Comparing asynchronous online discussions and face-to-face discussions in a classroom setting

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 272-286

  Qiyun, Wang ^a   Huay, Lit Woo ^b  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^b NIE ^*

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS; ONLINE SYSTEMS; STUDENTS;

ASYNCHRONOUS ONLINE; FACE-TO-FACE DISCUSSIONS; ONLINE DISCUSSIONS;

EDUCATION;

EID: 33847327493     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00621.x     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Belcher, D. (1999). Authentic interaction in a virtual classroom: leveling the playing field in a graduate seminar. Computers and Camposition, 16, 2, 253-267.
2. Berge, Z. L. (1995). Facilitating computer conferencing: recommendation from the field. Educational Technology, 35, 1, 22-30.
3. Card, K. A. & Horton, L. (2000). Providing access to graduate education using computer-mediated communication. International Journal of Instructional Media, 27, 3, 235-245.
4. Cooper, L. W. (2001). A comparison of online and traditional computer application classes. T.H.E. (Technological Horizons in Education) Journal, 28, 8, 52-58.
5. DeSanctis, G. & Monge, P. (1998). Communication processes for virtual organizations. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 3, 4, Retrieved on 20 February, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue4/ desanctis.html
6. Ellis, R. A. & Calvo, R. A. (2004). Learning through discussions in blended environments. Educational Media International, 41, 3, 263-274.
7. Hara, N., Bonk, C. J. & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology. Instructional Science, 28, 2, 115-152.
8. Hiltz, S. R. (1994). The virtual classroom: learning without limits via computer network, Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
9. Hiltz, S., Johnson, K. & Turoff, M. (1986), Experiments in group decision making: communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences. Human Communication Research, 13, 2, 225-252.
10. Hung, D., Tan, S. C. & Chen, D. T. (2005). How the Internet facilitates learning as dialog: design considerations for online discussions. International Journal of Instructional Media, 32,1, 37-46.
11. Johnson, D., Sutton, P. & Poon, J. (2000). Face-to-face vs CMC: student communication in a technologically rich learning environment. Retrieved on 20 February, 2006, from http:// www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/ coffs00/papers/daniel_johnson.pdf
12. Jonassen, D. H. & Kwon, H. (2001). Communication patterns in computer mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49,1, 3 5-51.
13. Kern, R. G. (1995). Restructuring classroom interaction with network computers: effects on quantity and characteristics of language production. The Modern Language Journal, 79, 4, 457-476.
14. Kiesler, S., Siegel, J. & McGuire, T. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 10, 1123-1134.
15. King, K. P. (2001). Educators revitalize the classroom "bulletin board": a case study of the influence of online dialogue on face-to-face classes from an adult learning perspective. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, 4, 337-354.
16. Lim, C. P. & Chai, C. S. (2004). An activity-theoretical approach to research of ICT integration in Singapore schools: orienting activities and learner autonomy. Computers & Education, 43, 3, 215-236.
17. Marra, R. M., Moore, J. L. & Klimczak, A. K. (2004). Content analysis of online discussion forums: a comparative analysis of protocols. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52, 2, 23-40.
18. Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: the role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Net works, 7, 3, 55-65.
19. Moallem, M. (2003). An interactive online course: a collaborative design model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51, 4, 85-103.
20. Newman, D. R., Webb, B. & Cochrane, C. (1996). A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning. Retrieved on 20 February, 2006, from http://www.qub.ac.uk/mgt/ papers/methods/contpap.html
21. Olaniran, B. A., Savage, G. T. &Sorenson, R. L. (1996). Experimental and experiential approaches to teaching face-to-face and computer-mediated group discussion. Communication Education, 45,3,244-259.
22. Peterson, C. L. & Bond, N. (2004). Online compared to face-to-face teacher preparation for learning standard-based planning skills. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36, 4, 345-360.
23. Powers, S. & Mitchell, J. (1997). Student perceptions and performance in a virtual classroom environment. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
24. Sotillo, S. M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4, 1, 82-119.
25. Tiene, D. (2000). Online discussions: a survey of advantages and disadvantages compared to face-to-face discussions. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9, 4, 371-384.
26. Vass, E. (2002). Friendship and collaborative creative writing in the primary classroom. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 18, 1, 102-110.
27. Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 1, 3-43.
28. Warschauer, M. (1995). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13, 2, 7-26.
29. Yu, F. Y. (2002). The efficacy of electronic telecommunications in fostering interpersonal relationships. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 26, 2, 177-189.