1.
Introduction
Electronic texts are an essential component of any
e-Learning environment. The way that the user interface is designed to
support navigation in electronic texts is critical since it determines
the way that the texts can be traversed and it is vital that
navigation problems, such as ‘feelings of lostness’ (e.g. Conklin
1987), are avoided. In e-Learning environments, a key question is how
navigation affects learning, and one important aspect of the learning
process is that learners feel ownership for their learning (e.g.
Cunningham et al 1993).
Previous research has demonstrated that navigation
aids affect the way users interact with educational electronic texts
and this, in turn, influences the achievement of learning outcomes
(e.g. McDonald and Stevenson 1999). We extend this by hypothesising
that different navigation aids will also impact upon users’ feelings
of ownership for learning and we present two experiments designed to
investigate these effects. The first experiment examined the effects
of the level of navigational freedom offered by a navigation aid on
feelings of ownership for learning. The second experiment examined the
effects of allowing learners the opportunity to create their own
navigation aids on feelings of ownership for learning.
‘Electronic text’ is used here as a generic term to
refer to any text presented in an electronic medium. These texts may
be presented in a variety of ways including WWW and stand-alone
CD-ROMs. Examples include hypertext documents (nodes of text connected
by embedded links), text organised in menu structures, or linear text
organised as a set of sequential nodes or as a single scrollable
document. We define ‘navigation aids’ as elements of an interface that
allow the user to access and traverse electronic texts; examples
include embedded links, menus, interactive maps, and bookmarks.
1.1
What is ownership for learning?
Milner-Bolotin’s (2001) working definition of
ownership is employed in this research. In this definition, learner
ownership is broken down into three interacting components of the
learning process: finding personal value, feeling in control, and
taking responsibility (see figure 1). Finding personal value is about
understanding how the knowledge and skills developed during learning
might be useful in situations outside the original learning
environment. High feelings of control occur when the learner makes
decisions and is a proactive rather than reactive learner.
Responsibility in learning, on the other hand, refers to the learner
taking responsibility, or feeling accountable, for the process of
learning as well as the results of learning. The highest levels of
ownership occur when all three components overlap. Situations where
only one or two components overlap result in lower feelings of overall
ownership.
Figure 1:
Learner ownership as an interactional effect of feelings of personal
value, control and responsibility. Adapted from Milner-Bolotin (2001).
1.2
Why is ownership important in learning?
Learner ownership is promoted as illustrating the
student-centredness of constructivist learning (Honebein 1996) and has
been proposed to be important in terms of motivation to learn (e.g.
Biggs 1999). Gross (1997) reported that attempts to encourage
ownership in a classroom setting had positive effects on learning. By
stressing student input, students came to feel responsible for their
learning and in turn it was found that they grasped material more
firmly, exhibited higher levels of inquiry and pursued tasks
independently.
1.3
Background and experimental hypotheses
1.3.1
Learner control and navigational freedom
Supporters of constructivism propose that learners
should be given responsibility and control over their learning (Honebein
1996; Duffy and Cunningham 1996), and educationalists have argued for
some time that providing appropriate levels of learner control
benefits learning (Eveland and Dunwoody 2001). In the context of
e-Learning, learner control can be used to refer the extent to which
learners are able to make choices and decisions when they use a piece
of educational technology. It should also be noted that learner
control is distinct from feelings of control, because even if control
is offered to the learner, it is not always the case that they will
feel and recognise this control.
In terms of ownership, Milner-Bolotin (2001)
proposed that learning environments that allow students higher control
over their learning, allow them to choose topics of investigation
which are more relevant for them, and allow them to be more
responsible for their learning, provide more opportunities for
students to develop a sense of ownership. In digital technology many
authors have interpreted this learner control as control over pace and
sequencing (Dillon and Gabbard 1998; for a detailed review see
Lunts 2002). We propose that one way this control and choice is
realised in electronic texts is as the extent to which learners are
able to explore the texts in a way they see fit.
In order to investigate control and choice in
electronic texts we define ‘navigational freedom’ as the degree of
choice a user has when deciding which page to visit. This equates to
the number of outgoing links a learner has to choose between on any
one page of the texts. The type of navigation aid(s) employed
determines the level of navigational freedom offered. For example, an
A-Z index, that allows the learner to choose between every page in an
electronic text, represents a navigation aid with higher navigational
freedom than paging buttons where the learner only has the choice of
going to the next or previous page in a predefined sequence. We
hypothesise that navigation aids that offer higher navigational
freedom will lead to higher feelings of ownership for learning than
navigation aids that offer lower navigational freedom. Experiment 1
was designed to measure these predicted effects.
1.3.2
Learner control and creating navigation
aids
Giving learners the opportunity to create their own
navigation aids can be seen as another way of offering the learner
control over their learning with electronic texts. Through creating
their own navigation aid, such as a map, the learner can exercise
control when they make choices and decisions about the content,
structure and layout of the navigation aid. The learner has the
control to tailor the navigation aid to their own needs and make
decisions about how they will access materials and in what order.
Recent developments in navigation aids allow the
user to adapt the aid and use it to represent ideas in the electronic
text. For example, Nestor Navigator (e.g.
Zeiliger et al 1997;
Zeiliger et al 1999; Nestor is available for download
here) is a web browser add-on that creates a graphical trace of
visited web pages as the user navigates. This trace can be rearranged
and edited, allowing users to create their own navigable structures
such as maps (click
here for an example map on Nestor related websites), contents
lists and alphabetical indexes which they can use as navigation aids.
Due to the proposed benefits of learner control in
encouraging ownership we hypothesise that creating navigation aids
will lead to higher feelings of ownership for learning with electronic
texts, than simply using navigation aids. Experiment 2 investigates
the effects of creating navigation aids as compared to using
navigation aids in Nestor.
The next section presents the methods employed in
experiments 1 and 2.
2.
Method
2.1
Experiment 1
Experiment 1 aimed to investigate the effects of
the level of navigational freedom offered by navigation aids on
feelings of ownership for learning. Participants used either paging
buttons, hypertext, an A-Z index or a map to navigate educational
electronic texts. They were then asked to rate their feelings of
ownership for their learning with the electronic texts on a
questionnaire.
2.1.1
Participants
Twenty-eight undergraduates and postgraduates on an
introductory Human Computer Interaction (HCI) course took part in the
study. Sixteen were female and twelve male. Ages ranged from 18-39
years. All had a similar level of background knowledge of the topic
presented in the electronic text.
2.1.2
Materials
Participants were given electronic text on the
subject of usability evaluation, compiled from teaching materials. The
text consisted of twenty-three nodes and was approximately 3100 words
in length. The materials were created and accessed using the
Nestor Navigator browser.
2.1.3
Design
A between-subjects design was employed and
participants were randomly assigned to experimental conditions, giving
a total of seven participants in each condition. The independent
variable was the type of navigation aid. The four conditions and
associated levels of navigational freedom were:
§
Condition 1: Paging
buttons (lower navigational freedom).
§
Condition 2:
Hypertext (medium navigational freedom).
§
Condition 3: A-Z
index (higher navigational freedom).
§
Condition 4: Map
(higher navigational freedom).
See figures 2-5 for illustration.
Condition 1 (paging buttons) consisted of ‘Next’
and ‘Previous’ buttons that allowed the user to access pages in a
sequential order. In condition 2 (hypertext) each page consisted of
hypertext and a back button, and the pages in the text were arranged
as a network of cross-referential links. Condition 3 (A-Z index)
consisted of a left-hand frame containing an interactive alphabetical
list of page titles, and a right hand frame showing the content of
pages. Similarly, condition 4 (map) consisted of a left-hand frame
containing an interactive graphical map of page titles, and a right
hand frame showing the page content.
The A-Z and map conditions were both included in
this experiment to represent high levels of navigational freedom in
order to assess the effects of the different structures they depict.
The graphical map shows one possible conceptual structure of the text.
The index, in contrast, shows an alphabetical structure.
The
dependent variable was the level of feelings of ownership for
learning. An ownership measurement questionnaire (Milner-Bolotin
2001), designed for measuring ownership in a classroom setting, was
adapted for use in the context of educational electronic texts. The
original questionnaire was worded in terms of ownership for learning
in a group project. The process of adapting the questionnaire involved
rewording the questions in terms of issues specific to the use of
electronic texts in learning. The adapted questionnaire consisted of
sixteen questions on feelings of control for learning, feelings of
responsibility for learning and feelings of value for learning.
Questions were rated on a five-point Likert scale from strongly
disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). The results of a reliability
analysis and factor analysis of the questionnaire will be discussed
further in the results section.
 
Figure 2: Paging
buttons. Figure 3:
Hypertext.
 
Figure 4: A-Z
index. Figure
5: Map.
2.1.4
Procedure
Participants were tested individually. Initially
participants were given a pre-test questionnaire on their knowledge of
usability evaluations, followed by a ten-minute training task in using
the navigation aids with sample materials on the American Museum in
Britain. For the main task, participants used electronic texts on
usability evaluation in a realistic educational task. They were given
a setting for a usability evaluation including details of a budget,
timescales and access to users. They were then given up to forty-five
minutes to use the task materials on usability evaluation to choose a
usability evaluation technique for the given setting. After they had
finished, they were asked to complete the questionnaire regarding
their feelings of ownership for learning with the electronic texts.
2.2
Experiment 2
Experiment 2 aimed to investigate the effects of
creating navigation aids on feelings of ownership for learning. The
experiment had two parts, each carried out by different participants.
Participants in part A of the experiment used electronic texts with an
existing map or facilities to create their own map as navigation aids.
Participants in part B used electronic texts with an existing A-Z
index or the facilities to create an A-Z index as navigation aids.
They were then asked to rate their feelings of ownership for learning
on a questionnaire. Data collected from the hypertext condition in
experiment 1 was also used as a comparison condition in parts A and B
of this experiment.
2.2.1
Participants
Twenty-six undergraduates and postgraduates on an
introductory HCI course took part in parts A and B. Thirteen took part
in part A and thirteen took part in part B. Of the twenty-six,
thirteen were female and fourteen male. Ages ranged from 18-49 years.
All had a similar level of background knowledge of the topic presented
in the electronic text.
2.2.2
Materials
The same text content was used as in experiment 1.
Again the materials were developed and accessed using the
Nestor Navigator browser.
2.2.3
Design
A between-subjects design was employed for both
parts A and B of this experiment and participants were randomly
assigned to experimental conditions.
The independent variable was the type of navigation
aid. For part A the experimental conditions were:
§
Condition 1: Using a
Map (+ Hypertext)
§
Condition 2: Creating
a Map (+ Hypertext)
For part B the experimental conditions were:
§
Condition 3: Using an
A-Z (+ Hypertext)
§
Condition 4: Creating
an A-Z (+ Hypertext)
Six participants took part in conditions 2 and 3,
and seven participants took part in conditions 1 and 4.
Condition 1 (using map + hypertext) consisted of
hypertext and a back button, and a graphical map of page titles in a
left-hand frame. In condition 2 (creating map + hypertext), initially
the participants accessed pages using hypertext. When the participants
visited a page, the page title and the visited link were represented
as a graphical trace in a left hand window. The page titles were
interactive and could be used to access pages in the electronic texts.
The participants were asked to arrange the map according to their own
preferences by re-arranging the shape of the map, adding new links and
deleting links.
Condition 3 (using A-Z + hypertext) consisted of
hypertext and a back button, as well as an interactive alphabetical
index of page titles in a left-hand frame. For condition 4 (creating
A-Z + hypertext) the participants could access pages using hypertext.
When the participants visited a page the page title was represented in
a window on the left hand side of the screen. These titles were
interactive and could be used to access pages in the electronic text.
Participants were asked to arrange page titles into alphabetical order
by clicking and dragging them into position.
As with experiment 1, the creating and using A-Z
and map conditions were both included in order to assess the effects
of the different structures that they depict. The map shows one
possible conceptual structure of the text, where as the A-Z shows an
alphabetical structure.
Finally, the following condition was also added as
comparison condition in both parts A and B, since it forms a baseline
for the conditions in both parts A and B:
§
Condition 5:
Hypertext
The data collected from the seven hypertext
participants in experiment 1 was used here as condition 5. The use of
this data as a comparison condition is valid since the procedures and
measures used in experiment 2 are the same as experiment 1. As such,
data from the hypertext condition can be compared against conditions 1
and 2, as well as against conditions 3 and 4.
The dependent variable was the level of feelings of
ownership for learning as measured by the ownership questionnaire
detailed in section 2.1.3.
2.2.4
Procedure
The procedure was the same as that used in
experiment 1, except that the participants in the creating navigation
aids conditions were asked to create the respective navigation aid as
they used the electronic texts.
3.
Results
3.1
Reliability analysis and confirmatory factor analysis
In order to assess the quality of our ownership
questionnaire, we performed an analysis of its internal reliability.
This process led to the removal of three questions due to low-item
total correlations, indicating that these questions were measuring a
different construct to the rest of the questionnaire. The final
questionnaire, used in the following analyses had thirteen questions,
and was found to have a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.8, indicating good
internal reliability.
In addition we performed a confirmatory factor
analysis to identify factors in the final questionnaire. Three factors
were revealed relating to: control over use of the electronic texts;
responsibility for learning with the electronic texts; and value for
learning with the electronic texts. See box 1 for the questions that
fell under each factor, and the questions that were removed.
Box 1: Questions that
fell under each factor and removed questions.
3.2
Experiment 1
This section reports on results from participants
in the paging buttons, hypertext, A-Z and map conditions in experiment
1.
Total ownership scores were calculated by reversing
the ratings for negatively worded questions and adding together
ratings for all questions on the questionnaire. All thirteen questions
were weighted equally so the total ownership scores were rated out of
65. The questionnaire responses were then examined in terms of average
ratings for each factor.
Average ratings for the control factor were
calculated by pooling all the participants’ ratings for the control
questions and calculating an average for each condition. The same
method was used to obtain average ratings for the responsibility and
value factors.
Due to the non-parametric nature of the data,
Kruskal-Wallis one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) by ranks were
employed to assess differences between conditions, and where
appropriate non-parametric tests for post-hoc pair-wise comparisons
according to the Siegal and Castellan (1988) method were also used
(see table 1). Note that graphs are only given where there are
significant differences between conditions.
Figure 6: Average
ratings on the control factor for conditions in experiment 1
Table 1: Results of
analyses performed on questionnaire ratings for the paging buttons,
hypertext, A-Z and map conditions in experiment 1
|
Analysis |
Average for each condition |
Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA |
Significant post-hoc tests (p<0.05) |
|
Total ownership scores
(out of 65) |
paging buttons – 49.71;
hypertext – 49.14;
A-Z index – 52.86;
map – 50.57. |
Non-significant. |
N/A. |
|
Control factor
(out of 5) |
paging buttons – 3.34;
hypertext – 3.54;
A-Z index – 4.40;
map – 4.17.
(see figure 6). |
Significant (H(3,140)=20.82,p<0.000) |
paging buttons vs A-Z;
paging buttons vs map;
hypertext vs A-Z;
hypertext vs map. |
|
Responsibility factor
(out of 5) |
paging buttons – 3.91;
hypertext – 3.97;
A-Z index – 3.57;
map – 3.54. |
Non-significant. |
N/A. |
|
Value factor
(out of 5) |
paging buttons – 3.91;
hypertext – 3.97;
A-Z index – 3.57;
map – 3.54. |
Non-significant. |
N/A. |
3.3
Experiment 2
Firstly we present the results of the analysis of
data collected from the using map and creating map conditions in part
A of experiment 2, compared with data from the hypertext condition in
experiment 1. We then present the results of analyses conducted on the
data from the using A-Z and creating A-Z conditions in part B of
experiment 2, again as compared with the data from the hypertext
condition in experiment 1. As discussed earlier the comparisons with
the hypertext condition are valid since the procedures and measures of
experiments 1 and 2 are the same.
Total ownership scores out of 65 were calculated in
the same way as in experiment 1. The questionnaire responses were also
examined in terms of ratings for each factor, and averages were again
calculated in the same was as in experiment 1. Kruskal-Wallis ANOVAs
were then employed to assess the effects of the different navigation
aids, and where appropriate non-parametric tests for post-hoc
pair-wise comparisons according to the Siegal and Castellan (1988)
method were also used. The results for parts A and B of experiment 2
are presented in tables 2 and 3 respectively. Graphs are only shown
for significant results.
Table 2: Results of
analyses performed on questionnaire ratings for the using map and
creating map conditions in part A of experiment 2, including
comparisons against the hypertext condition from experiment 1.
|
Analysis |
Average for each condition |
Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA |
Significant post-hoc tests (p<0.05) |
|
Total ownership scores
(out of 65) |
using map – 59.29;
creating map – 46.33;
hypertext – 49.14.
(see figure 7). |
Significant (H(2,20)=8.226,p<0.050). |
using map vs. creating map; using map vs.
hypertext. |
|
Control factor
(out of 5) |
using map – 4.69;
creating map – 3.70;
hypertext – 3.54.
(see figure 8) |
Significant (H(2,100)=26.19,p<0.000) |
using map vs. creating map; using map vs.
hypertext. |
|
Responsibility factor
(out of 5) |
using map – 4.51;
creating map – 3.63;
hypertext – 3.97.
(see figure 8) |
Significant
(H(2,100)=16.70,p<0.000) |
using map vs. creating map; using map vs.
hypertext. |
|
Value factor
(out of 5) |
using map – 4.43;
creating map – 3.22;
hypertext – 3.86.
(see figure 8) |
Significant
(H(2,60)=9.64,p<0.01) |
using map vs. creating map. |
Table 3: Results of
analyses performed on questionnaire ratings for the using A-Z and
creating A-Z conditions in part B of experiment 2, including
comparisons against the hypertext condition from experiment 1.
|
Analysis |
Average for each condition |
Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA |
Significant post-hoc tests (p<0.05) |
|
Total ownership scores
(out of 65) |
using A-Z – 52.00;
creating A-Z – 49.43;
hypertext – 49.14. |
Non-significant. |
N/A. |
|
Control factor
(out of 5) |
using A-Z – 3.57;
creating A-Z – 3.97;
hypertext – 3.54. |
Non-significant. |
N/A. |
|
Responsibility factor
(out of 5) |
using A-Z – 4.20;
creating A-Z – 3.94;
hypertext – 3.97. |
Non-significant. |
N/A. |
|
Value factor
(out of 5) |
using A-Z – 4.39;
creating A-Z – 3.90;
hypertext – 3.86. |
Non-significant. |
N/A. |
Figure 7: Average
total ownership scores for analyses of part A in experiment 2.
Figure 8: Average
ratings on the control, responsibility and value factors for analyses
of part A in experiment 2.
4.
Discussion
The two experiments presented here aimed to assess
the effects of navigational freedom and creating navigation aids on
ownership for learning with electronic texts. Overall the results of
these experiments indicate that navigation aids influence ownership for
learning.
4.1
Summary and explanation for findings
4.1.1
Experiment 1
Experiment 1 examined the effects of the level of
navigational freedom offered by a navigation aid, on feelings of
ownership for learning. It was found that navigational freedom had
significant impact upon feelings of control for learning with electronic
texts, but did not affect overall ownership, or the component feelings
of responsibility and value as measured by the questionnaire. In
particular A-Zs and maps led to significantly higher feelings of control
than paging buttons and hypertext. This suggests that the higher level
of navigational freedom offered by the A-Z and map encourages higher
feelings of control in the learner than the lower levels of navigational
freedom offered by the paging buttons and hypertext. The learner control
offered through higher navigational freedom has a positive influence on
feelings of control, but findings indicate that it does not affect high
feelings of responsibility or value in learning with electronic texts.
4.1.2
Experiment 2
Experiment 2 investigated the effects of creating
navigation aids on ownership for learning with electronic texts. For
part A, analyses showed that there were significant differences for
overall feelings of ownership between the using map, creating map and
hypertext conditions, but these results were not as predicted. It was
found that participants who used maps reported significantly higher
feelings of ownership than those that created their own maps.
Furthermore, participants who used maps also reported significantly
higher feelings of ownership on the questionnaire than participants that
used hypertext. However, for part B there were no significant
differences in the level of ownership reported by participants in the
using A-Z, creating A-Z and hypertext conditions.
The results of experiment 2 were also examined in
more detail by looking at participants’ ratings on each factor of the
questionnaire. The analyses of part A revealed that participants who
used maps reported significantly higher feelings of control,
responsibility and value for their learning than participants who
created their own maps. In addition, the participants who used maps also
reported significantly higher feelings of control and responsibility
than participants who used hypertext. For the analyses of part B, there
were no significant differences in the levels of control, responsibility
and value reported by participants who used A-Zs, created A-Zs or used
hypertext.
Our findings indicate that creating maps leads to
lower feelings of overall ownership, and each of its component factors
of control, responsibility and value, than using maps. However, the fact
that no significant differences were found between using A-Zs, creating
A-Zs and using plain hypertext for overall ownership, or the control,
responsibility and value factors, suggests that it is not simply the act
of creating a navigation aid that negatively leads to lower feelings of
ownership. The effect is specific to differences between the using and
creating map conditions in our experiment.
A potential explanation for this is that the activity
of creating a map, in itself, requires certain skills that the user may
not have unless they have used mind mapping software previously. In this
experiment, although the participants were given functional training in
map creation, they were not given any additional guidance about the best
techniques to apply when creating maps. This was intentionally left open
in this experiment so that participants could make their own decisions
about creating the map.
4.2
Scope of findings
The type of electronic texts and the type of tasks
employed in our experiments define the scope of our findings. The
electronic texts used in these experiments were on the subject of
usability evaluation, a topic that is central to HCI education, and has
little pre-defined structure. As such, the findings presented here are
of particular relevance to the use of educational electronic texts in
topics with similar inexact structures such as those in Art and History.
However, findings on ownership may differ for educational electronic
texts with natural pre-defined structures, such as biological
classification systems.
Our findings are also particularly relevant in
short-term educational tasks, such as those used in a single tutorial
session. However, findings on ownership may differ in long-term
educational tasks or projects. This may be particularly relevant to the
creation of navigation aids. Navigation aids that are created and
refined over time may have different effects on ownership to the
findings reported here.
The findings presented here focus on the effects of
navigation aids on feelings of ownership for learning. We have not
addressed other aspects of the learning process such as knowledge
development.
4.3
Implications of findings
There are three major implications of our findings.
Firstly, navigation aids affect feelings of ownership for learning with
electronic texts. This indicates that designers of these texts should
consider the employment of navigation aids carefully if they want to
promote feelings of ownership.
Secondly, higher navigational freedom leads to higher
feelings of control, but not higher overall ownership or the component
feelings of responsibility and value. Consequently, we suggest that the
designer of educational electronic texts should not simply look at
navigational freedom to encourage feelings of ownership for learning.
They should also address issues related to encouraging the user’s
feelings of responsibility and value in their learning. We can speculate
that aspects of the learning environment that might influence these
feelings include the relevancy of the task to the learner and the
learner’s involvement in decision making about the task.
The third implication of our experiments is that
creating navigation aids has little or negative effects on feelings of
ownership for learning, but that using maps to navigate is particularly
beneficial to ownership. As such, if they want to promote ownership
designers of educational electronic texts should be careful in the way
that they employ tools that allow users to create their own navigation
aids.
4.4
Conclusions and future research
Overall, our findings suggest that designers of
educational electronic texts should not assume that by increasing
navigational freedom, or offering learners the ability to create their
own navigation aids, they will increase the learner’s feelings of
ownership. Results presented here indicate that the effects of these
types of navigation aids are not clear-cut in terms of ownership, and
further investigation is needed.
Three key areas for future research have been
identified. Firstly, the results presented here only examine the
consequences of navigational freedom, and using and creating navigation
aids in terms of feelings of ownership for learning. In order to get a
complete picture of the effects of these activities further
investigation will look at how they influence users’ understandings of
the text content as well as how efficient they are to use. Secondly,
since it was thought that potential difficulties could have arisen with
the creation of maps due to learners’ inexperience in mind mapping
skills, another area for future investigation is to examine the effects
of additional training in mind-mapping skills and specific training in
the use of creating-map software, on feelings of ownership for learning.
Finally, this research should be extended by looking at the effects of
navigation aids on ownership for learning in the context of different
types of electronic texts and educational tasks.
References
-
Biggs, J.
(1999) Teaching for Quality Learning at University, Open
University Press, Buckingham, UK, pp61.
-
Conklin, J. (1987). “Hypertext
an Introduction and Survey”, IEEE Computer, Vol.20, No.9,
pp17-41.
-
Cunningham,
D. J., Duffy, T. M., and Knuth, R. A. (1993) “The Textbook of the
Future” in Hypertext: A Psychological Perspective, C. McNight,
A. Dillon and J. Richardson (Eds), Ellis Horwood, pp19-49.
-
Dillon, A.
and Gabbard, R. (1998) “Hypermedia as an Educational Technology: A
Review of Quantitative Research Literature on Learner Comprehension,
Control and Style”, Review of Educational Research, Vol.68,
No.3, pp322-349.
-
Duffy, T.
and Cunningham, D. J. (1996) “Constructivism: Implications for the
Design and Delivery of Instruction”, in D. Jonassen (Ed), Macmillan
Library Reference USA, NY, pp170-198.
-
Eveland, W.
P. and Dunwoody, S. (2001). “User Control and Structural Isomorphism
or Disorientation and Cognitive Load?” Communication Research,
Vol. 28, No. 1, pp48-78.
-
Gross, P. A.
(1997) Joint Curriculum Design: Facilitating Learner Ownership and
Active Participation in Secondary Classrooms, Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, NJ.
-
Honebein, P.
C. (1996) “Seven Goals for the Design of Constructivist Learning
Environments”, in Constructivist Learning Environments: Case
Studies in Instructional Design, B. G. Wilson (Ed), Educational
Technology Publications, NJ, pp11-24.
-
Lunts, E.
(2002) “What Does the Literature Say about the Effectiveness of
Learner Control in Computer Assisted Instruction?” Electronic
Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, Vol.1,
No.2, pp59-75. Available online:
http://ejite.isu.edu/Volume1No2/Lunts.pdf
-
McDonald, S.
and Stevenson, R. (1999) “Spatial Versus Conceptual Maps as Learning
Tools in Hypertext”, Journal of Educational Multimedia and
Hypermedia, Vol.8, No.1, pp43-64.
-
Milner-Bolotin,
M. (2001) The Effects of Topic Choice in Project-Based Instruction
on Undergraduate Physical Science Students’ Interest, Ownership, and
Motivation, PhD. Thesis, University of Texas at Austin.
-
Siegel, S.
and Castellan, N.J. (1988) Nonparametric Statistics for the
Behavioural Sciences, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill, NY.
-
Zeiliger,
R., Reggers, T., Baldewyns, L., Jans, V.
(1997). “Facilitating Web Navigation: Integrated Tools for Active and
Cooperative Learners”, in proceedings of the 5th
International Conference on Computers in Education, ICCE ’97,
Malaysia. Available online:
http://www.gate.cnrs.fr/~zeiliger/artWN97.doc
-
Zeiliger, R., Belisle,
C., Cerratto, T., (1999), Implementing a Constructivist Approach to
Web Navigation Support, in proceedings of
ED-MEDIA'99
Conference,
AACE, Seattle,Wa., USA. Available online :
http://www.gate.cnrs.fr/~zeiliger/artem99.htm
|
