对高等教育在线讨论工具进行混合方法评估

IF 16.4 1区化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-07-14 DOI:10.1016/j.iree.2024.100298

Alex Squires, Dan Rigby

{"title":"对高等教育在线讨论工具进行混合方法评估","authors":"Alex Squires, Dan Rigby","doi":"10.1016/j.iree.2024.100298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>We present a mixed methods comparative assessment of three online discussion tools widely used in higher education. We combine different data types (quantitative, qualitative) and sources (usage data, survey responses) to assess Piazza, Padlet, and Blackboard discussion boards. We highlight and discuss the differences between, and relative merits of, the tools and report the preferences of students on a large introductory Economics unit for them. We summarise lessons learnt from using the tools and make recommendations to engender greater student engagement with online discussion spaces.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477388024000161/pdfft?md5=fa53615608b6dabbe802c17203cb738d&pid=1-s2.0-S1477388024000161-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A mixed methods evaluation of online discussion tools in higher education\",\"authors\":\"Alex Squires, Dan Rigby\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.iree.2024.100298\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>We present a mixed methods comparative assessment of three online discussion tools widely used in higher education. We combine different data types (quantitative, qualitative) and sources (usage data, survey responses) to assess Piazza, Padlet, and Blackboard discussion boards. We highlight and discuss the differences between, and relative merits of, the tools and report the preferences of students on a large introductory Economics unit for them. We summarise lessons learnt from using the tools and make recommendations to engender greater student engagement with online discussion spaces.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477388024000161/pdfft?md5=fa53615608b6dabbe802c17203cb738d&pid=1-s2.0-S1477388024000161-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477388024000161\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1477388024000161","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

我们采用混合方法对高等教育中广泛使用的三种在线讨论工具进行了比较评估。我们结合了不同的数据类型（定量、定性）和来源（使用数据、调查反馈），对 Piazza、Padlet 和 Blackboard 讨论板进行了评估。我们强调并讨论了这些工具之间的差异和相对优点，并报告了学生在一个大型经济学入门单元中对这些工具的偏好。我们总结了使用这些工具的经验教训，并就如何提高学生对在线讨论空间的参与度提出了建议。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

A mixed methods evaluation of online discussion tools in higher education

We present a mixed methods comparative assessment of three online discussion tools widely used in higher education. We combine different data types (quantitative, qualitative) and sources (usage data, survey responses) to assess Piazza, Padlet, and Blackboard discussion boards. We highlight and discuss the differences between, and relative merits of, the tools and report the preferences of students on a large introductory Economics unit for them. We summarise lessons learnt from using the tools and make recommendations to engender greater student engagement with online discussion spaces.

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

Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合

CiteScore

31.40

自引率

1.10%

发文量

312

审稿时长

2 months

期刊介绍： Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.