You are here:

Comparative Study of Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Case Discussions
PROCEEDINGS

, , , University of North Carolina at Greensboro, United States

Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Atlanta, GA, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-52-5 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This study compares preservice teachers' preferences during online case discussions for synchronous vs. asynchronous modes and facilitation by peers or the instructor during a web-supported course on classroom management. Findings from surveys indicated that participants' strong initial preference for asynchronous discussions changed by the end of the semester, but preferences for peer vs. instructor facilitation remained about the same. Means for participants' initial and final responses to a dilemma-based case were statistically higher in a re-analysis of the case. An analysis of participants' responses as to why and/or how their thinking about the case changed or remained the same during the semester is provided. Explanations of participants' preferences for synchronous vs. asynchronous and peer or instructor-facilitated online case discussions are also provided.

Citation

Levin, B., Robbins, H. & Ye, H. (2004). Comparative Study of Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Case Discussions. In R. Ferdig, C. Crawford, R. Carlsen, N. Davis, J. Price, R. Weber & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2004--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 551-558). Atlanta, GA, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 5, 2024 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Angeli, C., Bonk, C.J., Supplee, L., & Malinkowski, S. (1998). A case-based electronic learning environment for preserice teacher education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 421 156).
  2. Bray, M. (2000). The evolution of communication protocols in an online web discussion site: A case study. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 462 961).
  3. Cifuentes, L., Murphy, K.L., Segur, R., & Kodali, S. (1997). Design considerations for computer conferences. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 30, 177-202.
  4. Clark, R.E. (1983). Reconsidering research on learning from media. Review of Educational Research, 53, 4545-459.
  5. Clark, R.E. (1985). Confounding in educational computing research. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1, 137-148.
  6. Clark, R.E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research& Development, 42 (2), 2129.
  7. Hara, N., Bonk, C.J., & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analysis of online discussions in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115-152.
  8. Harasim, L.M. (1990). Online education: An environment for collaboration and amplification. In L.M.. Harasim (Ed.). Online education: Perspectives on a new environment. (pp. 39-64). New York: Praeger.
  9. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S.R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1993). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambrisge, MA: MIT Press.
  10. Harrington, H.L. (2002). Using computer conferencing to foster and assess prospective teahcers’ moral sensitivity. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 323-342.
  11. Hewitt, J., Pedretti, E., Bencze, L., Vaillancourt, B., & Yoon, S. (2003). New Applications for Multimedia Cases: Promoting Reflective Practice in Preservice Teacher Education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 11(4), 483-500.
  12. Jonassen, D., Wang, F., Strobel, J., & Cernusca, D. (2003). Applications of a case library of technology Integration stories for teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 11(4), 529-548.
  13. Kinzer, C.K., & Risko, V.J. (1998). Multimedia and enhanced learning: Transforming preservice education. In D. Reinking, M. McKenna, L. Labbo, & R. Keifer (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformation in a posttypographic world. (Pp. 185-202) Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  14. Knowles, M. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  15. Lapadat, J.C. (2000). Teaching online: Breaking new ground in collabortative thinking. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 443 420).
  16. Levin, B.B. (1995). Using the case method in teacher education: The role of discussion and experience in teachers' thinking about cases. Journal of Teaching and Teacher Education, 11, 63-79.
  17. Levin, B.B. (1999). Analysis of the content and purpose of four different kinds of electronic communications among preservice teachers. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32, 139-156.
  18. Merriam, S.B., & Caffarella, R.S. (1991). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  19. Merseth, K.K. (1996). Cases and case methods in teacher education. In J. Sikula (Ed.). Handbook for Research on Teacher Education. (pp. 722-746). New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan.
  20. Poole, D. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-oriented online course: A case study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 22, 162-180.
  21. Risko, V.J., & Kinzer, C.K. (1999). The special power of multimedia cases to invite democratic teaching and learning. In R. McNergney, E. Ducharme, & M. Ducharme (Eds.). Educating for democracy: Case-method teaching and learning (pp. 45-60). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  22. Russell, T.L. (2000). The no-significant difference phenomenon. Montgomery, AL: IDECC.
  23. Silverman, R., & Welty, W.M., & Lyon, S. (1992) Case studies for teacher problem solving. New York: McGraw-Hill.
  24. Slavit, D. (2002). Expanding classroom discussion with an online medium. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 10, 407-422.
  25. Wright, V.H., Marsh, G.E., & Miller, M.T. (2000). A critical comparison of graduate students’ satisfaction in asynchronous and synchronous course instruction. Planning and Change, 31, 107-118.

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

Suggest Corrections to References

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts