연구동향 분석
박사

웹 기반 문제해결학습에서 스캐폴딩 유형과 메타인지 수준이 실재감, 문제해결수행 및 성취도에 미치는 영향

김주연 김주연 2015년

논문상세정보
    • 저자 김주연 김주연
    • 기타서명 Effects of scaffolding types and levels of metacognition on presence, problem solving performance and achievement in web-based problem solving learning
    • 형태사항 삽화: xvi, 167 p.
    • 일반주기 지도교수: 임규연, 참고문헌: p. 100-117
    • 학위논문사항 2015. 8. 졸업, 이화여자대학교 대학원:, 학위논문(박사)-, 교육공학과,
    • DDC 300
    • 발행지 서울 :
    • 언어 kor
    • 출판년 2015
    • 발행사항 이화여자대학교 대학원,
    유사주제 논문( 0)
인용/피인용

' 웹 기반 문제해결학습에서 스캐폴딩 유형과 메타인지 수준이 실재감, 문제해결수행 및 성취도에 미치는 영향' 의 참고문헌

  • 효과적인 웹기반수업을 위한 실용적인 교수중점 설계전략
    최욱 교육공학연구, 15(3), 261-282 [1999]
  • 효과적인 비계설정을 위한 수업설계모형
  • 학업상황의 정서조절이 학업성취도에 미치는 영향: 정서와 학습전략을 매개로. 미 간행 박사학위논문
    김은진 서울: 경희대학교 [2013]
  • 학습자의 메타인지 수준에 따른 문제중심학습의 효과
    최희정 아시아교육연구, 5(2), 1-24 [2004]
  • 하이퍼텍스트학습 상황에서 메타인지, 인지오류, 인지오류 감지 및하이퍼텍스트 구조가 저작체제 학습에 미치는 효과
    김회수 교육공학연구 11(1),123-160 [1995]
  • 하이퍼텍스트 학습 환경에서 scaffolding 교수 전략의 학습 효과.미간행 박사학위논문
    백영실 서울: 중앙대학교 [2000]
  • 하이퍼미디어 보조 학습에서 스캐폴딩 유형과 작동기억이 정신모형 형성에 미치는 영향
    진화봉 교육정보미디어연구, 12(3), 117-147 [2006]
  • 타당도와 신뢰도
    성태제 서울: 양서원 [1995]
  • 초등학교 아동의 메타인지 수준과 수학적 문제해결력, 추론 능력간의 관계
    이영주 한길준 교과교육연구, 4, 185-201 [2000]
  • 초기 사회과에서의 문제해결학습의 수용과 그 한계
    박남수 사회과교육연구, 17(2), 65-76 [2010]
  • 창의적 비판적 사고력과 교과 지식의 융합을 위한 교수·학습 모형으로서의 문제중심학습(PBL)고찰
    조연순 초등교육연구, 14(3), 295-316 [2001]
  • 창의적 문제해결을 위한 웹 기반 교수-학습 모형과 학습 환경 설계: 수학교과에서의 예시를 중심으로
    구양미 김영수. 노선숙 조성민 교과교육학연구, 10(1), 209-234 [2006]
  • 좋은 수업설계와 실제
    정석기 서울:원미사 [2008]
  • 인터넷 교육과 도구적 소프트웨어
    한승록 한국교육정보미디어학회 2000년도 추계학술대회 자료집. 191-196 [2000]
  • 인지적 도제 방법을 적용한 웹 기반 문제해결학습 환경 설계 및 구현
    이철희 조미헌 컴퓨터교육학회 논문지, 8(5), 1-11 [2005]
  • 이러닝 환경에서 e-튜터의 학습지원이 교수실재감과 학습실재감의 하위변인에 미치는 구조적 영향력
    강명희 김정화 ( Jeong Hwa Kim ) 교육정보미디어연구, 16(3),407-432 [2010]
  • 웹기반 학습환경에서 협력적 성찰이 문제해결 수행 및 과정에 미치는 영향
    김동식 이승희 교육공학연구, 19(1), 131-159 [2003]
  • 웹기반 프로젝트중심학습 환경에서 과제해결능력을 촉진시키는 스캐폴딩 설계모형 개발 연구
    이명규 장선영 교육공학연구, 28(2), 371-408 [2012]
  • 웹기반 프로젝트 학습에서 학습자의 내외향성과 교사의 스캐폴딩 유형에 따른 학업성취도와 학습참여도
    사공미경 ( Mi Gyung Sagong ) 최명숙 ( Myoung Sook Choi ) 교육정보미디어연구, 15(1), 215-234 [2009]
  • 웹기반 문제중심학습의 개발 사례: 초등,고등, 대학교의 경우
    강인애 김종화 이민수 이인수 교육공학연구, 15(1), 301-330 [1999]
  • 웹기반 문제중심학습(PBL)에서 메타인지와 스캐폴딩 유형이 성취에미치는 효과. 미간행 박사학위논문
    전희정 전라남도: 전남대학교 [2007]
  • 웹기반 문제중심학습 수업 사례연구: 성찰촉진방안 설계와 효과를 중심으로
    정현미 교육정보미디어연구, 13(1), 161-196 [2007]
  • 웹 자원기반 학습에서 교수자가 제공하는 메타인지 촉진전략의 효과 비교
    강명희 김민경 기업교육연구, 5(1), 5-28 [2003]
  • 웹 기반 문제해결학습 환경에서 소집단 협동학습전략이 온라인 토론의 참여도와 문제해결에 미치는 효과. 미간행 박사학위논문
    임정훈 서울: 서울대학교 [1998]
  • 웹 기반 가상교육에서 협력적 상호작용 촉진을 위한 학습자 지원 전략 개발
    권성호 교육공학연구, 17(3), 29-51 [2001]
  • 웹 기반 PBL 환경에서 토론지원도구의 개발 및 적용
    권성호 박수현 교육정보미디어연구, 10(4), 227-255 [2004]
  • 우리시대의 구성주의
    강인애 서울: 문음사 [2003]
  • 왜 구성주의인가
    강인애 서울: 문음사 [1997]
  • 온라인 학습 환경에서 문제해결 단계별 스캐폴딩 유형의 효과 분석
    장선영 교육공학연구, 30(2), 193-220 [2014]
  • 예비교사들의 학습스타일과 협력적 개념도 작성이 문제해결에 미치는 영향
    정선영 교육공학연구, 23(4), 55-77 [2007]
  • 시각적 공간적 작동기억 수준과 스캐폴딩 유형이 수학 문장제 성취에 미치는 영향
    김회수 안수경 교육공학연구, 29(1), 161-183 [2013]
  • 스포츠중계모형을 활용한 문제해결학습에서 스캐폴딩 유형이 문제해결력과 성취도에 미치는 영향
    김주연 이태구 임규연 한국교육공학회 춘계 학술대회 발표 논문집, 서울: 건국대학교 [2014]
  • 스캐폴딩 유형에 따른 스토리텔링 활용 웹기반 협력학습의 교육적 효과
    박지연 이예경 교육공학연구, 30(4), 805-837 [2014]
  • 사례 분석을 통한 PBL의 문제설계 원리에 대한 연구
    최정임 교육공학연구,20(1), 37-61 [2004]
  • 사고와 문제 해결 심리학
    김영채 서울:박영사 [1995]
  • 비구조적 문제해결을 위한 웹 기반 문제중심 학습환경이 개념이해및 문제해결에 미치는 영향. 미간행 박사학위논문
    신상철 서울: 중앙대학교 [2003]
  • 블렌디드 학습 환경에서 성찰적 사고 수준과 스캐폴딩 우형이 인지적 실재감 및 학업성취에 미치는 효과. 미간행 박사학위논문
    조성문 서울: 중앙대학교 [2012]
  • 문제해결과 웹기반 교육. 나일주 편저, 웹기반 교육 (pp. 351-370)
    최정임 서울: 교육과학사 [1999]
  • 문제유형의 익숙성 및 문제 관련성 인식이 비구조 문제해결 과정과 성취도에 미치는 효과
    김선연 교육공학연구, 24(2), 105-128 [2008]
  • 메타인지와 하이퍼텍스트 구조가 저작체제 학습에 미치는 효과
    金會洙 교육학연구, 32(5), 207-234 [1994]
  • 멀티미디어 기반 문제중심학습 환경에서 스캐폴딩 설계원리 탐색
    송해덕(Hae-Deok Song) 신서경(Suh-Kyung Shin) 열린교육연구, 18(3), 149-164 [2010]
  • 또래간 스캐폴딩 프로그램이 아동의 학업 자아개념과 문제해결력에 미치는 효과
    최수진 초등교육연구, 12(1), 175-194 [2005]
  • 대학수업에서의 문제중심학습 적용 사례연구:성찰일기를 통한 효과성 분석을 중심으로
    최정임 교육공학연구, 23(2), 35-65 [2007]
  • 다변량분석
    김석우 서울:교육과학사 [2005]
  • 기업교육에서 스캐폴딩 활용의 문제해결단계별 효과 분석
    도상오 오상철 기업교육연구, 14(1), 65-90 [2012]
  • 기업 이러닝에서 실재감과 학습효과의 구조적 관계 규명. 미간행박사학위논문
    김지심 서울: 이화여자대학교 [2009]
  • 교육실습 수업시연 수업연구를 위한 교실 수업 전략
    조용개 서울:학지사 [2011]
  • 교육사회학
    김신일 서울: 교육과학사 [2003]
  • 교수요인과 학업성취
    신세호 서울:교육출판사 [1983]
  • 교수-학습의 이론과 실제 5판. (이경화, 최병연, 김정희 공역)
    Gredler, M. E. 서울:아카데미프레스(원서 출판 2005) [2006]
  • 교과를 통한 창의적 문제해결력 교육방법 모색: 문제중심학습
    조연순 한국교육, 28(2), 205-227 [2001]
  • Winnips, J. C. (2001). Scaffolding by design as a model for www-based learnersupport. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Twence.
  • Vygotsky, L. S..(1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Voss, J. F., & Post, T. A. (1988). On the solving of ill-structured problems. In M.T. H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp.261-285). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Varnado, T. E. (2005). The effects of a technological problem solving activity onFIRSTTM LEGOTM league participants’ problem solving style andperformance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of VirginiaPolytechnic Institute and State.
  • Van Merrienboer, J. J. G., & Krammer, H. (1987). Instructional strategies andtactics for the design of introductory computer programming courses inhigh school. Instructional Science, 16(3), 251-285.
  • Travers, J. F., Elliott, S. N., & Kratochwill, T. R. (1993). Educational psychology:effective teaching, effective learning. Madison, Wis.: Brown &Benchmark.
  • Taraban, R., Rynearson, K., & Kerr, M. S. (2000). Metacognition and freshmanacademic performance. Journal of Developmental Education, 24(1), 12-18.
  • Tabak, I. (2004). Synergy: A complement to emerging patterns of distributedscaffolding. The journal of learning sciences, 13(3), 305-335.
  • Swanson, H. L. (1990). Influence of metacognitive knowledge and aptitude onproblem solving. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(2),306-314.
  • Slife, B. D., Weiss, J., & Bell, T. (1985). Separability of metacognition andcognition: Problem solving in learning disabled and regular students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77(4), 437-445.
  • Sinnott, J. D. (1989). A model for solution of ill-structured problem: Implicationsfor everyday and abstract problem solving. In J. D. Sinnott (Ed.),Everyday problem solving: Theory and application (pp. 72-99). New York:Praeger.
  • Simons, K. D., & Klein, J. D. (2007). The impact of scaffolding and studentachievement levels in a problem-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 35(1), 41-72.
  • Shin, N., Jonassen, D. H., & McGee, S. (2003). Predictors of well-structured andill-structured problem solving in an astronomy simulation. Journal of115Research in Science Teaching, 40(1), 6-33.
  • Sharma, P., & Hannafin, M. J. (2007). Scaffolding in technology-enhancedlearning environments. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(1), 27-46.
  • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1985). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL:Academic Press.
  • Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history andsocial issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. EducationalTechnology Research and Development, 50(3), 77-96.
  • Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem-based learning: An instructionalmodel and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5),31-38.
  • Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. The Internet andHigher Education, 10(1), 77-88.
  • Roehler, L. R., & Cantlon, D. J. (1997). Scaffolding: A powerful tool in socialconstructivist classroom. In K. Hogan & M. Pressley (Eds.), Scaffoldingstudent learning: Instructional approaches and issues (pp. 6-42).Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
  • Resource-based learning. In M. Spector, M. D.Merrill, J. van Merrienboer, & M. P. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook ofresearch on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp.525-536). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. http://www.aect.org/edtech/edition3/ER5849x_C040.fm.pdf
    Hannafin, M. J. Hill, J. 2015년 6월 7일검색 [2007]
  • Relan, A., & Gillani, B. B. (1997). Web based instruction and the traditionalclassroom: Similarities and differences. In B. H. Khan (Ed.), Web-basedinstruction (pp. 41-46). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational technologypublication.
  • Raes, A., Schellens, T., De Wever, B., & Vanderhoven, E. (2012). Scaffoldinginformation problem solving in web-based collaborative inquiry learning.Computers & Education, 59, 82-94.
  • Quintana, C., Zhang, M., & Krajcik, J. (2005). A framework for supporting114metacognitive aspects of online inquiry through software-basedscaffolding. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 235-244.
  • Quintana, C., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2001). Exploring a description andmethodology for learner-centered design. In W. Heineke & L. Blasi(Eds.), Methods of evaluating educational technology. Greenwich, CT:Information Age Publishing.
  • Presence in immersive virtual environment. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=380793
    Slater, M. Usoh, M. 2013년 10월 25일 검색 [1993]
  • Pedersen, S., & Liu, M. (2002). The effects of modeling expert cognitivestrategies during problem-based learning. Journal of EducationalComputing Research, 26(4), 353-380.
  • Pawan, F., Paulus, T. M., Yalcin, S., & Chang, C. F. (2003). Online learning:Patterns of engagement and interaction among in-service teachers.Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 119-140.
  • Office of Technology Assessment , 2월). Testing in Americanschools: Asking the right questions. (OTA-SET-519). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ota/Ota_1/DATA/1992/9236.PDF
    U.S. Congress 2015년 6월 5일 검색 [1992]
  • Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving. N.Y. Prentice-Hall,Inc.
  • Moore, D., Zabrucky, K., & Commander, N. E. (1997). Metacomprehension andcomprehension performance in younger and older adults. EducationalGerontology, 23(5), 467-475.
  • Metcalf, S. J., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2000). Model-It: A design retrospective.In M. J. Jacobson & R. B. Kozma (Eds.), Innovations in science andmathematics education: Advanced design for technologies of learning (pp.77-115). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum Assoc.
  • Metacognitivedevelopment in professional educators. The Researcher, 21(1), 32-40. http://www.nrmera.org/PDF/Researcher/Researcherv21n1Stewart.pdf
    Cooper, S. S. Moulding, L. R. Stewart, P. W. 2015년5월 2일 검색 [2007]
  • McKenzie, W., & Murphy, D. (2000). “I hope this goes somewhere”: Evaluation113of an on-line discussion group. Australian Journal of EducationalTechnology, 16(3), 239-257.
  • Mayer, R. E., & Wittrock, M. C. (2006). Problem solving. In P. A. Alexander & P.H. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp.287-304). New York: Macmillan.
  • Mayer, R. E. (1998). Cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational aspects ofproblem solving. Instructional Science, 26(1-2), 49-63.
  • Mayer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of timeand higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,7(3), 55-65.
  • Lin, X., Hmelo, C. E., & Kinzer, C. K. (1999). Designing technology to supportreflection. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(3),43-62.
  • Lin, X. (2001). Designig metacognitive activites. Educational Technology Researchand Development, 49(2), 22-40.
  • Lee, J. S. (1978). The effects of process behaviors on problem-solvingperformance in various tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Theuniversity of Chicago, Illinois.
  • Landa, A., & Roselli, T. (1991). Effects of the hypertextual approach versus thestructured approach on students’ achievement. Journal of ComputerBased Instruction, 18, 45-50.
  • Land, S. M., & Zembal-Saul, C. (2003). Scaffolding reflection and articulation ofscientific explanations in a data-rich, project-based learning environment:An investigation of progress portfolio. Educational Technology Researchand Development, 51(4), 65-84.
  • Lajoie, S. P., Lavigne, N. C., Guerrera, C., & Munsie, S. D. (2001). Constructingknowledge in the context of BioWorld. Instructional Science, 29(2),155-185.
  • Kuo, F. R., Hwang, G. J., & Lee, C. C. (2012). A hybrid approach to promptingstudents’ web-based solving competence and learning attitude.Computers & Education, 58(1), 351-364.
  • Kuo, F. R., Chen, N. S., & Hwang, G. J. (2014). A creative thinking approach toenhancing the web-based problem solving performance of universitystudents. Computers & Education, 72, 220-230.
  • Knowledge management usinga corporation intranet.http://www.mitre.org/sites/default/files/pdf/derrington_kmgmt.pdf
    Brooks, J. Derrington, D. C. Linton, F. 2013년 6월 7일 검색 [2000]
  • King, A. (1992). Facilitating elaborative learning through guided student-generatedquestioning. Educational Psychologist, 27(1), 111-126.
  • Kim, M. C., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Scaffolding problem solving intechnology-enhanced learning environments(TELEs): Bridging researchand theory with practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403-417.
  • Kapa, E. (2001). A metacognitive support during the process of problem solving acomputerized environment. Educational Studies in Mathematics,47(3),317-336.
  • Kao, M, T., Lehman, J. D., & Cennamo, K. S. Scaffolding in HypermediaAssisted Instruction: An example of integration. ED 397 803. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED397803.pdf, 2015년
    5월 22일 검색 [1996]
  • Kanuka, H., Liam, R., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructionalmethods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of EducationalTechnology, 38(2), 260-271.
  • Kanuka, H., & Garrison, D. R. (2004). Cognitive presence in online learning.Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(2), 30-49.
  • Jonassen, D. H., Howland, J., Moore, J., & Marra, R. M. (2003). Learning to solveproblems with technology: A constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle111River, New Jersey.
  • Jonassen, D. H. (2004). Learning to solve problems: An instructional design guide.San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
  • Jonassen, D. H. (2003). Using cognitive tools to represent problems. Journal ofResearch on Technology in Education, 35(3), 362-381.
  • Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.),Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory(2nd ed., pp. 215-239). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured andill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. EducationalTechnology Research and Development, 45(1), 65-94.
  • Jonassen, D. H. (1996). Computers in the classroom. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Educational technology publication.
  • Jackson, S. L., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (1998). The design of guidedlearner-adaptable scaffolding in interactive learning environments. Inpreceeding of CHI 1998, 18-23.
  • Hill, J., & Hannafin, M. J. (2001). Teaching and learning in digital environments:The resurgence of resource-based learning. Educational TechnologyResearch and Development, 49(3), 37-52.
  • Hill, C. C. (1979). Problem solving, Learning and teaching: An annotatedbibliography. NY: Nichols Publishing Company.
  • Hedberg, J., Brown, C., & Arrighi, M. (1997). Interactive multimedia andweb-based instruction: Similarities and differences. In B. H. Khan (Ed.),110Web-based instruction (pp. 47-58). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educationaltechnology publication.
  • Hannafin, M. J., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations,methods, and models. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories andmodels: A new paradigm of instructional theory (2nd ed., pp. 115-140). Mahwah,NJ: Erlbaum.
  • Hadwin, A. F., & Winne, P. H. (2001). CoNoteS2: A software tool for promotingself-regulation. Educational Research and Evaluation, 7(2-3), 313-334.
  • Guzdial, M., & Kehoe, C. (1998). Apprenticeship-based learning environments: Aprincipled approach to providing software-realized scaffolding throughhypermedia. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 9(3-4), 289-336.
  • Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. (1997). Social presence as a predictor ofsatisfaction within a computer mediated conferencing environment.American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8-26.
  • Grabe, M., & Grabe, C. (2000). Integrating the internet for meaningful learning.Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
  • Gibson, J. J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston, HoughtonMifflin.
  • Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2004). A conceptual framework for scaffoldingill-structured problem-solving process using question prompts and peerinteractions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(2),1095-22.
  • Ge, X., & Land, S. M. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving process inill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions.Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 21-38.
  • Ge, X. (2001). Scaffolding students’problem-solving processes on anill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions.Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Pennsylvania State University.
  • Gasevi?, D., Adesope, O., Joksimovi?, S., & Kovanovi?, V. (2015).Externally-facilitated regulation scaffolding and role assignment todevelop cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. Internetand Higher Education, 24, 53-65.
  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2003). A theory of critical inquiryin online distance education. In M. G. Moore & W. G. Anderson (Eds.),Handbook of distance education (pp. 113-127). Mahwah, New Jersey:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitivepresence, and computer conferencing in distance education. TheAmerican Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23.
  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in atext-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. TheInternet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
  • Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence inonline learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of DistanceEducation, 19(3), 133-148.
  • Garrison, D. R., & Arbaugh. J. B. (2007). Researching the community of inquiry108framework: Review, issues, and future direction. Internet and highereducation, 10(3), 157-172.
  • Gagne, R. M. (1977). The conditions of learning (3rd ed.). NY: Holt, Rinehart andWinston.
  • Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new areaof cognitive?developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10),906-911.
  • Fantuzzo, J. W., King, J. A., & Heller, L. R. (1992). Effects of reciprocal peertutoring on mathematics and school adjustment: A component analysis.Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 331-339.
  • Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D., & Pea, R. (1999). Addressing the challenges ofinquiry-based learning through technology and curriculum design. TheJournal of the Learning Sciences, 8(3-4), 391-450.
  • Duffield, J. A. (1991). Designing computer software for problem solvinginstruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(1),50-62.
  • Duch, B. J., Groh, S. E., & Allen, D. E. (2001). The power of problem-basedlearning. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing.
  • Distributed presence and community in cyberspace.Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the21st Century, 3(2), 12-32. http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~ipct-j/1995/n2/cutler.txt
    Cutler, R. 2014년 2월 3일 검색 [1995]
  • Defining virtual reality: Dimensions determining telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73-93. http://www.cybertherapy.info/pages/telepresence.pdf
    Steuer, J. 2013년 12월 7일 검색 [1992]
  • Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration:Prompts for reflection on KIE. International Journal of Science Education,22(8), 819-837.
  • Cuevas, H. M., Fiore, S. M., & Oser, R. L. (2002). Scaffolding cognitive andmetacognitive processes in low verbal ability learners: Use of diagrams incomputer-based training environments. Instructional Science, 30(6),433-464.
  • Critical Factors in studentsatisfaction and success: Facilitation student role adjustment in onlinecommunities of Inquiry. In J. Bourne & J. Moore (Eds.), Elements ofQuality Online Education: Into the Mainstream, (5th ed., pp. 29-38).Needham, MA: Sloan-C, forthcoming. http://books.google.co.kr/books?id=SaQHJwWO-3YC&printsec=frontcover&hl=ko#v=onepage&q&f=false
    Cleveland-Innes, M. Garrison, D. R. 2013년 11월 3일 검색 [2004]
  • Creating meaningful performance assessments: Fundamentalconcepts. ED 375 566. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED375566.pdf
    Elliott, S. N. 2015년6월 5일 검색 [1994]
  • Costa, A. L. (1984). Mediating the metacognitive monitoring: A cognitivedevelopmental inquiry. Educational Leadership, 42(3),57-62.
  • Communication innovation on a BBS: A content analysis.Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the21st Century, 1(2). http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~ipct-j/1993/n2/kuehn.txt
    Kuehn, S. 20015년3월 22일 검색 [1993]
  • Cho, K. L., & Jonassen, D. H. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds onargumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology Research andDevelopment, 50(3), 5-22.
  • Cho, K. L. (2001). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation andproblem solving in an online collaborative group problem-solvingenvironment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of thePennsylvania.
  • Chi, M. T. H., & Glaser, R. (1985). Problem solving ability. In R. J. Sternberg(Ed.), Human abilities: An information processing approach (pp. 227-250).New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.
  • Cagiltay, K. (2006). Scaffolding strategies in electronic performance supportsystems: Types and challenges. Innovations in Education and TeachingInternational, 43(1), 93-103.
  • Bulu, S. T., & Pedersen, S. (2010). Scaffolding middle school students’ contentknowledge and ill-structured problem solving in a problem-basedhypermedia learning environment. Educational Technology Research andDevelopment, 58(5), 507-529.
  • Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2001). The use of embedded scaffolds withhypermedia-supported student-centered learning. Journal of EducationalMultimedia and Hypermedia, 10(4), 333-356.
  • Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation and othermore mysterious mechanism. In F. E. Weinnert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.),Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65-116). LawrenceErlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
  • Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (2000). How people learn: Mind,experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  • Bielaczyc, K., Pirolli, P., & Brown, A. L. (1995). Training in self-explanation andself-regulation strategies: Investigating the effects of knowledgeacqusition activities on problem solving. Cognition and Instruction, 13,(2),221-252.
  • Berk, I. E., & Winsler, A. (1995). Scaffolding children’s learning: Vygotsky andearly childhood education. Washington, DC: The National Association forthe Education of Young Children.
  • Berardi-Coletta, R., Buyer, L. S., Dominowski, R. L., & Rellinger, E. R. (1995).Metacognition and problem solving: a process-oriented approach. Journalof Experimental Psychology, 21(1), 205-223.
  • Belland, B. R., Glazewski, K. D., & Richardson, J. C. (2008). A scaffoldingframework to support the construction of evidence-based argumentsamong middle school students. Educational Technology Research andDevelopment, 56(4), 401-422.
  • Being there: The subjective experience of presence. http://commtechlab.msu.edu/randd/research/beingthere.html#PERSONALPRESENCE 1210
    Heeter, C. 2015년 5월 11일 검색 [1992]
  • Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. G. (2008).Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective thanself-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educational TechnologyResearch and Development, 56(1), 45-72.
  • Azevedo, R., Cromley, J. G., & Seibert, D. (2004). Does adaptive scaffoldingfacilitate students: Ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(3), 344-370.
  • Archibald, D. (2010). Fostering the development of cognitive presence: Initialfindings using the community of inquiry survey instrument. The Internet& Higher Education, 13(1-2), 73-74.
  • Applications and categorization ofsoftware-based scaffolding. In J. Bourdear & R. Heller (Eds.), Proceedings117of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermdia andtelecommunications 2000 (pp. 1798-1799). Chesapeake, VA:AAGE. http://www.ibrarian.net/navon/paper/Applications_and_categorization_of_software_based.pdf?paperid=1042427
    McLoughlin, C. Winnips, K. 2013년 12월 22일 검색 [2000]
  • Anderson, J. R. (1980). Cognitive psychology and its implication. San Francisco:Freeman.
  • Akyol, Z., & Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding cognitive presence in anonline and blended community of inquiry: Assessing outcomes andprocesses for deep approaches to learning. British Journal of EducationalTechnology, 42(2), 223-250.
  • Acovelli, M., & Gamble, M. (1997). A coaching agent for learners usingmultimedia simulations. Educational Technology, 37(2), 44-48.
  • A manualfor the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire(MSLQ). Report 91-B-004, National Center for Research to Improve PostsecondaryTechaing and Learning, Ann Arbor, MI. ED 338 122. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED338122.pdf
  • 11월 17일). Scaffolding as a teaching strategy. http://workplacesafety.pbworks.com/f/Scaffold+Learning.doc
    R. R Van Der Stuyf 2013년 9월 7일 검색 [2002]
  • (SPSS/AMOS/HLM를 이용한) 알기 쉬운 통계분석: 기술통계에서 구102조방정식모형까지
    성태제 서울: 학지사 [2014]