Intentional Online Discussions in Teacher Education

Autor/inn/en	Piro, Jody S.; Anderson, Gina
Titel	Intentional Online Discussions in Teacher Education
Quelle	In: Teacher Educator, 53 (2018) 2, S.167-189 (23 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Piro, Jody S.) ORCID (Anderson, Gina)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0887-8730
DOI	10.1080/08878730.2017.1419394
Schlagwörter	Classification; Electronic Learning; Computer Mediated Communication; Case Studies; Intervention; Critical Thinking; Inservice Teacher Education; Preservice Teacher Education; Graduate Students; Questionnaires; Asynchronous Communication; Discourse Modes; Interaction; Student Teacher Attitudes; Scholarship; Intellectual Experience; Questioning Techniques; Educational Quality; Educational Trends; Intentional Learning + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem; Computerkonferenz; Case study; Fallstudie; Case Study; Kritisches Denken; Lehrerfortbildung; Lehramtsstudiengang; Lehrerausbildung; Graduate Study; Student; Students; Aufbaustudium; Graduiertenstudium; Hauptstudium; Studentin; Fragebogen; Diskursethik; Interaktion; Scholarships; Stipendium; Befragungstechnik; Fragetechnik; Quality of education; Bildungsqualität; Bildungsentwicklung; Intentionales Lernen
Abstract	The goal of a creating civil discourse in teacher education deeply intersects with the ways that students interact in online discussions. However, as discussion shifts to online formats, digital misinformation is becoming widespread and threatens critical and civil communication as cognitive biases emerge in dialogue. The purpose of this case study research was to explore the participants' perceptions of growth and pitfalls while using the six essential elements of an online discussion typology developed as a pedagogical intervention to increase critical thinking and civility in discourse. The findings suggested that participants' responses in online discussions implied some cognitive biases and those participants engaged most often in discussions that were safe, comfortable, and familiar. Nevertheless, in their metacognitive reflections on the typology, participants demonstrated awareness of how these tendencies toward cognitive comfort shortchanged discussions and potential opportunities to develop new perspectives. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01