1. IDT691FINAL PAPER HANSUK UM

2. 1. Introduction The key of changing digital technologies: Interaction between human and technology Hypermedia technology: Self-regulatory skills Online learning: Knowledge co-construction Support two evidences rooted in interactivity of technology

3. 2. Pedagogical Approaches to Interactive Technologies  Web 2.0: social learning and use of social software Learner ContentsLearnerInstructor

4. 2. Pedagogical Approaches to Interactive Technologies Interactive Technology in learning theory Behaviorism Contents (what) Cognitivism Processes (how) Constructivism Contextual learning

5. 3. First Evidence by Hypermedia Learning  Scaffolding effects by Hypermedia What Prior knowledge high process scaffolding low content & process scaffolding When Timing monitoring How Metacognitive monitoring Whom Delivery system

6. 3. First Evidence by Hypermedia Learning  Metacognitive skills: Self-regulated learner Utilize the “right tool for the job” Modify learning strategies and skills based on their awareness of effectiveness

7. 4. Second Evidence by online learning  LMS in Higher education Hintermayer found e-learning has an influence on individual development of various study skills and generic competencies Strong mentorship is required for students to achieve autonomy

8. 4. Second Evidence by online learning  Knowledge construction by Social network A case of broadcasting systems Bulletin Board Systems Blog Twitter Face Book Knowledge-building communities

9. 5. Conclusion  Interactive technology foster learning  Scaffolding by hypermedia learning and Knowledge construction by LMS  Promoted by strong mentorship

10. 6. Discussion  Importance of the topic Show and support the interactive relationship between learners and technologies  Argument Learner-content interaction is accelerated by learner- learner, or learner-instructor  Personal opinions Furthermore, Interactive technology also promotes interactivity one another among all three simultaneously: L-L, L-C, and L-I

11. 6. Discussion: Personal opinions learner

12. 7. References  Anglin, G.J. (1992). Instructional Technology: Past, Present, and Future (3rd Edition / 2nd Edition). Colorado: Libraries Unlimited.  Anderson, T, & Elloumi, F. ( 2004). Theory and practice of online Learning: Athabasca University  Azevedo, R. (2005). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? The role of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 40(4), 199 – 209.  Azevedo, R., & Jacobson, M. J. (2008). Advances in scaffolding learning with hypertext and hypermedia: A summary and critical analysis. Education Tech Research Dev, 56, 93-100.  Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., Cocking, R. R., & Donovan, S. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (expanded edition). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.  Budka, P., & Schallert, C. (2009). Transforming learning infrastures in social sciences through flexible and interactive technology-enhanced learning. Learn Inq, 25 (3), 131-142.  Jacobson, M. J. (2008). A design framework for educational hypermedia systems: Theory, research, and learning emerging scientific conceptual perspectives. Education Tech Research Dev, 56, 5-28.  Scheiter, K.,Gerjet, P., vollmann, B., & Catrambone, R. (2009). The impact of learner characteristics on information utilization strategies, cognitive load experienced, and performance in hypermedia learning. Learning and Instruction, 19, 387-401.  Shapiro, A. M. (2008). Hypermedia design s learner scaffolding. Education Tech Research Dev, 56, 29-44.  Sherin, B., Reiser, B. J., & Edelson, D. (2004). Scaffolding Aanalysis: Extending the Scaffolding metaphor to learning artifacts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(3), 387-421.  Verhoeven, L., Schnotz, W., & Paas, F. (2009) cognitive load in interactive knowledge construction. Learning and Instruction, 19, 369-375.  Warschauer, M. (2007). The paradixical future of digital learning. Learn Inq, 10 (3), 41-49.