New Science of Learning: Exploring the Future of Education



There is an abundance of literature themed with teaching in the knowledge society. Most educators have a shared belief that education in the future ought to offer the knowledge society a qualitatively different approach to encounter the demands of twenty-first century skills. Many argued that existing pedagogies and practices are unable to address the new paradigms in education. The needs to understand the complex processes of learning, transformed by the emerging technologies and social interactions, are widely debated in the academia as learning is becoming ubiquitous. In the midst of dynamic changes and confluence of computers, communication, media, and culture, the notion of learning in schools, communities, and social networking environments need to be freshly examined with theoretical lenses from interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary perspectives. The chapters in this book, brought together by leading educators and researchers from highly regarded institutions, share their experiences and provide theoretical frameworks, along with their contemporary research in the role of cognition, computers, and collaboration in education. In the concluding chapter, the major contributions and salient feature by the contributors are summarized with a view to inform the readers about the new developments in this area.


Open Educational Resource Nominal Group Technique Multimedia Environment Metacognitive Control Social Annotation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., et al. (2004). How does distance education compare to classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Brophy, J., & Good, T. (1986). Teacher behavior and student achievement. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.). New York: McMillan.Google Scholar
  3. Cassidy, T., Stanley, S., & Bartlett, R. (2006). Reflecting on video feedback as a tool for learning skilled movement. International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching, The Sport Coach as Learner, 1, 279–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cazden, C. B. (2001, 1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann (original work published 1988).Google Scholar
  5. DiGiano, C., & Patton, C. (2002). Orchestrating handhelds in the classroom with SRI’s ClassSync™. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning 2002 (pp. 706–707). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  6. Dillenbourg, P., & Fischer, F. (2007). Basics of computer-supported collaborative learning. Zeitschrift für Berufs- und Wirtschaftspädagogik, 21, 111–130.Google Scholar
  7. Eckrich, J., Widule, C. J., Shrader, R. A., & Maver, J. (1994). The effects of video observational training on video and live observational proficiency. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 13, 216–227.Google Scholar
  8. Fischer, F., Wecker, C., Schrader, J., Gerjets, P. H., & Hesse, F. W. (2005, August). Use-inspired basic research on the orchestration of cognition, instruction and technology in the classroom. Paper presented at the SIG Invited Symposium “Instructional design and empirical research: Experiments and/or design experiments” at the 11th Conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction (EARLI), Nicosia, Cyprus.Google Scholar
  9. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Walter Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gravier, C., Fayolle, J., Noyel, G., Leleve, A., & Benmohamed, H. (2006), Distance learning: Closing the gap between remote labs and learning management systems, Proceedings of IEEE First International Conference on E-Learning in Industrial Electronics, Hammamet, Tunisie, December 18–20, pp. 130–.134.Google Scholar
  11. Gunawardena, C., Carabajal, K., & Lowe, C. A. (2001). Critical analysis of models and methods used to evaluate online learning networks. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED456159).Google Scholar
  12. Hakkarainen, K. (2003). Progressive inquiry in a computer-supported biology class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 40(10), 1072–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & Barrows, H. S. (2008). Facilitating collaborative knowledge building. Cognition and Instruction, 26(1), 48–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jacobson, M. J., & Archodidou, A. (2000). The design of hypermedia tools for learning: Fostering conceptual change and transfer of complex scientific knowledge. Journal of the Learning Science, 9, 145–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kanuka, H. (2005). An exploration into facilitating higher levels of learning in a text-based Internet learning environment using diverse instructional strategies. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 10(3). Retrieved August 5, 2005, from
  16. Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (1998). On-line social interchange, discord, and knowledge construction. Journal of Distance Education, 13(1), 57–74.Google Scholar
  17. Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education. Chicago: Association Press/Follett.Google Scholar
  18. McManus, W., & Segner, R. (1991). Hypermedia in construction education. Paper presented at the Associated Schools of Construction conference. Retrieved August 1, 2003, from
  19. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: Social organization in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  20. Nussbaum, M., Hartley, K., Sinatra, G. M., Reynolds, R. E., & Bendixen, L. D. (2002). Enhancing the quality of on-line discussions. New Orleans, LA: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar
  21. Roschelle, J., Rafanan, K., Estrella, G., Nussbaum, M., & Claro, S. (2009). From handheld collaborative tool to effective classroom module: Embedding CSCL in a broader design framework. In Proceedings of computer supported collaborative learning practices (pp. 395–403). Rhodes, Greece: ISLS.Google Scholar
  22. Rourke, L. (2005). Learning through online discussion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Alberta, Edmonton Alberta Press.Google Scholar
  23. Sinclair, J., & Coulthard, M. (1975). Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Stahl, E., Zahn, C., & Finke, M. (2006). Knowledge acquisition by hypervideo design: An instructional program for university courses. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 15(3), 285–302.Google Scholar
  25. Thomas, M. J. W. (2002). Learning with incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 351–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The Differentiated Classroom: Responding to the Needs of All Learners, ASCD.
  27. von Inqvald, E. (2009). Teachers’ implementation and orchestration of Cabri: Initial use of a dynamic geometry software package in mathematics teaching. VDM Verlag, SaarbrückenGoogle Scholar
  28. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). Thinking and speech. In R. W. Rieber and A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, Volume 1: Problems of general psychology (Trans. N. Minick). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  29. Wells, G. (1993). Reevaluating the IRF sequence: A proposal for the articulation of theories of activity and discourse for the analysis of teaching and learning in the classroom. Linguistics in Education, 5(1), 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Emirates College for Advanced EducationAbu DhabiUAE

Personalised recommendations