Quality of Students’ Communicative Strategies Delivered Through Computer-Mediated Communications

This paper discusses the processes of interaction among learners in higher education using a model of content analysis to examine their social construction of knowledge through computer-mediated communications. Using qualitative content analysis methods, we examined students’ conference transcripts for evidence that their collaborative communicative acts generated constructions of new knowledge. This study was conducted over a period of 14 weeks, at the end of which students were asked to describe their feelings as a learner, discussion leader as well as provide explanations for their communicative actions. Earlier studies by Gunawardena, Lowe and Anderson (1997), which provided the basis for this analysis, indicated that the volume of student interaction was predominantly that of sharing and comparing information, the degree of which, was significantly higher than constructing knowledge. In this study, we asked what the outcome of student communicative strategies mean with respect to the quality of their learning experience, and the viability of the model as a content analysis tool in an educational context.

[1]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Toward a design theory of problem solving , 2000 .

[2]  Patricia Comeaux,et al.  The impact of an interactive distance learning network on classroom communication , 1995 .

[3]  R. Linn,et al.  Qualitative methods in research on teaching , 1985 .

[4]  C. Gunawardena,et al.  Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment , 1997 .

[5]  Sharan B. Merriam,et al.  Qualitative research and case study applications in education , 1998 .

[6]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[7]  Robin Mason.  From distance education to online education , 2000, Internet High. Educ..

[8]  P.R.J. Simons.  Towards a constructivistic theory of self-directed learning , 2000 .

[9]  R. Rorty.  Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth: Philosophical Papers , 1990 .

[10]  William E. Blanton,et al.  Chapter 7: Telecommunications and Teacher Education: A Social Constructivist Review , 1998 .

[11]  M. Patton,et al.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods , 1992 .

[12]  C. Gunawardena.  Social Presence Theory and Implications for Interaction and Collaborative Learning in Computer Conferences , 1995 .

[13]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation , 1991 .

[14]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Constructivism: Implications for the Design and Delivery of Instruction , 1996 .

[15]  D. Randy Garrison,et al.  Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education , 1999, Internet High. Educ..

[16]  Dorit Maor.  How does one evaluate students' participation and interaction in an Internet based unit? , 1998 .

[17]  L. Vygotsky.  Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes: Harvard University Press , 1978 .

[18]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[19]  M. Bullen.  PARTICIPATION AND CRITICAL THINKING IN ONLINE UNIVERSITY DISTANCE EDUCATION , 1998 .

[20]  Ann C. Jones,et al.  Conferencing in communities of learners: examples from social history and science communication , 2000, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[21]  Michael Davis,et al.  Cooperation vs. Deliberation: Computer Mediated Conferencing and the Problem of Argument in International Distance Education. , 2002 .

[22]  N. Denzin,et al.  Handbook of Qualitative Research , 1994 .

[23]  Curtis J. Bonk,et al.  Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course , 2000 .

[24]  M. Patton.  Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd ed. , 1990 .

[25]  Lauren B. Resnick,et al.  Shared cognition: Thinking as social practice , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[26]  Gary R. Morrison,et al.  An Analysis of Distance Education Research: Implications for the Instructional Technologist. , 2000 .

[27]  T. Anderson,et al.  Online Social Interchange, Discord, and Knowledge Construction , 1998 .

[28]  S. Merriam.  Case Study Research in Education , 1988 .

[29]  Dorit Maor.  Teacher and student reflections on interactions in an Internet based-unit , 1999 .

[30]  Tom Morgan.  Using Technology to Enhance Learning: Changing the Chunks. , 1996 .

[31]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Learning with Technology: A Constructivist Perspective , 1998 .

[32]  N. Denzin.  The art and politics of interpretation. , 1994 .

[33]  A. Strauss,et al.  The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research aldine de gruyter , 1968 .

[34]  D. Newman,et al.  A Content Analysis Method to Measure Critical Thinking in Face-to-Face and Computer Supported Group Learning , 1995 .

[35]  Ron Oliver,et al.  Student responses to collaborating and learning in a web-based environment , 2001, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[36]  John O'Malley,et al.  Students Perceptions of Distance Learning, Online Learning and the Traditional Classroom , 1999 .

[37]  Charlotte N. Gunawardena,et al.  Analysis of a Global Online Debate and the Development of an Interaction Analysis Model for Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in Computer Conferencing , 1997 .

[38]  D. Maor.  The Teacher's Role in Developing Interaction and Reflection in an Online Learning Community , 2003 .

[39]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Constructivism and computer‐mediated communication in distance education , 1995 .

[40]  E. Glasersfeld.  An Exposition of Constructivism: Why Some Like it Radical , 1991 .

[41]  R. Stake.  The art of case study research , 1995 .

[42]  Kenneth Tobin,et al.  The Practice of constructivism in science education , 1993 .

[43]  Andrew Feenberg,et al.  Building a global network: the WBSI experience , 1994 .

[44]  Lucia Rapanotti,et al.  Mapping interactions in a computer conferencing environment , 2001 .

[45]  Thomas C. Reeves,et al.  Instructional and social dimensions of class web pages , 1999, J. Comput. High. Educ..