Cited by 289Online and Blended LearningEnglish Language Learning and TeachingTeacher Education and Leadership Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Online Learning: Patterns of Engagement and Interaction Among In-Service Teachers

Open access
Pawan, Faridah, Paulus, Trena M., Yalcin, Semon, Chang, Ching-Fen·2003·Language Learning & Technology

Abstract

Language teacher education programs attempt to foster collaboration amongst pre-service and in-service teachers.The approach is in place in an online teacher education program in a Midwestern university where the current study was undertaken.Collaborative interactions are an essential element of any pedagogy which assumes that good learning is collaborative and that understanding comes through modeling, participation in, and reaction to the behaviors and thoughts of others.This study was conducted with the following objectives: (a) to analyze the patterns and types of collaborative interactions taking place in three online classes; and (b) to use these findings as a guide in the design of instructional interventions.Our goal is to understand the practice of collaborative teaching and learning so that assistance can be provided to support instructor efforts to include collaborative interactions in their courses.We used Garrison, Anderson, and Archer's ( 2001) "practical inquiry" model as a framework for the study.Without instructors' explicit guidance and "teaching presence," students were found to engage primarily in "serial monologues."Based on the findings, we propose three intervention strategies that may help instructors increase collaborative interactions in online discussions.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.64152/10125/25217

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Additional intervention strategies included clearly outlining participation requirements of the course, asking questions addressing the integration of ideas, and playing a visible role in guiding students towards the achievement of learning goals.

    “However, from a pedagogical standpoint, additional intervention strategies included: to clearly outline participation requirements of the course, to ask questions addressing the integration of ideas, and to play a visible role in guiding students towards the achievement of learning goals (Pawan et al. 2003).”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Pawan, F., Paulus, T. M., Yalcin, S., & Chang, C.-F.
Affiliations
Indiana University (US)
Venue
Language Learning & Technology
Published
2003-09-01
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
119-140
ISSN
1094-3501 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2137227662
Cited by
289
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 26
FWCI
54.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Language learning & technology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • ScholarSpace (University of Hawaii at Manoa) (submittedVersion)
  • Language learning & technology (cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › English Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
Keywords
online learning, collaborative interaction, in-service teachers, teacher professional development, online forums, teaching presence, educational intervention, teacher collaboration

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review