A quantitative multimodal discourse analysis of teaching and learning in a web-conferencing environment - The efficacy of student-centred learning designs

Computers and Education

Volumn 54, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 462-478

  Bower, Matt ^a   Hedberg, John G ^a  

^a MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Architectures for educational technology systems; Computer mediated communication; Cooperative collaborative learning; Evaluation methodologies; Interactive learning environments

Indexed keywords

ARCHITECTURES FOR EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SYSTEM; COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION; COOPERATIVE/COLLABORATIVE LEARNING; EVALUATION METHODOLOGIES; INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT;

ACTIVITY COEFFICIENTS; COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE; DESIGN; DISTRIBUTED COMPUTER SYSTEMS; SEMANTICS; STUDENTS; TEACHING; TECHNOLOGY;

CURRICULA;

EID: 71849118361     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.08.030     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Adobe Systems Inc. Acrobat Connect Professional. (2009).. Retrieved 05.08.09.
2. Anderson L., and Krathwohl D. A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives (2001), Longman, New York
3. Baldry A., and Thibault P.J. Multimodal transcription and text analysis (2006), Equinox Publishing Ltd, London
4. Bandura A. Social learning theory (1977), General Learning Press, New York
5. Barrett K., Bower B.L., and Donovan N.C. Teaching styles of community college instructors. The American Journal of Distance Education 21 1 (2007) 37-49
6. Bauer M.W. Classical content analysis. In: Bauer M.W., and Gaskell G. (Eds). Qualitative research with text image and sound (2000), Sage Publications, London, UK 131-151
7. Bower, M. (2008). Designing for interactive and collaborative learning in a web-conferencing environment. .
8. Bower M. Discourse analysis of teaching computing online. Computer Science Education 19 2 (2009) 69-92
9. Chang S.-.H.H., and Smith R.A. Effectiveness of personal interaction in a learner-centered paradigm distance education class based on student satisfaction. Journal of Research in Technology in Education 40 4 (2008) 407-426
10. Cheng, C. S., & Beaumont, C. (2004). Evaluating the effectiveness of ICT to support globally distributed PBL teams. In Proceedings 9th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education, Leeds, United Kingdom (pp. 47-51). Leeds, United Kingdom: ACM Press.
11. Churchill D. Teachers' private theories and their design of technology-based learning. British Journal of Educational Technology 37 4 (2006) 559-576
12. Clark R.C. Multimedia learning in e-courses. In: Mayer R.E. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2005), Cambridge University Press, New York 589-616
13. Conole G. Describing learning activities - Tools and resources to guide practice. In: Beetham H., and Sharpe R. (Eds). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning (2007), Routledge 81-91
14. Demetriadis S., Karoulis A., and Pombortsis A. "Graphical" Jogthrough: Expert based methodology for user interface evaluation, applied in the case of an educational simulation interface. Computers & Education 32 4 (1999) 285-299
15. Elluminate Inc. Elluminate Live web collaboration software. (2009). Retrieved 05.08.09.
16. Engeström Y. Learning by expanding: An activity theoretical approach to developmental research (1987), Orienta-Konsultit Oy, Helsinki
17. Gao, T. (2001). The effects of different levels of interaction on the achievement and attitudes of college students in a web-based learning environment. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Purdue University.
18. Greenhow C., and Belbas B. Using activity-oriented design methods to study collaborative knowledge-building in e-learning courses within higher education. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2 4 (2007) 363-391
19. Gunawardena C., Lowe C., and Anderson T. Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research 17 4 (1997) 397-431
20. Gwet K. Kappa statistic is not satisfactory for assessing the extent of agreement between raters. Statistical Methods for Inter-Rater Reliability Assessment 1 (2002) 1-6
21. Halliday M.A.K. An introduction to functional grammar (1985), Edward Arnold, London
22. Halliday M.A.K. Things and relations - Regrammaticising experience as technical knowledge. In: Martin J.R., and Veel R. (Eds). Reading science. Critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science (1998), Routledge, New York 185-235
23. Henri F. Computer conferencing and content analysis Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden papers (1992), Springer, New York pp. 115-136
24. Herring S.C. Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In: Barab S.A., Kling R., and Gray J.H. (Eds). Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning (2004), Cambridge University Press 338-376
25. Hollan J., Hutchins E., and Kirsh D. Distributed cognition: Toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Transactionson Computer-Human Interaction 7 2 (2000) 174-196
26. Jewitt C. Technology, literacy and learning - A multimodal approach (2006), Routledge, Oxon
27. Jonassen D.H. Learning as activity. Educational Technology 42 2 (2002) 45-51
28. Jonassen D.H., Lee C.B., Yang C.-.C., and Laffey J. The collaboration principle in multimedia learning. In: Mayer R.E. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2005), Cambridge University Press, New York 247-270
29. Jonassen D.H., and Rohrer-Murphy L. Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development 47 1 (1999) 61-79
30. King A. Guiding Knowledge construction in the classroom: Effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal 31 2 (1994) 338-368
31. Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J.-W., & Kreijins, K. (2004). Designing integrated collaborative e-learning. In W. Jochems, J. v. Merriënboer, R. Koper (Eds.), Integrated e-Learning: Implications for pedagogy, technology, and organisation (pp. 24-38).
32. Koo A.C. Factors affecting teachers' perceived readiness for online collaborative learning: A case study in Malaysia. Educational Technology & Society 11 1 (2008) 266-278
33. Kress G., Jewitt C., Ogborn J., and Tsatsarelis C. Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom (2001), Continuum, London
34. La Pointe K.D., and Gunawarndena C. Developing, testing and refining of a model to understand the relationship between peer interaction and learning outcomes in computer-mediated conferencing. Distance Education 25 1 (2004) 83-106
35. Lampert M. When the problem is not the question the solution is not the answer: Mathematical knowing and teaching. American Educational Research Journal 27 1 (1990) 29-63
36. Laurillard D. Rethinking university teaching - A framework for the effective use of learning technologies (2002), RoutledgeFalmer, Oxford, UK
37. Luan W.S., Bakar K.A., and Hong T.S. Using a student-centred learning approach to teach a discrete information technology course: The effects on Malaysian pre-service teachers' attitudes toward information technology. Technology Pedagogy and Education 15 2 (2006) 223-238
38. Luff P., Heath C., Kuzuoka H., Hindmarsh J., Yamazaki K., and Oyama S. Fractured ecologies: Creating environments for collaboration. Human-Computer Interaction 18 1/2 (2003) 51-84
39. Magliaro S.G., Lockee B.B., and Burton J.K. Direct instruction revisited: A key model for instructional technology. Educational Technology Research and Development 53 4 (2005) 41-55
40. Matthiessen C., and Halliday M.A.K. Systemic functional grammar: A first step into the theory (1997), Matthiessen & Halliday, Sydney
41. Mayer R.E. Introduction to multimedia learning. In: Mayer R.E. (Ed). The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2005), Cambridge University Press, New York 1-17
42. McCombs B.L., and Vakili D. A learner-centered framework for relearning. Teachers College Record 107 8 (2005) 1582-1600
43. Naidu S., and Jarvela S. Analyzing CMC content for what?. Computers & Education 46 1 (2006) 96-103
44. Norris S. Multimodal discourse analysis: A conceptual framework. In: Levine P., and Scollon R. (Eds). Discourse and technology: Multimodal discourse analysis (2004), Georgetown University Press 101-115
45. Oliver R., Harper B., Wills S., Agostinho S., and Hedberg J. Describing ICT-based learning designs that promote quality learning outcomes. In: Beetham H., and Sharpe R. (Eds). Rethinking pedagogy for a digital age: Designing and delivering e-learning (2007), Routledge, Oxford, UK 64-80
46. Perez Cereijo, M. V. (2001). Factors influencing how students value asynchronous web based courses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of North Texas.
47. Reeves T.C., Herrington J., and Oliver R. A development research agenda for online collaborative learning. Educational Technology Research and Development 52 4 (2004) 53-65
48. Reushle S., and Loch B.I. Conducting a trial of web conferencing software: Why, how, and perceptions from the coalface. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education 9 3 (2008) 19-28
49. Sedig K., Klawe M., and Westrom M. Role of interface manipulation style and scaffolding on cognition and concept learning in learnware. ACM Transactionson Computer-Human Interaction 8 1 (2001) 34-59
50. Stake R.E. Qualitative case studies. In: Denzin N.K., and Lincoln Y.S. (Eds). The handbook of qualitative research (1994), Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks 237-247
51. Stavredes, M. T. (2002). A case study of student experiences using alternative systems of delivery: Face-to-face versus interactive television video and computer mediated communication. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Minnesota.
52. Strijbos J.-.W., Martens R.L., Prins F.J., and Jochems W.M.G. Content analysis: What are they talking about?. Computers & Education 46 1 (2006) 29-48
53. Suthers D.D. Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 1 3 (2006) 315-337
54. Uebersax, J. Kappa coefficients. (2002). Retrieved 05.08.09.
55. Vu K.-.P.L., Hanley G.L., Strybel T.Z., and Proctor R.W. Metacognitive processes in human-computer interaction: Self-assessments of knowledge as predictors of computer expertise. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 12 1 (2000) 43-71
56. Waite, W. M., Jackson, M. H., Diwan, A., & Leonardi, P. M. (2004). Student culture vs group work in computer science. In Proceedings 35th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education, Norfolk, Virginia, USA (pp. 12-16). Norfolk, Virginia, USA: ACM Press.
57. Wimba Inc. Wimba Classroom. (2009). . Retrieved 23.03.09.
58. Wu H.-.K., and Huang Y.-l. Ninth-grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-centered technology-enhanced learning environments. Science Education 91 (2007) 727-749
59. Yoon F.S., Ho J., and Hedberg J.G. Teacher understandings of technology affordances and their impact on the design of engaging learning experiences. Educational Media International 42 4 (2005) 297-316