Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
6610module3mbracea
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

6610module3mbracea

373
views

Published on

Published in: Education

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
373
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. A qualitative meta-analysis of interactions and collaboration in a web-based learning environment
    Submitted by Mamoona Brace
    6610 Module 3
  • 2. Methods of Analysis
    • Selection of theme in 20 peer-reviewed journals.
    • 3. Identification of inclusion and exclusion criteria.
    • 4. Identification of 15 studies on the theme
    • 5. Synthesis of studies.
    • 6. Analysis of studies to identify patterns and categories.
  • Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria
  • 7.
  • 8. Synthesis of studies
  • Purposes of Studies
  • 15.
  • 16.
  • 17. Frameworks
  • 18.
  • 19. Methods of Studies
  • 20. Table 1
  • 21. Table 2
  • 22. Table 3
  • 23. Table 4
  • 24. Table 5
  • 25. Table 6
  • 26. Findings of the Studies
  • 27.
  • 28.
  • 29.
  • 30.
  • 31. Conclusions of the studies
  • 32.
  • 33.
  • 34. Implications of the Studies
  • 35.
  • 36.
  • 37. Discussion of Findings
  • 38.
  • 39.
  • 40. Conclusions
  • 41.
  • 42.
  • 43. Limitations of Meta-Analysis
  • 44.
  • 45. Implications of Meta-analysis
  • 46.
  • 47. References
    Brindley, J., Walti, C., & Blaschke, L (2009). Creating effective collaboration learning groups in an online environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(3). Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/675/1271
    Bouzidi, L., & Jaillet, A.(2009).Can online peer assessment be trusted? Educational Technology and Society, 12(4), 257-268.
    Heift,T., & Caws, C. (2000). Peer feedback in synchronous writing environments: A case study in French. Educational Technology and Society, 3(3).
    Ikpeze, C. (2007). Small group collaboration in peer-led electronic discourse: An analysis of group dynamics and interactions involving preservice and inservice teachers. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 15(3), 383-407.
    Lazonder, A. (2005). Do two heads search better than one? Effects of student collaboration on web search behaviourand search outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 465-475.
  • 48. References
    6. Li, L., Steckelberg, A., & Srinivasan, S. (2009). Utilizing peer interactions to promote learning through a web- based peer assessment system. Canadian Journal Of Learning And Technology / La Revue CanadienneDe L’ApprentissageEt De La Technologie, 34(2). Retrieved from http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/497/228
    7. Liu, E. F., & Lin, S.(2007) Relationship between peer feedback, cognitive and metacognitive strategies and achievement in networked peer assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(6), 1122- 1125.
    8. Maher, M., & Jacob,E. (2006). Peer computer conferencing to support teachers' reflection during action research. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 14(1), 127-150.
    9. O Murchu, D., & Sorensen, E. (2004). Online master communities of practice: collaborative learning in an intercultural perspective. European Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 1. Retrieved from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2004/Identifying_COPs.html
  • 49. References
    10. Poellhuber, B., Chomienne, M., & Karsenti, T. (2008). The effect of peer collaboration and collaborative learning on self-efficacy and persistence in a learner-paced continuous intake model. The Journal Of Distance Education / Revue De L'ÉDucation à Distance, 22(3). Retrieved from http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/451
    11. Seo, K.K. (2007). Utilizing peer moderating in online discussions: addressing the controversy between teacher moderation and nonmoderation. American Journal of Distance Education, 21(1), 21-36.
    12. Slavin, R. E. (1996). Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 21(1), 43–69.
    13. Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism:  Learning theory for the digital age.  International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), January 2005. Retrieved from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/index.htm
    14. Trautmann, N. (2009).Interactive learning through web-mediated peer review of student science reports. Education Technology Research and Development, 57, 685-704.
  • 50. References
    15. Tsai,C.C., Lin,S., Yuan, S.M. (2002). Developing science activities through a networked peer assessment system. Computers & Education, 38(1-3), 241-252.
    16. Tseng,S., Tsai, C.C.(2007) On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49, 1161–1174.
    17. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    18. Yu, F., Liu, Y., & Chan, T. (2005). A web-based learning system for question-posing and peer assessment. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 42(4), 337-348.