Methodological Advances in Research on Learning and Instruction and in the Learning Sciences
Main Article Content
Abstract
(Introduction article for Special Issue in Frontline Learning Research)
Article Details
How to Cite
Fischer, F., & Järvelä, S. (2014). Methodological Advances in Research on Learning and Instruction and in the Learning Sciences. Frontline Learning Research, 2(4), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v2i4.131
Section
Articles
FLR adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs Creative Common License (BY-NC-ND). That is, Copyright for articles published in this journal is retained by the authors with, however, first publication rights granted to the journal. By virtue of their appearance in this open access journal, articles are free to use, with proper attribution, in educational and other non-commercial settings.
References
Azevedo, R. & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition – Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science, 33(5), 367–379. DOI:10.1007/s11251-005-1272-9
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178. DOI:10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). New York: Springer. DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-77750-9_2
Cress, U., Held, C., & Kimmerle, J. (2013). The collective knowledge of social tags: Direct and indirect influences on navigation, learning, and information processing. Computers & Education, 60(1), 59-73. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.06.015
Dignath, C., Büttner, G. & Langfeldt, H.-P. (2008). How can primary school students acquire self-regulated learning most efficiently? A meta-analysis on interventions that aim at fostering self-regulation. Educational Research Review, 3, 101-129. DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003
Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning. In N. Balacheff et al. (Eds). Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 3-19). Springer, The Netherlands. DOI:10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_1
Eberle, J., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2014). Legitimate Peripheral Participation in Communities of Practice: Participation Support Structures for Newcomers in Faculty Student Councils. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(2), 1-29. DOI:10.1080/10508406.2014.883978
Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79-96). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Filsecker, M., & Hickey, D. T. (2014). A multilevel analysis of the effects of external rewards on elementary students' motivation, engagement and learning in an educational game. Computers & Education, 75, 136-148. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.008
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911. DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
Hannula, M., Lepola, J. & Lehtinen, E. (2010). Spontaneous focusing on numerosity as a domain-specific predictor of arithmetical skills. Journal for Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 394-406. DOI:10.1016/j.jecp.2010.06.004
Herrenkohl, L. R. & Cornelius, L. (2013). Investigating Elementary Students' Scientific and Historical Argumentation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(3), 413-461.
DOI:10.1080/10508406.2013.799475
Hoadley, C. & Van Haneghan, J. (2011). The Learning Sciences: Where they came from and what it means for instructional designers. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (3rd ed., pp. 53-63). New York: Pearson.
Järvelä, S. & Hadwin, A. (2013). New Frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25-39. DOI:10.1080/00461520.2012.748006
Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Vogel, F., Fischer, F., & Reiss, K. (2014). Effects of collaboration scripts and heuristic worked examples on the acquisition of mathematical argumentation skills of teacher students with different levels of prior achievement. Learning and Instruction, 32, 22-36. DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.003
Malmberg, J., Järvenoja, H. & Järvelä, S. (2013). Patterns in elementary school students’ strategic actions in varying learning situations. Instructional Science, 41, 933–954. DOI:10.1007/s11251-012-9262-1
Mulder, Y. G., Lazonder, A. W., De Jong, T. (2014). Using heuristic worked examples to promote inquiry-based learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 56-64. DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.08.001
Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable-and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239-257. DOI:10.1007/s11412-009-9070-z
Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Varma, S., McCandliss, B. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (2008). Scientific and pragmatic challenges for bridging education and neuroscience. Educational Researcher, 37, 140-152. DOI:10.3102/0013189X08317687
Wieman, C. E. (2014). The similarities between research in education and research in the hard sciences. Educational Researcher, 43(1), 12-14. DOI:10.3102/0013189X13520294
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166-183. DOI:10.3102/0002831207312909
Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141-178. DOI:10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
Collins, A. (1992). Toward a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O'Shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15-22). New York: Springer. DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-77750-9_2
Cress, U., Held, C., & Kimmerle, J. (2013). The collective knowledge of social tags: Direct and indirect influences on navigation, learning, and information processing. Computers & Education, 60(1), 59-73. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.06.015
Dignath, C., Büttner, G. & Langfeldt, H.-P. (2008). How can primary school students acquire self-regulated learning most efficiently? A meta-analysis on interventions that aim at fostering self-regulation. Educational Research Review, 3, 101-129. DOI:10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003
Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., & Fischer, F. (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning. In N. Balacheff et al. (Eds). Technology-enhanced learning (pp. 3-19). Springer, The Netherlands. DOI:10.1007/978-1-4020-9827-7_1
Eberle, J., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2014). Legitimate Peripheral Participation in Communities of Practice: Participation Support Structures for Newcomers in Faculty Student Councils. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 23(2), 1-29. DOI:10.1080/10508406.2014.883978
Greeno, J. G. (2006). Learning in activity. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 79-96). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Filsecker, M., & Hickey, D. T. (2014). A multilevel analysis of the effects of external rewards on elementary students' motivation, engagement and learning in an educational game. Computers & Education, 75, 136-148. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.008
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911. DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
Hannula, M., Lepola, J. & Lehtinen, E. (2010). Spontaneous focusing on numerosity as a domain-specific predictor of arithmetical skills. Journal for Experimental Child Psychology, 107, 394-406. DOI:10.1016/j.jecp.2010.06.004
Herrenkohl, L. R. & Cornelius, L. (2013). Investigating Elementary Students' Scientific and Historical Argumentation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 22(3), 413-461.
DOI:10.1080/10508406.2013.799475
Hoadley, C. & Van Haneghan, J. (2011). The Learning Sciences: Where they came from and what it means for instructional designers. In R. A. Reiser & J. V. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (3rd ed., pp. 53-63). New York: Pearson.
Järvelä, S. & Hadwin, A. (2013). New Frontiers: Regulating learning in CSCL. Educational Psychologist, 48(1), 25-39. DOI:10.1080/00461520.2012.748006
Kollar, I., Ufer, S., Reichersdorfer, E., Vogel, F., Fischer, F., & Reiss, K. (2014). Effects of collaboration scripts and heuristic worked examples on the acquisition of mathematical argumentation skills of teacher students with different levels of prior achievement. Learning and Instruction, 32, 22-36. DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2014.01.003
Malmberg, J., Järvenoja, H. & Järvelä, S. (2013). Patterns in elementary school students’ strategic actions in varying learning situations. Instructional Science, 41, 933–954. DOI:10.1007/s11251-012-9262-1
Mulder, Y. G., Lazonder, A. W., De Jong, T. (2014). Using heuristic worked examples to promote inquiry-based learning. Learning and Instruction, 29, 56-64. DOI:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.08.001
Reimann, P. (2009). Time is precious: Variable-and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(3), 239-257. DOI:10.1007/s11412-009-9070-z
Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Varma, S., McCandliss, B. D., & Schwartz, D. L. (2008). Scientific and pragmatic challenges for bridging education and neuroscience. Educational Researcher, 37, 140-152. DOI:10.3102/0013189X08317687
Wieman, C. E. (2014). The similarities between research in education and research in the hard sciences. Educational Researcher, 43(1), 12-14. DOI:10.3102/0013189X13520294
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal, 45(1), 166-183. DOI:10.3102/0002831207312909