What Does Wiki Reveal About the Knowledge Processing Strategies of School Pupils?

References

• Åkerfeldt, A. (2014a). Didaktisk design med digitala resurser. En studie av kunskaprepresentationer I en digitaliserad skola. Doktors avhandlingar från Institutionen för pedagogic och didaktik 32. Stockholm: Stockholm universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Åkerfeldt, A. (2014b). Re-shaping of writing in the digital age. A study of pupils’ writing with different resources. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 4(3), 172–193.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., & Smith, A. (2011). Developing writers. Teaching and learning in the digital age. Maidenhead, UK: Mc Graw-Hil.
   Google Scholar
• Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, R., & Ivanič, R. (1997). The politics of writing. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Coiro, J., & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixth-grade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214–257. doi: 10.1598/RRQ.42.2.2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical interpretation of distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Eds.), Distributed cognitions. Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cress, U., & Kimmerle, U. (2008). A systemic and cognitive view on collaborative knowledge building with wikis. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(2), 105–122. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11412-007-9035-z doi: 10.1007/s11412-007-9035-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flower, L. (1994). The construction of negotiated meaning: A social cognitive theory of writing. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flower, L., & Hayes, J. (2009). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32(4), 365–387. Retrieved from http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0010-096X%28198112%2932%3A4%3C365%3AACPTOW%3E2.0.CO%3B2-A doi: 10.2307/356600
   Google Scholar
• Hakkarainen, K., Lonka, K., & Lipponen, L. (2004). Tutkiva oppiminen: järki, tunteet ja kulttuuri oppimisen sytyttäjinä. Helsinki, Finland: WSOY.
   Google Scholar
• Harjunen, E. (2009). How do teachers view their own pedagogical authority? Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(1), 109–129. doi: 10.1080/13540600802661345
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harjunen, E. (2011). Students’ consent to a teacher’s pedagogical authority. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 55(4), 403–424. doi: 10.1080/00313831.2011.587325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harjunen, E. (2012). Patterns of control over the teaching-studying-learning process and classroom as complex dynamic environments: A theoretical framework. European Journal of Teacher Education, 35(2), 139–161. doi: 10.1080/02619768.2011.643465
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harjunen, E., & Rautopuro, J. (2015). Thinking about language use and languaging thinking. Learning outcomes in mother tongue and literature at the end of basic education in 2014. Helsinki: Finnish Education Evaluation Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Ivanič, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Kearney, P., & Plax, T. G. (1992). Student resistance to control. In V. P. Richmond & J. C. McCroskey (Eds.), Power in the classroom: Communication, control and concern (pp. 85–100). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Kimmerle, J., Moskaliuk, J., Oeberst, A., & Cress, U. (2015). Learning and collective knowledge construction with social media: A process-oriented perspective. Educational Psychologist, 50(2), 120–137. Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00461520.2015.1036273 doi: 10.1080/00461520.2015.1036273
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knight, E., & Gandomi, N. (2010). Participatory media for education: Next generation teaching and learning. UC Berkley: School of Information. Retrieved from http://ngtl.ischool.berkeley.edu/publications/participatory-media-for-education
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the new media age. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic theory of contemporary communication. London: Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Krippendorff, K. (1986). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (6th ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lonka, K. (1997). Explorations of constructive processes in student learning. Department of Psychology, University of Helsinki. Helsinki, Finland: Yliopistopaino.
   Google Scholar
• Lopez Ortiz, B. I., Lin, L., & Tipton, M. (2009). Co-authoring in online problem-based learning: Collaborative approaches and challenges. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(2), 293–303. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol5no2/ortiz_0609.pdf
   Google Scholar
• National Core Curriculum for Basic Education. (2004). Finnish National Board of Education. Retrieved from http://www.oph.fi/english/sources_of_information/core_curricula_and_qualification_requirements/basic_education
   Google Scholar
• Neal, M. R. (2011). Writing assessment and re revolution in digital texts and technologies. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.
   Google Scholar
• Nordmark, M. (2014). Digitalt skrivande I gymnasieskolans svenskundervisning. En ämnesdidaktisk studie av skrivprocessen. Örebro studies in Education 45. Örebro Studies in Educational Sciences an Emphasis on Didactics 9. Örebro: Örebro universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Poe, M. (2013). Making digital writing assessment fair for diverse writers. In H. A. McKee, & D. N. DeVoss (Eds.), Digital writing. Assessment and evaluation. Computers and composition. Digital Press/Utah State University Press. Retrieved from http://ccdigitalpress.org/dwae/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Reilly, C:A, & Atkins, A. T. (2013). Rewarding risk: Designing aspirational assessment processes for digital writing projects. In H. A. McKee, & D. N. DeVoss (Eds.), Digital writing. Assessment and evaluation. Computers and composition. Digital Press/Utah State University Press. Retrieved from http://ccdigitalpress.org/dwae/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Sharples, M. (1999). How we write: Writing as creative design. London, UK: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Siemens, G. (2006). Knowing knowledge. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/KnowingKnowledge_LowRes.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Tainio, L., & Grünthal, S. (2012). Language and literature education: Principles and reflections on mother tongue and literature. In H. Niemi, A. Toom, & A. Kallioniemi (Eds.), Miracle of education. The principles and practices of teaching and learning in Finnish schools (pp. 149–160). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Vauras, I. (2008). Tunneikonit verkkokeskustelussa? -) [Emoticons in virtual conversations? -)]. In S. Routarinne & T. Uusi-Hallila (Eds.), Nuoret kielikuvassa. Kouluikäisten kieli 2000-luvulla. [The language of young people in the 21st century] (pp. 210–221). Helsinki, Finland: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
   Google Scholar