Abstract
Almost all existing research studies on asynchronous online discussion focus on text-based forums. The use of text-based discussion could pose a significant challenge for participants who are weak in reading or writing. Participants may also run a higher risk of being misunderstood in text discussion due to the lack of verbal cues. In this chapter, we present two studies that examined the use of asynchronous voice or audio discussion. The overall findings suggest that asynchronous audio discussion has six distinct advantages over text discussion. However, despite the reported advantages, more than half the participants reported that they preferred to use a text discussion if given a choice. The reasons for such a preference are discussed in this chapter. We also found a significant association between the levels of knowledge construction (Gunawardena et al. J Educ Comput Res 17(4):397–431, 1997) and the mode of discussions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Akasha, O. (2011) Voicethread as a good tool to motivate ells and much more. In Koehler, M. and Mishra, P. (ed.) Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, pp 3123–3127, Virginia: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
An, Y.-J., & Frick, T. (2006). Student perceptions of asynchronous computer-mediated communication in face-to-face courses. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 485–499.
Angelova, M., & Riazantseva, A. (1999). If you don’t tell me, how can I know?: A case study of four international students learning to write the U.S. way. Written Communication, 16(4), 491–525.
Arend, B. (2009). Encouraging critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(1). Retrieved on February 15, 2012 from http://www.thejeo.com/Archives/Volume6Number1/Arendpaper.pdf
Bowe, F. G. (2002). Deaf and hard of hearing Americans’ instant messaging and e-mail use: A national survey. American Annals of the Deaf, 147(4), 6–10.
Brick, J., & Louie, G. (1984). Language and culture—Vietnam: Background notes for teachers in the adult migrant education program. Sydney: Adult Migrant Education Service.
Brunvand, S., & Byrd, S. (2011). Using voice thread to promote learning engagement and success for all students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(4), 28–37.
Chiu,Y-C. J. (2009). Facilitating Asian students’ critical thinking in online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 42–57.
Cho, S. P., & Carey, S. (2001). Increasing Korean oral fluency using an electronic bulletin board and Wimba-based voiced chat. The Korean Language in America, 6, 115–128.
Clark, D., & Walsh, S. (2004). iPod-learning. [White paper]. Brighton, UK: Epic Group.
Durbridge, N. (1984). Media in course design, No. 9, audio cassettes. The role of technology in distance education. Kent, UK: Croom Helm.
Eastmond, D. V. (1995). Alone but together: Adult distance study through computer conferencing. Cresskill: Hampton.
Girasoli, A. J., & Hannafin, R. D. (2008). Using asynchronous AV communication tools to increase academic self-efficacy. Computers and Education, 51, 1676–1682.
Gleason, J., & Suvorov, R. (2011). Learner perceptions of asynchronous oral computer-mediated communication tasks using Wimba Voice for developing their L2 oral proficiency. In S. Huffman & V. Hegelheimer (Eds.), The role of CALL in hybrid and online language courses. Ames, IA: Iowa State University. Retrieved on January 18, 2012 from http://www.public.iastate.edu/~apling/TSLL/2010/pdfs/gleason_and_suvorov_2011.pdf
Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397–431.
Hammond, M. (1999). Issues associated with participation in on line forums—the case of the communicative learner. Education and Information Technologies, 4(4), 353–367.
Hew, K. F. (2009). Use of audio podcast in k-12 and higher education: a review of research topics and methodologies. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(3), 333–357.
Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2011). Higher-level knowledge construction in asynchronous online discussions: An analysis of group size, duration of online discussion, and student facilitation techniques. Instructional Science, 39(3), 303–319.
Hew, K. F., & Hara, N. (2007a). Empirical study of motivators and barriers of teacher online knowledge sharing. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(6), 573–595.
Hew, K. F., & Hara, N. (2007b). Knowledge sharing in online environments: A qualitative case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(14), 2310–2324.
Hewitt, J. (2001). Beyond threaded discourse. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(3), 207–221.
Junor, L. (1992). Teaching by tape: Some benefits, problems, and solutions. Distance Education, 13(1), 93–107.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Liu, X., Doore, B. & Li, L. (2008). Scaffolding knowledge co-construction in web-based discussions through message labeling. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 3041–3046). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Mandernach, B. J. and Taylor, S. S. (2011) Web 2.0 applications to foster student engagement. In Miller, R. L. et al. (ed.) Promoting student engagement. Volume 1: Programs, Techniques and Opportunities (pp. 220–229), Society for the teaching of psychology: Division 2, American Psychological Association.
Marriott, P. & Hiscock, J. (2002). Voice vs Text-based Discussion Forums: an implementation of Wimba Voice Boards. In Driscoll, M. & Reeves, T. (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2002 (pp. 640–646). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
McIntosh, S., Braul, B., & Chao, T. (2003). A case study in asynchronous voice conferencing for language instruction. Educational Media International, 40(1), 63–74.
Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. New York: Methuen & Co. Ltd.
Poza, M. S. C. (2011). The effects of asynchronous computer voicevoice conferencing on L2 learners’ speaking anxiety. IALLT Journal of Language Learning Technologies, 41(1), 33–63.
Schellens, T., Keer, H. V., & Valcke, M. (2005). The impact of role assignment on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups. Small Group Research, 36(6), 704–745.
Williams, S. W., Watkins, K., Daly, B., & Courtney, B. (2001). Facilitating cross-cultural online discussion groups: Implications for practice. ETAL Distance Education, 22(1), 151–168.
Yaneske, E., & Oates, B. (2010). Using voice boards: Pedagogical design, technological implementation, evaluation and reflections. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology, 18(3), 233–250.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hew, K.F., Cheung, W.S. (2012). Asynchronous Audio Discussion. In: Student Participation in Online Discussions. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2370-6_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2370-6_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-2369-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-2370-6
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawEducation (R0)