[] Cart (0)
Search
Register for Newsletter
A Consortium of Institutions and Organizations Committed to Quality Online Education

Home

ALN's Relations: Current Educational Trends and Concepts and their Relation to ALN

by Sloan-C
AUTHORS:
John Sener
Northern Virginia Community College (NVCC), Extended Learning Institute (ELI)

CONTENTS:

I. Introduction

This document is a compilation of current fields, concepts, and trends in education and training, including a description of how each of these relates to asynchronous learning networks, or ALNs. Each concept, trend, or field is subjectively described in three categories:

  • Definition = a brief definition or description of the concept, or trend, etc.;
  • Relevance = an explanation of its significance, i.e., why it appears on this list; and
  • Relationship to ALN = an explanation of how the trend, or concept relates to ALN (e.g, how it is similar or different, how it fits or doesn't fit).
II. Purpose of this Compilation

ALN is the main frame of reference for those of us who are developing ALN projects as part of the ALN initiative funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. As many of us have begun to disseminate our project results at conferences and in publications, our activity has engendered interest, curiosity, and questions about ALN --What is it? Why is it called that? (How) is it any different from {x}?

Also, many ALN practitioners may be concentrating on how ALN relates or can be applied to their discipline, target learners, or other more focused frame of reference. I hope that this compilation will offer a bigger picture that can be useful in several ways:

As a useful project resource -- knowing what else is going on provides a roster of intellectual and other resources that may help your project. For instance, if your ALN project is working on an issue related to how students use groupware to work collaboratively, you may want to explore the work being done on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW).

Sharing your ALN work with other practitioners -- when talking with other people doing similar work, this list will help provide you a means to compare frames of references (i.e., to compare ALN with their work).

Recruiting new ALN practitioners -- when talking with other people who may be interested or who you're trying to interest in ALN, this list will help provide you with a means to form a common frame of reference (i.e., to compare ALN with something they already know about).

Toward developing ALN as a field of study -- one essential task in defining ALN as a field of study and a subject of scholarly activity is to describe how ALN relates to already established concepts and disciplines, what it encompasses and what falls outside its boundaries. Doing this is especially necessary for ALN since it both encompasses and cuts across a number of lines/categories (e.g., subject disciplines, target populations, teaching and delivery methodologies) that define other disciplines and concepts.

III. Topics -- Index of Included Terms IV. References
  1. Bruffee, K. (1995). Sharing Our Toys: Cooperative Learning versus Collaborative Learning. Change, Jan-Feb 1995, pp. 12-18.
  2. Klein, J. & Pridemore, D. (1994). Effects of Orienting Activities and Practice on Achievement, Continuing Motivation, and Student Behaviors in a Cooperative Learning Environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(4), 41-54.
  3. Slavin, R. (1990) Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  4. Magner, D. (1996). Fewer Professors Believe Western Culture Should Be the Cornerstone of the College Curriculum. The Chronicle of Higher Education, September 13, 1996, pp.A12-13.
  5. National Science Foundation (1995). Restructuring Engineering Education: A Focus on Change -- Report of an NSF Workshop on Engineering Education. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
  6. National Research Council (1995). Engineering Education: Designing an Adoptive System. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  7. American Society for Engineering Education (1994). ASEE Project Report: Engineering Education for a Changing World. ASEE Prism, December 1994.
  8. Agogino, A. (1995). Engineering Education Reform in the '90s. Syllabus, 8(6), 38-42.
  9. Johnson, D. W. (1981). Student-student interaction: the neglected variable in education. Educational Researcher, 5-10.
  10. Berge, Z. (1995). Facilitating Computer Conferencing: Recommendations from the Field. Educational Technology, Jan./Feb. 1995, pp. 22-30.
  11. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S., Teles, L. & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning Networks: A Field Guide to Teaching and Learning Online. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  12. Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B.B. (1995). Constructivism and Computer-Mediated Communication in Distance Education. Americal Journal of Distance Education, 9 (2)., pp. 7-26.
  13. Mayadas, F. (1996a). Posting on Sloan Foundation Grantee Discussion List, May 9, 1996.
  14. Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Societies 3 (3): 265-283.
  15. Duffy, T. & Jonassen, D., eds. (1992). Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  16. Merrill, D. (1992). Constructivism and Instructional Design. In Duffy and Jonassen, 1992, pp.99-114.
  17. Dick, W. (1995) Instructional Design and Creativity: A Response to the Critics. Educational Technology, 35 (4), July-August 1995, pp. 5-11.
  18. Willis, B., ed. (1994). Distance Education: Strategies and Tools. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology Publications. Preface, p.v.
  19. Mayadas, F. (1994). Asynchronous Learning Networks: Alfred P. Sloan Foundation's Program in Learning Outside the Classroom. URL: http://www.sloan.org/education/ALN.new.html
  20. Institute for Academic Technology (1996). Interim Report to the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation onRequirements for Using the World Wide Web for Distributed Learning. URL: http://www.iat.org/consortia/partners/sloan.html#meaning
  21. Cox, B. (1996). Evolving a Distributed Learning Community. URL: http://rembrandt.erols.com/mon/Cox/OnlineClassroom.html
  22. Jacobson, M. & Levin, J. (1993). Conceptual Frameworks for Network Learning Environments: Constructing Personal and Shared Knowledge Spaces. URL: http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/TTA/Papers/J&L-Tel-Ed93.html
  23. Cornelius, S. & Heywood, I. (1996). The `Learning Station': An interactive learning environment [for] distance learners in geographical information systems. Presented at the World Conference on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, Boston, MA, July 1996. Charlottesville, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
  24. Gery, G. (1991). Electronic performance support systems: How and why to remake the workplace through the strategic application of technology. Boston, MA: Weingarten Publications.
  25. Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt University (1992). Technology and the Design of Generative Learning Environments. In Duffy and Jonassen (1992), pp. 77-89.
  26. Jones, B.F., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J. & Rasmussen, C. (1996). Plugging In: Choosing and Using Educational Technology. North Central Regional Educational Laboratory: URL: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/edtalk/newtimes.htm
  27. Reigeluth, C. (1983). Instructional Design: What Is It and Why Is It? In Reigeluth, ed., Instructional-Design Theories and Models: An Overview of their Current Status, p.7. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  28. Lemke, R. (1995). Encouraging and Supporting Asynchronous Learning Networks. Presented at the First International Conference on Asynchronous Learning Networks, Philadelphia, October 1995.
  29. Gagne, R., ed. (1987). Instructional Technology: Foundations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  30. Reiser, R. (1987). Instructional Technology: A History. In Gagne, R., ed. (1987), p. 11.
  31. Geoghegan, W. (1994). Whatever Happened to Instructional Technology? Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Conference of the International Business Schools Computing Association, Baltimore, MD, July 17-20, 1994. URL: http://ike.engr.washington.edu/news/whitep/whg/wpi.htm
  32. Green, K. C., and Eastman, S. (1994). Campus Computing 1993: The USC National Survey of Desktop Computing in Higher Education, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
  33. Shanks, J. M. (1993). Faculty Computing in the University of California: Rationale, Design, and Summary Results for the 1992 Faculty Survey on Instructional Use of Computers. Presentation at EDUCOM '93, Cincinnati, Ohio, 19 October, 1993.
  34. Miller, R., Sayers, J., Reeve, V., & Kasten, A., eds. (1991). Multimedia and Related Technologies: A Glossary of Terms. Falls Church, VA: Monitor Information Services.
  35. Bruder, I. (1991). Guide to Multimedia: How It Changes the Way We Teach & Learn. Electronic Learning, Sept. 1991, pp. 22-26.
  36. Templin, R. (1996). From a speech given at Northern Virginia Community College, Alexandria campus (Learning Reources Services In-Service Day) 3/13?/96. URL: http://www.cit.org/people/rgtemplin.html
  37. Gross, R. (1995). Defining the Future: The New Mandate for Distance Learning in the 21st Century. Community College Journal, 66 (2), Oct/Nov. 1995, pp.28-33.
  38. Kearsley, G. (1993). Speaking Personally with Linda Harasim. The American Journal of Distance Education, 7(3), 70-73.
  39. Hiltz, S. R. (1994). The Virtual Classroom: Learning Without Limits via Computer Networks. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
  40. Mayadas, F. (1996b). Private Communication, 2/16/96.
  41. Masie, E. (1996). Learners Will Soon Assemble Custom Content `On-the-Fly'. The Lakewood Report on Technology for Learning, 2 (4), April 1996, pp. 1-2.
  42. Willis B., (1996) Strategies for Math, Science, Social Studies, and Language Arts. URL: http://www.indiana.edu/~eric_rec/bks/writlear.html
printer friendly version