The impact of different instructional facilitation approaches on students' participation during an online discussion
PROCEEDINGS
Heejung An, William Paterson University, United States ; Sunghee Shin, Queens College CUNY, United States ; Keol Lim, Teachers College, Columbia University, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-64-8 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA
Abstract
Asynchronous discussion is an integral part of both blended and online learning. To effectively accommodate, support, and promote the knowledge production process, instructors should select appropriate learning models and strategies. This study explores the specific facilitation approaches that may elicit students' participation in an online asynchronous discussion, as part of an undergraduate course for preservice teachers.
Citation
An, H., Shin, S. & Lim, K. (2008). The impact of different instructional facilitation approaches on students' participation during an online discussion. In K. McFerrin, R. Weber, R. Carlsen & D. Willis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2008--Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 204-207). Las Vegas, Nevada, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 3, 2023 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/27159/.
References
View References & Citations Map- Bangert-Drowns, R.L., Kulik, C-L.C., Kulik, J.A., & Morgan, M.T. (1991). The instructional effect of feedback in test-like events. Review of Educational Research, 61(2), 213-238.
- Dabbagh, N. (2007). The online learner: Characteristics and pedagogical implications. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 7(3). Retrieved October 19, 2007 from http://www.citejournal.org/vol7/iss3/general/article1.cfm
- Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J., & Haag, B.B. (1995). Constructivism and computermediated communication in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education. 9(2), 7-26.
- Markel. L. (2001).Technology and Education Online Discussion Forums: It's in the Response. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, Volume IV (Number II). Retrieved September 21, 2007, from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer42/markel42.html.
- Mandernach, B.J., Dailey-Hebert, A., & Donnelli-Sallee, E. (2007). Frequency and Time Investment of Instructors’ Participation in Threaded Discussions in the Online Classroom. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 6(1). Retrieved October 5, 2007 from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/PDF/6.1.1.pdf
- Moore, M.G. (1989). Three Types of Interaction, The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1–6.
- Schrire, S. (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers& Education, 46, 49-70.
- Stahl, G. (2004). Building collaborative knowing. Elements of a social thoery of CSCL. In P. Dillenbourg (Series Ed.) & J.W. Strijbos, P.A. Kirschner& R.L. Martens (Vol Eds.), Computer Supported collaborative learning, Vol 3. What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education (pp. 53-85). Boston,
- Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer-supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1-30.
- Wise, K., Hamman, B., and Thorson, K. (2006). Moderation, response rate, and message interactivity: Features of online communities and their effects on intent to participate. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(1), http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue1/wise.html
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References