10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Differentiated Instruction in Technology Rich Outcome Focused Learning Environments
Melike Özüdoğru
Manisa Celal Bayar University, Turkiye
Presenting Author: Özüdoğru, Melike
The ability to organize and teach effectively is crucial in today's academically and socially diverse classrooms. However, achieving effective planning and teaching processes based on different learner needs can be a challenging and problematic skill since the learner population is becoming more and more diverse in terms of gender, color, nationality, ethnicity, race, the language spoken at home, economic status, interests, readiness to learn, preferred modes of learning, self-awareness, confidence, at home, economic status, interests, readiness to learn, preferred modes of learning, self-awareness, confidence, independence, and information and communication technology (ICT) abilities, etc. (Boelens, Voet, and De Wever, 2018; Dosch & Zidon, 2014; Kamarulzaman, Md-Yunus, Azman, & Mohd-Zahidi, 2021; Onyishi, 2022; Santangelo & Tomlinson, 2009; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010). However, today, the majority of teachers have received little to no training to work effectively with this diversity and manage the learners in the same class who have above-below or average potential (Kamarulzaman et al., 2021). The findings of numerous studies revealed that instructors' practices, mostly based on lecturing with added discussions, are a poor representation of the various student bodies (Boelens et al., 2018; Joseph et al., 2013;; Santangelo & Tomlinson, 2009; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010). Additionally, Santangelo & Tomlinson (2009) noted that educational practices (such as the curriculum, physical layout, teaching processes, testing methods, etc.) had not changed significantly to take into account diverse students' experiences and learning needs. For this reason, there is an urgent need to strengthen teacher competency in dealing with the diversity-related issues that arise in classrooms. In this regard, Carol Tomlinson's (1999b) "Differentiated Instruction (DI)" was recommended.
DI is seen as both a philosophy and a model for teaching (Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010). The content, process, product, affect, and learning environment differentiation are five areas of DI implementation, and they are based on learner readiness, interests, and learning profiles (Tomlinson, 2001). The ‘content’ refers to the information or skills taught, while the ‘process’ is how students interpret, adapt, and own the content. The ‘product’ is how students express what has been understood, learned, and implemented after having received instruction. The ‘affect’ is how students feel in the instructional environment. The ‘learning environment’ refers to both the physical and the affective climate in the classroom, and it is the weather that affects everything that happens there (Santangelo & Tomlinson, 2009; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010).
As it is stated that preservice teachers who did not have DI modeled for them in their teacher education programs did not have knowledge of how to apply DI in their own classes after they started teaching in the K–12 environment (Tomlinson, 2001) and lacked confidence and had limited perspectives on curriculum and evaluation approaches that would accommodate learning differences (Wan, 2015), the purpose of this study was to implement differentiated instruction materials in the curriculum development in education course and investigate the effect of differentiated instruction on student achievement, planning abilities, and perceptions related to the technology rich outcome focused learning environments.
Based on the main purpose of the study, the following research questions were proposed:
- Is there a significant difference in pre-service teachers' (PST) beginning and ending semester grades based on lesson plan grades?
- Does the classroom environment's perception by pre-service teachers predict their course achievement?
- What are the perceptions of pre-service teachers about differentiated instruction, the planning process, and the classroom environment?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedMethod
In this study an explanatory mixed-methods research design was used (Creswell, 2012). The study was conducted during the fall semester of 2022–2023 for 11 weeks at a state university in the curriculum development in education course.
Participants
In the beginning of the semester, 61 willing PST completed the pre-course learner background questionnaire and prepared lesson plans. 53 of them prepared lesson plans at the end of the semester and completed the Technology-Rich Outcomes-Focused Learning Environment Inventory (TROFLEI). 43 (81.13%) of them were female, and 10 (18.87%) of them were male. In the qualitative part of the study, 15 pre-service teachers were selected according to the maximum variation sampling method to represent the diversity of perspectives or characteristics (Fraenkel & Wallen, 2009).
Instruments for Data Collection
In this study, a learner background questionnaire, semi-structured interviews, and Welch, Cakir, Peterson, and Ray's (2012) TROFLEI were implemented. PST’ planning the instruction scores and course grades was obtained from the course instructor. The questions for semi-structured interviews were adapted from literature (Danley & Willliams, 2020; Kokkinos, 2020; Santangelo & Tomlinson, 2009; Tomlinson, 2001) and implemented by taking the opinions of experts.
Procedures for Differentiated Course
In this study, PST were asked to prepare a lesson plan at the beginning of the semester on a subject of their choice for either primary or secondary level (differentiation of content based on student interest) to disclose their level and skills in preparing lesson plans and to assess whether they need early scaffolding to learn major course core topics (differentiation of content based on student readiness). PST were assigned three articles each week from well-known educational journals and books, taking their readiness levels into consideration. They were expected to write their reflections through blogs, use the Padlet platform, etc., or create podcasts, publish Youtube videos, etc. As for the process differentiation, different activities were implemented concurrently. In addition, at the end of the semester, while a group of learners preferred to be assessed with a multiple-choice test, another group preferred to be assessed by preparing a comprehensive take home exam that included higher-level questions (differentiation of product).
Data Analysis
This study's data were analyzed through descriptive and inferential statistical analysis techniques using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, 22.0) (Field, 2009) and qualitative data were analyzed via the content analysis method (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsAccording to the findings of this study, there is a significant difference in PST’ beginning and ending semester grades based on lesson plan grades. The classroom environments perceptions of pre-service teachers did not predict their course achievement; however, their perceptions of differentiated environments were positive. As for the experiences of PST, they focused on the lack of time for learners’ initial assessments as one of the most significant difficulties for differentiating their lesson planning. Moreover, they found difficulties in grouping students according to their interests, learning profiles, and readiness, in which they especially stated that the differences between the low and middle; high and middle readiness groups were not so clear. Their concern is related to classroom management issues; because if they are unable to plan effectively, their implementation may fail in a real classroom situation. Also, they stress their gain as a more accurate sense of time and its contribution.
Moreover, they emphasized their concerns regarding finding enjoyable and suitable activities according to their students’ interests, learning profiles, and readiness. According to PST, the quality of interaction in differentiated learning environment positively affected their perceptions of the classroom environment and also helped them learn course subjects better. In addition, the main positive learning outcome stated by PST is the acquisition of teaching skills and planning abilities in a differentiated classroom environment. All in all, it can be concluded that, differentiated instruction seemed to contribute to PST’ planning skills and learning of course content.
ReferencesReferences
Boelens, R., Voet, M., & De Wever, B. (2018). The design of blended learning in response to studentdiversity in higher education: Instructors’ views and use of differentiated instruction in blendedlearning. Computers & Education, 120, 197–212.http://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.009
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative andqualitative research. Boston: Pearson
Dosch, M., & Zidon, M. (2014). The course fits us: Differentiated instruction in the college classroom.International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 26, 343-357.
Danley, A. & Williams, C. (2020). Choice in learning: Differentiating instruction in the collegeclassroom. InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 15, 83-104.http://dx.doi.org/10.46504/15202005da
Field, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using spss. (3th Ed.). London: SAGE Publications.
Fraenkel, J. R. & Wallen, N. E. (2009). How to design and evaluate research in education (7th ed.).New York: McGraw Hill.
Joseph, S., Thomas, M., Simonette, G., & Ramsook, L. (2013). The impact of differentiated instructionin a teacher education setting: Successes and challenges. International Journal of HigherEducation, 2(3), 28-40.
Kamarulzaman, M. H., Md-Yunus, M., Azman, H., Mohd-Zahidi, A., (2021). The practice of onlinedifferentiated instruction and its impact on motivation and academic performance in the wakeof covid-19. Preprints, http://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202106.0028.v1
Kokkinos, T. (2020). Aspects of differentiation in teacher education: Exploring student teachers’experiences. African Educational Research Journal, 8(4), 814-821.http://doi.org/10.30918/AERJ.84.20.180.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook(3rd Ed.). United States: SAGE Publications.
Onyishi, C. (2022). Blended or differentiated instruction for inclusive education during post-covid19 era: The Need for upgrading school libraries in Nigeria. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal). https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/6979
Santangelo, T., & Tomlinson, C. (2009). The application of differentiated instruction in post-secondaryenvironments: Benefits, challenges, and future directions. International Journal of Teachingand Learning in Higher Education, 20(3), 307-323.
Tomlinson, C. A. (2001). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms (2nd ed.).Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated classroom.Alexandria, Virginia: ASCD.
Wan, S. W.-Y. (2015). Differentiated instruction: Hong Kong prospective teachers’ teaching efficacyand beliefs. Teachers and Teaching, 22(2), 148-176. http://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2015.1055435
Welch, A. G., Cakir, M., Peterson, C. M., & Ray, C. M. (2012). A cross-cultural validation of thetechnology-rich outcomes-focused learning environment inventory (troflei) in Turkey and theUSA. Research in Science & Technological Education, 30(1), 49-63.http://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2012.659179
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Learning-Design. A Proposal for Improving Technology-enhanced Teaching Activities Using ACAD Toolkit.
María Ángeles Llopis Nebot, Gracia Valdeolivas Novella, Francesc M. Esteve Mon, Sara Buils Morales, Virginia Viñoles Cosentino, Ana Sánchez-Caballé
Universitat Jaume I, Spain
Presenting Author: Llopis Nebot, María Ángeles;
Esteve Mon, Francesc M.
The European Commission (2019) promotes the role of teachers to help students develop 21st century competences through technology.,
However, the integration of ICT in the teaching-learning (T-L) process implies a change in the methodological approach towards the adoption of learner-centred pedagogical models (European Commission, 2020a; Mora-Cantallops et al., 2022).
The Joint Research Centre (JRC) developed the European Framework for Digital Competence in Education or DigCompEdu (Redecker & Punie, 2017), including elements such as the professional engagement of teachers, the use of ICT in the T-L process or the empowerment of students and their digital competence development.
However, when it comes down to technology-enhanced learning activities, several authors advocate for adopting holistic approaches, apart from a defined competency framework. With a holistic approach, it is necessary starting from situated contexts, oriented toward performance roles, with systemic function and relationship along with boosting constant development (Esteve et al., 2018; Goodyear et al., 2021).
Design for learning is associated with research on technology-enhanced learning (TEL) where the teaching role is seen as a designer of the student learning process (Laurillard, 2012). Likewise, its use is proposed for teachers to make pedagogically informed decisions in their teaching practices and the design of learning activities with an effective use of resources and technologies (Conole, 2012).
The ACAD (Activity-Centred Analysis and Design) framework by Carvalho and Goodyear (2014), and its ACAD Toolkit (Carvalho & Yeoman, 2019), aims to facilitate discussion processes that inform instructional design and analysis. According to Goodyear (2020) this model enables reconsideration of how teachers approach their instructional designs and how they develop and share new and improved designs. Gros and Durall (2020) show that this approach is increasingly being used in the design of learning environments that integrate educational technology to provide user-centred solutions.
The ACAD framework consists of four major structural dimensions for design (Goodyear et al., 2021). The learning scenario refers to the physical, spatial and instrumental elements, whether material or digital (spaces and resources). Social interaction establishes the types of relationships between the people involved in the activity (groupings and roles). Knowledge tasks are the tasks set for participants, the ways of organising knowledge and forms of learning that are part of the design, as well as the evaluation tasks. The fourth dimension - the learning activity- manifests itself when the learner interacts with the elements of the other dimensions at the moment of learning, and is the only dimension that cannot be designed, as it emerges through such interaction.
During the academic year 2021-2022, under the methodology of research based on educational design (Plomp & Nieveen, 2009), a first iteration was designed and implemented in the university classroom of the Bachelor's Degree in Early Childhood Education, using the ACAD Toolkit tool. This educational proposal intends to promote analysis and reflection on the didactic design of an activity enriched with technology. The research process and results can be found in Buils et al. (2022).
The aim of this article is to present the design process of the second iteration of the prototype model, which has been refined based on the evaluation and feedback from the first iteration.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedAs noted in the previous section, the methodology to be followed in this work is framed in the EDR studies (Plomp & Nieveen, 2009), focused on the improvement of innovative educational practices. This approach describes a systematic and iterative process consisting of three phases: (1) preliminary, (2) development and implementation or piloting, and (3) evaluation.
The principles under which the second iteration was designed considered that it should provide: a) more exploratory time with the tool; b) previous practice through given examples; c) more time for analysis of the activity itself, d) different groupings for analysis (individual, small group and large group), e) a pre-designed and uniform template to systematise, unify the analysis process and facilitate discussion.
At the same time, it was considered appropriate to maintain as a focus of analysis the same classroom practice analysed in the previous experience, consisting of the creation of an educational robotics activity in which the gender perspective is explicitly addressed.
With regard to the target group of the action, once again it will be the group of students in the degree course in Early Childhood Education who are taking the subject of Information and Communication Technologies in Education during the 2022-2023 academic year, although on this occasion the same proposal will also be carried out for students taking the same subject in Primary Education.
The tool used to collect information will be the pre-designed template for the analysis of the activity and the questionnaire developed using the Qualtrics tool and validated in the previous study (Buils et al., 2022).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe aim of this research is to present the design of the second iteration of a pedagogical activity analysis model based on the ACAD Toolkit tool.
As Mora-Cantallops et al. (2022) and European Commission (2020b) argues, there is a need to develop training to improve teachers' digital competence. It is increasingly relevant, at all educational levels and especially in higher education, the search for effective and useful methods to support the work of teachers. These methods are mainly important in relation to educational design that serve to validate in context the ideas that arise, and explore approaches that expand design repertoires, adapted to real learning conditions in interconnected contexts (Goodyear et al., 2021).
As expected results, once the new design is implemented and after its subsequent analysis, it is expected to find a significant improvement in the capacity for reflection and analysis of learning situations enriched by digital technology in future early childhood and primary education teachers. On the other hand, it is also expected to increase the general level of satisfaction of students with ACAD Toolkit and specifically, their perception regarding the pedagogical knowledge derived, 2) the introduction of improvements in the design of their activities or change of action and finally regarding the impact on their future performance.
Another expected finding is the increase in quality and quantity of pedagogical reflections made from the use of the ACAD framework and toolkit.
Based on the results obtained in this research, a third iteration of a pedagogical activity analysis model based on the ACAD Toolkit tool will be proposed.
At the time of closing this communication, the intervention is being put into practice, so it is expected to be able to detail some preliminary results at the time of its presentation.
ReferencesCarvalho, L., & Goodyear, P. (2014). Framing the analysis of learning network architectures. In P. Goodyear & L. Carvalho (Eds.), The architecture of productive learning networks (pp. 48-70). Routledge.
Carvalho, L. & Yeoman, P. (2019). Connecting the dots: Theorizing and mapping learning entanglement through archaeology and design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50, 1104-1117. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12761
European Commission. (2019). Key competences for lifelong learning. Publications Office. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2766/569540
European Commission. (2020a). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on achieving the European Education Area by 2025. {SWD (2020) 212 final}. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ES/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52020DC0625
European Commission (2020b). Digital Education Action Plan 2021-2027: Resetting Education and Training for the Digital Age. Publications Office. https://bit.ly/3qDhYJC
Conole, G. (2012). Designing for Learning in an Open World (vol. 4). Springer Science & Business Media.
Esteve, F., Castañeda, L., & Adell, J. (2018). Un modelo holístico de competencia docente para el mundo digital. Revista Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 32(1), 105-116. http://hdl.handle.net/10234/174771
Goodyear, P. (2020), Design and co-configuration for hybrid learning: Theorising the practices of learning space design. British Journal of Education Technology, 51, 1045-1060. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12925
Goodyear. P., Carvalho. L., & Yeoman. P. (2021) Activity-Centred Analysis and Design (ACAD): Core purposes, distinctive qualities and current developments. Education Tech Research Dev 69, 445–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09926
Gros, B., & Durall, E. (2020). Retos y oportunidades del diseño participativo en tecnología educativa. Edutec. Revista Electrónica De Tecnología Educativa, 74, 12-24. https://doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2020.74.1761
Laurillard, D. (2008). Technology enhanced learning as a tool for pedagogical innovation. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(3-4), 521-533. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9752.2008.00658.x
Mora-Cantallops M., Inamorato, A., Villalonga-Gómez C., Lacalle, J.R., Camarillo J., Sota J.M., Velasco J.R., & Ruiz P.M. (2022). The Digital Competence of Academics in Spain: A study based on the European frameworks DigCompEdu and OpenEdu. Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/448078
Plomp, T., & Nieveen, N. (2009). An introduction to educational design research. Netherlands Institute for curriculum development (SLO).
Redecker, C., & Punie, Y. (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators. DigCompEdu. JRC Science Hub. European Commission.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the innovation project EDUBOT-UJI (Ref.: 46112/22) and partially funded by the Spanish Ministry of Education under Grant FPU21/00298.
10. Teacher Education Research
Paper
Humanizing Relationships in Synchronous Group Work - the Role of the Video Camera in Online Learning Contexts
Bruna Nogueira1, Amber Hartwell1, Christy Thomas2, Barbara Brown1
1University of Calgary, Canada; 2Ambrose University, Canada
Presenting Author: Nogueira, Bruna;
Hartwell, Amber
With post-secondary institutions increasingly adopting online course offerings, there is much to learn about how video camera usage during online synchronous group work affects students’ learning experience and relationship building in digital environments (Hammond, 2017; Kleinsasser & Hong, 2016). Kalman et al. (2020), for instance, found that students in their upper and entry-level chemistry courses enjoyed being able to see everyone, leading to increased motivation to pay attention, attend class, concentrate, and do well. In this presentation, we will discuss the role of the video camera feature in synchronous online group work to promote positive relationships between students and the relevance of having those positive relationships for an enhanced learning experience at collective (group) and individual levels.
This study addresses the existing debate surrounding whether turning on video cameras should be a requirement in synchronous learning and provides perspectives of instructors and students related to video camera usage when working online with others. Opponents of the requirement to turn on the video camera cite reasons including privacy issues (Cobo & Vargas, 2022), student discomfort pertaining to personal appearance, their physical location being seen in the background, social norms, and unreliable technology (Castelli & Sarvary, 2021; Kalman et al., 2020; Nicandro et al., 2020; Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė et al., 2022). Reasons for not turning on the video camera in synchronous learning contexts are valid as they particularly pertain to self-efficacy and socioeconomic factors. Yet, justifications for enabling the video camera are also relevant as it can be used as a tool for cooperation, interaction, self-discipline, and self-control, in addition to helping increase learners’ motivation, sense of belonging in a community, and communication efforts (Falloon, 2011; Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė et al., 2022). Exploring undergraduate and doctoral students’ perceptions of the significance of the video camera in synchronous learning, Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė et al. (2022) found students felt less inclined to participate when their cameras were off, which resulted in a weaker student–teacher relationship.
In this study, 22 semi-structured interviews were performed with 12 students and 10 instructors enrolled in two Western Canadian postsecondary teacher education programs with online course delivery. Findings indicate that having the video camera on was important for participants to feel connected to group members, understand their needs, support them or rely on them. This means that enabling the video camera in synchronous online group work helps build positive relationships that can lead to an improved learning experience. However, there are many reasons that could influence a student’s decision for not enabling their video camera source during a synchronous group meeting or activity and, if forced to, this could negatively affect social interactions and relationship building. For instance, in relation to the reasons for not turning the video cameras on, all arguments presented by study participants pointed at issues related to culture or personal preferences. Therefore, the interpretation of the findings suggests that a successful teaching-learning process is characterized by a double movement: it allows the student to take ownership of their own learning in an active and autonomous way and, simultaneously, encourages the student to positively engage with his or her own learning process and environment. This means that the students’ voices should always be heard, and diversity should be both acknowledged and respected by all parties for the construction of positive relationships in online environments and the promotion of enhanced learning experiences.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis qualitative inquiry draws from a larger multiple case study examining how instructors designed group work in post-secondary online teacher education courses. Twenty-two semi-structured interviews were completed with 12 students (pre-service teachers) and 10 instructors from two Western Canadian teacher education faculties offering online courses. All interviews were performed over Zoom utilizing a protocol consisting of open-ended semi-structured interview questions asking students and instructors about their perceptions of using technology for online group work, how group work can help students become more connected with each other, what challenges they have experienced when developing group work in online courses, among others. Professional transcription was utilized, and participants engaged in transcript validation for increased data reliability (Merriam, 1995), accuracy and accountability (Liao & Hitchcock, 2018). After that, the data were analysed through two cycles of coding (Miles et al., 2014) for a more detailed understanding of themes that emerged from the interviews. During these cycles, critical reflection and reflexivity occurred through ongoing team meetings. Multiple members of the research team participated in transcript analysis and used strategies to ensure intercoder reliability and reduce bias in data analysis. In addition, an audit trail was documented, including coding methods and the creation of a codebook containing a description for each code (Miles et al., 2014). Coding methods used during the analysis process will be further elaborated on in the presentation. One of the themes that emerged from the data analysis related to video camera usage during synchronous online group work, which is prioritized in this paper. During the coding process, researchers noted participants’ positive or negative perspectives (e.g., feelings, opinions, and consequences) associated with the video camera on/off when working online in their groups. The careful and detailed data analysis process allowed for the identification of participants’ feelings, opinions, and consequences associated with video camera usage when working online in their groups. Analysis of the collected data allowed for the identification of relevant elements of discourse that were coded into four categories: reasons for video cameras off; consequences of video cameras off; consequences of video cameras on; and feelings associated with video cameras off. Quotes will be shared to illustrate each category.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsOverall, participants reported that not seeing others while synchronously connected and working together makes it hard to create positive relationships between peers and between students and instructors. That said, findings suggest that students should be encouraged to be heard and seen on video in synchronous online group work whenever possible as it has the potential to enhance their motivation and overall learning experience, in addition to promoting social connectedness and a sense of belonging to that learning environment. However, in this presentation, we will emphasize that students must also be respected in their limits, needs, and diversity, especially when there are valid reasons not to turn on the camera. Not acknowledging this could hinder the establishment of positive bonds with peers, instructors, institutions, and the students’ own knowledge-building processes.
The findings of this research contribute to the understanding that teaching and learning are complex phenomena and that many elements influence them, including the context and emotional aspects of all those involved in those processes. This study also contributes to the literature related to video camera usage in online learning environments and is particularly relevant to the current educational scenario given that the online delivery of courses is growing fast in post-secondary institutions. The results serve to inform universities and instructors to design online courses with synchronous group work, advancing the practice and profession of teaching. This study was supported by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) Development Insight grant.
ReferencesCastelli, & Sarvary, M. A. (2021). Why students do not turn on their video cameras during online classes and an equitable and inclusive plan to encourage them to do so. Ecology and Evolution, 11(8), 3565–3576. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7123
Cobo, C., & Vargas, P. R. (2022). Turn off your camera and turn on your privacy: A case study about Zoom and digital education in South-American countries. In Pangrazio, L., & Sefton-Green, J. (Eds.). Learning to Live with Datafication: Educational Case Studies and Initiatives from Across the World. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003136842-3
Falloon. (2011). Making the Connection: Moore’s Theory of Transactional Distance and Its Relevance to the Use of a Virtual Classroom in Postgraduate Online Teacher Education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 187–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2011.10782569
Hammond, M. (2017). Online collaboration and cooperation: The recurring importance of evidence, rationale and viability. Education and Information Technologies, 22, 1005-1024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9469-x
Kalman, R., Esparaza, M. M., & Weston, C. (2020). Student views of the online learning process during the COVID-19 pandemic: A comparison of upper-level and entry-level undergraduate perspectives. Journal of Chemical Education, 97, 3353– 3357. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00712
Kleinsasser, R., & Hong, Y.-C. (2016). Online group work design: Process, complexities, and intricacies. TechTrends, 60, 569-576. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0088-6
Liao, H., & Hitchcock, J. (2018). Reported credibility techniques in higher education evaluation studies that use qualitative methods: A research synthesis. Evaluation and Program Planning, 68, 157-165, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2018.03.005
Merriam, S. B. (1995). What can you tell from an n of 1?: Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. PAACE Journal of Lifelong Learning, 4, 50-60. https://www.iup.edu/pse/files/programs/graduate_programs_r/instructional_design_and_technology_ma/paace_journal_of_lifelong_learning/volume_4,_1995/merriam1995.pdf
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: a methods sourcebook (4th ed.). Sage.
Nicandro, V., Khandelwal, A., Weitzman, A. (2020). Please, let students turn their videos off in class. The Stanford Daily. https://www.stanforddaily.com/2020/06/01/please-let-students-turn-their-videos-off-in-class/
Sederevičiūtė-Pačiauskienė, Ž., Valantinaitė, I., & Asakavičiūtė, V. (2022). ‘Should I turn on my video camera?’The students’ perceptions of the use of video cameras in synchronous distant learning. Electronics, 11(5), 813-825.
|
