Asynchronous forums in EAP: Assessment issues

Language Learning and Technology

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 49-70

  Kol, Sara ^a   Schcolnik, Miriam ^a  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 45349089724     PISSN: None     EISSN: 10943501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (51)

1. Althaus, S. (1996). Computer-mediated communication in the university classroom: An experiment with online discussions. Paper prepared for delivery at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://teachpol.tcnj.edu/conference_papers/_manuscripts/sal96a. pdf.
2. Angeli, C., Bonk, C. J., & Hara, N. (1998). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. CRLT Technical Report, No. 2-98. Retrieved from Ingenta Connect.
3. Bhagyavati, Kurkovsky, S., & Whitehead, C.C. (2005). Using Asynchronous Discussions to Enhance Student Participation in CS Courses. Proceedings of the 36th SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education, St. Louis, Missouri, 111-115. Retrieved from ACM Digital Library.
4. Barbour, M. K., & Collins, M. A. J. (2005). Online writing as an indicator of student performance. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 2(8). Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Aug_05/article02.htm.
5. Bauer, J. F. (2002). Assessing student work from chatrooms and bulletin boards. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 91, 31-36.
6. Berge, Z. (1997). Computer conferencing and the on-line classroom. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 3(1), 3-21.
7. Bernath, U., & Hulsmann, T. (undated). Asynchronous discussions in virtual seminars: Might they work? Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/zef/literat/eden0203.pdf.
8. Bernath, U., & Rubin, E. (1999). Final Report and Documentation of the Virtual Seminar for Professional Development in Distance Education. A project within the AT&T Global Distance Learning Initiative sponsored by the AT&T Foundation and the International Council for Open and Distance Education, BIS-Verlag: Oldenburg, Germany.
9. Biber, D. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
10. Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2004). Asynchronous web discussions in teacher training courses: Promoting collaborative learning - or not? AACE Journal, 12(2), 155-170.
11. Black, A. (2005). The use of asynchronous discussion: Creating a text of talk. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 5(1), 5-24.
12. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1982). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc.
13. Bohlke, O. (2003). A comparison of student participation levels by group size and language stages during chatroom and face-to-face discussions in German. CALICO Journal, 21(1), 67-88.
14. Chong, S. M. (1998). Models of asynchronous computer conferencing for collaborative learning in large college classes. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy apprenticeship and discourse (pp. 157-182). New Jersey: L. Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
15. Chun, D. (1994). Using computer networking to facilitate the acquisition of interactive competence. System, 22(1), 17-31.
16. Crystal, D. (2001). Language and the Internet. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Cummings, J. A.; Bonk, C. J., & Jacobs, F. R. (2002). Twenty first century college syllabi: Options for online communication and interactivity. Internet and Higher Education, 5(1), 1-19.
18. Dougiamas, M., & Taylor, P. C. (2003). Moodle: Using learning communities to create an open source course management system. Proceedings of the EDMEDIA 2003 Conference, Honolulu, HI. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://dougiamas.com/writing/edmedia2003/.
19. th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, October 20-23, Savannah, GA.
20. Duffy, T. M., Dueber, B., & Hawley, C. L. (1998). Critical thinking in a distributed environment: A pedagogical base for the design of conferencing systems. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner-centered technologies for literacy apprenticeship and discourse (pp. 51-77). New Jersey: L. Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
21. Ellis, R. (2005). Principles of instructed language learning. System, 33(2), 209-224.
22. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.
23. Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory & practice of writing. London: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.
24. Hara, N., Bonk, C. J., & Angeli, C. (2002). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115-152.
25. Harasim, L. (1992). Foreword: Towards the electronic university. In M. Paulsen's, From bulletin boards to electronic universities: Distance education, Computer-mediated communication, and online education. ACSDE Research Monograph, Pennsylvania State University.
26. Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing - The Najaden papers (pp. 117-136). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
27. Ho, S. (2002). Evaluating students' participation in on-line discussions. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw02/ papers/refereed/ho/paper.html.
28. rd Simposio Internacional de Informatica Educativa, Portugal. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://www.esev.ipv.pt/3siie/actas/actas/doc01.pdf.
29. Kern, R. (2006). Perspectives on technology in learning and teaching languages. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 183-210.
30. Lamy, M. N., & Goodfellow, R. (1999). Reflective conversation in the virtual language classroom. Language Learning & Technology, 2(2), 43-61. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol2num2/article2/index. html.
31. Lapadat, J. C. (2002). Written interaction: A key component in online learning. JCMC, 7(4). Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana. edu/vol7/issue4/lapadat.html.
32. Lemke, J. L. (1989). Making text talk. Theory-into-Practice, 28(2), 136-41.
33. th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 2-4 February, 2000. Perth, Australia: Curtin University of Technology. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2000/mcloughlin.html.
34. Ortega, L. (1997). Processes and outcomes in networked classroom interaction: Defining the research agenda for L2 computer-assisted classroom discussion. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 82-93. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://llt.msu.edu/vol1num1/ortega/default.html.
35. Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college-level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492-518.
36. Oskoz, A. (2005). Students' dynamic assessment via online chat. CALICO Journal, 22(3), 512-136.
37. Pellettieri, J. (2000). Negotiation in cyberspace: the role of chatting in the development of grammatical competence. In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 59-86). New York: Cambridge University Press.
38. Sauvignon, S. (Ed.) (2002). Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher education. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
39. Schrire, S. (2003). A model for evaluating the process of learning in asynchronous computer conferencing. Journal of Instruction Delivery Systems, 17(1), 6-12.
40. Sherry, L. (2000). The nature and purpose of online discourse. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6(1), 19-52.
41. Sotillo, S. M. (2000). Discourse functions and syntactic complexity in synchronous and asynchronous communication. Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 82-119. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://llt.msu.edu/ vol4num1/sotillo/default.html.
42. Sullivan, N., & Pratt, E. (1996). A comparative study of two ESL writing environments: A computer-assisted classroom and a traditional oral classroom. System, 24(4), 491-501.
43. Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. New York: The Falmer Press.
44. Warschauer, M. (1996). Comparing face-to-face and electronic discussion in the second language classroom. CALICO Journal, 13(2-3), 7-26.
45. Warschauer, M. (1999). Electronic literacies: Language, culture, and power in online education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46. Warschauer, M. (2007). Technology and writing. In C. Davison & J. Cummins (Eds.), The International Handbook of English Language Teaching (pp. 907-912). Norwell, MA: Springer.
47. Weigle, S. C. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge Language Assessment Series. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
48. Weigle, S. C., Boldt, H., & Valsecchi, M. I. (2003). Effects of task and rater background on the evaluation of ESL student writing: A pilot study. TESOL Quarterly, 37(2), 345-354.
49. Wolfe-Quintero, K., Inagaki, S., & Kim, H. Y. (1998). Second language development in writing: Measures of fluency, accuracy, and complexity. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press.
50. Wu, D., & Hiltz, R. S. (2004). Predicting learning from asynchronous online discussions, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 139-152.
51. Zamel, V. (1992). Writing one's way into reading. TESOL Quarterly, 26(3), 463-485.