參考文獻 |
中文參考文獻
1. 王文靜(譯)(民96)。情境學習:合法的邊緣性參與(原作者:J., Lave, & E. Wenger)。上海:華東師範大學出版社。(原著出版年:1998)
2. 李暉、郭重吉(民88)。科學話語與科學概念之學習:以國中生理化課學習為例。科學教育學刊,10,3-30。
3. 李郁薇(民94)。網路學習社群中的潛水現象---一種被忽略的充分參與。國立中央大學學習與教學研究所碩士論文,中壢市。
4. 江火明、陳斐卿、李郁薇(民93)。從Wenger的社會學習理論談網路學習社群討論區的設計考量,125,93-105。
5. 林雅慧、張文華、林陳涌(民92)。國小低年級學生參與科學對談的類型之研究,科學教育學刊,11(1),51-74。
6. 林燕文、洪振方(民96)。對話論證的探究中學童論述策略對促進科學概念理解之研究。屏東教育大學學報,26,285-324。
7. 吳心楷、辛靜婷(民101)。數位學習研究中質性資料的管理與分析:以NVivo軟體的使用為例。載於宋曜廷(主編),數位學習研究方法(163-208頁)。台北市:高等教育。
8. 吳百興、張耀云、吳心楷(民99)。科學探究過程中的科學推理。科學教育研究與發展季刊,56,53-74。
9. 邱美虹、林秀蓁(民93)。以CHILDES分析一對一科學教學活動中師生互動共建科學知識的行為表現。科學教育學刊,12(2),133-158。
10. 洪莉(譯)(民91)。哈拉與抓虱的語言(原作者:R. Dunbar)。台北:遠流。
11. 洪煌堯(民101)。扎根理論研究法在數位學習研究上的應用。載於宋曜廷(主編),數位學習研究方法(137-162頁)。台北市:高等教育。
12. 祝惠珍(民95)。網路學習社群中的共構面貌──以迷思概念為探針。未出版之碩士論文,國立中央大學學習與教學研究所碩士論文,中壢市。
13. 郭佩宜、王宏仁(主編)(民95)。田野的技藝:自我、研究與知識建構。台北:巨流。
14. 柯靜宜、張文華、郭重吉(民93)。統整教學模組實施下之小組互動及知識共同建構。科學教育學刊,12(1), 1-26。
15. 教育部(民102)。十二年國民基本教育。台北市:作者。
16. 教育部(民92)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。台北市:作者。
17. 張秀美、曾仁佑、陳斐卿、鄭凱天(民103)。線上小組學習的發生處──以迷思概念為探針。科學教育學刊,22(2),77-102。
18. 張秀美、陳斐卿、曾仁佑(民101)。小組建立假設的合作探究策略--以網路環境為例。科學教育學刊,20(4),295-317。
19. 張秀美(民96)。情意鷹架者的實踐知識-以Lain網路社群為例。未出版之碩士論文,國立中央大學學習與教學研究所碩士班,中壢市。
20. 張君玫、劉鈴佑(譯)(民94)。社會學的想像(The Sociological Imagination)(原作者:C. W. Mills)。台北:巨流。(原著出版年:1959)
21. 陳文德(民96)。黑盒子被打開了嗎?──談「田野工作」與學術知識建構的關係。台灣社會學,13,243-264。
22. 陳均伊、張惠博、郭重吉(民93)。光反射與折射的另有概念診斷工具之發展與研究。科學教育學刊,12(3),311-340。
23. 陳斐卿、王慶中(民100)。社交網絡的學習:實踐星群觀點。資訊社會研究期刊,19,1-31。
24. 辜玉旻、張菀真、陳以欣(民98)。中文篇章朗讀之錯誤類型分析。教育心理學報,41(1),29-44。
25. 劉康(民94)。對話的喧聲 : 巴赫汀文化理論述評。台北:麥田出版。
26. 廖筱毓(民101)。線上科學對話與知識建構對大學生語言學習的影響。未出版之碩士論文,國立政治大學華語文教學碩士學位學程,台北。
27. 蔡敏玲(民91)。教育質性研究歷程的展現:尋找教室團體互動的節奏與變奏。台北:心理。
28. 樊琳、李賢哲(民91)。以「專題研究」培養國小職前教師科學探究過程與教材開發能力之研究。師大學報:科學教育類,47(2),105-126。
29. 蕭瑞麟(民95)。不用數字的研究:鍛鍊深度思考力的質性研究。台北:培生國際。
30. 謝國雄、高穎超、李慈穎、吳偉立、劉怡昀、劉惠純、鄭玉菁、葉虹靈、林文蘭等(民96)。以身為度、如是我做:田野工作的教與學。台北:群學出版有線公司。
31. 齊若蘭(譯)(民90)。複雜:走在秩序與混沌的邊緣(原作者:M. M. Waldrop)。台北:天下。(原著出版年:1993)
32. 藍偉瑩(民91)。小組互動與概念改變機制之探討─以物質狀態與氣體性質概念為例。未出版之碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學科學教育研究所,台北。
英文參考文獻
1. Aalst, J. V. (2009). Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge-construction, and knowledge-creation discourses. The International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4 (3), 259-287.
2. Abawajy, J., & Kim, T. H. (2011). Engaging and effective asynchronous online discussion forums. FGIT-ASEA/DRBC/EL 2011, 695-705.
3. Alozie, N. M., Moje, E. B., & Krajcik, J. S. (2010). An analysis of the supports and constraints for scientific discussion in high school project-based science. Science Education, 94(3), 395-427.
4. Andresen, M. A. (2009). Asynchronous discussion forums: success factors, outcomes, assessments, and limitations. Educational Technology and Society, 12(1), 249–257.
5. Anderson, K. T., & Weninger, C. (2012). Tracing ideologies of learning in group talk and their impediments to collaboration. Linguistics and Education, 23, 350-360.
6. Anderson, L.W., & Krathwohl, D.R. (2001). A taxonomy for Learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom′s taxonomy of educational objectives. NY: Longman.
7. Arvaja, M. (2007). Contextual perspective in analysing collaborative knowledge construction of two small groups in web based discussion. The International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2/3), 133-158.
8. Baker, M., Andriessen, J., Lund, K., van Amelsvoort, M., & Quignard, M. (2007). Rainbow: A framework for analyzing computer-mediated pedagogical debates. The International Journal of Computers Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(2-3), 247-272.
9. Bakhtin, M. M. (2002). The dialogic imagination: Four essays (C. Emerson, & M. Holoquist, Trans). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
10. Barab, S. A., Hay, K. E., Barnett, M. G., & Squire, K. (2001). Constructing virtual worlds: Tracing the historical development of learner practices/understandings. Cognition and Instruction, 19(1), 47-94.
11. Chang, H. M., Chen, F. C., Tzeng, R. Y., & Chen, Y. J. (2012). Reconsidering Meaning-making of Lurkers in Online Small Group Knowledge Co-construction. Paper presented at GCCCE (The 14th Global Chinese Conference on Computing in Education), Kenting, Taiwan.
12. Chang, H. M., Chen, F. C., Zhang, K. T., & Tzeng, R. Y. (2011). The Critical Moments of Knowledge Co-construction: Reconsidering Meaning-making of Postings in Online Group Discussion. Paper presented at the CSCL2011 (The 9th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning), Hong Kong, China.
13. Chang, H. M., Zhang, K. T., Tzeng, R. Y., & Chen, F. C. (2010). The Critical Moments of Knowledge Co-construction in Heterogeneous Group Discussion Online. Paper presented at TWELF2010 (The 6th Taiwan E-Learning Forum), Taichung, Taiwan.
14. Chen, F. C., & Chang, H. M. (2013). Engaged lurking – the less visible form of participation in online small group learning. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 8(1), 171-199.
15. Chen, F. C., Jiang, H. M., Lin, H. L., & Wang, H. R. (2001). High school students’ attempts at primary data in PBL via network: Lain experience. Paper presented at GCCCE2001 (The 5th Global Chinese Conference on Computing in Education), Taiwan.
16. Chin, C., & Osborne, J. (2010). Students′ questions and discursive interaction: Their impact on argumentation during collaborative group discussions in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(7), 883-908.
17. Chiru, C. G., & Trausan-Matu, S. (2012). Identification and Classification of the Most Important Moments from Students′ Collaborative Discourses. Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 330-339.
18. Chiu, M. M. (2008). Flowing toward correct contributions during group problem solving: A statistical discourse analysis. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(3), 415–463.
19. Clancey, W. J. (1995). A tutorial on situated learning. In J. Self, (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers and Education. Charlottesville (pp. 49-70), VA: AACE.
20. Clark, D., & Sampson, V. (2008). Assessing dialogic argumentation in online environments to relate structure, grounds, and conceptual quality. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 293-321.
21. Conradd, D. (2002). Deep in the Hearts of Learners: insights into the nature of online community. Journal of Distance Education, 7(1). Retrieved July 28, 2004 from: http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol17.1/conrad.html
22. Dennen, V. P. (2008). Pedagogical lurking: Student engagement in non-posting discussion behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(4), 1624-1633.
23. Dennen, V. P., & Wieland, K. (2007). From interaction to intersubjectivity: Facilitating online group discourse processes. Distance Education, 28(3), 281-297.
24. Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fisher, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: from design to orchestration. In N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, & S. Barnes, (Eds.), Technology enhanced learning: Principles and products (pp. 3-19). Springer, Netherlands.
25. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Osborne, J. F. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84 (3), 287–312.
26. Duschl, R. A. (2008). Quality argumentation and epistemic criteria, In S. Erduran & M. P. Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education (pp. 159-175). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
27. Edwards, D., & Mercer, N. (2003). Common Knowledge: The Development of Understanding in the Classroom. London: Routledge.
28. Engeström, Y. (1999). Expansive visibilization of work: An activity-theoretical perspective. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8, 63-93.
29. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPing into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin′s argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88, 915-933.
30. Felton, M., & Kuhn, D. (2001). The development of argumentive discourse skill. Discourse Processes, 32, 135-153.
31. Furberg, A. (2009). Socio-cultural aspects of prompting student reflection in Web-based inquiry learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(4), 397-409.
32. Gan, Y., & Zhu, Z. (2007). A Learning Framework for Knowledge Building and Collective Wisdom Advancement in Virtual Learning Communities. Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 206-226.
33. Gasson, S., & Waters, J. (2011). Using A Grounded Theory Approach To Study Online Collaboration Behaviors. European Journal of Information Systems, 1-24.
34. Gee, J. P. (2011). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method. New York, NY: Routledge.
35. Gijlers, H., Saab, N., Van Joolingen, W. R., De Jong, T., & Van Hout-Wolters, B. H. A. M. (2009). Interaction between tool and talk: How instruction and tools support consensus building in collaborative inquiry-learning environments. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(3), 252-267.
36. Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 395–429.
37. Hammer, D., & Berland, L. K. (2014). Confusing Claims for Data: A Critique of Common Practices for Presenting Qualitative Research on Learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(1), 37-46.
38. Hershkowitz, R., Hodas, N., Dreyfus, T., & Schwartz, B. (2007). Abstracting Processes, from individuals constructing of knowledge to a group’s “shared knowledge”. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 19(2), 41-68.
39. Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., & Ng, C. S. L. (2010). Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: a review of the research and empirical exploration. Instructional Science, 38(6), 571—606.
40. Hong, H. Y., Chen, F. C., Chang, H. M., Liao, C. Y., & Chan, W. C. (2009). Exploring the effectiveness of an idea-centered design to foster a computer-supported knowledge building environment. Paper presented CSCL (The 8th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning), Athens, Greece.
41. Hong, H. Y., & Teplovs, C. (2007). Using key terms to measure and visually represent community knowledge. Paper presented at the 11th Knowledge Building Summer Institute., Institute for Knowledge Innovation and Technology.
42. Hsu, P. L. (2013). The role of discursive resources in science talk. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 8, 285–294.
43. Hsu, Y. S. (2004). Using the internet to develop students’ capacity for scientific inquiry. Journal of Educational Computing Research﹐31(2), 137-161.
44. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. MA: MIT Press.
45. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., & Kanselaar, G. (2007). Visualization of agreement and discussion processes during computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(3), 1105-1125.
46. Jeong, H., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007). Knowledge convergence during collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 35, 287-315.
47. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A. (1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(1), 39-103.
48. Kim, H., & Song, J. (2005). The features of peer argumentation in middle school students′ scientific inquiry. Research in Science Education, 36(3), 211-233.
49. Koschmann, T. (2002). Dewey′s contribution to the foundations of CSCL research. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a CSCL community: Proceedings of CSCL 2002 (pp. 17-22). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
50. Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P. C., Marx, R. W., Bass, K. M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3-4), 313-350.
51. Kucuk, M. (2010). Lurking in online asynchronous discussion. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 2260–2263.
52. Kuhn, D., & Pearsall, S. (2000). Developmental origins of scientific thinking. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1(1), 113-119.
53. Latour, B. (1996). On interobjectivity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3(4), 228-245.
54. Lave, J., Murtaugh, M., & de la Rocha, O. (1984). The dialectic of arithmetic in grocery shopping. In B. Rogoff, & J. Lave (Eds.). Everyday cognition: its development in social context (pp. 67-94). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
55. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
56. Law, N., Yuen, J., Leng, J., & Wong, W. O. W. (2010). Community knowledge advancement and individual learning. In K. Gomez, L. Lyons, & J. Radinsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 326-327). Chicago: IL.
57. Lee, J. (2012). Patterns of Interaction and Participation in a Large Online Course: Strategies for Fostering Sustainable Discussion. Educational Technology & Society, 15(1), 260–272.
58. Lee, Y. W., Chen, F. C., & Jiang H. M. (2006). Lurking as Participation: A Community Perspective on Lurkers′ Identity and Negotiability. Paper presented at ICLS (the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences: Making a Difference). Bloomington, IN: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
59. Lin, C. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). Applying social bookmarking to collective information searching (CIS): An analysis of behavioral pattern and peer interaction for co-exploring quality online resources. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1249-1257.
60. Linn, M. C., Clark, D., & Slotta, J. D. (2003). Wise design for knowledge integration. Science Education, 87(4), 517–538.
61. Liu, C. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2008). An analysis of peer interaction patterns as discoursed by on-line small group problem-solving activity. Computers & Education, 50(3), 627-639.
62. Looi, C. K., Song, Y., Wen, Y., & Chen, W. (2013). Identifying Pivotal Contributions for Group Progressive Inquiry in a Multimodal Interaction Environment. In D. D. Suthers, K. Lund, C. P. Rose, C. Teplovs, & N. Law (eds.), Productive Multivocality in the Analysis of Group Interactions (Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Series 15) (pp. 265-289). New York: Springer.
63. Lu, J., Chiu, M., & Law, N. W. Y. (2011). Effects of collaborative argumentation processes on justifications: A statistical analysis of online discussion. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 946-955.
64. Lund, K. (2010). Pinpointing pivotal moments in collaboration. Paper presented at the STELLAR 2009 Alpine Rendez-Vous. Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany.
65. Matusov, E. (1996). Intersubjectivity without agreement. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3, 25-45.
66. Moss, J., & Beatty, R. (2006). Knowledge building in mathematics: supporting collaborative learning in pattern problems. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 441–465.
67. National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
68. Neelen, M., & Fetter, S. (2010). Lurking: a challenge or a fruitful strategy? A comparison between lurkers and active participants in an online corporate community of practice. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 6(4), 269-284.
69. Ng, K. C., & Murphy, D (2005). Evaluating interactivity and learning in computer conferencing using content analysis techniques. Distance Education, 26(1), 89-109.
70. Nielsen, J. A. (2012). Science in discussions: An analysis of the use of science content in socioscientific discussions. Science Education, 96, 428–456.
71. Oh, P. S. (2010). How can teachers help students formulate scientific hypotheses? Some strategies found in abductive inquiry activities of earth science. Journal of Science Education, 32(4), 541-560.
72. Oliveira, I., Tinoca, L., & Pereira, A. (2011). Online group work patterns: how to promote a successful collaboration. Computers and Education, 57(1), 1348-1357.
73. Oliveira, A. W. (2009). Developing Elementary Teachers Understanding of the Discourse Structure of Inquiry-Based Science Classrooms. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 8(2), 247-269.
74. Oliveira, A. W., & Sadler, T. D. (2008). Interactive patterns and convergence of meaning during student collaborations in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 634-658.
75. O′Neill, D. K. (2004). Building social capital in a knowledge-building community: Telementoring as a catalyst. Interactive Learning Environments, 12(3), 179-208.
76. Orton-Johnson, K. (2007). The online student: Lurking, chatting, flaming, and joking. Sociological Research Online, 12(6), 223-245.
77. Osborne, J., Erduran, S., & Simon, S. (2004). Enhancing the quality of argumentation in school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41(10), 994-1020.
78. Panitz, T. (1999). Collaborative versus Cooperative Learning: A Comparison of the Two Concepts Which Will Help Us Understand the Underlying Nature of Interactive Learning. Cape Cod Community College, peninsula, Massachusetts; USA. Retrieved Dec. 10, 2013, from: http://home.capecod.net/~tpanitz/tedsarticles/coopdefinition.htm.
79. Pathak, S. A., Kim, B., Jacobson, M. J., & Zhang, B. (2011). Learning the physics of electricity: A qualitative analysis of collaborative processes involved in productive failure. The International Journal of Computers Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(1), 57-73.
80. Piezon, S. L. (2011). Social Loafing and Free Riding in Online Learning Groups. Unpublish doctoral Dissertations. The Florida State University, USA.
81. Preece, J., Nonnecke, B., & Andrews, D. (2004). The Top 5 Reasons for Lurking: Improving Community Experiences for Everyone. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(2), 201-223.
82. Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable- and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. The International Journal of Computer-supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239-257.
83. Rojas-Drummond, S. M., Albarran, C., & Littleton, K. (2008). Collaboration, creativity and co-construction of oral and written texts. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3, 177-191.
84. Roschelle, J. (1992). Learning by collaborating. Convergent conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(3), 235-276.
85. Roth, W. M., & Lee, Y. J. (2007). “Vygotsky’s neglected legacy”: Cultural-historical activity theory. Review of Educational Research, 77(2), 186-232.
86. Rozenszayn, R., & Assaraf, O. B. Z. (2011). When Collaborative Learning meets Nature: Collaborative learning as a meaningful Learning tool in the Ecology inquiry Based Project. Research in Science Education, 41(1), 123–146.
87. Sacks, H., Schegloff, E. A., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplistic systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language, 50, 696-735.
88. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 97-118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
89. Scardamalia, M. (2002). Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp. 67-98). Chicago: Open Court.
90. Schmidt, H. J. (1997). Students′ misconceptions: looking for a pattern. Science Education, 81(2), 123-135.
91. Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers & Education, 46, 49–70.
92. Seidenberg, B., & Snadowsky, A. (1976). Social psychology. NY: Free Press.
93. Shirouzu, H. (2009). Submission for Basic Participation. Paper presented at the ALpineRDV2009-Pinpointing pivotal moments in collaboration Workshop, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany.
94. Shirouzu, H., Miyake, N., & Masukawa, H., (2002). Cognitively active externalization for situated reflection. Cognitive Science, 27, 469-501.
95. Smardon, R. (2004). Streetwise science: Toward a theory of the code of the classroom. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11(3), 201-223.
96. Stahl, G. (2013). Learning across levels. The International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 8 (1), 1-12.
97. Stahl, G. (2009). Studying virtual math teams. New York, NY: Springer.
98. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., & Suthers, D. (2006). CSCL: An Historical Perspective. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), (2006). Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
99. Stoney, S., & Oliver, R. (1999). Can Higher Order Thinking and Cognitive Engagement Be Enhanced with Multimedia?, Interactive Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning. Retrieved June 20, 2006 from http://imej.wfu.edu/articles/1999/2/07/printver.asp
100. Strijbos, J. W., & De Laat, M. F. (2010). Developing the role concept for computer-supported collaborative learning: An explorative synthesis. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 495-505.
101. Suthers, D., Lund, K., Rosé, C., Law, N., & Teplovs, C. (2013). Productive multivocality in the analysis of group interactions. New York: Springer.
102. Suthers, D. D., Dwyer, N., Vatrapu, R., & Medina, R. (2007). An abstract transcript notation for analyzing interactional construction of meaning in online learning. Paper presented at the 40th Hawai`i International Conference on the System Sciences (HICSS-34), Waikoloa, Hawai`i.
103. Suthers, D. D. (2006). Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning-making: A research agenda for CSCL. The International Journal of Computers Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 315-337.
104. Suthers, D. D. (2005). Technology Affordances for Intersubjective Learning: A Thematic Agenda for CSCL. In T. Koschmann, D. Suthers, & T. W. Chan (Eds.), Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! (pp. 662-671). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
105. Toulmin, S. E. (1958). The use of argument. Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press.
106. Tutty, J. I., & Klein, J. D. (2008). Computer-mediated instruction: a comparison of online and face-to-face collaboration. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56(2), 101-124.
107. Wang, C. T., Chen, F. C., & Chang, H. M. (2008). Collective brokering practices in a virtual learning community. Paper presented at ICCE (International Conference on Computers in Education). Taipei, Taiwan
108. Weinberger, A., & Fischer, F. (2006). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers & Education, 46(1), 71-95.
109. Wells, G., & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(3), 379–428.
110. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
111. Wise, A. F., & Chiu, M. M. (2012). Statistical Discourse Analysis of a Role-Based Online Discussion Forum: Patterns of Knowledge Construction. Paper presented at the HICSS 2012 (The 45th Hawaii international conference on system sciences), New York: IEEE.
112. Wise, A. F., Hsiao, Y. T., Marbouti, F., & Zhao, Y. (2012). Tracing Ideas and Participation in anAsynchronous Online Discussion across Individual and Group Levels over Time. In J. van Aalst, K. Thompson, M. J. Jacobson, & P. Riemann (Eds.), The Future of Learning: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS 2012). Sydney, Australia: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
113. Wise, A., Saghafian, M., & Padmanabhan, P. (2009). Comparing the Functions of Different Assigned Student Roles in Online Conversations. In T. Bastiaens et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education2009 (pp. 2034-2042). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
114. Zhang, M., Passalacqua, S., Lundeberg, M., Koehler, M.J., Eberhardt, J., Parker, J., Urban Lurain, M., Zhang, T., & Paik, S. (2010). “Science talks” in kindergarten classrooms: Improving classroom practice through collaborative action research. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(2), 161-179.
115. Zhang, J., & Chan, C. K. K. (2008). Examining the growth of community knowledge in an online space. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE), Taipei, Taiwan.
116. Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for collective cognitive responsibility in knowledge building communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 7–44.
117. Zhang, J., & Sun, Y. (2011). Reading for idea advancement in a grade 4 knowledge building community. Instructional Science, 39(4), 429-452.
118. Zhou, N. (2009). Question co-construction in VMT chats. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Studying Virtual Math Teams. New York, NY: Springer Press.
119. Zhu, E. (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34, 451-480. |