Cited by 79Online and Blended LearningEducational Technology and E-LearningTechnology-Enhanced Education Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exploring Two Teacher Education Online Learning Designs: A Classroom of One or Many?

Norton, Priscilla, Hathaway, Dawn·2008·Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Abstract

Online learning is rapidly becoming a permanent feature of higher education. In a preponderance of instances, online learning is designed using conventional educational practices: lecture, grades, group discussion, and the like. Concerns with traditional pedagogy instantiated by course management systems raise questions about the quality of learner’s online experiences. There is a need to reconsider the design of learning opportunities in light of emerging online delivery modes. This study compared learner perceptions of two online courses—one using the more traditional approach capitalizing on the affordances of Blackboard and one using the COPLS one-on-one model (Norton, 2003). Results revealed that both environments were perceived as providing a high quality learning experience. In addition, results point to the importance of self-regulation, the role of the instructor/facilitator/mentor, and the role of the group as factors influencing learners’ perception of the quality of their learning experience, positive aspects of their learning experience, and challenges that influenced their learning experience.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15391523.2008.10782517

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 31

  1. Allen I., 2005, Growing by degrees: Online education in the United States, 2005
  2. Bannan-Ritland B., 2003, Educational Researcher, 32, 21, 10.3102/0013189X032001021 · DOI
  3. Bereiter C., 1993, Surpassing ourselves.
  4. Berge Z. L., 1999, Educational Technology, 39, 5
  5. Blythe T., 1998, The teaching for understanding guide.
  6. Bransford J., 1990, Cognition, education, multimedia: Exploring ideas in high technology, 115
  7. Cobb P., 2001, Cognition and instruction: Twenty-five years of progress, 455
  8. Collins A., 1992, New directions in educational technology, 15, 10.1007/978-3-642-77750-9_2 · DOI · Paper page
  9. The Design-Based Research Collective., 2003, Educational Researcher, 32, 5, 10.3102/0013189X032001005 · DOI
  10. Flores J., 2006, Teaching English in the Two Year College, 33, 430, 10.58680/tetyc20065140 · DOI
  11. Hara N., 2000, Information, Communication and Society, 3, 557, 10.1080/13691180010002297 · DOI
  12. Harris J., 1998, Learning and Leading with Technology, 26, 6
  13. Herrington J., 2005, Journal of Interactive Learning Research., 16, 353
  14. Kelly A. E., 2000, Handbook of research design in mathematics and science education.
  15. Levine A., 2003, Distributed education: summary of a six-part series.
  16. Maloney W. A., 1999, Academe, 85, 18, 10.2307/40251764 · DOI
  17. Maxwell J., 2005, Qualitative research design: An interactive approach.
  18. McCombs B. L., 2005, Teacher College Record, 107, 1582, 10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.00534.x · DOI
  19. Meyer K., 2002, ASK-ERIC Higher Education Report, 29
  20. Minielli M. C., 2005, First Monday, 10, 10.5210/fm.v10i9.1279 · DOI
  21. Northrup P. T., 2002, The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3, 219
  22. Norton P., 2003, COPLS*: An alternative to traditional online course management tools
  23. Norton P., 2005, The art of mentoring.
  24. Norton P., 2000, Teaching with technology.
  25. Sonwalkar N., 2001, Syllabus, 15, 10
  26. Spangle M., 2002, Approaching value-centered education through the eyes of an electronic generation: Strategies for distance learning.
  27. Tricker T., 2001, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 26, 165, 10.1080/02602930020022002 · DOI
  28. Williams R., 2003, The non-designer’s design book (2nd
  29. Young S., 2006, The American Journal of Distance Education, 20, 65, 10.1207/s15389286ajde2002_2 · DOI
  30. Zachary L., 2000, The mentor’s guide: Facilitating effective learning relationships.
  31. Zemsky R, 2004, Thwarted Innovation: What happened to e-learning and why? A Final Report for The Weatherstation Project of The Learning Alliance at the University of Pennsylvania.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 79

Metadata

Authors
Norton, P., & Hathaway, D.
Affiliations
George Mason University (US)
Venue
Journal of Research on Technology in Education
Published
2008-06
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
475-495
ISSN
  • 1539-1523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1945-0818
OpenAlex
W1977706806
Cited by
79
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
36.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Research on Technology in Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and E-Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Technology-Enhanced Education Studies
Keywords
online learning design, teacher professional development, learner perceptions, virtual learning environments, Blackboard, student self-regulation, instructor role, online learning quality

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