Elements of Quality Online Education cation

More documents

Recommendations

Info

A Constructivist Model for Thinking About Learning Online28. Perkins, D. N. Person-plus: a distributed view of thinking and learning. In Distributed Cognitions.Psychological and Educational Considerations, ed. G. Salomon. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress, 1993.29. Salomon, G. No distribution without individuals’ cognition: a dynamic interactional view. InDistributed Cognitions. Psychological and Educational Considerations, ed. G. Salomon. New York:Cambridge University Press, 1993.30. Twigg, C. Innovations in Online Learning: Moving Beyond No Significant Difference. The PewLearning and Technology Program, 2000. Online: http://www.center.rpi.edu/PewSym/mono4.html.31. Danchak, M. M. Using adaptive hypermedia to match web presentation to learning styles. InElements of Quality Online Education: Into the Mainstream, ed. J. Bourne and J.C. Moore, 93–108.Needham, MA: Sloan-C, 2004.32. Harasim, L. On-line Education: Perspectives on a New Environment. New York: Praeger, 1990.33. Eastmond, D. V. Alone but Together: Adult Distance Study through Computer Conferencing.Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 1995.34. Hiltz, S. R. The Virtual Classroom: Learning without Limits via Computer Networks. Norwood, NJ:Ablex, 1994.35. Poole, D. M. Student participation in a discussion-oriented online course: A case study. Journal ofResearch on Computing in Education 33(2): 162–177, 2000.36. Garrison, D. R. Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: the role of reflectiveinquiry, self-direction and metacognition. In Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice andDirection, ed. J. Bourne and J.C. Moore, 47–58. Needham, MA: Sloan-C, 2003.37. Walther, J. Interpersonal effects in computer mediated interaction. Communication Research 21(4):460–487, 1994.38. Gunawardena, C. and F. Zittle. Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computermediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education 11(3): 8–26, 1997.39. Picciano, A. G. Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence and performance in anonline course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 6(1): 2002.40. Dziuban, J. I., and C. D. Dziuban. Reactive behavior patterns in the classroom. Journal of Staff,Program, and Organization Development 15(2): 85–91, 1997/98.41. Meyer, K. A. The Web’s impact on student learning. THE Journal, May 2003. Online:http://www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A4401.cfm.42. Bures, E. M., C. Aundsen, and P. C. Abrami. Motivation to learn via computer conferencing:exploring how task-specific motivation and CC expectations are related to student acceptance oflearning via CC. Journal of Educational Computing Research 27(3): 249–264, 2002.43. Davies, R. S. Learner intent and online courses. Paper presented at the annual meeting of theAmerican Educational Research Association, Chicago, 2003.44. Gunn, C. and M. McSporran. Dominant or different? Gender issues in computer supportedlearning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(1): 14–30, 2003.45. Morse, K. Does one size fit all? Exploring asynchronous learning in a multicultural environment.Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(1): 37–55, 2003.46. Ehlers, U-D. Quality in e-learning from a learner’s perspective. European Journal of Open andDistance Learning, 2004.Online: http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib./2004/Online_Master_COPs.html.47. Wittgenstein, L. Philosophical Investigations. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1963.48. Spiro, R. J. and J. C. Jheng. Cognitive flexibility and hypertext: Theory and technology for thenonlinear and multidimensional traversal of complex subject matter. In Cognition, Education, andMultimedia: Explorations in High Technology, ed. D. Nix and R.J. Spiro, 163–205. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum, 1990.49. McClintock, R. O. The Educators Manifesto: Renewing the Progressive Bond with Posterity throughthe Social Construction of Digital Learning Communities. New York: Institute for LearningTechnologies, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1999.28
A Constructivist Model for Thinking About Learning Online50. The Sloan Consortium. Effective Practices: Learning Effectiveness. 2002.Online: http://www.sloan-c.org/effectivepractices.51. Shank, R. Horses for courses. Communication of the ACM 41 (7): 23-25, 1998.52. Mayer, R. E. Multimedia Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001.53. McMartin, F. MERLOT: a model for user involvement in digital library design and implementation.Journal of Digital Information 5(3): 2004. Article No. 293.Online: http://jodi.ecs.soton.ac.uk/Articles/v05/i03/McMartin/.54. Parker, D. and A. Gemino. Inside online learning: Comparing conceptual and technique learningperformance in place-based and ALN formats. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 5(2): 64–74, 2001.55. Kashy, E., M. Thoennessen, G. Alberti, and Y. Tsai. Implementing a large on-campus ALN:Faculty perspective. Online Education, Volume 1. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 4(3):2000.56. Kashy, D. A., G. Abertelli, W. Bauer, E. Kashy, and M. Thoennessen. Influence of nonmoderatedand moderated discussion sites on student success. Journal of Asynchronous LearningNetworks 7(1): 31–36, 2003.57. Riccomini, P. The comparative effectiveness of two forms of feedback: Web-based modelcomparison and instructor delivered feedback. Journal of Educational Computing Research 27(3):213–228, 2002.58. Pelz, B. (My) Three principles of effective online pedagogy. Journal of Asynchronous LearningNetworks 8(3): 33–46, 2004.59. Aviv, R., Z. Erlich, G. Ravid, and A. Geva. Network analysis of knowledge construction inasynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(3): 1–23, 2003.60. Short, J., E. Williams, and B. Christie. The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Toronto:Wiley, 1976.61. Rice, R. E. Contexts of research in organizational computer-mediated communication. In Contexts ofComputer-Mediated Communication, ed. M. Lea. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992.62. Picard, R.W. Affective Computing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997.63. Rourke, L., T. Anderson, D. R. Garrison, and W. Archer. Assessing social presence inasynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education 14(2): 2001.64. Swan, K. Immediacy, social presence, and asynchronous discussion. In Elements of Quality OnlineEducation, Volume 3, ed. J. Bourne and J.C. Moore. Needham, MA: Sloan-C, 2002.65. Swan, K. Building communities in online courses: the importance of interaction. Education,Communication and Information 2(1): 23–49, 2002.66. Richardson, J. C. and K. Swan. Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(1): 68–88, 2003.67. Anderson, T., and L. Rourke. Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context.Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 5(2): 1–17, 2001.68. Shea, P. J., A. M. Pickett, and W. E. Pelz. A follow-up investigation of “teaching presence” in theSUNY Learning Network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(2): 61–80, 2003.69. Benbunan-Fich, R. and S. R Hiltz. Impact of asynchronous learning networks on individual andgroup problem solving: A field experiment. Group Decision and Negotiation 8: 409–426, 1999.70. Swan, K., D. Cook, S. Diaz, A. Kratcoski, M. Juliana, and M. van ‘t Hooft. Representation,conceptualization and use: modeling the effects of technology on learning. Paper presented at theannual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, 2004.71. Gardner, H. Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. New York: Basic Books, 1983.72. Paivio, A. Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach. New York: Oxford University Press,1986.73. Reinking, D. Computers, reading, and a new technology of print. In Reading and Computers: Issuesfor Theory and Practice, ed. D. Reinking, 3–23. New York: Teachers College Press, 1987.29
Page 1: Elements of Quality Online Educatio
Page 4 and 5: This book contains information obta
Page 6 and 7: Sloan-C has its administrative home
Page 9 and 10: IntroductionINTRODUCTIONFrank Mayad
Page 11 and 12: Introductionworkshops and publicati
Page 13: How can Online Pedagogy Improveon F
Page 16 and 17: A Constructivist Model for Thinking
Page 34 and 35: The Real-Time Case Method: The Inte
Page 44 and 45: A Case Study in Blended Learning: L
Page 58 and 59: Engagement in Online Learning Commu
Page 71: How can Asynchronous LearningNetwor
Page 74 and 75: Using Blended Learning to Drive Fac
Page 80 and 81:
Using Blended Learning to Drive Fac
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 87 and 88:
Higher Education, Blended Learning
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Adding Clicks to Bricks: Increasing
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115:
Page 119 and 120:
Instructional Technology Graduate P
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129:
Page 132 and 133:
Implementing Curricula Using a Vari
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 153 and 154:
Business Issues in Online Education
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
The Business of Online Education: A
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183:
Page 186 and 187:
Success Versus Value: What Do We Me
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
Page 196 and 197:
Page 199 and 200:
Reinventing the University: The Bus
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207:
show all

Elements of Quality Online Education cation

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

Delete template?

Save as template?