positive percept

  • Page 124 and 125:

    Results The first analysis was to d

  • Page 126 and 127:

    A significant difference was found

  • Page 128 and 129:

    Dai, D. Y. (2000). To be or not to

  • Page 130 and 131:

    Reece, I., & Walker, S. (1997). Tea

  • Page 132 and 133:

    Zhu, C. (2012). Student Satisfactio

  • Page 134 and 135:

    students’ visible learning behavi

  • Page 136 and 137:

    larger extent that working on the t

  • Page 138 and 139:

    online collaborative learning. On a

  • Page 140 and 141:

    Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Seg

  • Page 142 and 143:

    Alias, N. A. (2012). Design of a Mo

  • Page 144 and 145:

    scaffolding tool called “My Learn

  • Page 146 and 147:

    4. the systematic documentation, an

  • Page 148 and 149:

    necessary for success in an online

  • Page 150 and 151:

    aspects of online learning, such as

  • Page 152 and 153:

    Table 5. Questions that guided revi

  • Page 154 and 155:

    lack of self-directing ability nece

  • Page 156 and 157:

    Reeves, T. C. (2000, April), Enhanc

  • Page 158 and 159:

    that interest influences “what pe

  • Page 160 and 161:

    involved in engineering or biomedic

  • Page 162 and 163:

    4) self-efficacy for learning perfo

  • Page 164 and 165:

    From the expectancy-value model (Ec

  • Page 166 and 167:

    Liew, J., McTigue, E. M., Barrois,

  • Page 168 and 169:

    Squeak (http://www.squeak.org/), an

  • Page 170 and 171:

    Table 2. Participating parents’ p

  • Page 172 and 173:

    Collaboration Styles and Programmin

  • Page 174 and 175:

    Summary of Collaboration Styles and

  • Page 176 and 177:

    they had wished (as in Case 2). Mor

  • Page 178 and 179:

    Kelleher, C., & Pausch, R. (2005).

  • Page 180 and 181:

    thinking, and communication for the

  • Page 182 and 183:

    Research Design and Approach In edu

  • Page 184 and 185:

    trainees reported that video-taping

  • Page 186 and 187:

    Finally, writing reflective journal

  • Page 188 and 189:

    Cruickshank, D. R., Bainer, D. L.,

  • Page 190 and 191:

    Hismanoglu, M. (2012). Prospective

  • Page 192 and 193:

    approach to delivering instruction,

  • Page 194 and 195:

    As seen in table 2, the results of

  • Page 196 and 197:

    utilize the potential of ICT to max

  • Page 198 and 199:

    Beins, B.C. (2004). Research Method

  • Page 200 and 201:

    Strudler, N., & Wetzel, K. (1999).

  • Page 202 and 203:

    Chen, C.-H., & She, H.-C. (2012). T

  • Page 204 and 205:

    Constructing a good argument is not

  • Page 206 and 207:

    The writing frame is intended to pr

  • Page 208 and 209:

    In addition, students’ on-line sc

  • Page 210 and 211:

    1.17 to 3.04 from topic 1 to 7 (F=3

  • Page 212 and 213:

    later topics in all aspects, regard

  • Page 214 and 215:

    without the sources of specific kno

  • Page 216 and 217:

    Hou, H.-T. (2012). Analyzing the Le

  • Page 218 and 219:

    described in the Cognitive Process

  • Page 220 and 221:

    Table 2. Cognitive dimensions of th

  • Page 222 and 223:

    Figure 1. Distribution of the quant

  • Page 224 and 225:

    The sequences of C2->C2 and B4->B4

  • Page 226 and 227:

    In designing the discussion activit

  • Page 228 and 229:

    Wu, P.-H., Hwang, G.-J., Su, L.-H.,

  • Page 230 and 231:

    the physical assessment procedure i

  • Page 232 and 233:

    and the expected completion time is

  • Page 234 and 235:

    Research Tools The degree of master

  • Page 236 and 237:

    standard operating process skills b

  • Page 238 and 239:

    the control group. It is noticeable

  • Page 240 and 241:

    Acknowledgements This study is supp

  • Page 242 and 243:

    Lukman, R., & Krajnc, M. (2012). Ex

  • Page 244 and 245:

    et al., 2000). Various course manag

  • Page 246 and 247:

    First group activity: is to form a

  • Page 248 and 249:

    or or “…it can give you more in

  • Page 250 and 251:

    motivation, which occurred during t

  • Page 252 and 253:

    Liaw S. S., Chen G. D., Huang M. H.

  • Page 254 and 255:

    Process is one of the PBL instructi

  • Page 256 and 257:

    Figure1. Schematic drawings filled

  • Page 258 and 259:

    Figure 5. The screenshot of underst

  • Page 260 and 261:

    Results and Discussion System Achie

  • Page 262 and 263:

    5 I feel practicing applied math qu

  • Page 264 and 265:

    Fuson , K.C., & Willis , G. B.(1989

  • Page 266 and 267:

    collaboration might be better suite

  • Page 268 and 269:

    was participative and was represent

  • Page 270 and 271:

    One-way interaction Table 4. Distri

  • Page 272 and 273:

    41~50 27 5.0% 51~60 12 2.2% 61~70 4

  • Page 274 and 275:

    of 52%; 14%; 33%; 1.2%; 0.4% from p

  • Page 276 and 277:

    De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke

  • Page 278 and 279:

    Hsieh, T.-C., Wang, T.-I., Su, C.-Y

  • Page 280 and 281:

    Figure 1. A classical set and a fuz

  • Page 282 and 283:

    memory cycle updates and analytic h

  • Page 284 and 285:

    Feedback on Learning The learning f

  • Page 286 and 287:

    Table 2. Membership Functions of Li

  • Page 288 and 289:

    and invited 30 of them as participa

  • Page 290 and 291:

    Questionnaire analysis To further e

  • Page 292 and 293:

    Ho, H. F. (2005). Patent name: A me

  • Page 294 and 295:

    Jo, I.-H. (2012). Shared Mental Mod

  • Page 296 and 297:

    the task and with other team member

  • Page 298 and 299:

    Although SMMs have traditionally me

  • Page 300 and 301:

    Individual hypotheses tests Since t

  • Page 302 and 303:

    Edmondson, A. (1999). Psychological

  • Page 304 and 305:

    To demonstrate the feasibility of M

  • Page 306 and 307:

    Figure 1 schematically depicts an i

  • Page 308 and 309:

    logic (Baader, Calvanese et al. 200

  • Page 310 and 311:

    markup language, program language,

  • Page 312 and 313:

    Figure 1. In the URI layer, there a

  • Page 314 and 315:

    Ontology-Based Reasoning The infere

  • Page 316 and 317:

    The experience conditions are descr

  • Page 318 and 319:

    Joo, Y. J., Lim, K. Y., & Kim, S. M

  • Page 320 and 321:

    indirect effect on job performance,

  • Page 322 and 323:

    Participants Participants in this s

  • Page 324 and 325:

    7. Perceived usefulness .46* .47* .

  • Page 326 and 327:

    As the original and modified models

  • Page 328 and 329:

    continue performing their own job-t

  • Page 330 and 331:

    Pintrich, P. R. & De Groot, E. V. (

  • Page 332 and 333:

    learning system can be described as

  • Page 334 and 335:

    separately, but as integrated compo

  • Page 336 and 337:

    For each cluster the most important

  • Page 338 and 339:

    Course level adaptation - students

  • Page 340 and 341:

    We defined the following statistica

  • Page 342 and 343:

    Brusilovsky, P. (2004). Knowledge t

  • Page 344 and 345:

    Wu, L., & Looi, C.-K. (2012). Agent

  • Page 346 and 347:

    Learning-by-Teaching Stages, Reflec

  • Page 348 and 349:

    “Opportunity Cost’” and “De

  • Page 350 and 351:

    Analysis of Response Statements An

  • Page 352 and 353:

    A one-way analysis of covariance (A

  • Page 354 and 355:

    We further quantified the qualitati

  • Page 356 and 357:

    prompted to consider how their beli

  • Page 358 and 359:

    Lynch, M., & Metcalfe, M. (2006). R

  • Page 360 and 361:

    In stage 4, the initial amount is r

  • Page 362 and 363:

    Figure 2. Spaces for individual and

  • Page 364 and 365:

    Number of Participants (N=24) Tests

  • Page 366 and 367:

    Figure 12. Whole-groupdeciding Figu

  • Page 368 and 369:

    group’s progress is 98.4% ((1+1+1

  • Page 370 and 371:

    the activity of “fill in the figu

  • Page 372 and 373:

    Hwang, W.-Y., Shadiev, R., Kuo, T.

  • Page 374 and 375:

    generated by STR could improve lear

  • Page 376 and 377:

    products in performance, ease-of-us

  • Page 378 and 379:

    Results and Discussion In this sect

  • Page 380 and 381:

    Research question (2): Do the stude

  • Page 382 and 383:

    transcription. Forth, this study re

  • Page 384 and 385:

    APPENDIX 1. Timeline of the course

  • Page 386 and 387:

    Türel, Y. K., & Johnson, T. E. (20

  • Page 388 and 389:

    teachers may improve their IWB skil

  • Page 390 and 391:

    Chi-square tests of independence we

  • Page 392 and 393:

    Results show that while 164 respond

  • Page 394 and 395:

    Q24. IWB can be used in all kinds o

  • Page 396 and 397:

    Another key finding is that most te

  • Page 398 and 399:

    Bell, M. A. (2002). Teacher feature

October 2012 Volume 15 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...
January 2006 Volume 9 Number 1 - Educational Technology & Society
January 2007 Volume 10 Number 1 - Educational Technology ...
April 2012 Volume 15 Number 2 - Educational Technology & Society
July 2010 Volume 13 Number 3 - Educational Technology & Society
July 2011 Volume 14 Number 3 - Educational Technology & Society
January2009 Volume 12 Number 1 - Educational Technology ...
October 2011 Volume 14 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...
October 2009 Volume 12 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...
October 2007 Volume 10 Number 4 - Educational Technology ...
July 2007 Volume 10 Number 3 - Educational Technology & Society
April 2006 Volume 9 Number 2 - Educational Technology & Society
July 2012 Volume 15 Number 3
April 2007 Volume 10 Number 2 - Educational Technology & Society
April 2008 Volume 11 Number 2 - Educational Technology & Society
Download - Educational Technology & Society
April 2010 Volume 13 Number 2 - Educational Technology & Society
URL - Educational Technology & Society
Volume 2, Number 1, January 5, 1936
walkerana volume 15 number 1 march 2012 - FMCS-Freshwater ...
Spring/Summer 2012 Volume 22, Number 1 - Academic ...
free law journal - volume 3, number 1 (18 january 2007)
Guest Editorial - Creative Design - Educational Technology & Society
walkerana volume 15 number 1 march 2012 - FMCS-Freshwater ...
walkerana volume 15 number 1 march 2012 - FMCS-Freshwater ...
Volume 25, Number 1 • January & February 2010 ... - Women's Press
Volume 22, number 1, January 1981 - National Radio Astronomy ...
SPAFA JOURNAL Volume 21 Number 1 January ... - Seameo-SPAFA
Glebe Report - Volume 36 Number 1 - January 20 2006
Download - Educational Technology & Society