You are here:

The WebQuest Creation Process: A Case Study of Preservice Teachers Working Individualistically or Collaboratively
PROCEEDINGS

, Mercyhurst College, United States

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 case study focused on preservice teachers creation of a WebQuest working in an individualistic or collaborative work configuration. Constructivism, adult learning theory, and collaborative learning, with technology integration in preservice teacher education provided the framework for this study. Data analysis revealed that mechanisms of collaboration occur in both configurations impacting the creation process and product. Emergent themes include individualistic configuration for control, collaborative configuration for mutual engagement, mechanisms of collaboration in collaborative and individualistic work configurations, prior experience from an introductory technology course, and supported autonomy vs. collaboration. "Supported autonomy." a new theory emerging from this study requires further investigation.

Citation

Roberts, L. (2006). The WebQuest Creation Process: A Case Study of Preservice Teachers Working Individualistically or Collaboratively. 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. 1760-1767). Orlando, Florida, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 6, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Abdall-Haqq, I. (1995). Infusing technology into teacher education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED389699).
  2. Arquette, C., & Marx, S. (2002). Integrating technology into teacher education methods courses: A case study [Electronic Version]. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2002(1), 1687-1691.
  3. Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  4. Brown, J.S., Collins, A., & Duguid, S. (1988). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18(1), 3242.
  5. Brown, J.S., & Duguid, P. (2000). The social life of information. Boston: Harvard Business Press.
  6. Brookfield, S. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  7. Brown, A.L., & Campione, J.C. (1994). Guided discovery in a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice: Classroom lessons. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.
  8. Bruffee, K.A. (1993). Collaborative learning: Higher education, interdependence, and the authority of knowledge. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
  9. Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognition and Instruction, 8, 293-332.
  10. Chein, I. (1981). Appendix: An introduction to sampling. In L.H. Kidder, Selltiz, Wrightsman & Cook (Eds.), Research methods in social relations. (4th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
  11. Cole, M., & Wertsch, J.V. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39, 249-255.
  12. Dam, L. (1990). Learner Autonomy in Practice. In Gathercole, I. (Ed.). 1990, (pp. 16-37 CILT. Great Britain: Bourne Press.
  13. Davis, B.G. (1993). Tools for teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  14. DeMiranda, M.A., & Folkestad, J.E. (2000). Linking cognitive science theory and technology education practice: A powerful connection not fully realized. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 37(4). Retrieved January 4, 2004, from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JITE/v37n4/demiranda.html
  15. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O’Malley, C. (1995) The Evolution of Research on Collaborative Learning. In P. Reimann& H. Spada (Eds.), Learning in human and machines. Towards an interdisciplinary learning science (pp. 189-211).
  16. Doise, W. (1990). The development of individual competencies through social interaction. In H.C. Foot, M.J. Morgan& R.H. Shute (Eds.), Children helping children (pp. 43-64). Chichester: J. Wiley and Sons.
  17. Dutt-Doner, K., & Powers, S. (2000). The use of electronic communication to develop alternative avenues for classroom discussion. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 153-172.
  18. Fernald, S. & Molebash, P. (2000). Using WebQuests as an introduction to methods. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference Proceedings, 2000, 2251-2254.
  19. Gall, M., Gall, J., & Borg, W. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  20. Gardiner, L.F. (1998). Why we must change: The research evidence. Thought and Action, 16, 71-88.
  21. Gillingham, M.G., & Topper, A. (1999). Technology in teacher preparation: Preparing teachers for the future. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 7(4), 303-321.
  22. Gokhale, A.A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7(1). Retrieved November 18, 2003, from http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/jte-v7n1/gokhale.jte-v7n1.html
  23. Harlow, S.D., & Johnson, D. (1998). An epistemology of technology. Educational Technology Review, 9 (2-3), 15-18.
  24. Harper, B., Squires, D. & McDougall, A. (2000). Constructivist simulations: A new design paradigm. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(2), 115-130.
  25. Imel, S. (1995). Myths and realities: Teaching adults: Is it different? Columbus, OH: ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 381 690)
  26. ISTE (1999). National educational technology standards for students—connecting curriculum and technology. Retrieved December 29, 2003, from http://www.iste.org/standards/index.html
  27. ISTE (2000). National educational technology standards for teachers. Eugene, OR: ISTE.
  28. Jarvis, P. (1987). Adult learning in the social context. London: Croom Helm.
  29. Johnson, R.T., & Johnson, D.W. (1986). Action research: Cooperative learning in the science classroom. Science and Children, 24, 31-32.
  30. Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R.T. (1991). Learning together and alone. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Publishers.Johnson, D.W.,
  31. Johnson, R.T., & Smith, K. (1991). Active learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina: Interaction.
  32. Wilson, B.G. (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill.
  33. Lave, J., & Wegner, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  34. Mason, C., Alibrandi, M., Berson, M., Dawson, K., Diem, R., Dralle, T., Hicks, D., Keiper, T., & Lee, J. (2000). Waking the sleeping giant: Social studies teacher educators collaborate to integrate technology into methods’ courses. Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference Proceedings, 2000, 1985-1989.
  35. Mason, C., Berson, M., Diem, R., Hicks, D., Lee, J., & Dralle, T. (2000). Guidelines for using technology to prepare social studies teachers. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, (1). Retrieved August 4, 2003, from http://www.citejournal.org/vol1/iss1/currentissues/socialstudies/article1.htm
  36. Mayer, R.E., Schustack, M.W., & Blanton, W.E. (1999). What do children learn from using computers in an informal, collaborative setting? Educational Technology, 29(4), 27-31.
  37. Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications (Rev. Ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
  38. Milman, N.B., & Heinecke, W.F. (2000). Innovative integration of technology in an undergraduate history course. Theory and Research in Social Education, 28(4), 546-565.
  39. Moursund, D., & Bielefeldt, T. (1999). Will new teachers be prepared to teach in a digital age? A national survey on information technology in teacher education. Research Study by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), Eugene, OR.
  40. Oshima, J., Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1996). Collaborative learning processes associated with high and low conceptual progress. Instructional Science, 24, 125-155.
  41. Putnam, R.T. & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.
  42. Resnick, L.B. (1991). Shared cognition: Thinking as social practice. In L.B. Resnick, J.M. Levine, & S.D. Teasley (Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition, (pp. 1-20). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
  43. Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S.D. (1995). Construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In C.O'Malley (Ed.), Computer-supported collaborative learning. New York: Springer-Verlag.
  44. Roschelle, J.M., Pea, R.D., Hoadley, C.M., Gordin, D.N., & Means, B.M. (2000). Changing how and what children learn in school with computer-based technologies. Children and Computer Technology, 10(2), 76-101. Retrieved October 4, 2003, from http://www.future Ofchildren.o rg
  45. Salomon, G. (1993). No distribution without individual’s cognition: A dynamic interactional view. In G. Salomon (Ed.) Distributed cognitions—Psychological and educational considerations. (pp. 111-138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  46. Salomon, G., & Perkins, D.N. (1998). Individual and social aspects of learning, In P.D. Pearson& A. Iran-Nejad (Eds.), Review of Research in Education. (23rd ed., pp. 1-24). Washington, DC: AERA.
  47. Sandholtz, J.H., Ringstaff, C., & Dwyer, D.C. (1997). Teaching with technology: Creating student-centered classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.
  48. Slavin, R.E. (1996). Cooperative learning in middle and secondary schools. Clearinghouse, 64 (4), 200-204.
  49. Teasley, S.D., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Constructing a joint problem space: The computer as a tool for sharing knowledge. In S. Lajoie, & S. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools. (pp. 229-257). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum
  50. Totten, S., Sills, T., Digby, A., & Russ, P. (1991). Cooperative learning: A guide to research. New York: Garland.
  51. U.S. Department of Education (2003). Digest of education statistics, 2002. National Center for Educational Statistics. (NCES 2003-060).
  52. Vannatta, R.A., & Beyerbach, B. (2000). Facilitating a constructivist vision of technology integration among education faculty and preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 132-147.
  53. Von Glaserfeld, E. (1996) Introduction: Aspects of constructivism. In Fosnot, C.T. Constructivism: theory, perspectives and practice. (pp. 3-7). New York: Teachers' College Press
  54. WBEC (2000). The Power of the Internet for Learning: Moving from Promise to Practice, Web-Based Education Commission. Retrieved June 12, 2003, from http://interact.hpcnet.org/webcommission/index.htm #adobe.
  55. Yildirim, S. (2000). Effects of an educational computing course on preservice and inservice teachers: A Discussion and analysis of attitudes and use. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32, 479-495.
  56. Yoder, M. (1999). The student WebQuest. Learning and Leading With Technology. 26 (7), 6-9.

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

Suggest Corrections to References