<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rdf:RDF
   xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
   xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
   xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
   xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
   xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
   xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"

>
<channel rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/about">
<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2008 09:20:58 BST</pubDate>


	<title>CiteULike: tomeiter's library [11 articles]</title>
	<description>CiteULike: tomeiter's library [11 articles]</description>


	<link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter</link>
	<dc:publisher>CiteULike.org</dc:publisher>
	<dc:language>en-gb</dc:language>
	<dc:rights>Copyright &#169; 2004-2008 citeulike.org</dc:rights>
	<items>
    <rdf:Seq>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536360"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536358"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536356"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536354"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2333937"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2488077"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2488067"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2447210"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2396212"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2399016"/>
        <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/494784"/>

	</rdf:Seq>
	</items>
	</channel>


<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536360">
    <title>Network action research</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536360</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Action Research, Vol. 4, No. 2. (1 June 2006), pp. 205-226.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Current literature stresses the significance of networks and network theory in both social as well as technical domains. Not only is the role of networked technologies (such as mobile phones and the internet) in everyday life being scrutinized, but network theory is re-shaping an understanding of how social change and community interaction occurs. In this article, I build on these developments to propose network action research as a methodological variant of the action research family. I propose that network action research is a timely and appropriate research methodology to guide studies that involve people, place and technology and to meet the challenges that stem from the changing nature of community interaction and social formations within a network society. I outline how technology can be used to operationalize and support network action research. Examples from two case studies are used to illustrate key aspects of the methodology. 10.1177/1476750306063992</description>
    <dc:title>Network action research</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Marcus Foth</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1177/1476750306063992</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>Action Research, Vol. 4, No. 2. (1 June 2006), pp. 205-226.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-03-15T13:47:01-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2006</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Action Research</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>2</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>205</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>226</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>no-tag</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536358">
    <title>The status of action research in the People's Republic of China</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536358</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Action Research, Vol. 3, No. 4. (1 December 2005), pp. 383-402.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Participative action research can appear both strange and familiar in the People's Republic of China. China has a distinctive intellectual history, a specifically Chinese approach to citizen participation, and a growing interest in international forms of action research. For more than 30 years, participative approaches have been used in rural and community health in China, although these activities usually lack explicit reflective learning. Much of Chinese education follows authoritarian Confucian traditions. Transformation of Chinese education through action research is recently receiving official recognition as it is expected to develop creativity based on reflective thinking. There is also evidence that action research is bringing organizational and professional development to Chinese public administration, and enhancing rural health. While China has established a few centres of action research education cooperation from the West, it is inevitable that Chinese forms of action research will develop. The challenge for the international community of action researchers is to build open communication with Chinese action researchers to help the development of a Chinese way of conducting action research. 10.1177/1476750305058488</description>
    <dc:title>The status of action research in the People's Republic of China</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Ian Hughes</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Lin Yuan</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1177/1476750305058488</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>Action Research, Vol. 3, No. 4. (1 December 2005), pp. 383-402.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-03-15T13:46:02-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2005</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Action Research</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>3</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>4</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>383</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>402</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>action</prism:category>
    <prism:category>research</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536356">
    <title>Why Action Research?</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536356</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Action Research, Vol. 1, No. 1. (1 July 2003), pp. 9-28.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Members of the editorial board of Action Research responded to the question, `Why action research?' Based on their responses and the authors' own experiences as action researchers, this article examines common themes and commitments among action researchers as well as exploring areas of disagreement and important avenues for future exploration. We also use this opportunity to welcome readers of this new journal and to introduce them to members of the editorial board. 10.1177/14767503030011002</description>
    <dc:title>Why Action Research?</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Mary Brydon-Miller</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Davydd Greenwood</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Patricia Maguire</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1177/14767503030011002</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>Action Research, Vol. 1, No. 1. (1 July 2003), pp. 9-28.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-03-15T13:44:22-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2003</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Action Research</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>1</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>1</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>9</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>28</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>action</prism:category>
    <prism:category>research</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536354">
    <title>Action research literature 2004-2006: Themes and trends</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2536354</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Action Research, Vol. 4, No. 4. (1 December 2006), pp. 439-458.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This review of recent action research books covers the period from about mid-2004 to mid-2006, complementing an earlier review (Dick, 2004). After noting some important recent additions to the action research literature, I address the literature on several different applications of action research including education, community, participatory development, and organizations. There are briefer sections on other topics. Action research journals and special issues of other journals are also identified. Finally, I identify some themes and trends in the action research literature. 10.1177/1476750306070105</description>
    <dc:title>Action research literature 2004-2006: Themes and trends</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Bob Dick</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.1177/1476750306070105</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>Action Research, Vol. 4, No. 4. (1 December 2006), pp. 439-458.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-03-15T13:42:41-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2006</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Action Research</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>4</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>439</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>458</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>action</prism:category>
    <prism:category>research</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2333937">
    <title>Teaching Courses Online: A Review of the Research</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2333937</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 76, No. 1. (1 January 2006), pp. 93-135.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This literature review summarizes research on online teaching and learning. It is organized into four topics: course environment, learners' outcomes, learners' characteristics, and institutional and administrative factors. The authors found little consistency of terminology, discovered some conclusive guidelines, and identified developing lines of inquiry. The conclusions overall suggest that most of the studies reviewed were descriptive and exploratory, that most online students are nontraditional and Anglo American, and that few universities have written policies, guidelines, or technical support for faculty members or students. Asynchronous communication seemed to facilitate in-depth communication (but not more than in traditional classes), students liked to move at their own pace, learning outcomes appeared to be the same as in traditional courses, and students with prior training in computers were more satisfied with online courses. Continued research is needed to inform learner outcomes, learner characteristics, course environment, and institutional factors related to delivery system variables in order to test learning theories and teaching models inherent in course design. 10.3102/00346543076001093</description>
    <dc:title>Teaching Courses Online: A Review of the Research</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Mary Tallent-Runnels</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Julie Thomas</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>William Lan</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Sandi Cooper</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Terence Ahern</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Shana Shaw</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Xiaoming Liu</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.3102/00346543076001093</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 76, No. 1. (1 January 2006), pp. 93-135.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-02-05T09:32:38-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2006</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>76</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>1</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>93</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>135</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>no-tag</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2488077">
    <title>Does Homework Improve Academic Achievement? A Synthesis of Research, 1987-2003</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2488077</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 76, No. 1. (1 January 2006), pp. 1-62.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;In this article, research conducted in the United States since 1987 on the effects of homework is summarized. Studies are grouped into four research designs. The authors found that all studies, regardless of type, had design flaws. However, both within and across design types, there was generally consistent evidence for a positive influence of homework on achievement. Studies that reported simple homework-achievement correlations revealed evidence that a stronger correlation existed (a) in Grades 7-12 than in K-6 and (b) when students rather than parents reported time on homework. No strong evidence was found for an association between the homework-achievement link and the outcome measure (grades as opposed to standardized tests) or the subject matter (reading as opposed to math). On the basis of these results and others, the authors suggest future research. 10.3102/00346543076001001</description>
    <dc:title>Does Homework Improve Academic Achievement? A Synthesis of Research, 1987-2003</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Harris Cooper</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Jorgianne Robinson</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Erika Patall</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.3102/00346543076001001</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 76, No. 1. (1 January 2006), pp. 1-62.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-03-08T04:02:30-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2006</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>76</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>1</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>1</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>62</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>no-tag</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2488067">
    <title>&#34;Vygotsky's Neglected Legacy&#34;: Cultural-Historical Activity Theory</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2488067</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 77, No. 2. (1 June 2007), pp. 186-232.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The authors describe an evolving theoretical framework that has been called one of the best kept secrets of academia: cultural-historical activity theory, the result of proposals Lev Vygotsky first articulated but that his students and followers substantially developed to constitute much expanded forms in its second and third generations. Besides showing that activity theory transforms how research should proceed regarding language, language learning, and literacy in particular, the authors demonstrate how it is a theory for praxis, thereby offering the potential to overcome some of the most profound problems that have plagued both educational theorizing and practice. 10.3102/0034654306298273</description>
    <dc:title>&#34;Vygotsky's Neglected Legacy&#34;: Cultural-Historical Activity Theory</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Wolff-Michael Roth</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Yew-Jin Lee</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.3102/0034654306298273</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 77, No. 2. (1 June 2007), pp. 186-232.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-03-08T03:57:39-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2007</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>77</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>2</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>186</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>232</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>constructivism</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2447210">
    <title>Focus on Formative Feedback</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2447210</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 78, No. 1. (1 March 2008), pp. 153-189.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This article reviews the corpus of research on feedback, with a focus on formative feedbackdefined as information communicated to the learner that is intended to modify his or her thinking or behavior to improve learning. According to researchers, formative feedback should be nonevaluative, supportive, timely, and specific. Formative feedback is usually presented as information to a learner in response to some action on the learner's part. It comes in a variety of types (e.g., verification of response accuracy, explanation of the correct answer, hints, worked examples) and can be administered at various times during the learning process (e.g., immediately following an answer, after some time has elapsed). Finally, several variables have been shown to interact with formative feedback's success at promoting learning (e.g., individual characteristics of the learner and aspects of the task). All of these issues are discussed. This review concludes with guidelines for generating formative feedback. 10.3102/0034654307313795</description>
    <dc:title>Focus on Formative Feedback</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Valerie Shute</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.3102/0034654307313795</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 78, No. 1. (1 March 2008), pp. 153-189.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-02-29T10:22:44-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2008</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>78</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>1</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>153</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>189</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>feedback</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2396212">
    <title>Understanding Authority in Classrooms: A Review of Theory, Ideology, and Research</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2396212</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 77, No. 1. (1 March 2007), pp. 4-27.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Authority is a fundamental, problematic, and poorly understood component of classroom life. A better understanding of classroom authority can be achieved by reviewing writings on social theory, educational ideology, and qualitative research in schools. Social theories provide important analytical tools for examining the constitutive elements of authority but fall short of explaining its variability and contextual influences. Discussion of educational ideologies offers insights into the debates, historical contexts, and policy and reform agendas that shape the politics of authority while neglecting empirical realities. Qualitative studies present empirical data and analyses on the challenges intrinsic to classroom relations, but, exceptions aside, they often lack explicit attention to authority. More research focused on classroom authority as a social construction is needed to address critical educational concerns for contemporary practitioners, policy makers, and researchers. 10.3102/003465430298489</description>
    <dc:title>Understanding Authority in Classrooms: A Review of Theory, Ideology, and Research</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Judith Pace</dc:creator>
    <dc:creator>Annette Hemmings</dc:creator>
    <dc:identifier>doi:10.3102/003465430298489</dc:identifier>
    <dc:source>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, Vol. 77, No. 1. (1 March 2007), pp. 4-27.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-02-18T21:41:16-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2007</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>77</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>1</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>4</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>27</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>no-tag</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2399016">
    <title>A Systems Approach for Developing Technological Literacy</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/2399016</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Journal of Technology Education, Vol. 17, No. 1. (Fall 2005)&lt;/i&gt;</description>
    <dc:title>A Systems Approach for Developing Technological Literacy</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Frank Moti</dc:creator>
    <dc:source>Journal of Technology Education, Vol. 17, No. 1. (Fall 2005)</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2008-02-19T14:33:03-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2005</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Journal of Technology Education</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>17</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>1</prism:number>
    <prism:category>literacy</prism:category>
    <prism:category>technological</prism:category>
    <prism:category>wink</prism:category>
</item>



<item rdf:about="http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/494784">
    <title>Designing the Undesignable: Social Software and Control</title>
    <link>http://www.citeulike.org/user/tomeiter/article/494784</link>
    <description>&lt;i&gt;Journal of Educational Technology &#38; Society, Vol. 10, No. 3. (2007), pp. 60-70.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Social software, such as blogs, wikis, tagging systems and collaborative filters, treats the group as a first-class object within the system. Drawing from theories of transactional distance and control, this paper proposes a model of e-learning that extends traditional concepts of learner-teacher-content interactions to include these emergent properties of the group. It suggests that this feature of social software can facilitate an approach to e- learning that is qualitatively different from and capable of significantly augmenting traditional methods, with especial benefits for lifelong learners and those outside institutional boundaries. The paper goes on to explore some of the dangers and issues that need to be addressed in order for this new model to fulfill its promise, and to suggest a framework of principles to be used by designers of educationally-oriented social software.</description>
    <dc:title>Designing the Undesignable: Social Software and Control</dc:title>

    <dc:creator>Jon Dron</dc:creator>
    <dc:source>Journal of Educational Technology &#38; Society, Vol. 10, No. 3. (2007), pp. 60-70.</dc:source>
    <dc:date>2006-02-07T03:58:27-00:00</dc:date>
    <prism:publicationYear>2007</prism:publicationYear>
    <prism:publicationName>Journal of Educational Technology &#38; Society</prism:publicationName>
    <prism:volume>10</prism:volume>
    <prism:number>3</prism:number>
    <prism:startingPage>60</prism:startingPage>
    <prism:endingPage>70</prism:endingPage>
    <prism:category>social_software</prism:category>
    <prism:category>wink</prism:category>
</item>



</rdf:RDF>

