Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-7drxs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-20T21:39:55.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The use of questions in a synchronous intercultural online exchange project

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2017

Rong Yang Open the ORCID record for Rong Yang [Opens in a new window]
Rong Yang*
Affiliation:
The Gevirtz Graduate School of Education, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA (email: ryang@ucsb.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this digital era, online intercultural exchange has gained increased popularity in language and culture education. However, concerns arise over its productiveness and efficacy in engaging participants cognitively. In addition, there is a paucity of research on out-of-classroom synchronous online exchange projects, let alone those involving Chinese English learners and English-speaking Chinese learners. Guided by the social constructivist theory, this study examined the productiveness of a small-scale intercultural online exchange project from its quality dimension measured by the participants’ use of questions. The purpose was to gain a better understanding of the dynamics and educational value of online synchronous text communication in language and culture learning. Participants were six English learners from China and six English-speaking Chinese learners from the U.S. Unlike many previous intercultural exchanges, this project was entirely independent from the curricula on both sides. Within a certain time frame, participants chose when and where exactly the synchronous text chat took place. Data analyses focused on the self-generated questions found in chat logs. Although participants seemed to self-generate more lower-order than higher-order thinking questions, the latter were frequently used in the process of online discussion to engage learners from both sides in critical thinking and self-reflection. Differences in the use of questions were found across dyads, languages, and groups of participants. Implications for future research and project design were discussed.

Keywords

online intercultural exchangesynchronous text communicationproductiveness of online discussionuse of questions
Type
Regular papers
Information
ReCALL , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , January 2018 , pp. 112 - 130
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © European Association for Computer Assisted Language Learning 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abrams, Z. I. (2003) The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. The Modern Language Journal, 87(2): 157–167. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4781.00184 Google Scholar
AbuSeileek, A. and Qatawneh, K. (2013) Effects of synchronous and asynchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) oral conversations on English language learners’ discourse functions. Computers & Education, 62: 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.013 Google Scholar
Anderson, T. (1996) The virtual conference: Extending professional education in Cyberspace. International . Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 2: 121–135. http://hdl.handle.net/2149/727 Google Scholar
Anderson, L. and Krathwohl, D. A. (2001) Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B. and Applegate, A. J. (2002) Levels of thinking required by comprehension questions in informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 56(2): 174–180. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40962073 Google Scholar
Bradley, M. E., Thom, L. R., Hayes, J. and Hay, C. (2008) Ask and you will receive: how question type influences quantity and quality of online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5): 888–900. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00804.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloom, B., Englehart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W. and Krathwohl, D. (1956) Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain . New York, Toronto: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Chin, C. and Langsford, A. (2004) Questioning students in ways that encourage thinking. Teaching Science, 50: 16–21.Google Scholar
Choi, I., Land, S. M. and Turgeon, A. J. (2005) Scaffolding peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during online small group discussion. Instructional Science, 33: 483–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-1277-4 Google Scholar
Collison, G., Elbaum, B., Haavind, S. and Tinker, R. (2000) Facilitating online learning: Effective strategies for moderators. Madison: Atwood Publishing.Google Scholar
Cox, G., Carr, T. and Hall, M. (2004) Evaluating the use of synchronous communication in two blended courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20(3): 183–193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00084.x Google Scholar
Elder, L. and Paul, R. (1998) The role of Socratic questioning in thinking, teaching, and learning. The Clearing House, 71(5): 297–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098659809602729 Google Scholar
Gao, F., Wang, C. and Sun, Y. (2009) A new model of productive online discussion and its implications for research and instruction. Journal of Educational Technology Development & Exchange, 2(1): 65–78. https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.0201.05 Google Scholar
Gao, F., Zhang, T. and Franklin, T. (2013) Designing asynchronous online discussion environments: Recent progress and possible future directions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3): 469–483. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01330.x Google Scholar
García, J. S. and Crapotta, J. (2007) Models of telecollaboration (2): Cultura. Languages for Intercultural Communication and Education, 15: 62–84.Google Scholar
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (2000) Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3): 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1096-7516(00)00016-6 Google Scholar
Garrison, D., Anderson, T. and Archer, W. (2001) Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1): 7–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923640109527071 Google Scholar
Garrison, R. D. and Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005) Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3): 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2 Google Scholar
Ge, X., Chen, C. and Davis, K. A. (2005) Scaffolding novice instructional designers’ problem-solving processes using question prompts in a web-based learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 33(2): 219–248. https://doi.org/10.2190/5f6j-hhvf-2u2b-8t3g Google Scholar
Graesser, A. C, Rus, V. and Cai, Z. (2008) Question classification schemes. Proceedings of the Workshop on Question Generation.Google Scholar
Green, L. (1998) Online conferencing: Llessons learned. Office of Learning Technologies, Government of Canada. http://emoderators.com/moderators/lessonse.pdf Google Scholar
Groenke, S. (2010) Missed opportunities, misunderstandings, and misgivings: A case study analysis of three beginning English teachers’ attempts at authentic discussion with adolescents in a synchronous CMC environment. Journal of Technology & Teacher Education, 18(3): 387–414. http://www.learntechlib.org/p/27085 Google Scholar
Guth, S. and Helm, F. (eds.) (2010) Telecollaboration 2.0: language, literacies and intercultural learning in the 21st Century. Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2011.564917 Google Scholar
Guth, S. and Helm, F. (2012) Developing multiliteracies in ELT through telecollaboration. ELT Journal: English Language Teachers Journal, 66(1): 42–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccr027 Google Scholar
Im, Y. and Lee, O. (2004) Pedagogical implications of online discussion for preservice teacher training. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36: 155–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2003.10782410 Google Scholar
Ingram, A. L., Hathorn, L. G. and Evans, A. (2000) Beyond chat on the internet. Computers & Education, 35(1): 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-1315(00)00015-4 Google Scholar
Kanuka, H. and Anderson, T. (1998) Online social interchange, discord and knowledge construction. Journal of Distance Education, 13(1): 57–74. http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/137/412 Google Scholar
King, A. (1990) Enhancing peer interaction and learning in classroom through reciprocal questioning. American Educational Research Journal, 27(4): 664–687. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163105 Google Scholar
Kramsch, C. (1993) Context and culture in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002) A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into Practice, 41(4): 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2 Google Scholar
Lamy, M. N. and Hampel, R. (2007) Online communication in language teaching and learning. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lai, T. (2006) The effect of using peer discussion, learning journals and question prompts to support reflection in a distance learning environment. The Pennsylvania State University, unpublished PhD.Google Scholar
Lipman, M. (1991) Thinking in education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McLoughlin, C. and Luca, J. (2000, February) Cognitive engagement and higher order thinking through computer conferencing: We know why but do we know how. In: Flexible futures in tertiary teaching. Proceedings of the 9th Annual Teaching Learning Forum: 2–4. Perth, Australia: Curtin University of Technology. http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/confs/tlf/tlf2000/mcloughlin.html Google Scholar
McLoughlin, D. and Mynard, J. (2009) An analysis of higher order thinking in online discussions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 46(2): 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703290902843778 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, D. R., Webb, B. and Cochrane, C. (1997) Evaluating the quality of learning in computer supported cooperative learning. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(6): 484–495. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199706)48:6<484::AID-ASI2>3.0.CO;2-Q 3.0.CO;2-Q>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Notar, C. E., Wilson, J. D. and Montgomery, M. K. (2005) A distance learning model for teaching higher order thinking. College Student Journal, 39: 17–25.Google Scholar
O’Dowd, R. (2007) Introduction. In: R. O’Dowd (Ed.), Online intercultural exchange: an introduction for foreign language teachers. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters: 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccn065 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Dowd, R. and Ritter, M. (2006) Understanding and working with “failed communication” in telecollaborative exchanges. CALICO Journal, 23(3): 623–642. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24156364 Google Scholar
Pilkington, R. (2004) Developing discussion for learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20: 61–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2004.00080.x Google Scholar
Qatipi, S. (2011) Questioning and its true values in the process of learning and teaching to promote critical thinking. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 38: 71–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, G. (2000) E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. Kogan Page, London.Google Scholar
Savage, L. B. (1998) Eliciting critical thinking skills through questioning. The Clearing House, 71(5): 291–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098659809602727 Google Scholar
Schwier, R. A. and Dykes, M. E. (2004, June) The struggle for community and content in virtual learning communities. Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications: 2976–2982. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). http://www.learntechlib.org/p/12438 Google Scholar
Schrire, S. (2006) Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: Going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers and Education, 46: 49–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.04.006 Google Scholar
Taba, H. (1966) Teaching strategies and cognitive functioning in elementary school children. San Francisco: San Francisco State College.Google Scholar
Thomas, M. J. W. (2002) Learning within incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18: 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.03800.x Google Scholar
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978) Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Wang, C. (2005) Questioning skills facilitate online synchronous discussions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21(4): 303–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2005.00138.x Google Scholar
Ware, P. (2005) “Missed” communication in online communication: Tensions in a German-American telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 9(2): 64–89. http://llt.msu.edu/vol9num2/ware/ Google Scholar
Yang, Y. C., Newby, T. J. and Bill, R. L. (2005) Using socratic questioning to promote critical thinking skills through asynchronous discussion forums in distance learning environments. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3): 163–181. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_4 Google Scholar