2009
DOI: 10.1080/14703290902843778
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An analysis of higher order thinking in online discussions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
53
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 79 publications
(57 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
3
53
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It also considered Gunawardena's social networking spiral (2009) and Maslow's hierarchy of needs, along with studies on student perceptions (Gosmire, Morrison, and Van Osdel 2009;Ruey 2009;Yaunkun 2012), teachers' perceptions (Salmon 2011), course design (Ausburn 2004;Garrison, Anderson, and Archer 2000;Rhoades and Rhoades 2013) and research discussing evidence of higher order thinking in an online environment (Mak, Williams, and Mackness 2010;McLoughlin and Mynard 2009).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It also considered Gunawardena's social networking spiral (2009) and Maslow's hierarchy of needs, along with studies on student perceptions (Gosmire, Morrison, and Van Osdel 2009;Ruey 2009;Yaunkun 2012), teachers' perceptions (Salmon 2011), course design (Ausburn 2004;Garrison, Anderson, and Archer 2000;Rhoades and Rhoades 2013) and research discussing evidence of higher order thinking in an online environment (Mak, Williams, and Mackness 2010;McLoughlin and Mynard 2009).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to this, a study investigating higher-order thinking skills through online forums was that of McLoughlin and Mynard (2009) Bachelor of Education students in preparation as English teachers, thus the study consists of a twenty-week course for these STs, who took two modules, namely pedagogical grammar and the principles of the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach. Online forums (five prompts for each course) were included in both courses to encourage them to reflect, interact and discuss areas related to the course.…”
Section: Online Tools In Teacher Educationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…If the instructor desires to simply have an electronic means of creating a social connection between students and the instructor, this needs to be decided when constructing the discussions. Alternatively, if the goal is to create higher-level thinking and a thought-provoking discussion, then this should be the intent of the discussion when constructed (McLoughlin & Mynard, 2009). If the intent of the instructor is to actively involve students in the online discussions, a number of studies focused on the effective use of student-instructor interaction in this online environment.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet, to increase cognitive engagement with course concepts and to extend learning in an online environment, a visible and active instructor presence and interaction was requisite, as was a structured learning environment (Dutt-Doner & Powers, 2000;Im & Lee, 2003-2004Lee-Baldwin, 2005;Ryan & Scott, 2008;McLoughlin & Mynard, 2009;Paulus & Roberts, 2006). Hence, deeper learning requires more student-instructor interaction and therefore smaller class sizes, while classes that require less high-order thinking may suffice with larger numbers.…”
Section: Class Size and Instructor Presencementioning
confidence: 99%