EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 156 (2023) SHS Web Conf., 156 (2023) 09002 References
Open Access
Issue
SHS Web Conf.
Volume 156, 2023
International Conference on Teaching and Learning – Digital Transformation of Education and Employability (ICTL 2022)
Article Number 09002
Number of page(s) 5
Section T&L Content, Delivery, and Industry Engagement
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202315609002
Published online 13 January 2023
  1. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., et al (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Pearson, Allyn & Bacon. [Google Scholar]
  2. Brundiers, K., Barth, M., Cebrián, G., Cohen, M., Diaz, L., et al. (2021). Key competencies in sustainability in higher education— toward an agreed-upon reference framework. Sustainability Science, 16(1), 13-29. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chen, R. H. (2022). Effects of deliberate practice on blended learning sustainability: A community of inquiry perspective. Sustainability, 14(3), 1785. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cuseo, J. (2014). Student success: Definition, outcomes, principles and practices, Esource for college transitions. University of South Carolina: National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience & Students in Transition. [Google Scholar]
  5. De Freitas, S., & Oliver, M. (2005). Does e-learning policy drive change in higher education? A case study relating models of organisational change to e-learning implementation. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(1), 81-96. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. diFilipo, S. (2013). The policy of BYOD: Considerations for higher education. EDUCAUSE Review, 48(2), 60-61. [Google Scholar]
  7. Dziuban, C., Graham, C. R., Moskal, P. D., Norberg, A., & Sicilia, N. (2018). Blended learning: the new normal and emerging technologies. International journal of educational technology in Higher education, 15(1), 1-16. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (2009). A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice. New York: Routledge [Google Scholar]
  9. Gamage, K. A., Ekanayake, S. Y., & Dehideniya, S. C. (2022). Embedding Sustainability in Learning and Teaching: Lessons Learned and Moving Forward—Approaches in STEM Higher Education Programmes. Education Sciences, 12(3), 225. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. 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]
  11. Gikandi, J., Morrow, D., & Davis, N. (2011). Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2333-2351. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. Honnurvali, M. S., El-Saleh, A. A., Sheikh, A. M., Goh, K., Gupta, N., & Umar, T. (2022). Sustainable Engineering higher education in Oman-lessons learned from the pandemic (COVID-19), improvements, and suggestions in the teaching, learning and administrative framework. Journal of Engineering Education Transformations, 35(3). [Google Scholar]
  13. Humpl, S., & Andersen, T. (2022). The future of digital and online learning in higher education. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. [Google Scholar]
  14. Joosten, T., Weber, N. L., &Mc Guire, A. (2021). The blended institution of higher education: A model for a sustainable institution. https://www.everylearnereverywhere.org/resources/the-blended-institution-for-higher-education-a-model-for-a-sustainableinstitution/ [Google Scholar]
  15. Laurillard, D. (2014). Thinking about blended learning. London: UCL Institute of Education. Retrieved from http://kvab.be/denkersprogramma/files/DP_BlendedLearning_Thinking-about.pdf [Google Scholar]
  16. Lim, C. P., & Wang, T. (2016). A framework and selfassessment tool for building the capacity of higher education institutions for blended learning. Blended learning for quality higher education: Selected case studies on implementation from Asia-Pacific, 1-38. [Google Scholar]
  17. Pfeiffer, V. D. I., Scheiter, K., & Gemballa, S. (2012). Comparing and Combining Traditional Teaching Approaches and the Use of Video Clips for Learning How to Identify Species in an Aquarium. Journal of Biological Education, 46, (3), 140-148. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  18. Shea, P., & Bidjerano, T. (2010). Learning presence: Towards a theory of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and the development of a communities of inquiry in online and blended learning environments. Computers & education, 55(4), 1721-1731. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. Valiathan, P. (2002). Blended learning models. Learning circuits, 3(8), 50-59. [Google Scholar]
  20. van Puffelen, E. A. M., van Berkum, M., & Diederen, J. (2018). Balancing online and face-to-face teaching and learning activities. In Proceedings of the 14th International CDIO Conference, Kanazawa, Japan, June 28–July 2, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  21. Wang, S-K., Hsu, H-Y., Campbell, T., Coster, D. C., & Longhurst, M. (2014). An investigation of middle school science teachers’ and students’ use of technology inside and outside of classrooms: Considering whether digital natives are more technology savvy than their teachers. Educational Technology Research & Development, 62, 637-662. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. Wiek, A., Bernstein, M., Foley, R., Cohen, M., Forrest, N., Kuzdas, C., ... &Withycombe Keeler, L. (2016). Operationalising competencies in higher education for sustainable development. In: Handbook of Higher Education for Sustainable Development; Barth, M., Michelsen, G., Rieckmann, M., Thomas, I., Eds, 241-260. [Google Scholar]
  23. https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability/special_issues/higher_educational A special issue of Sustainability, ISSN 2071-1050 [Google Scholar]
  24. https://www.raiseyourhandtexas.org/blended-learning/understanding-different-models-blended-learning/ Published on August 2, 2016 [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.