You are here:

Incorporating online discussion in face to face classroom learning: A new blended learning approach
ARTICLE

,

Australasian Journal of Educational Technology Volume 23, Number 3, ISSN 0814-673X Publisher: Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education

Abstract

This paper discusses an innovative blended learning strategy which incorporates online discussion in both in-class face to face, and off-classroom settings. Online discussion in a face to face class is compared with its two counterparts, off-class online discussion as well as in-class, face to face oral discussion, to examine the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed strategy. By integrating online discussion into the flow of the classroom, learners are given dedicated time to foster a habit of critical thinking, reflection and articulating these online, which can subsequently seed further in-class oral discussions, and off-class online discussions. It is found that in-class, online discussion can provide a wider spectrum of discussion perspectives, equalise participation in discussion, and promote cognitive thinking skills and in depth information processing. However, the lack of face to face interactions and the need for sufficient time to do online postings pose challenges in implementing online discussion for face to face classroom learning.

Citation

Chen, W., Looi, C.K. & Looi, C.K. (2007). Incorporating online discussion in face to face classroom learning: A new blended learning approach. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(3),. Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education. Retrieved September 1, 2024 from .

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R. & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conference context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2). Http://www.sloan-C.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/v5n2_anderson.asp
  2. Bersin & Associates (2003). Blended learning: What works? An industry study of the strategy, implementation, and impact of blended learning. Bersin & Associates.
  3. Bonk, C.J. & Kim, K.J. (2005). Future directions of blended learning in higher education and workplace learning settings. In C.J. Bonk& C.R. Graham
  4. Bonk, C.J. & Graham, C.R. (Eds.) (2005). Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.
  5. Capozzoli, M., McSweeney, L. & Sinha, D. (1999). Beyond kappa: A review of interrater agreement measures. The Canadian Journal of Statistics, 27(1), 3-23.
  6. Clulow, V. & Brace-Govan, J. (2001). Learning through bulletin board discussion: A preliminary case analysis of the cognitive dimension. Paper presented at the Moving Online Conference II, September 2-4, 2001, Gold Coast, Australia.
  7. Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Education and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37-46.
  8. Curtis, D.D. & Lawson, M.J. (2001). Exploring collaborative online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(1), 21-34. Http://www.sloanc.org/publications/jaln/v5n1/v5n1_curtis.asp
  9. De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M. & Van Keer, H. (2005). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A 324 Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2007, 23(3)
  10. Dehler, C., & Parras-Hernandez, L.H. (1998). Using computer-mediated communication (CMC) to promote experiential learning in graduate studies. Educational Technology, 38(3), 52–55.
  11. Dziuban, C., Hartman, J., Juge, F., Moskal, P. & Sorg, S. (2005). Blended learning enters the mainstream. In C.J. Bonk& C.R. Graham (Eds.). Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.
  12. Fahy, P.J. (2005). Two methods for assessing critical thinking in computermediated communications (CMC) transcripts. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Education, 2(3). [viewed 2 March 2007] http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Mar_05/article02.htm
  13. Fahy, P., Ally, M., Crawford, G., Cookson, P.S., Keller, V. & Prosser, F. (2000). The development and testing of a tool for analysis of computer mediated conferencing transcripts. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 46(1), 85-88.
  14. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15, 7-23. [viewed 2 Mar 2007, verified 20 June 2007] http://communitiesofinquiry.com/documents/CogPres_Final.pdf
  15. Gay, G., Sturgill, A., Martin, W. & Huttenlocher, D. (1999). Document centered peer collaborations: An exploration of the educational uses of networked communication technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(3). [verified 20 Jun 2007] http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue3/gay.html
  16. Graham, C.R. (2005). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C.J. Bonk& C.R. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3-21). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer
  17. Gunawardena, C.N., Lowe, C.A. & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17, 397–431.
  18. Hara, N., Bonk, C. & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28(2), 115-152.
  19. Harasim, L. (1989). Online education: A new domain. In R. Mason& A. Kaye (Eds), Mindweave: Communication, computers and distance education (pp. 50-57). Oxford:
  20. Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A.R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden Papers, 115–136.
  21. Morgan, K.R. (2002). Blended learning: A strategic action plan for a new campus. Seminole, FL: University of Central Florida.
  22. Newman, D.R., Webb, B. & Cochrane, C. (1995). A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 3, 56-77. [viewed 2 March 2007] http://www.qub.ac.uk/mgt/papers/methods/contpap.html
  23. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1984). The spiral of silence: Public opinion--Our social skin. Chicago: University of Chicago.
  24. Oriogun, P.K. (2003). Towards understanding online learning levels of engagement using the SQUAD approach to CMC discourse. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(3), 371-387. Http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet19/oriogun.html
  25. Osguthorpe, R.T. & Graham, C.R. (2003). Blended learning systems: Definitions and directions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 4(3), 227–234.
  26. Pena-Shaff, J.B. & Nicholls, C. (2004). Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers& Education, 42, 243–265.
  27. Prain, V. & Lyons, L. (2000). Using information and communication technologies in English: An Australian perspective. In A. Goodwyn (Ed.), English in the digital age. London: Cassell Education.
  28. Reynolds, T. & Greiner, C. (2005). Integrated field experiences in online teacher education: A natural blend? In C.J. Bonk& C.R. Graham (Eds.). Handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Publishing.
  29. Ross, B. & Gage, K. (2005). Global perspectives on blending learning: Insight from WebCT and our customers in higher education. In C.J. Bonk& C.R. Graham
  30. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R. & Archer, W. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14, 51-70.
  31. Ruberg, L.F., Moore, D.M. & Taylor, C.D. (1996). Student participation, interaction, and regulation in a computer-mediated communication environment: A qualitative study. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14(3), 243–268.
  32. Sproull, L. & Kiesler, S. (1991). Connections: New Ways of Working in the Networked Organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 2007, 23(3)
  33. Weinberger, A. & Fischer, F. (2005). A framework to analyze argumentative knowledge construction in computer supported collaborative learning. Computers& Education, 46(1), 71-95.
  34. Valacich, J., Dennis, A. & Connolly, T. (1994). Idea generation in computer based groups: A new ending to an old story. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 448-467.
  35. Veerman, A. & Veldhuis-Diermanse, E. (2001). Collaborative learning through computer-mediated communication in academic education. In Euro CSCL 2001 (pp. 625–632). Maastricht: McLuhan institute, University of Maastricht.
  36. Vygotsky, L.S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
  37. Warschauer, M. (1997). Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice. Modern Language Journal, 81, 470-481.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Also Read

Related Collections