| Figures | ||
| 1.1. | Pattern of Cretan Labyrinth (Wikimedia Commons, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cretan-labyrinth-round.svg) | 4 |
| 1.2. | Stages of Campbell’s Hero’s Journey (adapted from Vogler, 2007, p. 205) | 10 |
| 1.3. | John William Waterhouse: Psyche entering Cupid’s Garden, 1903 (Harris Museum and Art Gallery, Preston, UK) | 11 |
| 1.4. | The Hero’s Inner Journey as basis of The Learner’s Journey (adapted from Vogler, 2007, p. 205) | 14 |
| 1.5. | The Heroine’s Journey (adapted from Murdock, 1990, p. 5) | 15 |
| 5.1. | The reconstitutive nature of the learning journey across the liminal space (adapted from Land et al., 2010, p. xii) | 72 |
| 5.2. | Conceptual learning according to Vygotsky | 75 |
| 5.3. | Visual representation of the zones and direction of conceptual development | 80 |
| 5.4. | Apparent correspondences between the TCF liminal space and the Vygotskian zones of development | 81 |
| 5.5. | Visual representation of learner progression through conceptual thresholds as zones of development | 83 |
| 6.1. | The semantic plane (from Maton, 2016, p. 16) | 97 |
| 7.1. | Problems if students are not supported to enter and traverse liminal space | 105 |
| 7.2. | Improvements if students are supported to enter and traverse liminal space | 109 |
| 7.3. | Improvements if students are supported to enter and traverse liminal space and form learning communities | 110 |
| 9.1. | Looking into the gallery, from the outside, through the glass covered with the writings between Ramesha and her aunt | 132 |
| 9.2. | Ramesha writing on the glass with brush and ink | 133 |
| 9.3. | The front room of Ramesha’s installation. The coffee table and photograph album on one side and the skeleton covered in broken glass on the far side with Ramesha working on writing on the glass | 134 |
| 9.4. | The three photographs provide details of the photograph album, with Ramesha’s face removed, and the skeleton | 134 |
| 9.5. | The make shift dark room that suggests the printing of photographs of Ramesha | 135 |
| 9.6. | The pink crib is made from wood that was split in order to show a contrast of the soft blankets and suggestion of comfort | 136 |
| 17.1. | Subject terms assigned to ‘Brain on Google’ article in Web of Science (Clarivate Analytics) and MEDLINE ® (U.S. National Library of Medicine) | 247 |
| 17.2. | Search strategy and planning worksheet | 248 |
| 17.3. | Data visualisation in Web of Science citation map (Source: Web of Science Group/Clarivate Analytics) | 248 |
| 18.1. | Numbers of the (non-) overlapping different thresholds mentioned by students and in the literature, and the percentages of the non-overlapping different threshold concepts | 263 |
| 18.2. | Numbers of the (non-) overlapping different thresholds mentioned by students and teachers and the percentages of the non-overlapping different threshold concepts | 264 |
| 18.3. | Percentage of students vs percentage of teachers mentioning a particular threshold concept | 266 |
| 25.1. | Conversational Model of Online Learning (Laurillard, 1993, 2013; revisited by Sharples, 2016) | 359 |
| Tables | ||
| 2.1. | Analogies and metaphors used in association with threshold concepts | 22 |
| 2.2. | Previously identified threshold concepts about online teaching and online course design | 27 |
| 2.3. | A sample of threshold concepts about online teaching | 31 |
| 6.1. | Transitivity analysis of discussion (including research participants’ errors with grammar and vocabulary use) | 95 |
| 8.1. | Sample data collection schedule: Winter 2015 | 115 |
| 8.2. | Test marks for student answers to questions on the sociological imagination, Test 1 and Test 3 | 118 |
| 11.1. | TverrSim – Students’ evaluations | 161 |
| 12.1. | Programme design and taxonomy of learning | 179 |
| 15.1. | Study design | 223 |
| 17.1. | Learning activities, attributes, and threshold characteristics | 251 |
| 18.1. | Frequencies of threshold concepts mentioned by students (Mathematics: N = 60; CS: N = 59 in 2014) | 259 |
| 18.2. | Percentages of thresholds characteristics judged applicable to the threshold concepts according to the students | 261 |
| 18.3. | Variation in the students’ concepts list | 262 |
| 18.4. | Threshold concepts mentioned by students | 262 |
| 18.5. | Frequencies of thresholds concepts predicted by their teachers (N = 12) | 263 |
| 18.6. | Variation in the teachers’ concepts list | 263 |
| 18.7. | Threshold concepts expected by the teachers | 264 |
| 18.8. | The percentages each threshold concept is mentioned by students and teachers, respectively; in each column the number of threshold concepts with this pair of percentages is also indicated | 265 |
| 25.1. | Participants 2015–2016 (from Altamimi, 2016) | 363 |
| 25.2. | Participants 2016–2017 (from Conde, 2017) | 364 |
Figures and Tables
in Threshold Concepts on the Edge
Herausgeber:innen:
und
Julie A. Timmermans
Julie A. Timmermans
Search for other papers by Julie A. Timmermans in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Julie A. Timmermans in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Ray Land
Ray Land
Search for other papers by Ray Land in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ray Land in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed