I think this article is worth a look even though I have a number of issues with it. It is a meta-survey of journal articles intended to account for various 'antecedents' and their impact on the effectiveness of technology-supported learning. I find that the set of journals considered is quite small and unrepresentative (it does not include, eg. IRRODL). Many of the references are quite old. It overgeneralizes in bad ways (eg., "Educational technology scholars... take a technology-centered approach in which they suggest pushing technological innovations into the classroom while expecting learners to adapt"). And its depiction of learning outcomes is inconsistent; sometimes 'cognitive processing' leads to 'actual learning', sometimes it doesn't. Maybe if the background were modernized and were the sources broader the diagrams might be more useful (though still subject to the criticisms of 'effect size' research).
Today: 0 Total: 18 [Direct link] [Share]
