Teacher–student interactions and learning outcomes in a distance learning environment

Offir, Baruch; Barth, Ingrid; Lev, Yoseph; Shteinbok, Arkady

doi:10.1016/s1096-7516(02)00162-8

Cited by 44 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several researchers have attempted to classify interactions according to their intended purpose (Mason 1991; Berge 1995; Gilbert & Moore 1998; Offir et al . 2003; Hawkins et al .…”

Section: Classification Of Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2011), all of whom identified interactions as having a social purpose, which includes creating a friendly environment where learning can occur. Although Gilbert and Moore (1998) classified interactions regarding course management and procedures as social, the majority of the researchers viewed those interactions as a distinct category they termed organizational (Mason 1991), procedural (Offir et al . 2003; Hawkins et al .…”

Section: Classification Of Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several researchers have attempted to classify interactions according to their intended purpose (Mason 1991;Berge 1995;Gilbert & Moore 1998;Offir et al 2003;Hawkins et al 2011), all of whom identified interactions as having a social purpose, which includes creating a friendly environment where learning can occur. Although Gilbert and Moore (1998) classified interactions regarding course management and procedures as social, the majority of the researchers viewed those interactions as a distinct category they termed organizational (Mason 1991), procedural (Offir et al 2003;Hawkins et al 2011), or managerial (Berge 1995. These interactions are not directly related to the content but set expectations, timetables, and procedural rules.…”

Section: By Typementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The nature of adolescent learner interaction in a virtual high school setting

Borup

Graham

Davies

2012

Computer Assisted Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study used survey data to measure the effect of learners' reported interactions with content, peers, and instructors on several course outcomes in two virtual high school courses that emphasized interactive learning. Surveys found that the large majority of students viewed all investigated types of interaction as educational and motivational. Students perceived learner–instructor and learner–content interactions to have significantly higher educational value (α < 0.01) than learner–learner interactions, and viewed learner–instructor interaction to be significantly more motivational (α < 0.01) than learner–content interaction. Furthermore, nine significant correlations were found involving the time students reported spending on human interaction and course outcomes. Seven of the significant correlations were related to the time students reported spending in human interaction and the more affective outcomes, such as course satisfaction and disposition towards the subject area. Outcomes also indicate that learner–learner interaction had higher correlations with course outcomes than learners' interactions with the content or their instructor. Students' perceived learning was not significantly correlated with any type of interaction, and only students' total reported time spent on learner–learner interaction and students' social learner–learner interaction were significantly correlated with their grade.

show abstract

“…Several researchers have attempted to classify interactions according to their intended purpose (Mason 1991; Berge 1995; Gilbert & Moore 1998; Offir et al . 2003; Hawkins et al .…”

Section: Classification Of Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Classification Of Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: By Typementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The nature of adolescent learner interaction in a virtual high school setting

Borup

Graham

Davies

2012

Computer Assisted Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…-Profesorado: actividad docente, inmediatez, roles (Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Goodyear, Salmon, Spector, Steeples & Tickner, 2001;LaRose, Eastin & Gregg, 2001;Offir, Barth, Lev & Shteinbok, 2003). (2000) se basa en la importancia de la cohesión social dentro del grupo y el sentimiento de pertenencia entre los miembros.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Como señala Silva y Gros (2007) (Chen, 2001; Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Gunawardena, Lowe & Anderson, 1998; Harasim, 2000;Salmon, 2000;Rourke et al, 1999). -Profesorado: actividad docente, inmediatez, roles (Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Goodyear, Salmon, Spector, Steeples & Tickner, 2001;LaRose, Eastin & Gregg, 2001;Offir, Barth, Lev & Shteinbok, 2003). (2000) se basa en la importancia de la cohesión social dentro del grupo y el sentimiento de pertenencia entre los miembros.…”

unclassified

Modelos para el análisis de contenido en la comunicación virtual

Gutiérrez-Santiuste

2014

EDMETIC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

 edmetic, Revista de Educación Mediática y TIC 70Modelos para el análisis de contenido en la comunicación virtual Models of content analysis in virtual communicationElba Gutiérrez-Santiuste 1 Resumen:Este artículo contiene una revisión de literatura sobre los modelos utilizados en la educación virtual para el análisis del contenido de las comunicaciones. Se examinan los aspectos teóricos y metodológicos, los antecedentes en que se basan y las modificaciones realizadas por investigadores relevantes en el campo. Analizar la comunicación virtual es útil para los actores del proceso educativo sin limitación de distancia y tiempo, en entornos integrados por tutores, enseñantes y estudiantes que interaccionan en una nueva modalidad con características propias. Describir los modelos de comunicación mediada por ordenador aporta una información valiosa para ampliar el conocimiento científico, con pretensiones de sistematizar las líneas de investigación que se están desarrollando actualmente y, como consecuencia, de repercusión sobre la comunidad investigadora.Palabras clave: análisis de contenido, comunicación, tecnologías de la información y la comunicación, investigación teórica.Abstract: This article contains a review of literature on the models used in virtual education for the analysis of the content of communications. It examines the theoretical and methodological background underlying and relevant amendments made by researchers in the field. Describe virtual communication is useful for education stakeholders without limitation of distance and time, in environments integrated by tutors, teachers and students to interact in a new modality with its own characteristics. Systematize models computer-mediated communication provides valuable information to further scientific knowledge, with pretensions to systematize the research currently being developed and, therefore, of impact on the research community. Keywords: content analysis, communication, ICT, theoretical research.1 Universidad de Granada. egutierrez@ugr.es IntroducciónEste artículo se basa en dos premisas fundamentales. En primer lugar la concepción de que la educación es comunicación, por lo que es imprescindible un conocimiento exhaustivo sobre qué y cómo se comunica para conocer uno de sus pilares básicos. Por otro, las herramientas tecnológicas han supuesto una manera diferente de comunicación profesoralumnado que, posiblemente, sea diferente a las condiciones de la acción comunicativa en una situación de presencialidad. Para conocer la manera en que las personas se comunican en situaciones de enseñanza-aprendizaje virtuales se han desarrollado diversos modelos de análisis, que han aportado una información valiosa para ampliar el conocimiento científico.Una de las herramientas de investigación que se ha mostrado más prometedora para la investigación de las comunicaciones virtuales es el análisis de contenido (Henri, 1992; Kanuka y Anderson, 1998;Mason, 1992; Rourke, Anderson, Garrison y Archer, 2000). No solo por la facilidad para guardar, organizar o ...

show abstract