F a i r D e a l i n g ( S h o r t E x c e r p t )

Journal: Educational Technology

Article: Designing Opportunities for Transformation with Emerging Technologies

Author: Veletsianos, George

Publisher: Educational Technology Publications Publication Date: 2011 Pages: 41-46

Course: ETEC_V 510 64A 2025W1 Design of Technology-Supported Learning Environments

Course Code: 510 64A Term: 2025 Winter Term 1

Department: ETEC_V

Copyright Statement of Responsibility

This copy was made pursuant to the Fair Dealing Requirements for UBC Faculty and Staff, which may be found at
http://copyright.ubc.ca/requirements/fair-dealing/. The copy may only be used for the purpose of research, private
study, criticism, review, news reporting, education, satire or parody. If the copy is used for the purpose of review,
criticism or news reporting, the source and the name of the author must be mentioned. The use of this copy for any
other purpose may require the permission of the copyright owner.

For more information on UBC\'s Copyright Policies, please visit UBC Copyright

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

 Herder and Herder.
Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st
century: A framework for research and practice. London:
RoutledgeFalmer.
Gleick, J. (1987). Chaos: Making a new science. New York:
Designing
Viking.
Horton, W. (2006). E-learning by design. San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Opportunities for
Juarrero, A. (1999). Dynamics in action: Intentional behavior as
a complex system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Knowles, M. S., Holton III, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2005).
Transformation w ith
The adult learner: The definitive classic in adult education
and human resource development (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: Emerging Technologies
Elsevier.
Ko, S., & Rossen, S. (2010). Teaching online: A practical guide
Ord ed.). New York: Routledge.
McCombs, B. L., & Vakili, D. (2005). A learner-centered
framework for e-learning. Teachers College Record, 107(Q),
George Veletsianos
1582-1600.
McDaniel, R. R., Jr. (2007). Management strategies for complex In this article, the author argues that technology use in
adaptive systems: Sensemaking, learning, and improvisation. education has focused on combating instructional
Performance Improvement Quarterly, 20(2) 21-42. problems and inefficiencies. While technology use for
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions o f adult such purposes is viable and important, the author
learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. proposes that practitioners and researchers in this field
Morowitz, H. J. (2002). The emergence o f everything: How the utilize emerging technologies as a means to provide
world became complex. New York: Oxford University Press. opportunities for personally relevant and meaningful
Ralloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning transformation. The author discusses strategies for
together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. providing such opportunities and presents examples of
Ralloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning potentially transformative learning activities and
communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. environments. The article concludes with caveats
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. regarding the pursuit of transformation in technology-
Rivera, B., & Rowland, G. (2008). Powerful e-learning: A enhanced learning environments.
preliminary study of learner experiences, lournal o f Online
Learning and Teaching, 4(1).
Rowland, G. (2007). Performance improvement assuming
Introduction
complexity. In G. Rowland (Ed.), Special issue on implica­ Online and blended education research and practice
tions of complexity. Performance Improvement Quarterly, historically have focused on cognitive concerns, such
20(2), 117-136. as how to best structure learning materials for effective
Rowland, G., & DiVasto, T. (2001). Instructional design and and efficient retention. This approach to online/
powerful learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly, blended learning focuses on using technology to
14(2), 7-36. combat inefficiencies within a mode of education that
Rowland, G., Hetherington, J., & Raasch, J. (2002). The is best described as delivery-based. In this article, I
individualized nature of powerful learning experience. propose a broader vision of technology-enhanced
Educational Technology, 42(2), 26-30.
learning: blended and online education that provides
Rowland, G., Lederhouse, A., & Satterfield, D. (2004). Powerful
learning experiences within coherent learner groups.
experiences and opportunities that can be more fu lfill­
Performance Improvement Quarterly, 17(2), 46-64. ing, meaningful, inspiring, and aesthetically appealing
Rowland, G., & Wilson, G. F. (1994). Liminal states in design­ than those afforded by traditional instructional designs.
ing. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 7(3), 30-45. To do so, I present a rationale for this argument, strate­
Stacey, R. D. (1996). Complexity and creativity in organizations. gies for providing such opportunities, and examples of
San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. transformative opportunities and experiences in online
Stacey, R. D. (2001). Complex responsive processes in organiza­ and blended education.
tions: Learning and knowledge creation. London: Routledge. The use of media and technology in instructional
Strogatz, S. (2003). Sync: The emerging science of spontaneous
order. New York: Hyperion.
Waldrop, M. M. (1992). Complexity: The emerging science at
the edge o f order and chaos. New York: Simon & Schuster. George Veletsianos is Assistant Professor of Instructional
Wilson, B. G., Switzer, S. H., Parrish, P., & the IDEAL Research Technology at the University of Texas, Austin. His research
Lab. (2007). Transformative learning experiences: How do we focuses on the use of emerging technologies in the design,
get students deeply engaged for lasting change? In M. development, and evaluation of open-ended online and
Simonson (Ed.), Proceedings o f selected research and devel­ hybrid learning environments. His focus areas are online learn­
opment presentations. Bloomington, IN: Association for ing and scholarship, adventure learning, pedagogical agents,
Educational Communications and Technology. and the learner experience (e-mail at veletsianos^gmail.com).

EDUCATIONAL TECH NOLOG Y/March-April 2011 41

design dates back to the conception of the field (Reiser, faculty who conduct technology-enhanced research
2001a, 2001b). More recently, the use of the Internet (e.g., virtual focus groups).
and participatory technologies for education have W hile educational technology and instructional
received increasing attention (Creenhow, Robelia, & design have traditionally focused on the use of tech­
Hughes, 2009), with both K-12 and higher education nology as a tool in instruction (e.g., to afford visualiza­
institutions seeking to expand their online course tion and to enable linking of Web-based content),
offerings (Allen & Seaman, 2010; Setzer & Lewis, recent literature on emerging technologies highlights
2005). Attempts at integrating technology within the negotiated and symbiotic relationship between
education, however, have often focused on enhancing pedagogy and technology, noting that technology
the efficiency and effectiveness of the status quo, sculpts educational practice and educational practice
replacing traditional instructional approaches with ones molds technology use/implementation (Veletsianos,
that are technologically reinforced, yet qualitatively 2010b; Whitworth & Benson, 2010). At the core of
similar (Cuban, 1988; Hughes, 2005; Wilson, Parrish, recent theoretical and technological advances in online
& Veletsianos, 2008). learning is the notion of utilizing technology as an
Transformative learning experiences are rarely sought impetus for designing novel learner experiences and
in instructional designs (Spence, 2001), and the use of opportunities for engagement with online communities.
technology to enable transformative learning is even For instance, Couros (2010) describes how he designed
more infrequent (Blin & Munro, 2008). This phen­ a course that enabled his students to learn by interact­
omenon has been observed despite the fact that ing with professional educators that were part of the
researchers and practitioners in our field have called online communities to which he belonged.
for greater emphasis on powerful and transformative
learning outcomes (e.g., Rowland & DiVasto, 2001; Designing Opportunities for Transformation
Wilson et ak, 2007). The challenge set forth in this in Online Learning Contexts
article, then, is to veer away from using technology to As discussed above, researchers in our field are
replace traditional teaching and learning processes, envisioning new roles for instructional designers and
and to move towards technology use to provide the for the use and implementation of emerging technolo­
opportunities for personally relevant and meaningful gy. In the next paragraphs, I discuss approaches to aid
transformation. in the transition towards transformative blended and
Research continues to show that access to technolo­ online education. These approaches are informed by
gy alone has limited impact on learning outcomes and social constructivist theory (Vygotsky, 1978), and aim
instructional methods (Bednarz & van der Schee, 2006; to foster experiences and opportunities that can be
Cuban, 2001; Schrum ef a/., 2007) and is often used more fulfilling, meaningful, inspiring, and aesthetically
to support passive, teacher-centered, and didactic appealing than those afforded by traditional instruc­
instruction (Herrington et a/., 2009). Over the last sev­ tional designs.
eral years, however, our field has seen calls for technol­
ogy use in education that (a) broadens its foundations, Design Opportunities that Allow
and (b) meets higher-level objectives and outcomes. For Engagement Beyond Course Activities
instance, authors in this issue discuss learning that Contextualized and situated learning activities are
impacts learners' identities and sense of being in the valuable to learning (Lave, 1996; Lave & Wenger,
world; Hilton eta/. (2010) discuss the provision of edu­ 1991). This has led to calls for authentic or real-world
cation to learners not formally registered in a course; learning where class activities resemble activities that
Dunlap and Lowenthal (in press) discuss the use of Web learners may face in their life outside of the classroom.
2.0 technologies to support self-directed lifelong learn­ While authentic learning activities serve to bridge this
ing; and Rutherford (2010) discusses user-driven social gap, learning is often seen as a single and sporadic
media platforms as locales for informal professional classroom activity as opposed to an endeavor that is
development. Within these developments, the role of ongoing, lifelong, and independent of educational
the instructional designer is also changing: McDonald institutions and age (Field, 2006).
(2009), Hokanson & M iller (2009), and Rieber in Recognizing the fact that learning is a lifelong
Hirumi et a/. (2010), for example, envision aesthetic process that occurs naturally outside of the classroom,
and artistic roles for instructional designers by explor­ designers are advised to design opportunities for activ­
ing fields such as storytelling and craftsmanship. ities that allow learners to engage with course-related
Additionally, Peacock et ak (2009) predict learning topics outside of the classroom. Such activities should
technologists'* role to expand to include support for occur in open-ended learning environments that allow
for learner flexibility, self-direction, and student-
• Learning Technologists is the term traditionally used in the U K to centered control of learning (Land & Hannafin, 1996)
describe instructional designers. to accommodate learner interests. For instance, intro­

42 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY/March-April 2011

ducing learners to communities of practice should be extended to include added elements of interaction,
an integral part of higher education curricula. such as conversations with cooperative learning
Communities of practice are defined as "groups of experts. For example: The founders of cooperative
people who share a concern or a passion for something learning theory could be invited to comment on
they do and learn how to do it better as they interact student reflections; or teachers who have been practic­
regularly" (Wenger, 1998). By introducing learners to ing cooperative learning in their classrooms and have
such communities and inviting learners to participate been recognized for their endeavors could be asked to
and engage with others who are interested and vested virtually visit the classroom to answer student questions
in similar endeavors, learning moves outside of the and help the learners contextualize their reflections.
classroom and into the realm of day-to-day life. Another example of a learning activity that may
In introductory instructional design courses, for leave a lasting impression relates to Adventure Learning
example, students can be introduced to (and scaffolded (Doering, 2006; Veletsianos & Kleanthous, 2009).
into) online communities, such as the Instructional Adventure Learning is an approach to education that
Technology Forum (http://it.coe.uga.edu/itforum /). involves learners in exploring real-world issues within
Learners can access these communities while enrolled collaborative and inquiry-based learning environments.
in the course, but more importantly, they can be given The GoNorth! Adventure learning projects engage
the opportunity to become part of the community, students in investigating environmental problems while
to become contributing and real members, and to they follow a team of explorers that dogsled through
continue in this fashion indefinitely. circumpolar regions of the world. One of the activities
Notably, increasing numbers of educators use Web undertaken by a group of these students was the
2.0 tools to provide opportunities for community construction of dog sleds for the purpose of hosting an
engagement (e.g., Webb, 2009). The conversations that "Arctic Day" to raise funds for environmental steward­
occur on Web logs (blogs), Twitter, and other social ship. While fundraising by itself may be a memorable
networking sites are relevant and immediate, and by activity for K-12 students, the act of fundraising while
introducing students to the tools and the community constructing a dog sled to teach others about the
that is using the tools to engage in meaningful conver­ impact of the changing climate becomes an activity
sations, educators can provide opportunities for trans­ that students w ill remember over time.
formation that exist outside of the classroom context,
outside of regular teaching hours, and outside of Design for Intrigue, Risk-taking, and Challenge
educators' immediate control. Opportunities for transformation can also be
The last point (transformation being outside of provided by activities that are intriguing and challeng­
educators' immediate control) is important for two ing to learners. While intrigue and risk-taking are not
reasons. First, it is important for learners to understand, usually features associated with conventional learning
and instructors to acknowledge, that knowledge is design, researchers have recently turned their attention
distributed and that the instructor is not the sole source to these in the context of educational video games and
of knowledge on a topic. Second, while the instructor
virtual worlds. For instance, video game players are
can provide opportunities for engagement and trans­ asked to engage in quests in unfamiliar environments
formation, such outcomes cannot be forced or (e.g., alien lands) or explore settings that are atypical of
achieved unless learners exploit such opportunities. I their day-to-day life (Mezirow, 1978). Yellowlees and
return to this important point in the concluding section Cook (2006), for example, recreated a mental health
of the article. treatment ward in Second Life, and gave their students
a taste of what it means to experience schizophrenia in
Design for Lasting Impression the real world. As students' virtual characters walked
Instructional design is often concerned with defined the virtual hallways, they were overcome by hallucina­
outcomes that are functional but short-term. Imagine, tions, including "the floor disappearing from underfoot,
for example, a course on cooperative learning theory writing on posters that morphs into derogatory words, a
(Johnson & Johnson, 1989). A functional but short-term pulsating gun that suddenly appears on a table, and
outcome may be to ask learners to post a critique of menacing voices that laugh." Such activities are
cooperative learning on a personal blog. This activity challenging because they are unfamiliar, difficult to
allows learners to contemplate and reflect on coopera­ come to terms with, and involve learners taking an
tive learning practice, serving the major goals of a active role in the experience.
traditional technology-enhanced curriculum. The Importantly, intrigue is sustained by allowing
extent to which this activity w ill leave a lasting impres­ learners to participate in stories and narratives that are
sion on learners, however, is debatable. What is the of immediate relevance to their learning (Veletsianos &
value of a learning activity if it's not memorable? A Doering, 2010). In the context of the GoNorth!
lasting impression may be more likely if the activity is projects, learners enjoyed the unfolding and intriguing

EDUCATIONAL TECH NOLOG Y/M ardi-A pnl 2011 43

narrative of a team of explorers traversing the Arctic, interactions with transformative content and activities.
with its unexpected outcomes and imaginative story­ We should aspire for learning that changes the ways a
telling. In addition, the story and experience were learner acts in the world. For instance, we should
participatory. That is, learners took an active role in aspire for our students to find their school experiences
contributing to the story by raising money, discussing engaging enough such that they talk to their friends/
the issues raised in the story with their family, and family about what they are learning and attempt to
asking questions of experts. implement what they have learned in their day-to-day
Veletsianos (2010a) further demonstrated the idea of lives. Other indicators of such "transformative"
stories sustaining interest and intrigue in a study of education may be student discussions of their desire to
higher education students who participated in an make a difference in the world, improve their skills, or
Adventure Learning project designed to explore open­ become leaders in their professions.
ness in education. In this study, the unfolding narrative While creative pedagogies of fun and engagement
involved students in watching a keynote video, posing can be time-consuming, their outcomes may be worth
questions, critiquing answers they received, filming the extra time. Some examples might be virtual
video vignettes, and engaging in a debate related to the competitions and debates across universities, develop­
efficacy of open learning online. ing technology-enhanced and location-based learning
In collaboration with special education faculty, we activities using smartphones (e.g., Squire, in press), or
designed another example of a simple activity that involving the local community in learning activities
could be intriguing and invite risk-taking and chal­ (see Design for Reflection below).
lenge: In K-12 classrooms throughout the United For example, the author leads the design of an
States, parents and teachers convene to develop adventure learning project (http://yoteach.us) imple­
Individualized Education Programs (IEP) for children mented in a sociology course that aims to enable
with unique educational needs. Challenges arise when learners to explore the many roles that teachers play in
parents and professionals do not agree with each other the classroom while following the updates of a team of
on the extent of support children need. Preservice urban explorers traveling through the city of Austin,
teachers studying special education are rarely able to Texas. The explorers share teacher stories told to them
practice collaboration skills and how to solve commu­ by Austin residents and lead students in examining
nication difficulties between parents and themselves. teacher roles via an online learning environment which
To combat this issue and embed aspects of intrigue and includes: trail reports that present the issues, audio
risk-taking, parents could be asked to contribute video- updates sharing the team's experiences, and video
recorded challenges they have had in partnering with interviews. Students then ask questions, comment on
schools to meet their child's educational needs. findings, and discuss pertinent issues with experts. The
Students can then be asked to identify the problem and project culminates in students conducting their own
devise a solution to improve the parent-school relation­ multi-modal investigations of sociological topics in
ship. their own communities and sharing their own stories
Those solutions can then be shared with parents and within the online learning environment.
other professionals who can videoconference with the
class to discuss the effectiveness of the proposed solu­
Design for Reflection
tions. Requiring learners to devise solutions to real
Reflective practice (Schon, 1983, 1987) is an
problems and present their solutions to interested
important aspect of lifelong learning because it allows
parties invites them to take risks, and to challenge
practitioners to think critically about their activities
themselves to devise solutions good enough to address
(e.g., curricular decisions) and examine the reasons,
competing requirements (e.g., school resources vs.
rationale, and outcomes surrounding such activities.
parent demands).
Applied to learners and transformation, Mezirow
(1978) posits that taking the time to reflect on one's
Design for Engagement learning in relation to one's experiences is important.
According to Wilson, Parrish, and Veletsianos Reflecting on learning experiences, as opposed to
(2008), instructional designers have mostly focused on being a passive recipient of information, allows for
the design of efficient and effective products while meaningful and personalized learning (Schon, 1987),
ignoring deep learning engagement. Fun, excitement, and this point is well illustrated in the article by
creativity, and aesthetic aspects of instruction, though Calandra and Puvirajah (this issue), who discuss how
recognized as being facets of good instruction the video-enhanced reflective process has "produced
(Kirschner & Cerjets, 2006), are largely lacking in lucid, holistic insight into participants' thinking about
educational technology implementations (ibid.). By their teaching [practice]" with the result being "partici­
designing creative activities that invite engagement, pants [who] have shown shifts in perspectives about
fun, and excitement, designers can enable sustained themselves and their teaching."

44 EDUCATIONAL TECH NOLOG Y/March-April 2011

 The Vital Signs project (http://www.vitalsignsme. because related learning outcomes are invited (as
org/) is an example of a learning experience that is opposed to constructed/designed), transformational
designed for reflection. In this project, students learn learning experiences may not be replicable or even
science by participating in a real-life research project predictable. Opportunities for transformation may be
focused on locating and documenting Maine's native acted upon with powerful results, or they may be acted
and invasive species. The nature of the project is such upon without resulting in any inspiring outcomes. For
that reflection about the local community and its example, reflection may enable learners to gain
species is built into the learning experience. By valuable information about themselves and to act upon
documenting and reporting local species, learners their newfound knowledge; or, reflection may not lead
reflect on and form connections to their local commu­ to any new and powerful understanding of the self. The
nity and its habitat and develop their sense of place in extent to which transformative outcomes can be
relation to their surroundings. Importantly, this project realized depends on numerous factors, including
also subscribes to ideas discussed above relating to individual learners, the scaffolds presented to them,
real-world engagement. and the design of the opportunities for transformation.
Online learning endeavors are most frequently
Transformative Online and guided by arguments of efficiency, reduced costs,
Blended Learning and Its Caveats expanded course offerings, and reaching more (and
In this article, I propose that we employ technology different kinds of) learners. Yet, technological innova­
as a means to provide opportunities for personally tions allow us to do much more. In this article, I have
relevant and meaningful transformation. Even though argued that we should strive to provide opportunities
formal education is grounded on the attainment of for fulfillment and personal transformation, and I have
explicit goals, we are at a unique position to target presented strategies and examples for providing such
specified outcomes while also providing opportunities opportunities for online and blended education. Future
for transformation. Nevertheless, various caveats need investigations of the topic need to present evidence of
to be acknowledged in relation to the pursuit of how online learning approaches can foster transforma­
transformative online/blended learning. tive outcomes and opportunities, while at the same
First, transformative learning experiences cannot be time delineating a more formal description of an online
"imposed" on learners. Wilson and Parrish {this issue) pedagogy of transformation. O
make a similar argument when they claim that "deeper
forms of learning can't just be made to happen; they are References
invited, and encouraged, and facilitated. Experi­
Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on demand: Online
ence, after all is largely a subjective thing— it's how
education in the United States, 2009. Needham, MA:
real people encounter their worlds, not how they Sloan Center for Online Education; http://www.sloan-
should respond or what the materials are meant to do c.org/publications/survey/pdf/leamingondemand.pdf.
to them." This article is grounded on a similar premise, Bednarz, S. W., & van der Schee, J. (2006). Europe and the
as technology has been described as an agent of United States: The implementation of geographic informa­
change, within a paradigm shift, as a way to provide tion systems in secondary education in two contexts.
opportunities for transformation while sculpting Technology, Pedagogy, and Education, 15(2), 191-205.
pedagogical practice. Blin, F., & Munro, M. (2008). Why hasn't technology
Second, since it is not possible to construct transfor­ disrupted academics' teaching practices? Understanding
resistance to change through the lens of activity theory.
mative experiences but to provide opportunities for
Computers & Education, 50(2), 475-490.
transformation, these learning experiences are bound to
Couros, A. (2010). Developing personal learning networks
encompass unknown outcomes. In other words, the for open and social learning. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.),
outcomes associated with these opportunities may or Emerging technologies in distance education (pp. 109-128).
may not be transformational. Consequently, the out­ Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press; h ttp ://b it.
comes of opportunities for transformation do not lend ly/9Vuanu .
themselves well to being evaluated using pre-defined Cuban, L. (1988). Constancy and change in schools (1880s
objectives. An added complexity relates to the to the present). In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Contributing to educa­
definition of the term transformation as a personally tional change: Perspectives on research and practice (pp.
fulfilling and meaningful outcome. If transformation is 85-105). Berkeley: McCutchan.
personalized, it is difficult to assess it based on pre- Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the
classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
established guidelines. Indeed, individualized assess­
Doering, A. (2006). Adventure learning: Transformative hybrid
ment may be the only meaningful approach available online education. Distance Education, 27(2), 197-215.
to evaluate transformative learning. Dunlap, J. C., & Lowenthal, P. R. (in press). Learning, unlearn­
Finally, due to instructional designers' inability to ing, and relearning: Using Web 2.0 technologies to support
pinpoint clear-cut transformational outcomes, and the development of lifelong learning skills. In G. D.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY/March-April 2011 45

 Magoulas (Ed.)/ E-infrastructures and technologies for life­ http://ineducation.ca/article/facebook-source-inform al-
long learning: Next generation environments. Hershey, PA: teacher-professional-developmcnt.
IGI Global. Schrum, L., Thompson, A., Maddux, C., Sprague, D., Bull,
Field, ). (2006) Lifelong learning and the new educational G., & Bell, L. (2007). Editorial: Research on the effectiveness
order. London: Trentham. of technology in schools: The roles of pedagogy and
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. (2009). Learning, content. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher
teaching, and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and Education lOnline serial], 7(1); http://www.citejournal.
classroom research: What path should we take now? org/vol7/iss 1/editorial/article 1. cfm .
Educational Researcher, 35(4), 233-245. Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner New York:
Herrington, J., Herrington, A., Mantei, J., Olney, I., & Ferry, Basic Books.
B. (2009). New technologies, new pedagogies: Mobile Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San
learning in higher education. University of Wollongong; Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
http://ro.uow.edu.au/newtech/. Setzer, J. C., & Lewis, L. (2005). Distance education courses
H ilto n ,). L., Graham, C., Rich, P., & Wiley, D. (2010). Using for public elementary and secondary school students:
online technologies to extend a classroom to learners at a 2002-2003 (NCES 2005-010). Washington, DC: U. S.
distance. Distance Education, 3 Z(1), 77-92. Department of Education, National Center for Education
Hirumi, A., Appelman, B., Rieber, L., & Van Eck, R. (2010). Statistics.
Preparing instructional designers for game-based learning: Spence, L. (2001). The case against teaching. Change, 11-19.
Part 2. TechTrends, 54(4), 19-27. Squire, K. (in press). From information to experience: Place-
Hokanson, B., & Miller, C. (2009). Role-based design: A con­ based augmented reality games as a model for learning in a
temporary framework for innovation and creativity in globally networked society. Teachers College Record;
instructional design. Educational Technology, 49(2), 21-28. http://W ebsite.education.wisc.edu/kdsquire/tenure-hles/
Hughes, J. E. (2005). The role of teacher knowledge and learn­ 01-TCR-squire-edits.pdf.
ing experiences in forming technology-integrated pedagogy. Veletsianos, G. (2010a). A small-scale adventure learning
lournal o f Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2), 277- activity and its implications for higher education practice
302. and research, in Education, 160); http://bil.ly/8YVvEn .
Johnson D „ & Johnson, R. (1989). Cooperation and competi­ Veletsianos, G. (2010b). A definition of emerging technologies
tion: Theory and research. Edina, MN: Interaction Book for education. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.), Emerging technologies
Company. in distance education (pp, 3-22). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca
Kirschner, P., & Gerjets, P. (2006). Instructional design for University Press; http://btt.ly/cPIPqd.
effective and enjoyable computer-supported learning. Veletsianos, G., & Doering, A. (2010). Long-term student
Computers in Human Behavior, 22(1) 1-8. experiences in a hybrid, open-ended, and problem based
Land, S., & Hannafin, M. (1996). A conceptual framework for Adventure Learning program. Australasian lournal o f
the development of theories-in-action with open-ended Educational Technology, 26(2), 280-296; http://w w w .
learning environments. Educational Technology Research ascilite.org.au/aiet/ajet26/velctsianos.html.
and Development, 44(3), 37-53. Veletsianos, G., & Kleanthous, I. (2009). A review of
Lave, J. (1996). Teaching, as learning, in practice. Mind, Adventure Learning. The International Review o f Research
Culture, and Activity, 3(3), 149-164. in Open and Distance Learning, 10(6), 84-105.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: Development o f higher
peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press. University Press.
McDonald, J. (2009). Imaginative instruction: What master Webb, E. (2009). Engaging students with engaging tools.
storytellers can teach instructional designers. Educational EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 32(4), ]-7 .
Media International, 46(2), 111-122. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities o f practice: Learning, mean­
Mezirow, J. (1978). Perspective transformation. Adult ing, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Education Quarterly, 28(2), 100-110. Whitworth, A., & Benson, A. (2010). Learning, design, and
Peacock, S., Robertson, A., Williams, S., & Clausen, M. G. emergence: Two case studies of Moodle in distance
(2009). The role of learning technologists in supporting e- education. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.), Emerging technologies
research. Alt-J, Research in Learning Technology, 77(2), in distance education (pp. 193-211). Edmonton, AB:
115-129. Athabasca University Press.
Reiser, R. A. (2001a). A history of instructional design and Wilson, B., Parrish, P., & Veletsianos, G. (2008). Raising the bar
technology: Part I: A history of instructional media. Educa­ for instructional outcomes: Towards transformative learning
tional Technology Research and Development, 49(]), 53-64 experiences. Educational Technology, 48(3), 39-44.
Reiser, R. A. (2001b). A history of instructional design and Wilson, B., Switzer, S., Parrish, P., & the IDEAL Research Lab.
technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. (2007). Transformative learning experiences: How do we get
Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(2), students deeply engaged for lasting change? In M. Simonson
57-67. (Ed.), Proceedings o f selected research and development
Rowland, G., & DiVasto, T. (2001). Instructional design and presentations. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educational
powerful learning. Performance Improvement Quarterly, Communications and Technology.
14(2), 7-36. Yellowlees, P. M., & Cook, J. N. (2006). Education about
Rutherford, C. (2010). Facebook as a source of informal hallucinations using an Internet virtual reality system: A
teacher professional development. In Education, 16(1); qualitative survey. Academic Psychiatry, 30(6), 534-539.

46 EDUCATIONAL TECH NOLOG Y/March-April 2011