idt691final paper hansuk um n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Learning Effects of Interactive Technologies: Two Evidences PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Learning Effects of Interactive Technologies: Two Evidences

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 12

Learning Effects of Interactive Technologies: Two Evidences - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 136 Views
  • Uploaded on

IDT691FINAL PAPER HANSUK UM. Learning Effects of Interactive Technologies: Two Evidences. 1. Introduction. 2. Pedagogical Approaches to Interactive Technologies. Web 2.0: social learning and use of social software. 2. Pedagogical Approaches to Interactive Technologies.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Learning Effects of Interactive Technologies: Two Evidences' - candid


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
2 pedagogical approaches to interactive technologies
2. Pedagogical Approaches to Interactive Technologies
  • Web 2.0: social learning and use of social software
3 first evidence by hypermedia learning
3. First Evidence by Hypermedia Learning
  • Scaffolding effects by Hypermedia

WhatPrior knowledge

high process scaffolding

low content & process scaffolding

When Timing

monitoring

How Metacognitive monitoring

Whom Delivery system

3 first evidence by hypermedia learning1
3. First Evidence by Hypermedia Learning
  • Metacognitive skills: Self-regulated learner

Utilize the “right tool for the job”

Modify learning strategies and skills

based on their awareness of effectiveness

4 second evidence by online learning
4. Second Evidence by online learning
  • LMS in Higher education

Hintermayer found e-learning has an influence on individual development of various study skills and generic competencies

Strong mentorship is required for students to achieve autonomy

4 second evidence by online learning1
4. Second Evidence by online learning
  • Knowledge construction by Social network

A case of broadcasting systems

Bulletin Board Systems

Blog

Twitter

Face Book

Knowledge-building communities

5 conclusion
5. Conclusion
  • Interactive technology foster learning
  • Scaffolding by hypermedia learning and Knowledge construction by LMS
  • Promoted by strong mentorship
6 discussion
6. Discussion
  • Importance of the topic

Show and support the interactive relationship between learners and technologies

  • Argument

Learner-content interaction is accelerated by learner-learner, or learner-instructor

  • Personal opinions

Furthermore,Interactive technology also promotes interactivity one another among all three simultaneously: L-L, L-C, and L-I

7 references
7. References
  • Anglin, G.J. (1992). Instructional Technology: Past, Present, and Future (3rd Edition / 2nd Edition). Colorado: Libraries Unlimited.
  • Anderson, T, &Elloumi, F. (2004) . Theory and practice of online Learning: Athabasca University
  • Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199–209.
  • Azevedo, R., & Jacobson, M. J. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: A summary and critical analysis. Education Tech Research Dev, 56, 93-100.
  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., & Donovan, S. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded edition). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Budka, P., & Schallert, C. (2009). Transforming learning infrastures in social sciences through flexible and interactive technology-enhanced learning. Learn Inq, 25 (3), 131-142.
  • Jacobson, M. J. (2008). A design framework for educational hypermedia systems: Theory, research, and learning emerging scientific conceptual perspectives. Education Tech Research Dev, 56, 5-28.
  • Scheiter, K.,Gerjet, P., vollmann, B., & Catrambone, R. (2009). The impact of learner characteristics on information utilization strategies, cognitive load experienced, and performance in hypermedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 19, 387-401.
  • Shapiro, A. M. (2008). Hypermedia design s learner scaffolding. Education Tech Research Dev, 56, 29-44.
  • Sherin, B., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. (2004). Scaffolding Aanalysis: Extending the Scaffolding metaphor to learning artifacts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 387-421.
  • Verhoeven, L., Schnotz, W., & Paas, F. (2009) cognitive load in interactive knowledge construction. Learning and Instruction, 19, 369-375.
  • Warschauer, M. (2007). The paradixical future of digital learning. Learn Inq, 10 (3), 41-49.