Analyzing the learning process of an online role-playing discussion activity

Educational Technology and Society

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 211-222

  Hou, Huei Tse ^a  

^a NATIONAL TAIWAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Behavioral pattern; Instructional strategy; Online discussion; Role playing

Indexed keywords

EID: 84864398694     PISSN: 11763647     EISSN: 14364522     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Anderson, W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's educational objectives. NY: Longman.
2. Bakeman, R., & Gottman, J. M. (1997). Observing interaction: An introduction to sequential analysis. (2nd ed.). UK: Cambridge University Press.
3. Black, E. W., Dawson, K., & Priem, J. (2008). Data for free: Using LMS activity logs to measure community in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(2), 65-70.
4. Bos, N., & Shami, N. S. (2006). Adapting a face-to-face role-playing simulation for online play. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(5), 493-521.
5. Chang, C-K, McDaniel, E. D. (1995). Information search strategies in loosely structured settings. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12(1), 95-107.
6. Chien, L. D., Muthitacharoen, A. M., & Frolick, M. N. (2003). Investigating the use of role play training to improve the communication skills of IS professionals: Some empirical evidence. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 43(3), 67-74.
7. Daradoumis, T., Martinez-Mones, A., & Xhafa, F. (2006). A layered framework for evaluating online collaborative learning interactions. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64(7), 622-635.
8. De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., & Valcke, M. (2008). Structuring asynchronous discussion groups by introducing roles: Do students act in line with assigned roles? Small Group Research, 39(6), 770-794.
9. Driver, R., Newton, P., & Obsorne, J. (2000). Establishing the norms of scientific argumentation in classrooms. Science Education, 84, 287-312.
10. Erduran, S., Simon, S., & Osborne, J. (2004). TAPping into argumentation: Developments in the application of Toulmin's argument pattern for studying science discourse. Science Education, 88(6), 915-933.
11. Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of 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), 397-431.
12. 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.
13. Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2007). An analysis of peer assessment online discussions within a course that uses project-based learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 15(3), 237-251.
14. Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2008). Analysis of problem-solving based online asynchronous discussion pattern. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 17-28.
15. Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2009). Using blogs as a professional development tool for teachers: Analysis of interaction behavioral patterns. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4), 325-340.
16. Hou, H. T. (2010). Exploring the behavioural patterns in project-based learning with online discussion: Quantitative content analysis and progressive sequential analysis, Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(3), 52-60.
17. Hou, H. T., Chang, K. E., & Sung, Y. T. (2010). Applying lag sequential analysis to detect visual behavioral patterns of online learning activities. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), E25-27.
18. Hou, H. T. (2011). A case study of online instructional collaborative discussion activities for problem solving using situated scenarios: An examination of content and behavior cluster analysis, Computers & Education, 56(3), 712-719.
19. Jeong, A. C. (2003). The sequential analysis of group interaction and critical thinking in online threaded discussions. American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 25-43.
20. Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. (2007). When to jump in: The role of the instructor in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 49(2), 193-213.
21. Oh, S., & Jonassen, D. H. (2007). Scaffolding online argumentation during problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23(2), 95-110.
22. Pata, K., Sarapuu, T., & Lehtinen, E. (2005). Tutor scaffolding styles of dilemma solving in network-based role-play. Learning and Instruction, 15(6), 571-587.
23. Gilbert, P. K., & Dabbagh, N. (2005). How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: A case study. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(1), 5-18.
24. Rourke, L., & Anderson, T. (2004). Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 52(1), 5-18.
25. Rovai, A. P., Wighting, M. J., Baker, J. D., & Grooms, L. D. (2009). Development of an instrument to measure perceived cognitive, affective, and psychomotor learning in traditional and virtual classroom higher education settings. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(1), 7-13.
26. Strijbos, J. W., Martens, R. L., Jochems, W. M. G., & Broers, N. J. (2004). The effect of functional roles on group efficiency: Using multilevel modeling and content analysis to investigate computer-supported collaboration in small groups. Small Group Research, 35(2), 195-229.
27. Sung, Y. T., Chang, K. E., Lee, Y. H., & Yu, W. C. (2008). Effects of a mobile electronic guidebook on visitors attention and visiting behaviors. Educational Technology and Society, 11(2), 67-80.
28. Valcke, M., De Wever, B., Zhu, C., & Deed, C. (2009). Supporting active cognitive processing in collaborative groups: The potential of Bloom's taxonomy as a labeling tool. The Internet and Higher Education, 12(3-4), 165-172.
29. Wallace, R., & Kupperman, J. (1997, March). Online search in the science classroom: Benefits and possibilities. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
30. Wishart, J. M., Oades, C. E., & Morris, M. (2007). Using online role play to teach internet safety awareness. Computers & Education, 48(3), 460-473.
31. Yeh, Y. C. (2010). Analyzing online behaviors, roles, and learning communities via online discussions. Educational Technology & Society, 13(1), 140-151.
32. Zhu, E. (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34(6), 451-480.