E-learning resources in Hong Kong Essay Example
E-learning resources in Hong Kong Essay Example

E-learning resources in Hong Kong Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
  • Pages: 4 (943 words)
  • Published: September 18, 2017
  • Type: Essay
View Entire Sample
Text preview

Askell-Williams and Lawson (2005) conducted a comprehensive survey on teaching and learning approaches, exploring various aspects of the subject. Expert perspectives from psychology, sociological constructivism, and socio-linguistics emphasize the significance of discussion as a means of instruction and learning. Dillon (1994) argued that discussion enhances students' understanding of the subject matter, addresses relevant issues, promotes personal growth, and highlights the value of group reflection and deliberation. Additionally, discussion serves as a process for constructing knowledge.

In the classroom setting, social transactions prompt students to share their thinking in the "public sphere," allowing for augmentation, examination, elaboration, critique, and connection of ideas with others' understandings. Tobin et al.(1994) further emphasized that discussion plays a crucial role in interactive student engagement by providing opportunities to negotiate differing opinions and seek understanding. A vital aspect is developing students' ability t

...

o ask questions and clarify their understanding through peer interaction. This fosters confidence in expressing viewpoints and taking valid stances.

According to societal cognitive perspective discourse is considered an essential tool for cognitive development. Nuthall (1997) proposes that discourse plays a crucial role in connecting socio-cultural experiences with the self-organizational activities of the mind.Askell-Williams and Lawson (year) found that engaging in discussions involving multiple perspectives can enhance students' understanding beyond what they learn solely from the teacher-student relationship. By considering a wider range of social and logical relationships, their comprehension becomes more enriched. This expanded network of connections provides students with a mental space to explore, interact, and consider alternative beliefs, arguments, and conclusions (Nuthall, 1997, p.743).

However, it is important to note that discourse may not always be suitable for every situation as a learning strategy. Baxter et al. (2001) demonstrate

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

that for "low-achieving" students, participating in class discussions might not be effective. These students may struggle to actively engage in conversations and overcome their shyness when expressing their thoughts.

Hollander's study (2002) acknowledges the challenges of organizing effective individual-level discussions. Some students may dominate the conversation while others contribute minimally or have difficulties communicating effectively. Additionally, there is no guarantee of coherence within the discussion.

Therefore, simply allowing students to discuss among themselves is insufficient for facilitating effective discussions.
The text highlights the need for guidance in asking appropriate questions and responding properly in discussions. It emphasizes that students must have knowledge on effectively participating in discussions to fully benefit from using them as a learning approach. The paper aims to discuss the importance of collaboration and discussion in online learning environments (OLEs). Active learning with interaction involving faculty as peers, guides, and facilitators is considered more effective for OLEs. Discussion increases student engagement and active participation compared to traditional teacher talk instruction methods. It also enhances students' sense of achievement and satisfaction. Clark points out differences between traditional classrooms and OLEs, which are illustrated in the table below.

<

Traditional Classroom

OLE

Lecture Time

Lecture clip is limited Online categories run 24 hours from the beginning to the end of the class

Class Break

Casual conversations in the classroom will interrupt the order of the class Discussion forums have replaced casual conversations in the classroom and have a permanent written record

Discussion quality

Dicsussions are no longer rapid or experimental. Secret student dialogues in the class are not easily monitored, but all information will be logged and traced in the discussion room.Students

may face limitations in participating at any time of the day in a traditional classroom due to location and space constraints.However, in the discussion room, students can participate anytime from work, home or while traveling.In traditional classrooms, instructors play a significant role in motivating students to learn.On the other hand, in the discussion room, students are self-motivated and responsible for their contributions and deadlines without reminders of fixed meeting times and places with due dates.Fig1 illustrates the differences between traditional classrooms and OLEs.The shift from in-person treatment to computer mediated discussion is clear from previous sessions. Online learning environments (OLEs) have advantages over traditional classrooms for treatment purposes. An and Frick (2006) [I] found that students prefer using electronic resources for learning and interacting with each other. In certain circumstances, students actually prefer computer-mediated communication (CMC) over face-to-face (F2F) communication due to its flexibility. This text emphasizes the benefits of digital learning platforms, such as increased interactivity and the ability for students to learn at their own pace. The use of computer aids transforms independent learning into peer learning, promoting social interaction. Online learning maximizes the interaction between teachers, students, content, and interface, facilitating constructive thinking. Furthermore, computer-mediated communication allows students more time to respond to questions and analyze them before providing thoughtful responses. This gives students control over their learning experience by allowing them to interact with peers and build knowledge. Online discussion tools are commonly used in computer-mediated communication and can be categorized as synchronized or asynchronous formats which have different impacts on educational platforms. This session will explore the advantages and disadvantages of using discussion tools for learning.
An asynchronous discussion tool, also

known as instruction that occurs in delayed time and doesn't require simultaneous participation from students and instructors (Johnson, 2006), has been widely used in distance education to overcome postal service delays. It has proven to be useful in instructional contexts. Text-based asynchronous direction is also commonly used in post-secondary education as an online treatment that isn't synchronous. Research on asynchronous online treatment indicates several benefits: it promotes thoughtful discussion, allows communication with students in different time zones, facilitates ongoing discussions with file storage capabilities, and enables all students to respond to a topic (Johnson). However, there are potential limitations to using asynchronous treatment rooms. Some of these limitations include infrequent checking of the forum by students, lack of immediate feedback leading to feelings of isolation, and the need for more discussion time for fruitful outcomes. Despite these limitations, a survey by Dede and Kremer found that students prefer asynchronous treatment tools because they provide a comprehensive exchange of ideas even though they require more time commitment compared to synchronous chats and offer less social interaction (Johnson). On the other hand, synchronous discussion tools provide valuable opportunities for real-time communication and collaboration among students and instructors (Johnson).According to Johnson (2006), synchronous instruction, which involves real-time participation of both students and instructors, was initially used through closed circuit telecasting on university campuses. In the early years, video-conferencing and interactive television connected distant classrooms, allowing for spontaneous interaction and fostering a sense of connection among students. Educators have since explored how synchronous tools aid student learning. These tools facilitate simultaneous text-based conversations among multiple users. Branon and Essex's research (2001) demonstrated that chat tools are beneficial for various

purposes such as virtual office hours, team decision-making, idea brainstorming, community building, and addressing technical issues (p.36). Through spontaneous feedback using synchronous discussion tools, students actively engage in discussions without needing to frequently check for updates as required by asynchronous platforms. However, implementing synchronous discussion tools poses challenges compared to their asynchronous counterparts. Ensuring all students are online at the same time can be difficult, especially when managing large-scale conversations. Additionally, limited time for reflection may hinder deep thinking during real-time discussions.

In addition, poor typists may find it challenging to type responses in a timely manner (Branon & Essex 2001,p.36).

A Comparison of Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Treatment

Educators generally agree that asynchronous online treatment is more effective for learning outcomes than face-to-face treatment. However, there are limitations such as isolation and lack of engagement that make exclusive reliance on this method problematic. As a result, there is a growing trend towards incorporating synchronous chat tools to simulate face-to-face interaction and overcome these restrictions. The use of synchronous chats not only enhances social interaction but also improves student learning outcomes.

Johnson (2001) suggests combining both synchronous and asynchronous chat tools in the Online Learning Environment for higher levels of student satisfaction and mastery of course requirements compared to using either method alone. This approach is supported by a study indicating that students who utilize both treatment options are more likely to meet course requirements due to increased personal engagement in learning [original page number missing].

A review was conducted on the Instructor Controlled Chat System (ICCS) proposed by Thirunarayanan in 2000 with the aim of addressing issues related to chat confusion and convergence.The suggested improvements

to the system are as follows:
a) Instructor-mediated conversations - Teachers would have two windows on their computer screen, one for student discussions and another for teacher control. Messages from students would first go to the teacher window before being published to other students. The teacher would select relevant questions or responses to post, allowing students to only type and respond once the teacher sends it to their window.
b) Instructor notifications before chat sessions - This improvement involves saving short comments, questions, and statements in a database prior to the chat session. If a student lacks ideas during the discussion, pre-saved statements can be used by the teacher to ask questions or remind students about staying focused on the relevant topic.

However, there are potential problems with ICCS:
1) The effectiveness and smoothness of discussions heavily rely on the teacher.
2) As teachers censor discussion material, the quality of discussions is contingent upon their judgment.
3) Students may become less attentive as they rely on the remarks or guidance provided by the teacher.
4) The workload of teachers may increase if multiple discussion groups exist within a class.

The mediated chat system proposed by Hugo, Pimentel & [Person's name] aims to address "Message Overload" in online communication (Lucena, 2006). This refers to the overwhelming amount of messages being displayed simultaneously.The issue of message overload in mediated chat is solved by sending students' messages to a chat server and placing them in a queue. The chat server displays the messages one by one in a dialogue window, allowing students to see their position in the queue through a queue list. If a student's message reaches the top priority, they can cancel

it and send a new one. However, although mediated chat effectively solves message overload, it presents potential issues for facilitating effective discussions. One such issue is the lack of teacher presence to assist students in critical thinking. Additionally, there is no way to quiz or change the waiting line position as discussion flow depends on the chat server.

To address these concerns, Tamura et al.(year not mentioned) propose using a scenario-based asynchronous treatment environment that incorporates the Six Thinking Hats model (Shuichi, 2007) within CSCL discussions. In this model, students are assigned different colored hats based on specific characteristics associated with each hat color. They then contribute their thoughts according to these attributes. After an initial session with the hats, a facilitator guides the entire group to engage in a group review section before moving on to other hat sections. During this "Group Review," each student critiques others' statements while being overseen by a facilitator (Figure 5).The priority order for wearing the hats is as follows: Red > White > Green > Yellow > Black and Blue. The Red Hat allows students to express personal opinions easily, even if they are unfamiliar with the Six Thinking Hats method. The White Hat provides factual information for discussion. After using both the Red Hat and White Hat, it is beneficial to include the Green, Yellow, and Black hats to contribute ideas and different perspectives that enrich discussions. Finally, the Blue Hat serves as a summarizing hat that should be worn last.

Using the "Six Thinking Hats" model in discussions creates a platform for parallel thinking that satisfies five previously mentioned advantages. Tamura and Shuichi (2006) conducted research using questionnaires

which suggested that this system allows for diverse perspectives on topics while providing convenience in summarization.

There are several key takeaways from employing this system. Initially, it is beneficial to have students individually contribute their thoughts at the start of a discussion as it promotes diverse thinking among students. However, assigning specific roles to students after the initial round can be more effective. This ensures that no minor ideas, such as feelings, are overlooked in subsequent discussions. By assigning a student to a particular role after the first round, this issue can be resolved (further details will be explained in the next chapter).The system should have features that assist in summarizing ideas and enable students to take on specific roles. According to Johnson & Johnson (1995), controversy arises when individuals hold conflicting thoughts or information and strive for understanding. The educational approach known as Structured Academic Controversy (SAC) encourages students to argue in favor of one side at a time. Students are divided into two teams, taking turns presenting arguments on a controversial topic. They must provide arguments for both sides and ultimately come to an understanding.

In SAC, students initially work in pairs to familiarize themselves with one side of the issue. Then they engage in debates with another pair who is knowledgeable about the opposing side. Afterward, the pairs switch sides, become familiar with the opposing argument, and engage in debate once again. Finally, the two pairs come together to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each side of the argument, reach a consensus on their collective opinion, and present that idea to other teams.

For more information about Structured Academic Controversy, please visit http://www.lawanddemocracy.org/discussionsac.html.The

method called Philosophic Chairs Discussion employs the Six Thinking Hats Model to encourage the examination of various viewpoints on a matter prior to developing a conclusive viewpoint.

Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds
New