SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Angeli, C., Valanides, N. & Bonk, C. J. (2003). Communication in a web-based conferencing system: The quality of computer-mediated interactions. British Journal of Educational Technology 34(1), 3143.
  • Austin, J. L. (1962.) How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  • Authors (2006).
  • Benbunan-Fich, R. & Hiltz, S. R. (1999). Educational applications of CMCS: Solving case studies through asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 4(3). Retrieved on June 7, 2007 http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue3/benbunan-fich.html.
  • Booth, S. & Hulten, M. (2003). Opening dimensions of variation: An empirical study of learning in a Web-based discussion. Instructional Science, 31, 6586.
  • Carter, K. (1989). Using cases to frame mentor-novice conversations about teaching. Theory into Practice, 27(3), 214222.
  • Condon, S. L., & Čech, C. G. (1996). Discourse management strategies in face-to-face and computer-mediated decision making interactions. Electronic Journal of Communication, 6(3). Retrieved on June 7, 2007 http://www.cios.org/getfile/CONDON_V6N396.
  • Condon, S. L., & Čech, C. G. (2001, January). Profiling turns in interaction. Paper presented at the 34th Annual Conference of the Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Persistent Conversation Workshop and Minitrack in the Digital Documents Track), Hawaii.
  • Cox, G., Carr, T., & Hall, M. (2004). Evaluating the use of synchronous communication in two blended courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, 183193.
  • Davidson-Shivers, G., Muilenburg, L. & Tanner, E. (2001). How do students participate in synchronous and asynchronous online discussions? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(4), 351366.
  • Eggen, P. & Kauchak, D. (2004). Educational Psychology: Windows on Classrooms (6th edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
  • Fauske, J. & Wade, S. E. (2003-2004). Research to practice online: Conditions that foster democracy, community, and critical thinking in computer-mediated discussions. Journal of Research on Technology in Education 36(2), 137153.
  • Floyd, D. M. & Bodur, Y. (2005). Using case study analysis and writing to structure clinical experiences in a teacher education program. The Educational Forum 70, 4860.
  • Francis, G., & Hunston, S. (1992). Analysing everyday conversation. In M.Coultard (Ed.), Advances in spoken discourse analysis (pp. 123161). London: Routledge.
  • Gideonse, H. (1999). What is a Case? What Distinguishes Case Learning? In M. R. Sudzina (Ed.), Case Applications for Teacher Education: Cases of Teaching and Learning in the Content Areas. (pp. 18). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
  • Heckman, R. & Annabi, H. (2005). A content analytic comparison of learning processes in online and face-to-face case study discussions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2), article 7. Retrieved June 7, 2007 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue2/heckman.html
  • Henri, F., & Rigault, C. (1996). Collaborative distance education and computer conferencing. In T. T.Liao (Ed.), Advanced educational technology: Research issues and future potential (pp. 4576). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  • Herring, S. C. (1996). Two variants of an electronic message schema. In S. C.Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 81106). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  • Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In S. A.Barab, R.Kling & J. H.Gray (eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hew, K. F. & Cheung, W. S. (2003a). Evaluating the participation and quality of thinking of pre-service teachers in an asynchronous online discussion environment: Part 1. International Journal of Instructional Media 30(3), 247262.
  • Hew, K. F. & Cheung, W. S. (2003b). Evaluating the participation and quality of thinking of pre-service teachers in an asynchronous online discussion environment: Part 2. International Journal of Instructional Media 30(4), 355366.
  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2003). Analyzing collaborative knowledge construction: multiple methods for integrated understanding. Computers & Education, 41 397420.
  • Hough, B., Smithey, M. & Evertson, C. (2004). Using computer-mediated communication to create virtual communities of practice for intern teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(3), 361386.
  • Howell-Richardson, C., & Mellar, H. (1996). A methodology for the analysis of patterns of participation within computer mediated communication courses. Instructional Science, 24, 4769.
  • Im, Y., & Lee, O. (20032004). Pedagogical implications of online discussion for preservice teacher training. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(2), 155170.
  • Ingram, A. L., Hathorn, L. G., & Evans, A. (2000). Beyond chat on the internet. Computers & Education, 35, 2125.
  • Kerres, M. & De Witt, C. (2003). A didactical framework for the design of blended learning arrangements. Journal of Educational Media, 28(2-3), 101113.
  • Kruempel, K. (2000). Making the right (interactive) moves for knowledge-producing tasks in computer-mediated groups. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 43(2), 185195.
  • LeCompte, M., & Goetz, J. P. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52, 3160.
  • Levin, B., He, Y. & Robbins, H. (2004). Comparative study of synchronous and asynchronous online case discussions. In C.Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2004 (pp. 551558). Chesapeake, VA:AACE.
  • Levin, B., He. Y. & Robbins, H. (2006). Comparative analysis of preservice teachers’ reflective thinking in synchronous versus asynchronous online case discussions. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(3), 439460.
  • Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. New York: Sage.
  • Lincoln, Y. & Guba, E. G. (1986). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and Authenticity in naturalistic evaluation. In D. D.Williams (Ed.), Naturalistic Evaluation (pp.7383). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
  • Longacre, R. E. (1992). “The discourse strategy of an appeals letter.” In W. C.Mann & S. A.Thompson (eds.), Discourse description: Diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text (pp.109–30). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  • Merriam, S. B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Paulus, T. (2004). Collaboration or cooperation? Analyzing small group interactions in educational environments. In T.Roberts (Ed.) Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education. Idea Group.
  • Pena-Shaef, J., Martin, W., & Gray, G. (2001). An epistemological framework for analyzing student interactions in computer-mediated communication environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 12(1), 4168.
  • Pindiprolu, S. S., Peterson, S. M. P., Rule, S. & Lignugaris/Kraft, B. (2003). Using Web-mediated experiential case-based instruction to teach functional behavioral assessment skills. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26(1), 116.
  • Rourke, L. & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology Research & Development 52(1), 518.
  • Rourke, L. & Anderson, T. (2002). Using web-based, group communication systems to support case study learning at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 3(2). Retrieved October 8, 2007 from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/107/186.
  • Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, R. and Archer, W. (2001a). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 12, 822.
  • Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R. & Archer, W. (2001b). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 5170.
  • Schweitzer, K., Paechter, M. & Weidenmann, B. (2003). Blended learning as a strategy to improve collaborative task performance. Journal of Educational Media 23(2–3), 211224.
  • Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Shulman, L. S. (1992). Toward a pedagogy of cases. In J.Shulman (Ed.) Case methods in teacher education (pp. 132). New York: Teachers College Press.
  • Slavit, D. (2002). Expanding classroom discussion with an online medium. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 10(3), 407422.
  • Snyder, P. & McWilliam, P. J. (1999). Evaluating the efficacy of case method instruction: Findings from preservice training in family-centered care. Journal of Early Intervention, 22, 114125.
  • Stahl, G. (2006). Group cognition. Computer Support for Building Collaborative Knowledge (Acting with Technology). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Stephens, A. C., & Hartmann, C. E. (2004). A successful professional development project’s failure to promote online discussion about teaching mathematics with technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1), 5773.
  • Sudzina, M. R. (2000). Case study considerations for teaching educational psychology. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, Louisiana.
  • Sudzina, M. R. (Ed.). (1999a). Case Applications for Teacher Education: Cases of Teaching and Learning in the Content Areas. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Sudzina, M. R. (1999b). Guidelines for teaching with cases. What is a Case? In M. R.Sudzina (Ed.), Case Applications for Teacher Education: Cases of Teaching and Learning in the Content Areas. (pp. 920). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Tsai, C. & Chuang, S. (2005). The correlation between epistemological beliefs and preferences toward Internet-based learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 97100.
  • Wells, G. & Arauz, R. M. (2006). Dialogue in the classroom. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 15(3), 379423.
  • Whipp, J. L. (2003). Scaffolding critical reflection in online discussions: Helping prospective teachers think deeply about field experiences in urban schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4), 321333.
  • Wood, S. N. & Nahmias, C. K. (Winter 2005). Perceptions of classroom realities: Case pedagogy in an English education methods course. Action in Teacher Education 26(4), 7484.
  • Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing.