You are here:

How Did Graduate Students of Education Major Perceive Ground Rules in Online Discussions?

, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States

Journal of Interactive Learning Research Volume 30, Number 1, ISSN 1093-023X Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

Online discussions have been proliferating in US higher education. Due to its widespread incorporation into university courses, instructors have been making efforts to design effective online discussions to enhance student learning. Ground rules play an important role in regulating student behaviors and performance in online discussions. This study reports how graduate students in education perceive ground rules designed for online discussions. The findings of the study provide insights on the role of ground rules in promoting student learning through online discussions.

Citation

Wang, Y.m. (2019). How Did Graduate Students of Education Major Perceive Ground Rules in Online Discussions?. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 30(1), 5-25. Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved June 5, 2023 from .

© 2019 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Abdullah, T. (2010). Relationship of metacognitive monitoring with interaction in an asynchronous online discussion forum. Behaviour& Information Technology, 29(4), 395-402.
  2. Agee, J. & Smith, S.U. (2011). Online discussion in a doctoral research methods course: ‘Like a text by many authors’. Studies in Continuing Education, 33(3), 301-319.
  3. Ajayi, L. (2009). An exploration of pre-service teachers’ perceptions of learning to teach while using discussion board. Educational Technology& Society, 12 (2), 86-100.
  4. Bassett, P. (2011). How do students view asynchronous online discussions as a learning experience? Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 7, 69-79.
  5. Berry, G. (2007, August). Asynchronous Discussion Boards: Student Perceptions. Paper presented at the 23rd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching& Learning. Madison, WI.
  6. Chen, D.V., Wang, Y.M., & Hung, D. (2009). A Journey on Refining Rules for Online Discussion: Implications for the Design of Learning Management Systems. Interactive Learning Research, 20(2), 157-173. Interactive Learning Research, 20(2), 157-173.
  7. Chou, P.N. & Chen, W.F. (2010). Chinese students’ perception of online learning in western discussion boards: a cultural perspective. International Journal of Instructional Technology& Distance Learning. 7(2), 35-43.
  8. Creswell, J.W., & Garrett, A.L. (2008). The” movement” of mixed methods research and the role of educators. South African journal of education, 28(3), 321-333.
  9. Crosta, L., Manokore, V., & Gray, M. (2016). From an Online Cohort Towards a Community of Inquiry: International Students’ Interaction Patterns in an Online Doctorate Program. Interactive Online Learning, 14(2), 45-57.
  10. Ebrahimi, A., Faghih, E., & Dabir-Moghaddam, M. (2016). Student perceptions of effective discussion in online forums: a case study of pre-service teachers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54(5), 1-9.
  11. Herbert, M. (2006). Staying the course: A study in online student satisfaction and retention. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 9(4), 300-317.
  12. Hung, D., & Chen, D-T. (2003). Learning within the context of communities of practices: ARe-conceptualization of tools, rules, and roles of the activity system. Educational Media International, 39((3/4)), 247-255.
  13. Jackson, J. (2016). Asynchronous threaded discussions and intercultural learning: Student sojourner perspectives. Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 25(3), 229-249.
  14. Jose, J., & Abidin, M.J.Z. (2016). A pedagogical perspective on promoting English as aforeign language writing through online forum discussions. English Language Teaching, 9(2), 84-101.
  15. Kirmizi, Ö. (2015). The influence of learner readiness on student satisfaction and academic achievement in an online program at higher education. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 14(1), 133-142.
  16. Kuo, Y.C., Walker, A.E., Belland, B.R., & Schroder, K.E. (2013). A predictive study of student satisfaction in online education programs. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 14(1), 16-39.
  17. Levy, Y. (2007). Comparing dropouts and persistence in e-learning courses. Computers and Education, 48(2), 185-204.
  18. Lin, K.M. (2011). E-learning continuance intention: Moderating effects of user e-learning experience. Computers& Education, 56(2), 515-526.
  19. Lo, C.C. (2010). How student satisfaction factors affect perceived learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(1) 47-54.
  20. Maurino, P.S.M. & Schoenacher, S. (2010, June). Student perceptions of online discussions: Is there agreement between students and faculty? Paper presented at 8th International Conference on Education and Information Systems, Technologies and Applications (EISTA), Orlando, Florida.
  21. Meyer, K.A. (2007). Student Perceptions of face-to-face and online discussions: The advantage goes to.... Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(4), 53-69.
  22. Morgan, K. (2006). Ground rules in online discussions: Help or hindrance? Teaching in Marriage and Family, 6, 285-305.
  23. Naaj, A.M., Nachouki, M. & Ankit, A. (2012). Evaluating student satisfaction with blended learning in a gender-segregated environment. Information Technology Education: Research, 11, 185-200.
  24. Noel-Levitz (2014). 2014 national student satisfaction and priorities report. Coralville, IA: Noel-Levitz. Retrieved from www.noellevitz.com/Benchmark. Noel-Levitz (2015-2016). 2015-2016 national student satisfaction and priorities report. Coralville, IA: Noel-Levitz. Retrieved from www.noellevitz.com/ Benchmark. How Did Graduate Students of Education Major Perceive Ground Rules 25
  25. Noel-Levitz (2017). 2017 national student satisfaction and priorities report. Coralville, IA: Noel-Levitz. Retrieved from www.noellevitz.com/Benchmark.
  26. Oakman, J. (2016). Beyond Coursework: Developing Communities in an Online Program of Study. Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 15, 167-179.
  27. Ozcan, O. & Hacer, O. (2013). An examination of computer engineering students’ perceptions about asynchronous discussion forums. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science& Technology Education, 9(14), 371-378.
  28. Pena-Shaff, J.B. & Altman, W.S. (2009). Case-based instruction, using asynchronous online discussions: a synthesis. Excellence in College Teaching, 20(3), 97-121.
  29. Sahin, I. & Shelley, M. (2008). Considering students’ perceptions: The distance education student satisfaction model. Educational Technology& Society, 11(3), 216-223.
  30. Staaman, J.K. (2009). The joint negotiation of ground rules: Establishing a shared collaborative practice with new educational technology. Language and Education, 23(1), 79-95.
  31. Timotheou, M.M. (2017). Exploring change in graduate students’ perceptions of web-based education throughout an asynchronous course. Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 26(1), 61-88.
  32. Trespalacios, J., & Perkins, R. (2016). Sense of community, perceived learning, and achievement relationships in an online graduate course. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 17(3), 31-49.
  33. Tsai, K.C. (2017). Teacher-Student Relationships, Satisfaction, and Achievement among Art and Design College Students in Macau. Journal of Education and Practice, 8(6), 12-16.
  34. Waite, T. (2005). Activity Theory. (http://www.slis.indiana.edu/faculty/yrogers/ Act_theory2/). Retrieved on September 15, 2008.
  35. Wang, Y.M. & Chen, D.V. (2008). Essential elements in designing online discussions to promote cognitive presence– A Practical experience. Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12 (3-4), 157-177.
  36. Wang, Y.M. & Chen, D.V. (2010). Promoting spontaneous facilitation in online discussions: Designing object and ground rules. Educational Media International, 47(3), 249-264.
  37. Ward, T. & Dodd, L. (2011). Evaluation of a final-year module using online asynchronous discussion. Psychology Learning and Teaching, 10(3), 246252.
  38. Yenika-Agbaw, V. (2010). Teaching children’s literature online: Modern technology and virtual classroom communities. New Horizon in Education, 58(3), 111-117.
  39. Yiadom-Boakye, G. (2011). Students’ perception about virtual chat (synchronous) and discussion board (asynchronous) course content delivery. Unpublished Thesis, University of Central Missouri.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References