Professional Development at a Distance

References

• Anderson, T. D. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M. G. Moore and W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (p. 129–144). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, T. D., & Garrison, D. R. (1998). Learning in a networked world: New roles and responsibilities. In C. C. Gibson (Ed.), Distance learners in higher education (pp. 97–112). Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Dede, C. (2006) Online professional development for teachers: Emerging models and methods. Cambridge:, MA: Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K. (1989). Interpretive interactionism. Newbury Park: CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A, Shea, P., Pelz, W., & Swan, K. (2000). Factors influencing faculty satisfaction with asynchronous teaching and learning in the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(3), 245–278.
   Google Scholar
• Garet, M. S., Porter, A. C., Desimone, L., Birman, B. F., & Yoon, K. S. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915–945.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R. (2006). Online community of inquiry update: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Unpublished paper. Retrieved October 10, 2007, from http://communitiesofinquiry.com/sub/papers.html
   Google Scholar
• Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87–105.
   Google Scholar
• Guskey, T. R. (2003). What makes professional development effective? Phi Delta Kappan, 84(10), 748–750.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• International Association for K-12 Online Learning (iNACOL). (2010). National standards for quality for online learning. Retrieved September 11, 2010, from http://www.inacol.org/research/nationalstandards/NACOL%20Standards%20Quality%20Online%20Courses%202007.pdf
   Google Scholar
• International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2008). National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (2nd ed). Retrieved November 11, 2010, from http://www.iste.org/standards/nets-for-teachers.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.
   Google Scholar
• Ketelhut, D. J., McCloskey, E., Dede, C., Breit L., & Whitehouse, P. (2006). Core tensions in online teacher professional development. In C. Dede (Ed.), Online professional development for teachers: Emerging models and methods (pp. 237–263). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
   Google Scholar
• Killion, J. (2001). E-Learning standards for educators: Implementing the standards for staff development. National Staff Development Council: Oxford Ohio. Retrieved October 10, 2007, from http://www.nsdc.org/library/authors/e-learning.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lao, T., & Gonzalez, C. (2005). Understanding online learning through qualitative descriptions of professor and students’ experiences. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(3), 459–475.
   Google Scholar
• Mayer, R. E., Heiser, J., & Lonn [LOON?], S. (2001). Cognitive constraints on multimedia learning: When presenting more material results in less understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93, 390–397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore, J. (2005). The Sloan Consortium quality framework and the five pillars. The Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C).
   Google Scholar
• Moore, M. G. (1989). Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• National Education Association (NEA). (2001, February). Higher Education on the Web, 7(1). Retrieved November 3, 2002, from http://www.nea.org/he/heupdate/vol7no1.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pate, P. E., & Thompson, K. F. (2003). Effective professional development: What is it? In V.A. Anfara & P.G. Andrews (Eds.), Handbook of research in middle level education, leaders for a movement: Professional preparation and development of middle level teachers and administrators (pp. 123–143). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, J., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1). Retrieved June 1, 2004, from http://www.aln.org/pubhcations/jaln/v7n1/index.asp
   Google Scholar
• Rossman, M. (1999). Successful online teaching using an asynchronous learner discussion forum. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 3(2), 91–97.
   Google Scholar
• Sandholtz, J. (2001). Learning to teach with technology: A comparison of teacher development programs. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 9(3), 349–374.
   Google Scholar
• Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1–22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shea, P., Pickett, A., & Pelz, W. (2003). A follow-up investigation of “teaching presence” in the SUNY Learning Network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2).
   Google Scholar
• Shea, P., Swan, K., Fredericksen, E., & Pickett, A. (2002). Student satisfaction and reported learning in the SUNY learning network. Elements of quality online education. Needham, MA: Sloan-C.
   Google Scholar
• Signer, B. (2008). Online professional development: Combining best practices from teacher, technology and distance education. Professional Development in Education, 34(2), 205–218.
   Google Scholar
• Sloan Consortium (Sloan-C). (2003). Elements of quality online education. The Sloan Consortium. In Bourne, J., & Moore, J. (Eds.), The Sloan-C series: Vol. 4. Retrieved from http://www.sloan-c.org
   Google Scholar
• Southern Regional Education Board (SREB). (2006). Standards for quality online courses. Retrieved September 11, 2010, from http://www.sreb.org/programs/edtech/pubs/2006Pubs/06T05_Standards_quality_online_courses.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sparks, D. (2002). Designing powerful staff development for teachers and principals. Oxford, OH: National Staff Development Council.
   Google Scholar
• Sparks, D., & Hirsh, S. (1997). A new vision for staff development. Alexandria, VA, and Oxford, OH: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development and National Staff Development Council.
   Google Scholar
• Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness: What the research tells us. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education, practice and direction (pp. 13–25). Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education.
   Google Scholar
• Swan, K. (2006). Threaded discussion. Retrieved December 15, 2006, from http://www.oln.org/conferences/ODCE2006/papers/Swan_Threaded_Discussion.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Swan, K., Holmes, A., Vargas, J., Jennings, S., Meier, E., & Rubenfeld, L. (2002). Situated professional development and technology integration. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10(2), 169–190.
   Google Scholar
• Swan, Schenker, Aviv, Shea, & Lin, L. (2006). Student satisfaction with online learning: A concept analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
   Google Scholar
• Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A., Pelz, W., & Maher, G. (2000). Building knowledge building communities: Consistency, contact and communication in the virtual classroom. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(4), 359–383.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tallent-Runnels, M., Thomas, J., Lan, W., Cooper, S., Ahern, T., Shaw, S., & Liu, X. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93–135.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. New York: New York Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tu, C. H. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. American Journal of Distance Learning, 16(3), 131–150.
   Google Scholar
• Wolcott, H. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, and interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar