Using asynchronous online discussions in primary school project work

Using asynchronous online discussions for interschool collaborative project work represents one of the innovative practices in the Singapore classroom. With anytime, anywhere access to interactions among the students and teachers, the asynchronous nature of these interactions leads to new paradigms for teaching and learning, with both unique problems of coordination and unique opportunities to support active participation and collaborative learning. A research study was conducted to investigate how primary school students participate and learn in project work based on co-construction of knowledge in asynchronous online learning environments. 10 teachers and 20 students from 5 primary schools participated in this half-year long research study. Teachers crafted project tasks for implementation at the students' level and these tasks were addressed collaboratively by the students who formed project groups with members from another school. Quantitative and qualitative analyses of students' activity in the asynchronous online environment were conducted. Students' sent and received notes as well as the frequency of scaffolds used in the online environment were evaluated. Each note was also ranked according to Gunawardena, Lowe and Anderson's (1997) Interaction Analysis Model. The findings provided evidence to suggest that primary school students participating in the online project work learning environment were capable of the co-construction of knowledge up till Phase IV of the Interaction Analysis Model.

[1]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[2]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Designing Environments for Constructive Learning , 2012, NATO ASI Series.

[3]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  Structural Knowledge: Techniques for Representing, Conveying, and Acquiring Structural Knowledge , 1993 .

[4]  Allan Jeong.  The Sequential Analysis of Group Interaction and Critical Thinking in Online , 2003 .

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

[6]  Ckk Chan,et al.  Beyond “sitting next to each other”: A design experiment on knowledge building in teacher education , 2001 .

[7]  Zane L. Berge,et al.  Review of research in distance education, 1990 to 1999 , 2001 .

[8]  L. Lipponen,et al.  Patterns of participation and discourse in elementary students’ computer-supported collaborative learning , 2003 .

[9]  Gail H. Weems.  Comparison of Beginning Algebra Taught Onsite versus Online. , 2002 .

[10]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  The psychology of written composition , 1987 .

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

[12]  R. Schwarzenberger,et al.  Mathematical discussion and mathematical understanding , 1988 .

[13]  P. Ramsden.  Learning to lead in higher education , 1991 .

[14]  Jean McKendree,et al.  "The Vicarious Learned": investigating the benefits of observing peer dialogues , 1997 .

[15]  E. Stacey.  Collaborative Learning in an Online Environment , 1999 .

[16]  Choon Lang Quek,et al.  Computer mediated communication as a collaborative tool for facilitating student-centered learning in project- based classrooms , 2005 .

[17]  Gerry Stahl,et al.  Reflections on WebGuide: seven issues for the next generation of collaborative knowledge-building environments , 1999, CSCL.

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

[19]  Lev Vygotsky.  Mind in society , 1978 .

[20]  Rachel R. Van Der Stuyf.  Scaffolding as a Teaching Strategy , 2002 .

[21]  Thérèse Laferrière,et al.  Integration of an Online Discussion Forum in a Campus-based Undergraduate Biology Class , 2004 .

[22]  Charles J. Miller.  Use of the Internet in Teaching Mathematics in the Community College. , 1999 .

[23]  M. Warschauer.  Computer-Mediated Collaborative Learning: Theory and Practice. , 1997 .

[24]  David A. Thomas,et al.  Analysis of group problem-solving tasks in a geometry course for teachers using computer-mediated conferencing , 2000 .

[25]  Lasse Lipponen,et al.  The challenges for computer supported collaborative learning in elementary and secondary level: Finnish perspectives , 1999, CSCL.

[26]  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 .

[27]  Lai Yin Kwok,et al.  Scaffolding supports in project-based learning through Knowledge Community (KC): Collaborative learning strategies and pedagogical facilitation , 2004 .

[28]  A. P. Rovai.  Building classroom community at a distance: A case study , 2001 .

[29]  Susan Imel.  Learning Technologies in Adult Education. Myths and Realities. , 2001 .

[30]  Educational Improvement,et al.  New Teacher and Student Roles in the Technology-Supported Classroom , 2007 .

[31]  Peter C. Honebein,et al.  Constructivism and the Design of Learning Environments: Context and Authentic Activities for Learning , 1993 .

[32]  Mark Guzdial,et al.  Effective Discussion Through a Computer-Mediated Anchored Forum , 2000 .

[33]  D. Garrison,et al.  Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education , 2001 .

[34]  Robin Mason,et al.  Evaluation Methodologies for Computer Conferencing Applications , 1992 .

[35]  Julia Chiyo Myers.  Content analysis of computer-mediated collaborative mathematical problem solving , 2002 .

[36]  Dorit Maor,et al.  Quality of Students’ Communicative Strategies Delivered Through Computer-Mediated Communications , 2004 .

[37]  Bracha Kramarski.  Enhancing Mathematical Discourse: The Effects of E-mail Conversation on Learning Graphing , 2002 .

[38]  Jennifer Jean. Kosiak.  Using asynchronous discussions to facilitate collaborative problem solving in college algebra , 2004 .

[39]  James R. Layton,et al.  No Significant Difference Phenomenon , 1999, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..