Suggested Readings for Admission Exam

  • Branch, R. M. (2014). Instructional Design Models. In J. M. Spector, M.D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 77-87). New York: Springer Science+Business Media.
  • Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L. & Cocking, R.R. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
  • Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, SAGE. NY.
  • Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. W. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Pearson Higher Ed.
  • Sawyer, K. (2014) The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences. Cambridge University Press. NY.
  • Spector, M. J. (2015) Foundations of Educational Technology: Integrative Approaches and Interdisciplinary Perspectives. Routledge, UK.
  • Akpınar, Y. & Aslan, Ü. (2015) Supporting children’s learning of probability through video game programming. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 53(2), 228-259.
  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 32-40.
  • Butcher, K.R. (2006). Learning from text with diagrams: Promoting mental model development and inference generation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 182–197.
  • Chen, C.M. & Chung, H. (2015) Effects of different video lecture types on sustained attention, emotion, cognitive load, and learning performance Computers & Education, 80, 108-121.
  • Cordova, D. I. & Lepper, M. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology. 88(4). 715-730.
  • DeRouin, R.E, Fritzsche, B.A., & Salas, E. (2004). Optimizing e-learning: Research-based guidelines for learner-controlled training. Human Resource Management, 43(2–3), 147–162.
  • Harskamp, E.G., Mayer, R.E., & Suhre, C. (2007). Does the modality principle for multimedia learning apply to science classrooms? Learning and Instruction, 17, 465–477.
  • Jamet, E., & Bohec, O. (2007). The effect of redundant text in multimedia instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 588–598.
  • Johnson, A. M., Reisslein, J. & Reisslein, M. (2014). Representation sequencing in computer-based engineering education. Computers & Education, 72, 249–261.
  • Kirschner, P. A. & van Merrienböer, J. G. (2013). Do learners really know best? Urban legends in education. Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 169-183.
  • Koehler, M. J. & Mishra, P. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. The Teachers College Record, 108(6): 1017–1054.
  • Lim, J., Reiser, R.A., & Olina, Z. (2009). The effects of part-task and whole task instructional approaches on acquisition and transfer of a complex cognitive skill. Ed. Tec. Research & Development, 57, 61–77.
  • Mayer, R.E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312–320.
  • Mayer, R.E., Hegarty, M., Mayer, S., & Campbell, J. (2005). When static media promote active learning: Annotated illustrations versus narrated animations in multimedia instruction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 11, 256–265. 
  • Mayer, R.E., Mathias, A., & Wetzell, K. (2002). Fostering understanding of multimedia messages through pretraining: Evidence for a two-stage theory of mental model construction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 147–154.
  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia learning: The role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 358–368.
  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2000). A coherence effect in multimedia learning: The case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 117–125.
  • Moreno, R., & Mayer, R.E. (2004). Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 165–173.
  • Ozogul, G., Johnson, A., & Atkinson, K. (2013) Investigating the impact of pedagogical agent gender matching and learner choice on learning outcomes and perceptions. Computers & Education. 67, 36–50.
  • Shapiro, A.M. (2008). Hypermedia design as learner scaffolding. Educational Technology Research & Development, 56, 29–44.