The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Instructional design of scaffolded online learning modules for self-directed and inquiry-based learning environments
Abstract
Abstract Technology is ubiquitous in the modern world; to harness its educational potential in the quest to introduce environments that are flexible and differentiate for individual student learning needs, the strategic use of the complex array of tools is required. Engagement with this challenge has the potential to lead to the provision of interfaces that allow students to access these resources and become independent learners. It is therefore important to identify and evaluate the features of such interfaces to calibrate and respond to individual student needs. In this context, the quality of differentiated support for learning, referred to as scaffolding, is established as paramount to the design and structure of online environments. In this study, the instructional design referred to as predict, observe, explain and evaluate (POEE), informed by constructivist theories of learning, to implement multiple scaffolding strategies is described. The POEE scaffolding strategy was applied in the creation of two inquiry learning modules. Student engagement with these inquiry modules in a self-directed online environment was explored to identify critical elements of the scaffolding. The findings of this study, based on students' interactions and engagement with the learning modules, enabled the conceptualisation of a multimodal scaffolding strategy for self-directed inquiry. We propose that the recommendations from the implementation of these scaffolded learning modules can represent exemplars illustrative of an enriched instructional design paradigm to support students’ independent study in blended environments.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“While linguistics and teacher education are the primary application areas of SR, it is also used in other subjects, such as STEM education (Gass and Mackey, 2016;Al Mamun, Lawrie, and Wright, 2020;Schindler and Lilienthal, 2019).”
From A systematic review of Stimulated Recall (SR) in educational research from 2012 to 2022 (2024) · cites this paper as Al Mamun, Lawrie, and Wright, 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Using thematic analysis in psychology
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006) · Qualitative Research in Psychology · doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa · Cited by 194,414
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905
THE ROLE OF TUTORING IN PROBLEM SOLVING *
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x · Cited by 8,851
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 · Cited by 7,776
Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999) · The Internet and Higher Education · doi:10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6 · Cited by 6,619
The Psychology of Survey Response
Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., & Rasinski, K. (2000) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511819322 · Cited by 4,734
White, R., & Gunstone, R. (2014) · doi:10.4324/9780203761342 · Cited by 894
Van der Kleij, F. M., Feskens, R. C. W., & Eggen, T. J. H. M. (2015) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654314564881 · Cited by 714
Design for classroom orchestration
Dillenbourg, P. (2013) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.013 · Cited by 386
Bumbacher, E., Salehi, S., Wieman, C., & Blikstein, P. (2018) · Journal of Science Education and Technology · doi:10.1007/s10956-017-9719-8 · Cited by 59
Cited by
Lee, H.-Y., Chen, P.-H., Wang, W.-S., Huang, Y.-M., & Wu, T.-T. (2024) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-024-00447-4 · Cited by 273
“Such an approach is particularly effective in higher education, as confirmed by Al Mamun and Lawrie (2023) and Mamun et al. (2020), and aligns with GCLA’s problem-solving orientation.”
BackgroundLee, H.-Y., Wu, T.-T., Lin, C.-J., Wang, W.-S., & Huang, Y.-M. (2024) · Journal of Educational Computing Research · doi:10.1177/07356331231211916 · Cited by 52
A systematic review of Stimulated Recall (SR) in educational research from 2012 to 2022
Zhai, X., Chu, X., Wang, M., Tsai, C.-C., Liang, J.-C., & Spector, J. M. (2024) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-024-02987-6 · Cited by 47
Sancar-Tokmak, H., & Dogusoy, B. (2023) · Interactive Learning Environments · doi:10.1080/10494820.2020.1799025 · Cited by 17
Utilizing Social Clustering-Based Regression Model for Predicting Student’s GPA
Hassan, Y. M. I., Elkorany, A., & Wassif, K. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3172438 · Cited by 15
“As gathered from previous studies [9], [10], most of the conducted research relies heavily on being able to model and represent the student effectively.”
Result
Metadata
- Authors
- Mamun, M. A. A., Lawrie, G., & Wright, T.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-01
- Volume
- 144
- Pages
- 103695
- ISSN
- 0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2973117219
- Cited by
- 283
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 52.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.