You are here:

Networking Remote Rural Schools for Learning and Knowledge Building: Teachers’, School Learners’ and Schools’ trajectories
PROCEEDINGS

, Laval University, Canada ; , McGill University, Canada

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Orlando, Florida, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-58-7 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This presentation will report on ICT integration trajectories in innovative remote networked settings. The design experiment involves thirteen sites. Trajectories of teachers, school learners, and schools are here considered. Data were participants' interactions: university-school interaction, classroom interaction, and interaction in the virtual collaborative space using an electronic forum and a desktop videoconferencing system. Engeström's activity theory framework (1987) was applied to the data. Trajectories as regards ICT integration were identified.

Citation

Laferriere, T. & Breuleux, A. (2006). Networking Remote Rural Schools for Learning and Knowledge Building: Teachers’, School Learners’ and Schools’ trajectories. In C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, K. McFerrin, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2006--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3167-3171). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved February 2, 2023 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Becker, H.J., & Riel, M.M. (2000). Teacher professional engagement and constructivist-compatible computer use. (Report No. 7) Irvine, CA and Mineapolis, MN: University of California, Irvine and University of Minnesota: Teaching, Learning, and Computing: 1998 National Survey. Centre for Research on Information Technology and Organizations. Retrieved September 2005, from http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/report_7
  2. Brown, A.L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178.
  3. Burtis, J. (2001). The analytic toolkit for knowledge forum. Technical Report. Toronto, ON: Knowledge Forum Project, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education/University of Toronto. Retrieved November 2005, from http://kftools.oise.utoronto.ca/atk/
  4. Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon and T.O’Shea (eds.), New directions in educational technology. New York: Springler-Verlag.
  5. Collins, A. (1999). The changing infrastructure of education research. In Issues in education research, edited by E. Condliffe Lagemann, & Shulman, L.S. (pp. 289-198). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  6. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32– 42.
  7. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit.
  8. Greeno, J.G., Collins, A.M., & Resnick, L.B. (1996). Cognition and learning. In D. Berliner & R. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 15–46). New York: Macmillan.
  9. Gusky, T.R. (1999). Evaluating professional development, USA: Crowin Press.
  10. Holmes Group (1990). Tomorrow’s schools: A report of the Holmes Group. East Lansing (MI): (501 Erickson Hall, East Lansing 48824-1034).
  11. Kozma, R. (2000). Qualitative Studies of Innovative Pedagogical Practices Using Technology. SITES M2 design document, IEA.
  12. Lave, J. (1990). Cognition in practice. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Lawley, E. (1992). Discourse and Distortion in ?Computer-Mediated Communication. Retrieved October 2005, from http://www.itcs.com/elawley/discourse.html
  15. Kozma, R.B., & Anderson, R.E. (2002). Qualitative case studies of innovative pedagogical practices using ICT. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 18 (4), 387-394.
  16. McCormick, R. (2004). Collaboration: The Challenge of ICT. International Journal of Technology and Design Education 14, 159–176.
  17. Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem-solving. In C.O'Malley (Ed.) Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (pp. 69-97). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  18. Salomon, G. (Ed.) (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  19. Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994) Computer Support for Knowledge-Building Communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3, 3, 265-283.
  20. Schön, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
  21. Springer, L., Stanne, M.E., & Donovan, S.S. (1999). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 69(1), 21-51.
  22. Wegerif, R., & Mercer, N. (1997). Using Computer-based Text Analysis to Integrate Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Research on Collaborative Learning. Language and Education, 11(4), 271-286.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections