You are here:

Ethical Issues in Online Research and Assessment
PROCEEDINGS

, University of Warwick, United Kingdom ; , Western Carolina University, United States, United States ; , , Western Carolina University, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Quebec City, Canada ISBN 978-1-880094-63-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Full Text

Abstract

Based on a post-graduate online course recently taught at a major American public university, this paper explores the ethical issues associated with analysis of computer conference transcripts. It discusses how lack or negative responses of potential participants can limit the analysis of conference transcripts. The paper also discusses the importance of triangulating the interpretations of the transcripts with other data sources used in the study. This is followed by a general discussion of the difficulties encountered throughout the study and raises issues to advance understanding in this new area of inquiry. Based on the results of this study, the paper recommends a series of strategies for future research

Citation

Santos, I., LeBaron, J., Crow, R. & McGinty, D. (2007). Ethical Issues in Online Research and Assessment. In T. Bastiaens & S. Carliner (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2007--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 6500-6507). Quebec City, Canada: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 12, 2024 from .

© 2007 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, T. & Kanuka, H. (2003). E-research: Methods, strategies and issues. London: Allyn and Bacon
  2. Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. NY: Hafner Publishing Company
  3. Bloom, B.S., Engelhart, M.D, Furst, E.J., Hill, W.H. & Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. NY: David McKay
  4. Brook, C. (2004). Exploring community development in online settings. Doctoral dissertation, Edith Cowan University, Australia
  5. Browne, E. (2003). Conversation in cyberspace: A study of online learning. Open Learning, 18(3), 245 − 259 Bruckman, A. Online. Retrieved 15/7/2007 http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~asb/ethics/
  6. Ertmer, P.A., Richardson, J.C, Belland, B., Camin, D., Connoly, P., Coulthard, G., Lei, K. & Mong, C. (2007). Using peer feedback to enhance the quality of student online postings: An exploratory study. Journal of computer mediated communication, 12(2). Retrieved 23/5/2007 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue2/ertmer.html
  7. Fung, Y.H. (2004). Collaborative online learning: Interaction patterns and limiting factors. Open Learning, 19(2), 35 − 149
  8. Gabriel, M.A. (2004). Learning together: Exploring group interactions online. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 54 − 72
  9. Garrison, R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer
  10. Garrison, R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence and computer conference in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7 − 23
  11. Gerbic, P. & Stacey, E. (2005). A purposive approach to content analysis: Designing analytical frameworks. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(1), 45 − 59
  12. Gunawardena, C., 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. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397 − 431
  13. Hammond, M. & Wiriyapinit, M. (2005). Learning through online discussion: A case of triangulation in research. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(3), 283 − 302
  14. Hara, N., Bonk, C.J. & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28(2), 115-152
  15. Harasim, L. (1990). Online education: An environment for collaboration and intellectual amplification. In L. Harasim (Ed.). Online education: Perspectives on a new environment (pp.39-66). NY: Praeger
  16. Harasim, L. (2002). What makes online learning community successful? The role of collaborative learning in social and intellectual development. In C. Vrasidas& G.V. Glass (Eds.). Distance education and distributed learning (pp. 181 − 200). Greenwich CT: Information Age Publishing
  17. Heckman, R. & Annabi, H. (2005). A content analytic comparison of learning processes in online and face to face case study discussions. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 10(2). Retrieved February 7, 2005, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue2/heckman.html
  18. Henri, F. (1991). Computer conferencing and content analysis. The Najaden papers. (pp.117 − 136). NY: Springer DASHDASH
  19. VerlagHiltz, R. & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation: Human communication via computer. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley Advanced Book Program
  20. Jeong, A.C. (2003). The sequential analysis of group interaction and critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 25 − 43
  21. King, S.A. (1996). Researching Internet communities: Proposed ethical guidelines for the reporting of results. The Information Society, 12(2), 119 − 127
  22. Krathwohl, D.R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’ s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(2), 212-218
  23. Kraut, R., Olso, J., Banaji, M., Bruckman, A., Cohen, J. & Couper, M. (2003). Psychological research online: Opportunities and challenges. Retrieved 20/5/2007, from http://www.apa.org/science/apainternetresearch.pdf
  24. Lee, D. (2004). Sense of co-accomplishment in collaborative work as threshold in establishing a sense of community
  25. Mason, R. (1989). A case study of the use of computer conferencing at the Open University. Doctoral Dissertation, Open University, United Kingdom
  26. Mason, R. (1991). Evaluation methodologies for computer conferencing applications. In A.R. Kaye (Ed.). Collaborative learning through computer conferencing. The Najaden papers. (pp.105 − 116). NY: Springer-Verlag
  27. Mazur, J.M. (2004). Conversation analysis for educational technologists: Theoretical and methodological issues for researching the structures, processes and meaning of on-line talk. In D.H. Jonassen (Ed.). Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp.1073 − 1098). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
  28. Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-bass
  29. Meyer, K.A. (2004). Evaluating online discussions: Four different frames of analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2). Retrieved 29/05/2005 from http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v8n2/v8n2_meyer.asp Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. (1994). An expanded source book: Qualitative data analysis (2nd Ed.). London: Sage Publications
  30. Murphy, E. (2004). Recognition and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 421-431
  31. Naidu, S. & Järvelä, S. (2006). Analyzing CMC content for what? Computers& Education, 46(1), 96 − 103
  32. Pena-Shaff, J.B., & Nicholls, N. (2004). Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers& Education, 42(3), 243 − 265
  33. Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: Designing usability, supporting sociability. New York: John Wiley& Sons
  34. Rourke, L., Anderson, T. & Garrison, R. (1999). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 51 − 70
  35. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R. & Archer, W. (2001). Methodological issues in the content analysis of
  36. Strijbos, J., Marten, R.L., Prins, F.J. & Jochems, W.M.G. (2006). Content analysis: What are they talking about? Computers& Education, 46(1), 29 − 48

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

Suggest Corrections to References