双管齐下:在线和现场讨论为学生提供了互补的学习机会。

IF 4.6 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Kylea R Garces, Aaron N Sexton, Abigail Hazelwood, Nathan Steffens, Linda Fuselier, Natalie Christian
{"title":"双管齐下:在线和现场讨论为学生提供了互补的学习机会。","authors":"Kylea R Garces, Aaron N Sexton, Abigail Hazelwood, Nathan Steffens, Linda Fuselier, Natalie Christian","doi":"10.1187/cbe.23-04-0062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Discussions play a significant role in facilitating student learning through engagement with course material and promotion of critical thinking. Discussions provide space for social learning where ideas are deliberated, internalized, and knowledge is cocreated through socioemotional interactions. With the increase of internet-based and hybrid courses, there is a need to evaluate the degree to which online discussion modalities facilitate quality discussions and enhance student achievement. We assessed the effectiveness of asynchronous online discussion boards and traditional face-to-face discussions via qualitative (thematic coding and discussion network analysis) and quantitative (Bloom's taxonomy) techniques and evaluated student perceptions via precourse and postcourse surveys. We found differential strengths of the two formats. Online discussions increased response complexity, while in-person discussions fostered improved connections with course material. Themes related to sharing of personal identity, humanity and verbal immediacy were more frequent throughout in-person discussions. Survey responses suggested that a sense of community was an external motivator for preference of in-person discussions, while anxiety was a factor influencing online discussion preference. Our findings suggest that online and in-person discussions are complementary, and work in tandem to facilitate complex student thinking through online environments and social learning within the classroom.</p>","PeriodicalId":56321,"journal":{"name":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","volume":"23 3","pages":"ar34"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440744/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It Takes Two: Online and In-person Discussions Offer Complementary Learning Opportunities for Students.\",\"authors\":\"Kylea R Garces, Aaron N Sexton, Abigail Hazelwood, Nathan Steffens, Linda Fuselier, Natalie Christian\",\"doi\":\"10.1187/cbe.23-04-0062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Discussions play a significant role in facilitating student learning through engagement with course material and promotion of critical thinking. Discussions provide space for social learning where ideas are deliberated, internalized, and knowledge is cocreated through socioemotional interactions. With the increase of internet-based and hybrid courses, there is a need to evaluate the degree to which online discussion modalities facilitate quality discussions and enhance student achievement. We assessed the effectiveness of asynchronous online discussion boards and traditional face-to-face discussions via qualitative (thematic coding and discussion network analysis) and quantitative (Bloom's taxonomy) techniques and evaluated student perceptions via precourse and postcourse surveys. We found differential strengths of the two formats. Online discussions increased response complexity, while in-person discussions fostered improved connections with course material. Themes related to sharing of personal identity, humanity and verbal immediacy were more frequent throughout in-person discussions. Survey responses suggested that a sense of community was an external motivator for preference of in-person discussions, while anxiety was a factor influencing online discussion preference. Our findings suggest that online and in-person discussions are complementary, and work in tandem to facilitate complex student thinking through online environments and social learning within the classroom.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56321,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cbe-Life Sciences Education\",\"volume\":\"23 3\",\"pages\":\"ar34\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11440744/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cbe-Life Sciences Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.23-04-0062\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cbe-Life Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.23-04-0062","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通过参与课程材料和促进批判性思维,讨论在促进学生学习方面发挥着重要作用。讨论为社会学习提供了空间,在讨论中,思想得到了讨论、内化,知识通过社会情感互动而共同创造。随着网络课程和混合课程的增加,有必要对在线讨论模式促进高质量讨论和提高学生成绩的程度进行评估。我们通过定性(主题编码和讨论网络分析)和定量(布鲁姆分类法)技术评估了异步在线讨论板和传统面对面讨论的有效性,并通过课前和课后调查评估了学生的看法。我们发现两种形式的优势各不相同。在线讨论增加了回答的复杂性,而面对面讨论则加强了与课程材料的联系。在面对面讨论中,与分享个人身份、人性和语言直接性相关的主题更为常见。调查反馈表明,社区感是偏好面对面讨论的外部动力,而焦虑则是影响偏好在线讨论的一个因素。我们的研究结果表明,在线讨论和面对面讨论是相辅相成的,通过在线环境和课堂内的社交学习,它们可以共同促进学生的复杂思维。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
It Takes Two: Online and In-person Discussions Offer Complementary Learning Opportunities for Students.

Discussions play a significant role in facilitating student learning through engagement with course material and promotion of critical thinking. Discussions provide space for social learning where ideas are deliberated, internalized, and knowledge is cocreated through socioemotional interactions. With the increase of internet-based and hybrid courses, there is a need to evaluate the degree to which online discussion modalities facilitate quality discussions and enhance student achievement. We assessed the effectiveness of asynchronous online discussion boards and traditional face-to-face discussions via qualitative (thematic coding and discussion network analysis) and quantitative (Bloom's taxonomy) techniques and evaluated student perceptions via precourse and postcourse surveys. We found differential strengths of the two formats. Online discussions increased response complexity, while in-person discussions fostered improved connections with course material. Themes related to sharing of personal identity, humanity and verbal immediacy were more frequent throughout in-person discussions. Survey responses suggested that a sense of community was an external motivator for preference of in-person discussions, while anxiety was a factor influencing online discussion preference. Our findings suggest that online and in-person discussions are complementary, and work in tandem to facilitate complex student thinking through online environments and social learning within the classroom.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cbe-Life Sciences Education
Cbe-Life Sciences Education EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
13.50%
发文量
100
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: CBE—Life Sciences Education (LSE), a free, online quarterly journal, is published by the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB). The journal was launched in spring 2002 as Cell Biology Education—A Journal of Life Science Education. The ASCB changed the name of the journal in spring 2006 to better reflect the breadth of its readership and the scope of its submissions. LSE publishes peer-reviewed articles on life science education at the K–12, undergraduate, and graduate levels. The ASCB believes that learning in biology encompasses diverse fields, including math, chemistry, physics, engineering, computer science, and the interdisciplinary intersections of biology with these fields. Within biology, LSE focuses on how students are introduced to the study of life sciences, as well as approaches in cell biology, developmental biology, neuroscience, biochemistry, molecular biology, genetics, genomics, bioinformatics, and proteomics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信