Reaching beyond an online/offline divide: invoking the rhizome in higher education course design

References

• Alexander, S., & Boud, D. (2001). Learners still learn from experience when online. In S. Alexander & D. Boud (Eds.), Teaching & learning online – Pedagogies for new technologies (pp. 3–15). London: Kogan Page.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 775–786.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buckingham, D., Scanlon, M., & Sefton-Green, J. (2001). Selling the digital dream: Marketing educational technology to teachers and parents. In A. Loveless & V. Ellis (Eds.), ICT, pedagogy and the curriculum: Subject to change (pp. 20–40). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Burke, C. (2013). Looking back to imagine the future: Connecting with the radical past in technologies of school design. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23, 39–55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castells, M. (2010). Globalisation, networking, urbanisation: Reflections on the special dynamics of the information age. Urban Studies, 47, 2737–2745.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chess, S., & Booth, P. (2014). Lessons down a rabbit hole: Alternate reality gaming in the classroom. New Media and Society, 16, 1002–1017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clegg, S. (2010a). Academic identities re-formed? Contesting technological determinism in accounts of the digital age. Contemporary Social Science, 6, 175–189.
   Google Scholar
• Clegg, S. (2010b). Time future – The dominant discourse for higher education. Time & Society, 19, 345–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism & schizophrenia. Minnesota, MN: University of Minnesota.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, R., Biesta, G., & Thorpe, M. (2009). Rethinking context for learning and teaching. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Facer, K. (2013). What is space for? Towards a politics and a language for the human in education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 23, 121–126.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison, D., & Vaughan, N. (2008). Blended learning in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
   Google Scholar
• Gilster, P. (1998). Digital literacy. New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Gunn, C., & Steel, C. (2012). Linking theory to practice in learning technology research. Research in Learning Technology, 20(2), doi:10.3402/rlt.v20i0.16148.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, R. (2013). Educational technology and the enclosure of academic labour inside public higher education. The Journal for Critical Education Policy Studies, 11(3), 52–82.
   Google Scholar
• Hartley, J. (2009). The uses of digital literacy. St Lucia: University of Queensland Press.
   Google Scholar
• Issroff, K., & Scanlon, E. (2002). Educational technology: The influence of theory. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2002(2), Art. 6. doi:http://doi.org/10.5334/2002-6
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A., & Wiegel, M. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Chicago, IL: The MacArthur Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy and learning: A multimodal approach. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Jones, C., Ramanau, R., Cross, S., & Healing, G. (2010). Net generation or digital natives: Is there a distinct new generation entering university? Computers & Education, 54, 722–732.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kennedy, G., Krause, K.-L., Judd, T., Churchward, A., & Gray, K. (2008). First year experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives? Australasian Journal of Digital Technology, 24, 108–122.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keppell, M., Souter, K., & Riddle, M. (Eds.). (2012). Physical and virtual learning spaces in higher education: Concepts for the modern learning environment. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
   Google Scholar
• Kirkwood, A. (2009). E-Learning: You don’t always get what you hoped for. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 18, 107–121.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2013). Missing: Evidence of a scholarly approach to teaching and learning with technology in higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 18, 327–337.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koltay, T. (2011). The media and the literacies: Media literacy, information literacy, digital literacy. Media, Culture & Society, 33, 211–221.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane, J., & Sharp, S. (2014). Pathways to success: Evaluating the use of ‘enabling pedagogies’ in a university transition course. Journal on Education, 2, 66–73.
   Google Scholar
• Lankshear, C., & Knobel, M. (Eds.). (2008). Digital literacies: Concepts, policies, practices. New York, NY: Peter Lang Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lea, M. R. (2013). Reclaiming literacies: Competing textual practices in a digital higher education. Teaching in Higher Education, 18, 106–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Littlejohn, A., & Pegler, C. (2007). Preparing for blended e-learning. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mangen, A., Walgermo, B. R., & Bronnick, K. (2013). Reading linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 58, 61–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margaryan, A., & Littlejohn, A. (2008). Repositories and communities at cross-purposes: Issues in sharing and reuse of digital learning resources. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24, 333–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason, R., & Rennie, F. (2008). E-learning and social networking handbook: Resources for higher education. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• McGettigan, A. (2012). Who let the dogs out? The privatization of higher education. radical philosophy, 174, 22–27.
   Google Scholar
• McWilliam, K., Hartley, J., & Gibson, M. (2008). Introduction: Digital literacy. Media International Australia, 128, 46–48.
   Google Scholar
• Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Molesworth, M., Scullion, R., & Nixon, E. (Eds.). (2010). The marketisation of higher education and the student as consumer. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Mundy, M.-A., Kupczynski, L., & Kee, R. (2012). Teacher’s perceptions of technology use in the schools. SAGE Open, 2(1), doi:10.1177/2158244012440813.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson, K., Courier, M., & Joseph, G. J. (2011). Teaching tip: An investigation of digital literacy needs of students. Journal of Information Systems Education, 22, 95–109.
   Google Scholar
• Nespor, J. (1994). Knowledge motion. London: The Falmer Press.
   Google Scholar
• Oblinger, D., & Oblinger, J. (Eds.). (2005). Education the net generation. EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Olapiriyakul, K., & Scher, J. M. (2006). A guide to establishing hybrid learning courses: Employing information technology to create a new learning experience, and a case study. The Internet and Higher Education, 9, 287–301.
   Google Scholar
• Oxford Reference. (2015). Overview: Ecosystem. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095741559
   Google Scholar
• Palfrey, J., & Gasser, U. (2008). Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. New York, NY: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Prensky, M. (2001a, October). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Prensky, M. (2001b, December). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 2: Do they really think differently? On the Horizon, 9(6), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Salaway, G., Caruso, J., with Nelson, M. (2008). The ECAR study of undergraduate students and information technology. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE.
   Google Scholar
• Sassen, S. (2002). Towards a sociology of information technology. Current Sociology, 50, 365–388.
   Google Scholar
• Schank, R. C. (2000). The virtual university. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 3, 9–16.
   Google Scholar
• Tapscott, A. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the net generation. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 68, 599–623.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tinto, V. (2003). Learning better together: The impact of learning communities on student success. Higher Education monograph series, 1(8).
   Google Scholar
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wenger, E., White, N., & Smith, J. D. (2009). Digital habitats: Stewarding technology for communities. Portland, OR: CPsquare.
   Google Scholar
• Whitton, N., & Moseley, A. (2012). Using games to enhance learning and teaching: A beginner’s guide. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Woltering, V., Herrler, A., Spitzer, K., & Spreckelsen, C. (2009). Blended learning positively affects students’ satisfaction and the role of the tutor in the problem-based learning process: Results of a mixed-method evaluation. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 14, 725–738.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Young, E. B., Genosko, G., & Watson, J. (2013). The Deleuze and Guattari dictionary. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar