Group items tagged

Suddenly you read: THIS CLASS IS ASYNCHRONOUS. Yikes! An article about Asych vs. Sych courses

THe best of both worlds: asynchronous and synchronous tools

"Students in both asynchronous and synchronous settings performed well. However, students taught using asynchronous videotaped lectures had lower satisfaction with the method of content delivery, and preferred live interactive sessions or a mix of interactive sessions and asynchronous videos over delivery of content using the synchronous or asynchronous method alone."

Eric Fredericksen, Alexandra Pickett, Peter Shea State University of New York William Pelz Herkimer County Community College Karen Swan University of Albany Abstract "…100% of faculty reported that they were either satisfied or very satisfied with the SUNY Learning Network." Spring 1999 SLN Faculty Satisfaction Survey The State University of New York (SUNY) Learning Network (SLN) is the on-line instructional program created for the 64 colleges and nearly 400,000 students of SUNY. The foundation of the program is freedom from schedule and location constraints for our faculty and students. The primary goals of the SLN are to bring SUNY's diverse and high-quality instructional programs within the reach of learners everywhere, and to be the best provider of asynchronous instruction for learners in New York State and beyond. We believe that these goals cannot be achieved unless faculty receives appropriate support. This paper will examine factors that have contributed to the high level of faculty satisfaction we have achieved in the SLN. The analysis will be done on several levels. This first section will look at the SLN at a program-wide level and will provide information regarding the systemic implementation of our asynchronous learning environment. The second section examines issues that contribute to on-line teaching satisfaction from a faculty- development and course-design perspective. This section will present the evolution of the four-stage faculty development process and a seven-step course design process that was developed by SLN and comment on lessons learned. The third section presents results from the SLN Faculty Satisfaction Survey conducted in spring 1999. This section examines factors from a quantitative analysis that significantly contributes to faculty satisfaction with on-line teaching and offers recommendations for course and program design based on these factors. The fourth section e

Analysis of students' contributions revealed that there is a substantial evidence of collaboration, but that there are differences between conventional face-to-face instances of collaborative learning and what occurs in an asynchronous, networked environment. Johnson & Johnson (1996) list the following major types of behaviors in collaborative learning situations: * giving and receiving help and assistance; * exchanging resources and information; * explaining elaborating information; * sharing existing knowledge with others; * giving and receiving feedback; * challenging others' contributions (cognitive conflict and controversy leading to negotiation and resolution); * advocating increased effort and perseverance among peers; * engaging in small group skills; * monitoring each others' efforts and contributions.

Analysis of students' contributions revealed that there is a substantial evidence of collaboration, but that there are differences between conventional face-to-face instances of collaborative learning and what occurs in an asynchronous, networked environment. Johnson & Johnson (1996) list the following major types of behaviors in collaborative learning situations: * giving and receiving help and assistance; * exchanging resources and information; * explaining elaborating information; * sharing existing knowledge with others; * giving and receiving feedback; * challenging others' contributions (cognitive conflict and controversy leading to negotiation and resolution); * advocating increased effort and perseverance among peers; * engaging in small group skills; * monitoring each others' efforts and contributions.

The aim of the Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks is to describe original work in asynchronous learning networks (ALN), including experimental results. Our mission is to provide practitioners in online education with knowledge about the very best research in online learning. Papers emphasizing results, backed by data are the norm. Occasionally, papers reviewing broad areas are published, including critical reviews of thematic areas. Papers useful to administrators are welcome. Entire issues are published from time-to-time around single topic or disciplinary areas. The Journal adheres to traditional standards of double-blind peer review, and authors are encouraged to provide quantitative data; currently JALN's acceptance rate is 25%. The original objective of the Journal was to establish ALN as a field by publishing articles from authoritative and reliable sources. The Journal is now a major resource for knowledge about online learning.

This jounal is a major resource for knowlege about online learning.

Study focuses on one aspect of facilitation, the way in which we communicate and guide students in asynchronous learning networks (ALN) and how this process might be improved upon.

Steps to converting the classroom to an online asynchronous environment.

facts on the numbers of synchronous vs asynchronous courses

Asynchronous Discussions

Paper lists learner centricity, asynchronous interaction, communication effectiveness and assessment facilitation as the major pedagogical attributes of online discussion boards. Also discusses the strategy of applying data mining techniques to aid assessment of discussion board transcripts. Text mining as an extension of data mining algorithm could be used effectively to assess discussion board transcripts with the goal of eliminating subjectivity in the assessment of discussion board contributions.

Study on the effect of audio feedback in an asynchronous class

abstract

Offir, B., Lev, Y., & Bezalel, R. (2008). Surface and Deep Learning Processes in Distance Education: Synchronous versus Asynchronous Systems. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1172-1183.