Evaluating technology-enhanced learning: A comprehensive framework

References

• Alyusuf RH, Prasad K, Abdel Satir AM, Abalkhail AA, Arora RK. 2013. Development and validation of a tool to evaluate the quality of medical education websites in pathology. J Pathol Inform 4:29
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Atkins MJ, O'halloran C. 1995. AMEE Medical Education Guide No. 6. Evaluating multimedia applications for medical education. Med Teach 17:149–160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Case SM, Swanson DB. 2001. Constructing written test questions for the basic and clinical sciences. 3rd ed. Philadelphia, PA: National Board of Medical Examiners
   Google Scholar
• Clune WH. 2002. Methodological strength and policy usefulness of cost-effectiveness research. In: Levin HM, Mcewan PJ, editors. Cost-effectiveness and educational policy. Larchmont, NY: Eye On Education. pp 55–68
   Google Scholar
• Cook DA. 2010. Twelve tips for evaluating educational programs. Med Teach 32:296–301
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook DA. 2014. The value of online learning and MRI: Finding a niche for expensive technologies. Med Teach 36(11):965–972
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook DA, Beckman TJ. 2006. Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: Theory and application. Am J Med 119:166.e7–16
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cook DA, Bordage G, Schmidt HG. 2008. Description, justification, and clarification: A framework for classifying the purposes of research in medical education. Med Educ 42:128–133
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook DA, Dupras DM. 2004. A practical guide to developing effective web-based learning. J Gen Intern Med 19:698–707
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook DA, Triola MM. 2014. What is the role of e-learning? Looking past the hype. Med Educ 48:930–937
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook DA, West CP. 2013. Reconsidering the focus on “outcomes research” in medical education: A cautionary note. Acad Med 88:162–167
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellaway R. 2010a. Apples and architraves: A descriptive framework for e-learning research. Med Teach 32:95–97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellaway R. 2010b. Developing learning resources. In: Dornan T, Mann KV, Scherpbier AJJA, Spencer JA, editors. Medical education: Theory and practice. Edinburgh, UK: Churchill Livingstone. pp 265–282
   Google Scholar
• Ellaway RH. 2006. Evaluating a VLE in medical education. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from Edinburgh Research Archive: http://hdl.handle.net/1842/885
   Google Scholar
• Ellaway RH. 2014. Virtual patients as activities: Exploring the research implications of an activity theoretical stance. Perspect Med Educ 3:266–277
   Google Scholar
• Ellaway RH, Pusic M, Yavner S, Kalet AL. 2014a. Context matters: Emergent variability in an effectiveness trial of online teaching modules. Med Educ 48:386–396
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellaway RH, Pusic MV, Galbraith RM, Cameron T. 2014b. Developing the role of big data and analytics in health professional education. Med Teach 36:216–222
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engeström Y. 1987. Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit Oy
   Google Scholar
• Fink LD. 2003. Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
   Google Scholar
• Frye AW, Hemmer PA. 2012. Program evaluation models and related theories: AMEE guide no. 67. Med Teach 34:e288–299
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. 1999. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: The RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health 89:1322–1327
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glenn J. 1996. A consumer-oriented model for evaluating computer-assisted instructional materials for medical education. Acad Med 71:251–255
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldie J. 2006. AMEE Education Guide no. 29: Evaluating educational programmes. Med Teach 28:210–224
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodyear P, Retalis S. 2010. Learning, technology and design. In: Goodyear P, Retalis S, editors. Technology-enhanced learning: Design patterns and pattern languages. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers. pp 1–28
   Google Scholar
• Harvey J. 1998. Evaluation cookbook. Edinburgh: Learning Technology Dissemination Initiative, Heriot-Watt University
   Google Scholar
• Hummel-Rossi B, Ashdown J. 2002. The state of cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses in education. Rev Educ Res 72:1–30
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kern DE, Thomas PA, Howard DM, Bass EB. 1998. Curriculum development for medical education: A six-step approach. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press
   Google Scholar
• Kirkpatrick D. 1996. Revisiting Kirkpatrick's four-level model. Train Dev 50(1):54–59
   Google Scholar
• Knight CL, Sakowski HA, Houghton BL, Laya MB, DeWitt DE. 2004. Developing a peer review process for web-based curricula. Minting a new coin of the realm. J Gen Intern Med 19:594–598
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kogan JR, Holmboe ES, Hauer KE. 2009. Tools for direct observation and assessment of clinical skills of medical trainees: A systematic review. JAMA 302:1316–1326
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krug S. 2000. Don't make me think! A common sense approach to Web usability. Indianapolis, IN: Macmillan USA
   Google Scholar
• Laurillard D. 2001. Rethinking university teaching: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. New York: RoutledgeFalmer
   Google Scholar
• Levin HM. 2001. Waiting for Godot: Cost-effectiveness analysis in education. New Direct Eval 90:55–68
   Google Scholar
• Mayer RE. 2005. Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In: Mayer RE, editor. The cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp 31–48
   Google Scholar
• Merisotis JP, Phipps RA. 2000. Quality on the line: Benchmarks for success in internet-based distance education. Washington, DC: Institute for Higher Education Policy
   Google Scholar
• Moore JC. 2005. The Sloan Consortium quality framework and the five pillars. Newburyport, MA: The Sloan Consortium
   Google Scholar
• Morrison GR, Ross SM, Kemp JE, Kalman H. 2010. Designing effective instruction. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen J. 2012. Usability 101: Introduction to usability. Published by Neilsen Norman Group. [Accessed 24 July 2014] Available from http://www.nngroup.com/articles/usability-101-introduction-to-usability/
   Google Scholar
• Oliver M. 2000. An introduction to the evaluation of learning technology. Educ Technol Soc 3(4):20–30
   Google Scholar
• Olson CA, Shershneva MB. 2004. Setting quality standards for web-based continuing medical education. J Contin Educ Health Prof 24:100–111
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pangaro L, ten Cate O. 2013. Frameworks for learner assessment in medicine: AMEE Guide No. 78. Med Teach 35:e1197–e1210
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quality Matters Program. 2014. Quality matters: A national benchmark for online course design. [Accessed 24 July 2014] Available from https://www.qualitymatters.org/
   Google Scholar
• Ries E. 2011. The lean startup: How today's entrepreneurs use continuous innovation to create radically successful businesses. New York, NY: Crown Business
   Google Scholar
• Sandars J. 2010. Cost-effective e-learning in medical education. In: Walsh K, editor. Cost-effectiveness in medical education. Oxon: Radcliffe. pp 40–47
   Google Scholar
• Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CP. 2011. General overview of the theories used in assessment: AMEE Guide No. 57. Med Teach 33:783–797
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stufflebeam D. 2003. The CIPP model for evaluation. In: Kellaghan T, Stufflebeam D, editors. International handbook of educational evaluation. Vol. 9. Netherlands: Springer. pp 31–62
   Google Scholar
• Training and Executive Development Group. 2014. Training and Development: Training needs analysis. Published by U. S. Office of Personnel Management. [Accessed 24 July 2014] Available from http://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/training-and-development/planning-evaluating/
   Google Scholar
• van Merriënboer JJG, Clark RE, de Croock MBM. 2002. Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID Model. Educ Technol Res Dev 50(2):39–64
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wall D. 2010. Evaluation: Improving practice, influencing policy. In: Swanwick T, editor. Understanding medical education: Evidence, theory and practice. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell. pp 336–351
   Google Scholar
• Yardley S, Dornan T. 2012. Kirkpatrick's levels and education ‘evidence'. Med Educ 46:97–106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zendejas B, Wang AT, Brydges R, Hamstra SJ, Cook DA. 2013. Cost: The missing outcome in simulation-based medical education research: A systematic review. Surgery 153:160–176
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar