With the goal of furthering the use of IT to facilitate learning and to enhance creative potential, in this dissertation I have described a “creative knowledge engineering” model consisting of three phases: information sharing and search, active knowledge construction, and creative thinking. Based on this model, I developed a series of Internet-based learning activities and environments in which learners can experience multiple aspects of
self-awareness regarding information retrieval or learning processes to facilitate learning and creative thinking (Fig. 12).
breaking conceptual boundaries and
awareness of shared resources and knowledge construction process Study2
Knowledge construction
awareness of information sharing and search process
awareness of shared resources and knowledge construction process Study2
Knowledge construction
awareness of information sharing and search process
Study1 Information search
Self-awareness / Outcomes
Figure 12. Features of the 3 studies.
According to the study results, (a) the distinctively human factor known as thinking style was identified as a central factor in predicting search intention, (b) active knowledge construction can be encouraged through the design of a “beyond sharing” process for
knowledge elaboration within social communities, and (c) concept boundaries can be broken and creative potential developed by improving learner conceptual self-awareness using the introspective and comparative features of the integrated concept map system (ICMSys).
Future researchers may be interested in elaborating on the underlying theories or
design principles to create better understanding of the benefits of creative knowledge engineering, or to extend CKE application domains. For example, tailoring search engine interfaces to conform to personal information needs has the potential to reduce information complexity in order to increase user comprehension. By retrieving shared information from the Internet more efficiently, users can focus on active knowledge integration by
incorporating proper information into existing cognitive structures. Researchers can adopt the CCL strategy used in the BeyondShare activity to extend simple information sharing to active learning and to develop a sense of a learning community via peer modeling and assessment in a CSCW environment.
Furthermore, researchers and teachers may be interested in using the ICMSys to help learners identify novel relationships between ideas by improving conceptual self-awareness and breaking habitual concept boundaries. Promoting self-awareness may not directly result in greater creativity, but it may represent an important step toward overcoming personal barriers to creativity. The CKE application domain may include IT applications, educational technology, digital content, or information communication. Researchers or teachers can apply parts of the CKE model to devise activities for specific purposes, with the goal being to help learners appreciate others’ viewpoints, recognize their own thinking habits, and encourage creative mindsets.
References
Ausubel, D. P. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart
& Winston.
Baker, M., Hansen, T., Joiner, R., & Traum, D. (1999). The role of grounding in collaborative learning tasks. In Dillenbourg, P. (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and
computational approaches, Amsterdam: Elsevier, 31-63.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A Social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Bangert-Drowns, R. L., Kulick, C. L. C., Kulick, J. A., & Morgan, M. T. (1991). The
instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61, 213-238.
Barron, R. S., Kerr, N. L., & Miller, N. (1992). Group process, group decision, group action.
Bristol, PA: Open University Press.
Battelle, J. (2005). The search: How Google and its rivals rewrote the rules of business and transformed our culture. New York, USA: Portfolio Hardcover.
Beers, P. J., Boshuizen, H. P. A., Kirschner, P. A., & Gijselaers, W. H. (2005). Computer support for knowledge construction in collaborative learning environments.
Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 623-643.
Bharat, K., & Mihaila, G. A. (2001). When experts agree: Using non-affiliated experts to rank popular topics. Proceedings of the 10th International World Wide Web Conference, Hong Kong. Available online at http://www.www10.org/cdrom/papers/474/index.html Bilal, D. (1998). Children’s search processor in using World Wide Web search engines: An
exploratory study. Proceedings of the 61st American Society for Information Science Annual Meeting (pp. 45-53). Pittsburgh, PA.
Bilal, D. (2000). Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine. I. Cognitive,
physical, and affective behaviors on fact-based tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51, 646-665.
Bilal, D. (2001). Children’s use of the Yahooligans! Web search engine. II. Cognitive and physical behaviors on research tasks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 52, 118-137.
Bilal, D., & Kirby, J. (2002). Differences and similarities in information seeking: Children and adults as Web users. Information Processing and Management, 38, 649-670.
Bisseret, A., Figeac-Letang, C., & Falzon, P. (1988). Modelling opportunistic reasonings: The cognitive activity of traffic signal setting technicians. INRIA Technical Report No.
893. Rocquencourt: INRIA.
Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine.
Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on the World Wide Web (pp.107-117).
Brisbane, Australia.
Brown, A. L. (1987). Metacognition, executive control, self-regulation, and other more mysterious mechanisms. In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, motivation, and understanding (pp. 65–116). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Burleson, W. (2005). Developing creativity, motivation, and self-actualization with learning systems. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63, 436–451.
Canas, A. J., Ford, K. M., Novak, J. D., Hayes, P., Reichherzer, T., & Suri, N. (2001). Online concept maps: Enhancing collaborative learning by using technology with concept maps. The Science Teacher, 68(2), 49-51.
Cañas, A. J., Hill, G., Carff, R., Suri, N., Lott, J., Eskridge, T., Gómez, G., Arroyo, M., &
Carvajal, R. (2004). CmapTools: A knowledge modeling and sharing environment. In Proceedings of the first international conference on concept mapping (pp. 125–133), Pamplona, Spain.
Chang, K. E., Sung, Y. T., & Lee, C. L. (2003). Web-based collaborative inquiry learning.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 56–69.
Chiu, C. H., Huang, C. C., & Chang, W. T. (2000). The evaluation and influence of interaction in network supported collaborative concept mapping. Computers &
Education, 34(1), 17–25.
Chung, W. K., O’Neil, F., Herl, E., & Dennis, A. (1997). Use of the networked collaborative concept mapping to measure team processes and team outcomes. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, Illinois.
Coffey, J. W. (2007). A meta-cognitive tool for courseware development, maintenance, and reuse. Computers & Education, 48(4), 548–566.
Conn, S. R., & Rieke, M. L. (Eds.) (1994). l6PF (5th ed.): Technical manual. Champaign, IL:
Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc.
Crooks, T. J. (1988). The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research, 58, 45-56.
Cugini, J., Laskowski, S., & Sebrechts, M. (2000). Design of 3D visualization of search results: Evolution and evaluation. Proceedings of IST/SPIE's 12th Annual
International Symposium—Electronic Imaging 2000: Visual Data Exploration and Analysis (pp. 23-28). San Jose, CA.
Duval, S., & Wicklund, R. A. (1972). A theory of objective self-awareness. New York:
Academic Press.
Edmonds, G. S., & Pusch, R. (2002). Creating shared knowledge: Instructional knowledge management systems. Educational Technology and Society, 5(1), 100-104.
Falchikov, N. (1995). Peer feedback marking: Developing peer assessment. Innovations in Education & Training International, 32, 175-187.
Falchikov, N., & Magin, D. (1997). Detecting gender bias in peer marking of students’ group process work. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 22, 385-396.
Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Creativity: A knowledge base, metacognitive skills, and personality factors. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29(4), 265–268.
Finke, R. A., Ward, T. M., & Smith, S. M. (1992). Creative cognition: Theory, research, and applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Fisher, K. M. (1990). Semantic-networking: The new-kid on the block. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27, 1001–1018.
Fischer, G., Giaccardi, E., Eden, H., Sugimoto, M., & Ye, Y. (2005). Beyond binary choices:
Integrating individual and social creativity. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63, 482–512.
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognition aspects of problem-solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231–235). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ford, C. M. (1996). A theory of individual creative action in multiple social domains.
Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1112–1142.
Ford, N., & Miller, D. (1996). Gender differences in Internet perception and use. Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Electronic Library and Visual Information Research (ASLIB) (pp. 183-192). London, UK.
Ford, N., Miller, D., & Moss, N. (2005). Web search strategies and human individual differences: Cognitive and demographic factors, Internet attitudes, and approaches.
NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Freeman, M. (1995). Peer assessment by groups of group work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 20, 289-300.
Fry, P. S., & Lupart, J. L. (1987). Cognitive Processes in Children's Learning. Springfield,
MA: Charles C. Thomas.
Gaines, B. R., & Shaw, M. L. G. (1995). Concept maps as hypermedia components.
International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 43(3), 323–361.
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds: An anatomy of creativity seen through the lives of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Gandhi. New York: Basic Books.
Garner, R., & Alexander, P. A. (1989). Metacognition: Answered and unanswered questions.
Educational Psychologist, 24(2), 143–158.
Greenberg, S., & Marwood, D. (1994). Real time groupware as a distributed system:
Concurrency control and its effect on the interface. In Furuta, R. & Neuwirth, C.
(Eds.), Proceedings of the ACM CSCW’94 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, New York: ACM Press, 207-217.
Haveliwala, T. H. (2002). Topic-sensitive PageRank. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on the World Wide Web (pp. 517-526). Honolulu, HI.
Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., & Mäkitalo, K. (2003). Sharing perspectives in virtual interaction:
Review of methods of analysis. In Wasson, B., Ludvigsen, S. & Hoppe, U. (Eds.), Designing for change in networked learning environments, Proceedings of the
International Conference on Computer-Support for Collaborative Learning, Dortrecht:
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 395-404.
Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1992). Order effects in belief updating: The belief adjustment model. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 1-55.
Holscher, C., & Strube, G. (2000). Web search behavior of Internet experts and newbies.
Computer Networks, 33, 337-346.
Hsieh-Yee, I. (2001). Research on Web search behavior. Library & Information Science Research, 23, 167–185.
Huang, C. Y. (2004). The establishment of a thinking style questionnaire for elementary students and its creativity related research. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Hsinchu University of Education, Taiwan.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1998). Active learning: Cooperation in the college classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book.
Johnson, D. W., Maruyama, G., Johnson, R., Nelson, D., & Skon, L. (1981). Effects of cooperative, competitive, and individualistic goal structures on achievement: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 47-62.
Katz, Y. J. (2002). Attitudes affecting college students’ preferences for distance learning.
Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(1), 2-9.
Kim, K. S., & Allen, B. (2002). Cognitive and task influences on Web searching behavior.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 52(2), 109-119.
Kleinberg, J. M. (1998). Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. Proceedings of the 9th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (pp.668-677). San Francisco, CA.
Komis, V., Avouris, N., & Fidas, C. (2002). Computer-supported collaborative concept mapping: Study of interaction. Education and Information Technologies, 7(2), 169-188.
Kornilakis, H., Grigoriadou, M., Papanikolaou, K. A., & Gouli, E. (2004). Using WordNet to support interactive concept map construction. In Proceedings of the fourth IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies, Joensuu, Finland.
Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002). Sociability in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Educational Technology and Society, 5(1), 8-22.
Kremer, R. (1996). Toward a multi-user, programmable web concept mapping “Shell” to handle multiple formalisms. In Proceedings of the tenth Banff knowledge acquisition workshop, Banff, Alberta, Canada.
Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C. L. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58, 79-97.
Last, D. A., O’ Donnell, A. M., & Kelly, A. E. (2001). The effects of prior knowledge and goal strength on the use of hypertext. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 10(1), 3-25.
Lazander, A. W., Biemans, H. J. A., & Wopereis, I. G. J. H. (2000). Differences between novice and experienced users in searching information on the World Wide Web.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 51(6), 576-581.
Lin, C., & Tsai, C. (2005). Navigation flow map method of representing students' search strategies on the Web. Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (pp. 3229-3236). Chesapeake, USA: AACE.
Lin, S. S. J., Liu, E. Z. F., & Yuan, S. –M. (2002). Student attitudes toward networked peer assessment: Case studies of undergraduate students and senior high school students.
International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(2), 241-254.
Lin, S. S. J., Sun, C. T., & Kao, G. Y. M. (2002). Designing a networked-sharing construction environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 489-492.
Liu, E. Z. F., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. –M. (2002). Alternatives to instructor assessment: A
case study of comparing self and peer assessment with instructor assessment under networked innovative assessment procedures. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(4), 1-10.
Malone, J., & Dekkers, J. (1984). The concept map as an aid to information in science and mathematics. School Science and Mathematics, 84(3), 220–231.
Michinov, N., & Primois, C. (2005). Improving productivity and creativity in online groups through a social comparison process: New evidence for asynchronous electronic brainstorming. Computers in Human Behavior, 21(1), 11–28.
Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). Engaging students in active learning: The case for personalized multimedia messages. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(4), 724-733.
McCarthy, C., Bligh, J., Jennings, K., & Tangney, B. (2005). Virtual collaborative learning environments for music: Networked drumsteps. Computers & Education, 44(2), 173-195.
Mulder, I., & Swaak, J. (2002). Assessing group learning and shared understanding in technology mediated interaction. Educational Technology and Society, 5(1), 35-47.
Mulder, I., Swaak, J., & Kessels, J. (2004). In search of reflective behavior and shared understanding in ad hoc expert teams. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(2), 141-154.
Mullen, B., Johnson, C., & Salas, E. (1991). Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: A meta-analytic integration. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 12, 3–23.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977). Telling more than we can know: verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84(3), 231–259.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning how to learn. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Okebukola, P. A., & Jegede, O. J. (1989). Cognitive preference and learning model as
determinates of meaningful learning through concept mapping. Science Education, 71, 232–241.
O'Reilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software, retrieved October 30, 2006 from
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html.
Rada, R. (1998). Efficiency and effectiveness in computer-supported peer-peer learning.
Computers and Education, 30(3/4), 137-146.
Reader, W., & Hammond, N. (1994). Computer-based tools to support learning from
hypertext: Concept mapping tools and beyond. Computers & Education, 22, 99–106.
Resnick, M. (1996). Distributed constructionism. Proceedings of the International
Conference on Learning Science, Northwestern University, retrieved May 20, 2004 from http://llk.media.mit.edu/papers/archive/Distrib-Construc.html.
Resnick, M. (2002). Rethinking learning in the digital age. In Kirkman, G. (Ed.), The Global Information Technology Report: Readiness for the networked word, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 32-37.
Roschelle, J., & Teasley, S. (1995). The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In O'Malley, C. E. (Ed.), Computer supported collaborative learning, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 69-97.
Roth W. M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1992). The social construction of scientific concepts or the concept map as a conscription device and tool for social thinking in high school
science. Science Education, 76, 531-557.
Rouet, J. F. (2003). What was I looking for? The influence of task specificity and prior knowledge on students’ search strategies in hypertext. Interacting with Computers, 15(3), 409-428.
Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Shavelson, R. J. (1996). Problems and issues in the use of concept maps in science assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 33(6), 569-600.
Saulsman, L. M., & Page, A. C. (2004). The five-factor model and personality disorder empirical literature: A meta-analytic review. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1055-1085.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1991). Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: A challenge for the design of new knowledge media. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 1(1), 37-68.
Selker, T. (2005). Fostering motivation and creativity for computer users. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63, 410–421.
Shapiro, A. M. (2000). The effect of interactive overviews on the development of conceptual structure in novices learning from hypermedia. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(1), 57-78.
Stahl, G. (2005). Group cognition in computer-assisted collaborative learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 79-90.
Strachan, I. B., & Wilcox, S. (1996). Peer and self assessment of group work: Developing an effective response to increased enrollment in a third year course in microclimatology.
Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 20(3), 343-353.
Sternberg, R. J. (1994). Thinking and problem solving. San Diego, USA: Academic Press, Inc.
Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Thinking styles. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (1995). Styles of thinking in school. European Journal for High Ability, 6, 201-219.
Sternberg, R. J., & Wagner, R. K. (1999). Readings in cognitive psychology. Orlando, USA:
Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
Suls, J., & Fletcher, B. (1983). Social comparison in the social and physical sciences: An archival study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 575–580.
Suthers, D. (2005). Technology affordances for intersubjective learning: A thematic agenda for CSCL. Paper presented at the International Conference of Computer Support for Collaborative Learning, May 30-June 4, 2005, Taipei, Taiwan.
Tauer, J. M., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2004). The effects of cooperation and competition on intrinsic motivation and performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86(6), 849-861.
Topping, K. J. (1998). Peer assessment between students in colleges and universities. Review of Educational Research, 68, 249-276.
Turner, J. C., Meyer, D. K., Cox, K. E., Logan, C., DiCintio, M., & Thomas, C. (1998).
Creating contexts for involvement in mathematics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(4), 730-745.
Van Lehn, K. A., Chi, M. T. H., Baggett, W., & Murray, R. C. (1995). Progress report:
Towards a theory of learning during tutoring. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Learning Research and Development Center.
Wallace, J. D., & Mintzes, J. J. (1990). The concept map as a research tool: Exploring conceptual change in biology. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 1033–1052.
Yang, S. J. H., Chen, I. Y. L., & Shao, N. W. Y. (2004). Ontology enabled annotation and knowledge management for collaborative learning in virtual learning community.
Educational Technology & Society, 7(4), 70-81.
Yuan, W. (1997). End-user searching behavior in information retrieval: A longitudinal study.
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(3), 227-229.
Zamir, O., & Etzioni, O. (1999). Grouper: A dynamic clustering interface to Web search results. Proceedings of 8th WWW Conference (pp. 1361-1374). Toronto, Canada.
Zhang, L. F., & Sternberg, R. J. (2005). A threefold model of intellectual styles. Educational
Psychology Review, 17(1), 1-53.