Vol 1 No 3 (2018): Advances in Research on Social Networking in Open and Distributed Learning
Articles

Blending online asynchronous and synchronous learning

Lisa C. Yamagata-Lynch
Bio
Published April 12, 2018
Keywords
  • online learning environments,
  • synchronous learning,
  • asynchronous learning,
  • student reflections
How to Cite
Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. “Blending Online Asynchronous and Synchronous Learning”. Demonstration Journal of the Classic Theme, Vol. 1, no. 3, Apr. 2018, https://demo.publicknowledgeproject.org/ojs3/demo/index.php/classic/article/view/828.

Abstract

In this article I will share a qualitative self-study about a 15-week blended 100% online graduate level course facilitated through synchronous meetings on Blackboard Collaborate and asynchronous discussions on Blackboard. I taught the course at the University of Tennessee (UT) during the spring 2012 semester and the course topic was online learning environments. The primary research question of this study was: How can the designer/instructor optimize learning experiences for students who are studying about online learning environments in a blended online course relying on both synchronous and asynchronous technologies? I relied on student reflections of course activities during the beginning, middle, and the end of the semester as the primary data source to obtain their insights regarding course experiences. Through the experiences involved in designing and teaching the course and engaging in this study I found that there is room in the instructional technology research community to address strategies for facilitating online synchronous learning that complement asynchronous learning. Synchronous online whole class meetings and well-structured small group meetings can help students feel a stronger sense of connection to their peers and instructor and stay engaged with course activities. In order to provide meaningful learning spaces in synchronous learning environments, the instructor/designer needs to balance the tension between embracing the flexibility that the online space affords to users and designing deliberate structures that will help them take advantage of the flexible space.

References

  1. Anderson, A. H., McEwan, R., Bal, J., & Carletta, J. (2007). Virtual team meetings: An analysis of communication and context. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(5), 2558–2580. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2007.01.001
  2. Arbaugh, J. (2004). Learning to learn online: A study of perceptual changes between multiple online course experiences. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(3), 169–182. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2004.06.001
  3. Asterhan, C. S. C., & Schwarz, B. B. (2010). Online moderation of synchronous e-argumentation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5(3), 259–282. doi:10.1007/s11412-010-9088-2
  4. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of The Learning Sciences, 2(2), 141–178. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
  5. Carville, S., & Mitchell, D. R. (2000). “It’s a bit like Star Trek’: The effectiveness of video conferencing. Innovations in Education & Training International, 37(1), 42–49. doi:10.1080/135580000362070
  6. Chen, W., & You, M. (2007). The differences between the influences of synchronous and asynchronous modes on collaborative learning project of industrial design. In D. Schuler (Ed.), Online communities and social computing (pp. 275–283). Berlin Heidelberg: Springer. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-73257-0_31
  7. Conrad, R.-M., & Donaldson, J. A. (2011). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for creative instruction (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  8. Dziuban, C., Hartman, J., Judge, F., Moskal, P., & Steven, S. (2006). Blended learning enters mainstream. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 195–208). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
  9. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Retrieved from http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/Engestrom/expanding/toc.htm
  10. Feldman, A. (2003). Validity and quality in self-study. Educational Researcher, 32(3), 26–28. doi:10.3102/0013189X032003026
  11. Fetterman, D. M. (1996). Videoconferencing on-Line: Enhancing communication over the Internet. Educational Researcher, 25(4), 23–27. doi:10.2307/1176777
  12. Finkelstein, J. E. (2006). Learning in real time: Synchronous teaching and learning online. Jossey-Bass.
  13. Freeman, M., deMarrais, K., Preissle, J., Roulston, K., & Pierre, E. A. S. (2007). Standards of evidence in qualitative research: An incitement to discourse. Educational Researcher, 36(1), 25–32. doi:10.3102/0013189X06298009
  14. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & 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. doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
  15. Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction Is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 133–148. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2
  16. Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Prentice Hall.
  17. Graham, C. R. (2006). Blended learning systems: Definition, current trends, and future directions. In C. J. Bonk & C. R. Graham (Eds.), The handbook of blended learning: Global perspectives, local designs (pp. 3–21). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.
  18. Graham, C. R., Woodfield, W., & Harrison, J. B. (2013). A framework for institutional adoption and implementation of blended learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 4–14. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.003
  19. Hamilton, M. L., & Pinnegar, S. (2000). On the threshold of a new century trustworthiness, integrity, and self-study in teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(3), 234–240. doi:10.1177/0022487100051003012
  20. Hamilton, M. L., Smith, L., & Worthington, K. (2008). Fitting the methodology with the research: An exploration of narrative, self-study and auto-ethnography. Studying Teacher Education, 4(1), 17–28. doi:10.1080/17425960801976321
  21. Han, H. (2013). Do nonverbal emotional cues matter? Effects of video casting in synchronous virtual classrooms. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(4), 253–264. doi:10.1080/08923647.2013.837718
  22. Howard, C. D., Boling, E., Rowland, G., & Smith, K. M. (2012). Instructional design cases and why we need them. Educational Technology, 52(3), 34–39.
  23. Hrastinski, S. (2010). How do e-learners participate in synchronous online discussions? Evolutionary and social psychological perspectives. In N. Kock (Ed.), Evolutionary psychology and information systems research (pp. 119–147). US : Springer. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4419-6139-6_6
  24. Johnson, G. M. (2006). Synchronous and asynchronous text-based CMC in educational contexts: A review of recent research. TechTrends, 50(4), 46–53. doi:10.1007/s11528-006-0046-9
  25. Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Learning to solve problems: A handbook for designing problem-solving learning environments. New York: Routledge.
  26. Knox, D. M. (1997). A review of the use of video‐conferencing for actuarial education — a three‐year case study. Distance Education, 18(2), 225–235. doi:10.1080/0158791970180204
  27. LaBoskey, V. K. (2004). The methodology of self-study and its theoretical underpinnings. In J. J. Loughran, M. L. Hamilton, V. K. LaBoskey, & T. Russell (Eds.), International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices (pp. 817–869). Netherlands : Springer. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4020-6545-3_21
  28. Loughran, J. (2005). Researching teaching about teaching: Self-study of teacher education practices. Studying Teacher Education, 1(1), 5–16. doi:10.1080/17425960500039777
  29. Loughran, J. (2007). Researching teacher education practices responding to the challenges, demands, and expectations of self-study. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 12–20. doi:10.1177/0022487106296217
  30. Lehman, R. M., & Conceição, S. C. O. (2010). Creating a sense of presence in online teaching: How to “be there” for distance learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  31. Mabrito, M. (2006). A study of synchronous versus asynchronous collaboration in an online business writing class. American Journal of Distance Education, 20(2), 93–107. doi:10.1207/s15389286ajde2002_4
  32. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation: Revised and expanded from qualitative research and case study applications in education (3rd ed.). San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
  33. Moore, M. G. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keagan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp. 22–29). New York: Routledge. Retrieved from http://www.uni-oldenburg.de/zef/cde/support/readings/moore93.pdf
  34. Moore, R. (2003). Reexamining the field experiences of preservice teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(1), 31–42.
  35. Moskal, P., Dziuban, C., & Hartman, J. (2013). Blended learning: A dangerous idea? The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 15–23. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.12.001
  36. Motteram, G., & Forrester, G. (2005). Becoming an online distance learner: What can be learned from students’ experiences of induction to distance programmes? Distance Education, 26, 281–298. doi:10.1080/01587910500291330
  37. Muilenburg, L. Y., & Berge, Z. L. (2005). Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study. Distance Education, 26, 29–48. doi:10.1080/01587910500081269
  38. O’neil, M. (2013, November 11). New council to develop standards, best practices for online learning. Wired Campus. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/new-council-to-develop-standards-best-practices-for-online-learning/48171?cid=wc&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en
  39. Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online learning communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  40. Payne, G., & Williams, M. (2005). Generalization in qualitative research. Sociology, 39(2), 295–314. doi:10.1177/0038038505050540
  41. Percell, K. (2013). Online video | Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project (p. 23). Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2007/Online-Video.aspx
  42. Petty, T., & Farinde, A. C. (2013). Investigating student engagement in an online mathematics course through windows into teaching and learning. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 261–270.
  43. Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2004). A development research agenda for online collaborative learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 53–65. doi:10.1007/BF02504718
  44. Rowland, G. (1993). Designing and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development, 41(1), 79–91. doi:10.1007/BF02297094
  45. Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  46. Taplin, R. H., Kerr, R., & Brown, A. M. (2013). Who pays for blended learning? A cost–benefit analysis. The Internet and Higher Education, 18, 61–68. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.002
  47. The Design-Based Research Collective. (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5–8. doi:10.3102/0013189X032001005
  48. Tracy, S. J. (2010). Qualitative quality: Eight “big-tent” criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(10), 837–851. doi:10.1177/1077800410383121
  49. Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23. doi:10.1007/BF02504682
  50. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., Click, A., & Smaldino, S. E. (2013). Activity systems as a framework for scaffolding participant reflections about distance education in an online instructional technology course. Reflective Practice, 14(4), 536–555. doi:10.1080/14623943.2013.809336
  51. Young, J. R. (2011, August 28). College presidents are bullish on online education but face a skeptical public. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/College-Presidents-Are-Bullish/128814/