Facilitating Shared Online Group Learning between Carers, Service Users and Social Work Students

REFERENCES

• Adelman, C. & Alexander, R. (1982) The Self-Evaluating Institution, Methuen, London.
   Google Scholar
• Alon, I. (2003) ‘Experiential learning in international business via the World Wide Web’, Journal of Teaching in International Business, vol. 14, no. 2–3, pp. 79–98.
   Google Scholar
• Banks, V. (2006) Ethics and Values in Social Work, Palgrave-Macmillan, Basingstoke.
   Google Scholar
• Beresford, P. & Croft, S. (2004) ‘Service users and practitioners reunited: the key component for social work reform’, British Journal of Social Work, vol. 34, pp. 53–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Branfield, F. (2007) User Involvement in Social Work Education, Shaping Our Lives National User Network/SCIE, London.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, K. & Young, N. (2008) ‘Building capacity for service user and carer involvement in social work education’, Social Work Education: The International Journal, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 84–96.
   Google Scholar
• Care Council for Wales (2004) The Approval and Visiting of Degree Courses in Social Work (Wales) Rules 2004, Care Council for Wales, Cardiff.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, A. (2005) Situational Analysis: Grounded Theory After the Postmodern Turn, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Conole, G., Hall, M. & Smith, S. (2002) ‘An evaluation of an online course for medical practitioners’, Educational Technology & Society, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 66–75.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, B. (2001) ‘Constructivism in social work: towards a participative practice viability’, British Journal of Social Work, vol. 31, pp. 721–738.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corich, S., Kinshuk, L. & Hunt, L. (2006) Measuring Critical Thinking within Discussion Forums using a Computerised Content Analysis Tool, Networked Learning Conference [online]. Available at: www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk/past/nlc2006/abstracts/pdfs/P07%20Corich.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Cragg, C., Dunning, J. & Ellis, J. (2008) ‘Teacher and student behaviours in face-to-face and on-line courses: dealing with complex concepts’, Journal of Distance Learning, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 115–128.
   Google Scholar
• Curtis, S., Gesler, W., Smith, G. & Washburn, S. (2000) ‘Approaches to sampling and case selection in qualitative research: examples in the geography of health’, Social Science and Medicine, vol. 50, pp. 1001–1014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Department of Health (2002) Requirements for Social Work Training, Department of Health, London.
   Google Scholar
• Freire, P. (1973) Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Harper and Row, Hagerstown, MN.
   Google Scholar
• Freire, P. & Faundez, A. (1989) Learning to Question: A Pedagogy of Liberation, WCC Publications, New York.
   Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005) ‘Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: interaction is not enough’, American Journal of Distance Education, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 133–148.
   Google Scholar
• Garrison, R. & Kanuka, H. (2004) ‘Blended learning: uncovering its transformative potential in higher education’, The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 95–105.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, M. & Webb, S. (2010) Ethics and Value Perspectives in Social Work, Palgrave, Basingstoke.
   Google Scholar
• Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C. & Anderson, T. (1997) ‘Analysis of global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computing conferencing’, Journal of Educational Computing Research, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 397–431.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haythornthwaite, C. & Andrews, R. (2011) E-learning Theory and Practice, Sage, London.
   Google Scholar
• Holley, D. & Oliver, M. (2009) ‘Negotiating the digital divide: narratives from the have and the have-nots’, Journal of Enhancing Learning in the Social Sciences (ELISS), vol. 1, no. 3 [online]. Available at: http://www.eliss.org.uk/, accessed 30 April 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Humphreys, C. (2005) ‘Service user involvement in social work education: a case example’, Social Work Education, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 797–803.
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, L. & Sabin, K. (2010) ‘Sampling hard-to-reach populations with respondent driven sampling’, Methodological Innovations Online, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 38–48.
   Google Scholar
• Jonassen, D., Davison, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J. & Bannan Haag, B. (1995) ‘Constructivism and computer mediated communication in distance education’, The American Journal of Distance Education, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 7–26.
   Google Scholar
• Kindred, M. (2010) Practical Guide to Working with Reluctant Clients in Health and Social Care, Jessica Kingsley, London.
   Google Scholar
• Krippendorff, K. (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Levin, B., He, Y. & Robbins, H. (2004) ‘Comparative study of synchronous and asynchronous online case discussions’, in Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2004, eds C.Crawford, et al., AACE, Chesapeake, VA, pp. 551–558.
   Google Scholar
• Levin, E. (2004) Involving Service Users and Carers in Social Work Education, SCIE/Policy Press, London.
   Google Scholar
• Loureiro, N. & Gunawardena, C. (2009) Analysis of Negotiation and Argumentative Skills in Online Collaborative Learning from Social, Cognitive, and Constructivist Perspectives, Open University, Netherlands [online]. Available at: www.ou.nl/Docs/Campaigns/ICDE209/Papers/Final_paper_592Miranda_Nazare_Loureiro.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• McLoughlin, C. & Panko, M. (2002) Multiple Perspectives on the Evaluation of Online Discussion, World Conference on Educational Multimedia, The Association of the Advancement of Computing in Education, Norfolk, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Molyneux, J. & Irvine, J. (2004) ‘Service user and carer involvement in social work training: a long and winding road?’, Social Work Education, vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 293–308.
   Google Scholar
• Neuendorf, K. (2002) The Content Analysis Guidebook, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Peck, E., Gulliver, P. & Towel, D. (2002) ‘Information, consultation or control: user involvement in mental health services in England at the turn of the century’, Journal of Mental Health, vol. 11, pp. 441–451.
   Google Scholar
• Rubin, F. (1995) A Basic Guide to Evaluation for Development Workers, Oxfam, Oxford.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. A. (1987) Educating the Reflective Practitioner, John Wiley & Sons, San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Smart, K. & Cappel, J. (2006) ‘Students' perceptions of online learning: a comparative study’, Journal of Information Technology Education, vol. 5, pp. 201–218.
   Google Scholar
• Sprenger, M. (2008) Differentiation through Learning Styles and Memory, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, N. (2010) Theorizing Social Work Practice, Palgrave, Basingstoke.
   Google Scholar
• Trivedi, P. & Wykes, T. (2002) ‘From passive subjects to equal partners: qualitative review of user involvement in research’, British Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 181, pp. 468–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trochim, W. (2009) ‘Evaluation policy and evaluation practice’, in Special Issue ‘Evaluation Policy and Evaluation Practice’, eds W.Trochim, M.Mark & L.Cooksy, New Directions for Evaluation, vol. 123, pp. 13–32.
   Google Scholar
• Turcotte, S. & Laferrière, T. (2004) ‘Integration of an online discussion forum in a campus-based undergraduate biology class’, Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, vol. 30, no. 2.
   Google Scholar
• Williams, J. & Goldberg, M. A. (2005) The Evolution of eLearning, 22nd Ascilite Conference, Brisbane, Australia.
   Google Scholar