Following the initiative started in May with the first one, now we have done the second version of the Recommended Readings Seminar, following the compilation of readings done in the Book “Educational Technology” by Chris Davies y Rebbeca Eynon (2016). This second part is titled by the authors as “Research into Technology and Learning Sciences, and Associated Theoretical and Methodological Issues”, and includes the following readings.
We hope you find them provocative:
The Science of Learning and Instruction Meets Computer Science
- Vannevar Bush, ‘As We May Think’, The Atlantic Monthly, July 1945, 1–19.
- Pask, ‘Conversational Techniques in the Study and Practice of Education’, British Journal of Educational Psychology, 1976, 46, 12–25.
- Arthur C. Graesser, Shulan Lu, George Tanner Jackson, Heather Hite Mitchell, Matthew Ventura, Andrew Olney, and Max M. Louwerse, ‘AutoTutor: A Tutor with Dialogue in Natural Language’, Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 2004, 36, 2, 180–92.
- Yanghee Kim and Amy L. Baylor, ‘A Social-Cognitive Framework for Pedagogical Agents as Learning Companions’, Educational Technology Research and Development, 2006, 54, 6, 569–90.
- Edys S. Quellmalz and James W. Pellegrino, ‘Technology and Testing’, Science, 2009, 2, 75–9
Users and Contexts in Designing Technology for Learning
- Ann L. Brown, ‘Design Experiments: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges in Creating Complex Interventions in Classroom Settings’, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1992, 2, 2, 141–78.
- Dahlbäck, A. Jönsson, and L. Ahrenberg, ‘Wizard of Oz Studies: Why and How’, Knowledge Based Systems, 1993, 6, 4, 258–66.
- Kari Kuutti, ‘Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for Human-Computer Interaction Research’, in B. Nardi (ed.), Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction (MIT Press, 1995), pp. 17–44.
- Richard E. Mayer and Roxana Moreno, ‘A Split-Attention Effect in Multimedia Learning: Evidence for Dual Processing Systems in Working Memory’, Journal of Educational Psychology, 1998, 90, 2, 312–20.
- Allison Druin, ‘The Role of Children in Design of New Technology’, Behaviour and Information Technology, 2002, 21, 1, 1–25.
- Sasha Barab and Kurt Squire, ‘Design Based Research: Putting a Stake in the Ground’, Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2004, 13, 1, 1–14.
Part 3: Techniques for Analysing Learning Behaviour Online
- Henri and B. Pudelko, ‘Understanding and Analysing Activity and Learning in Virtual Communities’, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 2003, 19, 474–87.
- De Wever, T. Schellens, M. Valcke, and H. Van Keer, ‘Content Analysis Schemes to Analyze Transcripts of Online Asynchronous Discussion Groups: A Review’, Computers & Education, 2006, 46, 1, 6–28.
- Caroline Haythornthwaite and Maarten de Laat, ‘Social Networks and Learning Networks: Using Social Network Perspectives to Understand Social Learning’, in L. Dirckinck-Holmfeld, V. Hodgson, C. Jones, M. de Laat, D. McConnell, and T. Ryberg (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning (2010), pp. 183–90.
- Cristobal Romero and Sebastian Ventura, ‘Educational Data Mining: A Review of the State of the Art’, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics—Part C: Applications And Reviews, 2010, 40, 6, 601–18.
- Simon Buckingham Shum and Rebecca Ferguson, ‘Social Learning Analytics’, Educational Technology & Society, 2011, 15, 3, 3–26.
- Lori Lockyer, Elizabeth Heathcote, and Shane Dawson, ‘Informing Pedagogical Action: Aligning Learning Analytics with Learning Design’, American Behavioral Scientist, 2013, 57, 10, 1439–59.