参考异步在线讨论中的其他参与者:高等教育背景下的引用模式

Q2 Arts and Humanities Psychology of Language and Communication Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.2478/plc-2022-17
Mario Cal-Varela, Francisco J. Fernández-Polo
{"title":"参考异步在线讨论中的其他参与者:高等教育背景下的引用模式","authors":"Mario Cal-Varela, Francisco J. Fernández-Polo","doi":"10.2478/plc-2022-17","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The effectiveness of asynchronous online discussions as a learning tool in higher education critically depends on the participants’ ability to create a cohesive social space. Referring to one another’s messages is a key way to display a sense of affiliation and solidarity, and contribute to the consolidation of the learning community. However, research has shown that students often fail to adequately exploit this dimension of the online forum, as it requires considerable involvement in the activity and is very time-consuming.In the current study, we examined references to previous posts in a set of online discussions held during a one-term undergraduate course. The overall frequency of citations was low, with slightly over half of the 885 analyzed posts containing at least one reference. While this seems to indicate that a large number of participants conceived the activity as hardly interactive, for those who did quote their classmates, the preferred practice was using their first names, although the more formal name+surname pattern increased in the second half of the course, possibly indicating an awareness of the academic character of the activity. If the frequency and kind of mutual references can be taken as a measure of how successful asynchronous online discussions can prove as a collaborative learning tool, our results invite deep reflection regarding task design to ensure that students and instructors understand their goals in the same way.","PeriodicalId":20768,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Language and Communication","volume":"35 3","pages":"353 - 374"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Referring to other participants in asynchronous online discussions: Citation patterns in a higher education context\",\"authors\":\"Mario Cal-Varela, Francisco J. Fernández-Polo\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/plc-2022-17\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The effectiveness of asynchronous online discussions as a learning tool in higher education critically depends on the participants’ ability to create a cohesive social space. Referring to one another’s messages is a key way to display a sense of affiliation and solidarity, and contribute to the consolidation of the learning community. However, research has shown that students often fail to adequately exploit this dimension of the online forum, as it requires considerable involvement in the activity and is very time-consuming.In the current study, we examined references to previous posts in a set of online discussions held during a one-term undergraduate course. The overall frequency of citations was low, with slightly over half of the 885 analyzed posts containing at least one reference. While this seems to indicate that a large number of participants conceived the activity as hardly interactive, for those who did quote their classmates, the preferred practice was using their first names, although the more formal name+surname pattern increased in the second half of the course, possibly indicating an awareness of the academic character of the activity. If the frequency and kind of mutual references can be taken as a measure of how successful asynchronous online discussions can prove as a collaborative learning tool, our results invite deep reflection regarding task design to ensure that students and instructors understand their goals in the same way.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20768,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology of Language and Communication\",\"volume\":\"35 3\",\"pages\":\"353 - 374\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology of Language and Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2022-17\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Language and Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2022-17","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要异步在线讨论作为高等教育中的一种学习工具的有效性在很大程度上取决于参与者创造有凝聚力的社会空间的能力。相互交流信息是显示归属感和团结感的关键方式,有助于巩固学习社区。然而,研究表明,学生们往往无法充分利用在线论坛的这一维度,因为它需要大量参与活动,而且非常耗时。在当前的研究中,我们在一个学期的本科生课程中进行了一系列在线讨论,研究了对以前帖子的引用。被引用的总体频率较低,在885篇被分析的帖子中,略高于一半的帖子至少包含一篇参考文献。虽然这似乎表明,许多参与者认为这项活动几乎没有互动性,但对于那些引用同学名字的人来说,他们更喜欢使用自己的名字,尽管在课程的后半部分,更正式的名字+姓氏模式有所增加,这可能表明他们意识到了这项活动的学术性质。如果可以将相互参考的频率和种类作为衡量异步在线讨论作为一种协作学习工具的成功程度的标准,那么我们的研究结果就需要对任务设计进行深入思考,以确保学生和教师以同样的方式理解他们的目标。
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
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Referring to other participants in asynchronous online discussions: Citation patterns in a higher education context
Abstract The effectiveness of asynchronous online discussions as a learning tool in higher education critically depends on the participants’ ability to create a cohesive social space. Referring to one another’s messages is a key way to display a sense of affiliation and solidarity, and contribute to the consolidation of the learning community. However, research has shown that students often fail to adequately exploit this dimension of the online forum, as it requires considerable involvement in the activity and is very time-consuming.In the current study, we examined references to previous posts in a set of online discussions held during a one-term undergraduate course. The overall frequency of citations was low, with slightly over half of the 885 analyzed posts containing at least one reference. While this seems to indicate that a large number of participants conceived the activity as hardly interactive, for those who did quote their classmates, the preferred practice was using their first names, although the more formal name+surname pattern increased in the second half of the course, possibly indicating an awareness of the academic character of the activity. If the frequency and kind of mutual references can be taken as a measure of how successful asynchronous online discussions can prove as a collaborative learning tool, our results invite deep reflection regarding task design to ensure that students and instructors understand their goals in the same way.
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
Psychology of Language and Communication
Psychology of Language and Communication Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊最新文献
The ambiguous relation between verbal irony understanding and need for cognitive closure: Reports from two studies Are Polish CLIL learners more willing to communicate in English than non-CLIL learners? Twitter language samples reflect collective emotional responses following political leaders’ rhetoric during the pandemic across four countries A star is born? The German gender star and its effects on mental representation Stimulus-response binding is not a gradually learned association between specific stimuli and their responses: Evidence from a teenage bilingual population
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1