You are here:

Defining Project-Based Learning for the Next Generation of e-Learning Resources in Science
PROCEEDINGS

, , Texas A&M University, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in New Orleans, Louisiana, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-02-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

Defining Project-Based Learning (PBL) for the next generation of e-learning resources is needed due to the advances in publishing technologies (Stern, Aprea, & Ebner, 2003; Trumbo, 1999) and the demand for increased visual content (Slough & McTigue, 2010; Leu, 2000). Multi-touch tablets (MTT) have been reported to provide enriched interactions; new instructional approaches and models; interactive assessment and feedback (Roschell et al., 2007) which are strong characteristics of PBL. One evolving innovative science textbook that takes advantage of the MTT is E. O. Wilson’s Life on Earth: An Introduction (Wilson, Ryan, & McGill, 2012). One interesting feature of this e-textbook is the inclusion of Project-Based Learning activities as drivers for inquiry (Slough, Erdogan, Cavlazoglu, Wakefield, & Akgun, 2012). This paper discusses the development of an evolving framework using a synthesis of several well respected PBL proponents for the evaluation of PBLs in e-textbooks using the Life of Earth text as a referent.

Citation

Wilson, R. & Slough, S. (2013). Defining Project-Based Learning for the Next Generation of e-Learning Resources in Science. In R. McBride & M. Searson (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2013--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 4927-4932). New Orleans, Louisiana, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 27, 2022 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Aggie STEM. (2013). Project design. Retrieved from http://aggie-stem.tamu.edu/whitepaper1.php Anderson, S. & Slough, S.W. (2012). Digital delight or digital doldrum: A study of graphical representation in digital science textbooks. In P. Resta (Ed.), Society for technology and teacher education annual 2012 (pp.4492-4497). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
  2. Bazerman, C. (2006). Analyzing the multidimensionality of text in Education. In J.L. Green, G. Camilli and P.B. Elmore (Eds.), Handbook of complementary methods in education research (pp77-94). Mahwah, NJ:
  3. Buck Institute for Education. (2013). Project design. Retrieved from http://www.bie.org/tools/freebies/project_design_rubric Capraro, R.M., & Slough, S.W. (Eds.). (2008). Project-based learning: An integrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) approach. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
  4. Creswell, J.W. (2003) Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
  5. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education.
  6. Eckert, J. (2009). More than widgets TAP: A systematic approach to increased teaching effectiveness. Retrieved from http://www.tapsystem.org/publications/ffo_rpts_eckert.pdf.
  7. Edutopia. (2013). Project design. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/stw-project-based-learning-best-practicesguide
  8. Grant, M.M. (2002). Getting a grip on project-based learning: Theory, cases and recommendations. Meridian: A middle school computer technologies journal, 5(Winter).
  9. Hulls, C.C.W. (2005, October). Using a tablet PC for classroom instruction. Paper presented at the 35th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Indianapolis, IN.
  10. Intel. (2013). Project design. Retrieved from http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education/k-12/projectdesign/design.html.
  11. Freitas, C.A. (2007). Talked images: Examining the contextualised nature of image use. Pedagogies, 2, 151-164.
  12. Johnson, D.W. And Johnson, R.T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational researcher, 38 (5), 365-379.
  13. Krajcik, J.S., Blumenfeld, P., Marx, R.W., Bass, K.M., Fredricks, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). Middle school students' initial attempts at inquiry in project-based science classrooms. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 7(3 & 4),313-350.
  14. Kumar, L., & Eyck, R. (2008). Using assessment for instruction. Retrieved from http://www.leadered.com/pdf/Assessment%20kit%20excerpt.pdf.
  15. Leu, D.J. (2000). Literacy and technology: Deictic consequences for literacy education in an information age. In M.L. Kamil, P.B. Mosenthal, P.D. Pearson& R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research. (Vol. III, pp. 743-770). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  16. McTigue, E.M., & Slough, S.W. (2010). Student-accessible science texts: Elements of design. Reading Psychology, 31, 213-227.
  17. Mitchell, R. (2007). PC-tablets: The next dimension. Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Pen-based Learning Technologies, Washington, DC, USA, 1-4. .
  18. Mock, K. (2004). Teaching with tablet PC'S. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 20(2), 17-27.
  19. Neuendorf, K.A. (2002). The content analysis handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  20. Piaget, J. (1969). The mechanisms of perception. New York: Basic Books.
  21. Porter, A.C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.
  22. Roschelle, J., Tatar, D., Chaudbury, S.R., Dimitriadis, Y., Patton, C., & DiGiano, C. (2007). Ink, improvisation, and interactive engagement: Learning with tablets. Computer, 40(9), 42-48.
  23. Rupley, W.H., & Slough, S.W. (2010). Building prior knowledge and vocabulary in science in the intermediate grades: Creating hooks for learning. Literacy Research and Instruction, 49, 99-112.
  24. Sekerci, H. (2011). FATIH project in education. The presentation presented in 27 June 2011 at the 1. Workshop of Educational Research in Sakarya University Cultural and Conventional Center in Sakarya, TURKEY.
  25. Slough, S.W., McTigue, E.M., Kim, S., & Jennings, S. (2010). Science textbooks’ use of representation: A descriptive analysis of four sixth grade science texts. Reading Psychology, 31, 301-325.
  26. Teacher Advancement Program. (2013). Instructional rubric. Retrieved from http://cell.uindy.edu/docs/TAP/TAPInFocus.pdf Thomas, J.W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. San Rafael, CA: Autodesk Foundation.
  27. Trumbo, J. (1999). Visual literacy and science communication. Science Communication, 20(4), 409-425.
  28. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  29. Weingarten, R. (2012) Fixing the fixation on testing. Huff post education. [Weblog comment]. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/randi-weingarten/fixing-the-fixation-on-te_b_1287495.html
  30. Wilson, E.O., Ryan, M., & McGill, G. (2012) E.O. Wilson’s Life on Earth. Wilson Digital, Available from http://www.apple.com/itunes/

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

Suggest Corrections to References