2012 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences 2012
DOI: 10.1109/hicss.2012.113
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Anchored Asynchronous Online Discussions: Facilitating Participation and Engagement in a Blended Environment

Abstract: This research was conducted as a field experiment that explored the potential benefits of anchoring in asynchronous online discussions for business statistics classes. Many students tend to perform poorly in these classes, which are usually taught using traditional methods with emphasis on lecturing, knowledge reproduction, and treatment of students as dependent learners. Course activities are typically centered on the teacher as the source of all knowledge and understanding. Moreover, student interactions are… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
3
1
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
(15 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Anchoring in online discussions allows for the selection of any piece of a document (word, sentence, paragraph, or page) to be the focus of the discussion thread [4,5,6]. An anchored asynchronous online discussion (AAOD) tool offers students a simple and effortless interface to participate in discussions.…”
Section: Anchored Asynchronous Online Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anchoring in online discussions allows for the selection of any piece of a document (word, sentence, paragraph, or page) to be the focus of the discussion thread [4,5,6]. An anchored asynchronous online discussion (AAOD) tool offers students a simple and effortless interface to participate in discussions.…”
Section: Anchored Asynchronous Online Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The last measure, structured interaction, evaluates, how well structured and goal oriented the discussion was and how the communication in the team was perceived. The measure contains five unweighted items from Alrushiedat & Olfman (2012), and van der Pol et al (2006), with different rating scales [1,28]. Table 1 shows the measures, which were captured in a postprocess survey.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Table 1 shows the measures, which were captured in a postprocess survey. 1 The item "How effective was this meeting compared to a face-to-face meeting." is excluded from the mean and t-test calculations.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%