LVS
Digitale toetsen
Professionalisering
Blended learning E-learning trends en ontwikkelingen
Rekenen
Dyscalculie Verbeteren rekenvaardigheid mbo
Taal
Game Interactieve Fictie Vroege ontwikkeling geletterdheid ICT-vroege geletterdheid Verhaalbegrip kleuters met ICT
Leren
Adaptieve software Blended learning Cognitieve balans Onderzoekend leren Kwaliteit leermateriaal Effectiever onderwijs Edutainment Blended learning effect E-portfolio’s Burgerschap games Verbeteren leerprestaties ICT differentiatie Mythe van leerstijlen
Lezen
Lezen met lees-app Ontluikende geletterdheid ICT oplossing problemen lezen Digitale leeskilometers groep 3
Middelen
Computerapplicaties Digitaal schoolbord ICT-beleidsplan Leren in 2020 - 1 ICT in kindcentra Leren in 2020 - 2 Onderwijs en ICT Werking en beperking
Problemen
Cyberpesten Digitale dementie Digitale media en kinderhersenen Problematisch internetgedrag Kleuters en iPads
ICT
Digitale leermiddelen Digitale geletterdheid vo ICT-innovatie Tablet in het onderwijs Nieuwsgierigheid computergames Integreren in klassenpraktijk Buitenschoolse mediagebruik Jonge kinderen en tabletgebruik Digitale gymles Opleiding ICT beheerder
Verder kijken
ict onderwijs digitale vaardigheden ICT rekenen software internet informatie zoeken kennis learning analytics samenwerkend leren metacognitieve vaardigheden tutor scaffolding multimedia beeld geluid audio multimedia geheugen ict multimedia geheugen ict effectief leren multimedia geheugen ict effectief leren bronnen multimedia geheugen zelfsturing ict opbrengstgericht werken digitaal leerlingvolgsysteem professionalisering ict praktijk serious games beroepsonderwijs synchroon coachen opleiding leraren tekst schrijven outline tool toetsen leerlingvolgsysteem opbrengsten TPACK ICT integratie onderwijs typen schrijven typecursus lezen videovoorbeelden ict effect animatie leerproces instructie video

 

Referenties

Geplaatst op 1 juni 2016

  1. Ainsworth, S. & VanLabeke, N. (2004). Multiple forms of dynamic representation.Learning and Instruction, 14, 241-255.
  2. Anderson, R.C., Pichert, J.W. & Shirey, L.L. (1983). Effects of the reader’s schema at different points in time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 271-279.
  3. Atkinson, R.K., Derry, S.J., Renkl, A. & Wortham, D. (2000). Learning from examples: Instructional principles from the worked examples research. Review of Educational Research, 70, 181-214.
  4. Atkinson, R.C. & Shiffrin, R.M. (1968). Human memory: A proposed system and its control processes. In K.W. Spence & J.T.I. Spence, The psychology of learning and motivation (deel 2, pp. 89-195). New York, NY: Academic Press.
  5. Ayres, P. (2006). Impact of reducing intrinsic cognitive load on learning in a mathematical domain. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 287-298.
  6. Baddeley, A.D. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
  7. Baddeley, A.D. (1997). Human memory: Theory and practice (Red.). Hove, Verenigd Koninkrijk: Psychology Press.
  8. Berthold, K., Eysink, T.H.S. & Renkl, A. (2009). Assisting self-explanation prompts are more effective than open prompts when learning with multiple representations.Instructional Science, 37, 345-363.
  9. Boucheix, J.M., Lowe, R.K., Kemala-Putri, D. & Groff, J. (2013). Cueing animations: Dynamic signaling aids information extraction and comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 25, 71-84.
  10. Brand-Gruwel, S., Kester, L., Kicken, W. & Kirschner, P.A. (2014). Learning Ability Development in Flexible Learning Environments. In J.M. Spector, D.M. Merrill, J. Elen & M.J. Bishop (Red.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (pp. **). New York, NY: Springer.
  11. Brockett, R.G. (2006). Self-directed learning and the paradox of choice. International Journal of Self-directed Learning, 3(2), 27-33.
  12. Brockett, R.G. & Hiemstra, R. (1991). Self-direction in adult learning: Perspectives on theory, research, and practice. Londen, Verenigd Koninkrijk: Routledge.
  13. Camp, G., Paas, F., Rikers, R. & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2001). Dynamic problem selection in air traffic control training: A comparison between performance, mental effort and mental efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 575-595.
  14. Carlson, R.A., Khoo, H. & Elliot, R.G. (1990). Component practice and exposure to a problem-solving context. Human Factors, 32, 267-286.
  15. Carlson, R.A., Sullivan, M.A. & Schneider, W. (1989). Component fluency in a problem solving context. Human Factors, 31, 489-502.
  16. Carroll, J.M. (2000). Making use: Scenario-based design of human-computer interactions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  17. Cho, Y.H. & Jonassen, D.H. (2012). Learning by self-explaining causal diagrams in high-school biology. Asia Pacific Education Review, 13(1), 171-184.
  18. Clarke, T., Ayres, P. & Sweller, J. (2005). The impact of sequencing and prior knowledge on learning mathematics through spreadsheet applications. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53, 15-24.
  19. Corbalan, G., Kester, L. & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2008). Selecting learning tasks: Effects of adaptation and shared control on efficiency and task involvement.Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33, 733-756.
  20. Corbalan, G., Kester, L. & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2009). Combining shared control with variability over surface features: Effects on transfer test performance and task involvement. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 290-298.
  21. Corbalan, G., Kester, L. & Merriënboer, J J.G. van (2011). Learner-controlled selection of tasks with different surface and structural features: Effects on transfer and efficiency.Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 76-81.
  22. Corradi, D., Elen, J. & Clarebout, G. (2012). Understanding and enhancing the use of multiple representations in chemistry education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 21, 780-795.
  23. Cowan, N. (1997). Attention and memory: An integrated framework. Oxford, Verenigd Koninkrijk: Oxford University Press.
  24. Croock, M.B.M. de & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2007). Paradoxical effects of information presentation formats and contextual interference on transfer of a complex cognitive skill.Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1740-1761.
  25. Croock, M.B.M. de, Merriënboer, J.J.G. van & Paas, F. (1998). High versus low contextual interference in simulation-based training of troubleshooting skills: Effects on transfer performance and invested mental effort. Computers in Human Behavior, 14, 249-267.
  26. Devolder, P., Pynoo, B., Voet, T., Adang, L., Vercruysse, J. & Duyck, P. (2009). Optimizing physicians’ instruction of PACS through e-learning: Cognitive load theory applied. Journal of Digital Imaging, 22(1), 25-33.
  27. Dufresne, R.J., Gerace, W.J., Thibodeau-Hardiman, P. & Mestre, J.P. (1992). Constraining novices to perform expertlike problem analyses: Effects on schema acquisition. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 307-331.
  28. Ertmer, P.A. & Newby, T.J. (1996). The expert learner: Strategic, self-regulated, and reflective. Instructional Science, 24, 1-24.
  29. Fowler, J. (2008). Experiential learning and its facilitation. Nurse Education Today, 28, 427-433.
  30. Fulgham, S.M. (2008). The effects of varying levels of support through worked examples on achievement in software application training (masterscriptie, Texas Tech University, Verenigde Staten).
  31. Genuchten, E. van, Scheiter, K. & Schüler, A. (2012). Examining learning from text and pictures for different task types: Does the multimedia effect differ for conceptual, causal, and procedural tasks? Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 2209-2218.
  32. Ginns, P. (2005). Meta-analysis of the modality effect. Learning and Instruction, 4, 313-331.
  33. Ginns, P. (2006). Integrating information: A meta-analysis of the spatial contiguity and temporal contiguity effects. Learning and Instruction, 16, 511-525.
  34. Goetz, E.T., Schallert, D.L., Reynolds, R.E. & Radin, D.I. (1983). Reading in perspective: What real cops and pretend burglars look for in a story. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 500-510.
  35. Gog, T. van, Jarodzka, H., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P. & Paas, F. (2009). Attention guidance during example study via the model’s eye movements. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 785-791.
  36. Grave, W.S. de, Schmidt, H.G. & Boshuizen, H.P.A. (2001). Effects of problem-based discussion on studying a subsequent text: A randomized trial among first year medical students. Instructional Science, 29, 33-44.
  37. Gulikers, J.T.M., Bastiaens, Th.J. & Martens, R.L. (2005). The surplus value of an authentic learning environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 509-521.
  38. Gurlitt, J., Dummel, S., Schuster, S. & Nückles, M. (2012). Differently structured advance organizers lead to different initial schemata and learning outcomes. Instructional Science, 40, 351-369.
  39. Gurlitt, J. & Renkl, A. (2008). Are high-coherent concept maps better for prior knowledge activation? Differential effects of concept mapping tasks on high school vs. university students. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 407-419.
  40. Gurlitt, J., Renkl, A., Motes, M. & Hauser, S. (2006). How can we use concept maps for prior knowledge activation – different mapping-tasks lead to different cognitive processes. In S.A. Barab, K.E. Hay & D.T. Hickey (Red.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 217-221). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  41. Hassanabadi, H., Robatjazi, E.S. & Savoji, A.P. (2011). Cognitive consequences of segmentation and modality methods in learning from instructional animations. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 1481-1487.
  42. Hatsidimitris, G. & Kalyuga, S. (2013). Guided self-management of transient information in animations through pacing and sequencing strategies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(1), 91-105.
  43. Helsdingen, A.S., Van Gog, T. & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2011a). The effects of practice schedule on learning a complex judgment task. Learning and Instruction, 21, 126-136.
  44. Helsdingen, A.S., Gog, T. van & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2011b). The effects of practice schedule and critical thinking prompts on learning and transfer of a complex judgment task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 383-398.
  45. Höffler, T.N. & Schwartz, R. (2011). Effects of pacing and cognitive style across dynamic and non-dynamic representations. Computers and Education, 57, 1716-1726.
  46. Holland, J.H., Holyoak, K.J., Nisbett, R.E. & Thagard, P.R. (Red.) (1989). Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  47. Hout-Wolters, B.H.A.M. van, Simons, P.R.J. & Volet, S.E. (2000). Active learning: Self-directed learning and independent work. In P.R.J. Simons, J. van der Linden & T. Duffy (Red.), New Learning (pp. 21-36). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  48. Imhof, B., Scheiter, K., Edelmann, J. & Gerjets, P. (2012). How temporal and spatial aspects of presenting visualizations affect learning about locomotion patterns. _Learning and Instruction, 2_2, 193-205.
  49. Jarodzka, H., Gog, T. van, Dorr, M., Scheiter, K. & Gerjets, P. (2013). Learning to see: Guiding students’ attention via a model’s eye movements fosters learning. Learning and Instruction, 25, 62-70.
  50. Johnson, C.I. & Mayer, R.E. (2010). Adding the self-explanation principle to multimedia learning in a computer-based game-like environment. Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1246-1252.
  51. Johnson, C.I. & Mayer, R.E. (2012). An eye movement analysis of the spatial contiguity effect in multimedia learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 18, 178-191.
  52. Jossberger, H., Brand-Gruwel, S. & Wiel, M. van de & Boshuizen, H.P.A. (2010). The Challenge of Self-Directed and Self-Regulated Learning in Vocational Education: A Theoretical Analysis and Synthesis of Requirements. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 62, 415-440.
  53. Kalyuga, S. (2008). Relative effectiveness of animated and static diagrams: An effect of learner prior knowledge. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 852-861.
  54. Kalyuga, S. & Sweller, J. (2005). Rapid dynamic assessment of expertise to improve the efficiency of adaptive e-learning. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53, 83-93.
  55. Khacharem, A., Spanjers, I., Zoudji, B., Kalyuga, S. & Ripoll, H. (2012). Using segmentation to support the learning from animated soccer scenes: An effect of prior knowledge. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 14, 154-160.
  56. Kicken, W., Brand-Gruwel, S., Merriënboer, J.J.G. van & Slot, W. (2009a). Design and evaluation of a development portfolio: How to improve students’ self-directed learning skills. Instructional Science, 37, 453-473.
  57. Kicken, W., Brand-Gruwel, S., Merriënboer, J J.G. van & Slot, W. (2009b). The effects of portfolio-based advice on the development of self-directed learning skills in secondary vocational education. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 57, 439-460.
  58. Kirschner, F., Paas, F. & Kirschner, P.A. (2009). Individual and group-based learning from complex cognitive tasks: Effects on retention and transfer efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 306-314.
  59. Kirschner, F., Paas, F., Kirschner, P.A. & Janssen, J. (2011). Differential effects of problem-solving demands on individual and collaborative learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 21, 587-599.
  60. Knowles, M.S. (1975). Self-directed learning. Chicago, IL: Follett publishing company.

Kühl, T., Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P. & Edelmann, J. (2011). The influence of text modality on learning with static and dynamic visualizations. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 29-35.

  1. Leahy, W., Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (2003). When auditory presentations should and should not be a component of multimedia instruction. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 17, 401-418.
  2. Lee, C.H. & Kalyuga, S. (2011). Effectiveness of on-screen pinyin in learning Chinese: An expertise reversal for multimedia redundancy effect. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 11-15.
  3. Leppink, J., Broers, N.J., Imbos, T., Vleuten, C.P.M. van der & Berger, M.P.F. (2012). Self-explanation in the domain of statistics: An expertise reversal effect. Higher Education, 63, 771-785.
  4. Limniou, M. & Whitehead, C. (2010). Online general pre-laboratory training course for facilitating first year chemical laboratory use. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences, 5,39-55.
  5. Liu, T.C., Lin, Y.C., Tsai, M.J. & Paas, F. (2012). Split-attention and redundancy effects on mobile learning in physical environments. Computers and Education, 56, 172-181.
  6. Machiels-Bongaerts, M., Schmidt, H.G. & Boshuizen, H.P.A. (1993). Effects of mobilizing prior knowledge on information processing: Studies of free recall and allocation of study time. British Journal of Psychology, 84, 481-498.
  7. Machiels-Bongaerts, M., Schmidt, H.G. & Boshuizen, H.P.A. (1995). The effect of prior knowledge activation on text recall: An investigation of two conflicting hypotheses. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 409-423.
  8. Mautone, P.D. & Mayer, R.E. (2001). Signaling as a cognitive guide in multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 377-389.
  9. Mayer, R.E. (2009). Multimedia learning (tweede editie). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  10. Mayer, R.E. & Chandler, P. (2001). When learning is just a click away: Does simple user interaction foster deeper understanding of multimedia messages? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 390-397.
  11. Mayer, R.E. & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 43-52.
  12. Mayer, R.E., Mathias, A. & Wetzell, K. (2002). Fostering understanding of multimedia messages through pre-training: Evidence for a two-stage theory of mental model construction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 147-154.
  13. Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (1990). Strategies for programming instruction in high school: Program completion vs. program generation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 6, 265-285.
  14. Merriënboer, J.J.G. van & Croock, M.B.M. de (1992). Strategies for computer-based programming instruction: Program completion vs. program generation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 8, 365-394.
  15. Merriënboer, J.J.G. van & Kirschner, P.A. (2013). Ten steps to complex learning (tweede herziene uitgave). New York, NY: Routledge.
  16. Merriënboer, J.J.G. van & Luursema, J.J. (1996). Implementing instructional models in computer-based learning environments: A case study in problem selection. In T.T. Liao (Red.), Advanced educational technology: Research issues and future potential (pp. 184-206). Berlijn, Duitsland: Springer Verlag.
  17. Merriënboer, J J.G. van, Schuurman, J.G., de Croock, M.B.M. & Paas, F. (2002). Redirecting learners’ attention during training: Effects on cognitive load, transfer test performance and training efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 12, 11-37.
  18. Merriënboer, J.J.G. van & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17, 147-177.
  19. Merriënboer, J.J.G. van & Vleuten, C.P. van der (2012). Technology-based assessment in the integrated curriculum. In M.C. Mayrath, J. Clarke-Midura, D.H. Robinson & G. Schraw (Red.), Technology-based assessments for 21st century skills (pp. 245-370). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
  20. Miller, G.A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63(2), 81–97.
  21. Moussa-Inaty, J., Ayres, P.L. & Sweller, J. (2012). Improving listening skills in English as a foreign language by reading rather than listening: A cognitive load perspective. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 391-402.
  22. Musallam, R. (2010). The effects of using screencasting as a multimedia pre-training tool to manage the intrinsic cognitive load of chemical equilibrium instruction for advanced high school chemistry students (masterscriptie, University of San Francisco, Verenigde Staten).
  23. Nokes, T.J., Hausmann, R.G.M., VanLehn, K. & Gershman, S. (2011). Testing the instructional fit hypothesis: The case of self-explanation prompts. Instructional Science, 39, 645-666.
  24. Olina, Z., Reiser, R.A., Huang, X., Lim, J. & Park, S. (2006). Problem format and presentation sequence: Effects on learning and mental effort among US high school students. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 299-309.
  25. Paas, F. & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 122-133.
  26. Paivio, A. (1986). Mental representation: A dual coding approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  27. Palmeri, T.J. (1999). Theories of automaticity and the power law of practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25, 543-551.
  28. Perkins, D.N. & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational Researcher, 18, 16-25.
  29. Pollock, E., Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (2002). Assimilating complex information. Learning and Instruction, 12, 61-86.
  30. Quilici, J.L. & Mayer, R.E. (1996). Role of examples in how students learn to categorize statistics word problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 144-161.
  31. Rasch, T. & Schnotz, W. (2009). Interactive and non-interactive pictures in multimedia learning environments: Effects on learning outcomes and learning efficiency. Learning and Instruction, 19, 411-422.
  32. Renkl, A. (1999). Learning mathematics from worked-out examples: Analyzing and fostering self-explanations. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 477-488.
  33. Renkl, A., Atkinson, R.K. & Grosse, C.S. (2004). How fading worked solution steps works – A cognitive load perspective. Instructional Science, 32, 59-82.
  34. Rey, G.D. (2012). A review of research and a meta-analysis of the seductive details effect. Educational Research Review, 7, 216-237.
  35. Roelle, J. & Berthold, K. (in druk). The expertise reversal effect in prompting focused processing of instructional explanations. Instructional Science. DOI 10.1007/s11251-012-9247-0
  36. Salden, R.J.C.M., Paas, F. & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2006). A comparison of approaches to learning task selection in the training of complex cognitive skills.Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 321-333.
  37. Salden, R J.C.M., Paas, F., Broers, N.J. & Merriënboer, J J.G. van (2004). Mental effort and performance as determinants for the dynamic selection of learning tasks in air traffic control training. Instructional Science, 32, 153-172.
  38. Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P., Huk, T., Imhof, B. & Kammerer, Y. (2009). The effects of realism in learning with dynamic visualizations. Learning and Instruction, 19, 481-494.
  39. Schmidt, H.G., Volder, M.L. de, Grave, W.S. de, Moust, J.H.C. & Patel, V.L. (1989). Explanatory models in the processing of science text: The role of prior knowledge activation through small-group discussion. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 610-619.
  40. Schmidt-Weigand, F., Kohnert, A. & Glowalla, U. (2010). A closer look at split visual attention in system- and self-paced instruction in multimedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 20, 100-110.
  41. Schnotz, W. & Rasch, T. (2005). Enabling, facilitating, and inhibiting effects of animations in multimedia learning: Why reduction of cognitive load can have negative results on learning. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53, 47-58.
  42. Seufert, T., Schütze, M. & Brünken, R. (2009). Memory characteristics and modality in multimedia learning: An aptitude-treatment-interaction study. Learning and Instruction, 19, 28-42.
  43. Spanjers, I.A.E., Gog, T. van, Wouters, P, & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van(2012). Explaining the segmentation effect in learning from animations: The role of pausing and temporal cueing. Computers and Education, 59, 274-280.
  44. Spanjers, I.A.E., Wouters, P. Gog, T. van & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2011). An expertise reversal effect of segmentation in learning from animated worked-out examples.Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 46-52.
  45. Sung, E. & Mayer, R.E. (2012). Affective impact of navigational and signaling aids to e-learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 473-483.
  46. Sweller, 1988: Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12(2), 257-285.
  47. Sweller, J., Merriënboer, J.J.G. van & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10, 251-296.
  48. Tabbers, H.K. (2002). The modality of text in multimedia instructions. Refining the design guidelines (masterscriptie, Open Universiteit).
  49. Tabbers, H.K., Martens, R.L. & Merriënboer, J.J.G. van (2004). Multimedia instructions and cognitive load theory: Effects of modality and cueing. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(1), 71-82.
  50. Taminiau, E.M.C. (2013). Advisory models for on-demand learning (masterscriptie, Open Universiteit).
  51. Ternier, S., De Vries, F., Börner, D. & Specht, M. (2012). Mobile augmented reality with audio, supporting fieldwork of Cultural Sciences students in Florence. In G. Eleftherakis, M. Hinchey & M. Holcombe (Red.), Software Engineering and Formal Methods – Proceedings of 10th International Conference, SEFM 2012 (pp. 367-379). Heidelberg, Duitsland/Dordrecht: Springer.
  52. Veenman, M.V.J., Van Hout-Wolter, B.H.A.M. & Afflerbach, P. (2006). Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition & Learning, 1, 3-14.
  53. Westelinck, K. de, Valcke, M., Craene, B. de & Kirschner, P. (2005). The cognitive theory of multimedia learning in the social sciences knowledge domain: Limitations of external graphical representations. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 555-573.
  54. Wetzels, S. (2009). Individualised strategies for prior knowledge activation(masterscriptie, Open Universteit).
  55. Wickens, C.D., Hutchins, S., Carolan, T. & Cumming, J. (2013). Part task training and increasing difficulty training strategies: A meta-analysis approach. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 55, 461-470.
  56. Willoughby, T., Wood, E., Desmarais, S., Sims, S. & Kalra, M. (1997). Mechanisms that facilitate the effectiveness of elaboration strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 682-685.
  57. Yeh, Y.F., Chen, M.C., Hung, P.H. & Hwang, G.J. (2010). Optimal self-explanation prompt design in dynamic multi-representational learning environments. Computers and Education, 54, 1089-1100.
  58. Zimmerman, B.J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation. A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P.R. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Red.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  59. Zimmerman, B.J. (2006). Development and adaptation of expertise: The role of self-regulatory processes and beliefs. In K.A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P.J. Feltovich & R.R. Hoffman (Red.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 683-703). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Details van het onderzoek

  
NWO-projectnummer:  
Titel onderzoeksproject:  
Looptijd:30-11--0001 tot 30-11--0001

[Bron: Nationaal Regieorgaan Onderwijsonderzoek (NRO)]

Schrijf in voor de nieuwsbrief
Schrijf in voor de nieuwsbrief
Schrijf in voor de nieuwsbrief
Schrijf in voor de nieuwsbrief
[extra-breed-algemeen-kolom2]

NOT 2017

Reviews ontwikkelingsmateriaal




Inschrijven nieuwsbrief


Volg wij-leren.nl

Volg ons op LinkedIn Volg ons op twitter Volg ons op facebook

Mis geen bijdragen.