EdTechinGeneral
[1] Richard E. Mayer, Julie Heiser and Steve Lonn . Cognitive Constraints on Multimedia Learning: When Presenting More Material Results in Less Understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology Volume 93, Issue 1, March 2001, Pages 187-198.
Comments: When students received concurrent on-screen text that summarized (Experiment 1) or duplicated (Experiment 2) the narration of the lecture, they performed worse on tests of retention and transfer than did students who received no on-screen text. This redundancy effect is consistent with a dual-channel theory of multimedia learning in which adding on-screen text can overload the visual information-processing channel, causing learners to split their visual attention between 2 sources.
[2] Leonard Springer, Mary Elizabeth Stanne, Samuel Donovan. Effects of Small-Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis. Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education (22nd, Albuquerque, NM, November 6-9, 1997).
Comments: The results of the meta-analysis suggest that small-group learning has significant and positive effects on undergraduates in [STEM] courses and programs.
[3] Beth Simon, Ruth Anderson, Crystal Hoyer, and Jonathan Su. Preliminary experiences with a tablet pc based system to support active learning in computer science courses. In ITiCSE ’04: Proceedings of the 9th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, pages 213–217. ACM Press, 2004.
[4] R. Anderson, J. Chen, L. Jie, N. Li, N. Linnell, V. Razmov, and F. Videon. Supporting an interactive classroom environment in a cross-cultural course. In ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education, to appear., 2007.
Comment: Out of all of the Classroom Presenter publications, I chose this one because I thought it was a neat and slightly relevant application of the technology with the cross-cultural component.
[5] Rand W. Guthrie and Anna Carlin Waking the Dead: Using interactive technology to engage passive listeners in the classroom. Proceedings of the Tenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New York, New York, August 2004
Comments: Presents audience response system that displays histogram of student responses to multi-choice questions. Basically concludes that anything that encourages active-learning is beneficial. This paper has a nice set of hypothesis for measuring success of educational technology (primarily based on student perceptions).
[6] Bill Penuel, Jeremy Roschelle, and Louis Abrahamson. The networked classroom. (61:5):50–54, 2004.
[7] eClass: J. A. Brotherton and G. D. Abowd. Lessons learned from eClass: Assessing automated capture and access in the classroom. In CHI ‘04: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 121–155, New York, NY, USA, 2004. ACM Press.
[8] LiveNotes: M. Kam, J. Wang, A. Iles, E. Tse, J. Chiu, D. Glaser, O. Tarshish, and J. Canny. Livenotes: a system for cooperative and augmented note-taking in lectures. In CHI ‘05: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, 531–540, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM Press.
[9] D. Miller, J. Culp, and D. Stotts. Facetop tablet :: note-taking assistance for deaf persons. In Assets ’06: Proceedings of the ACM SIGACCESS conference on Computers and accessibility, 247–248, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM Press.
[10] S. Mukhopadhyay and B. Smith. Passive capture and structuring of lectures. In MULTIMEDIA ’99: Proceedings of the ACM international conference on Multimedia (Part 1), 477–487, New York, NY, USA, 1999. ACM Press.
- Enabling Technology:
[11] J. Beavers, T. Chou, R. Hinrichs, C. Moffatt, M. Pahud, and J. V. Eaton. The learning experience project: Enabling collaborative learning with ConferenceXP. Microsoft Research Technical Report MSR-TR-2004-42, April 2004.
[12] Adobe Systems Incorporated. Adobe acrobat connect. http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobatconnect/, 2007.
