• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Staying Connected: Student Teachers' Perceptions of Computer- Mediated Discussions

Posted on: Tuesday, 19 July 2005, 03:00 CDT

Abstract

This qualitative study examined the perspectives of 4 student teachers who used computer-mediated discussion (CMD) during their school-based field practicum. Five types of data were collected for this study: interviews, focus group transcripts, concept maps, e- mail correspondence, and archived online messages. Analysis of the data suggests that using an online discussion forum can give student teachers professional and personal support and encourage close relationships with peers and can be used as a tool to construct content knowledge about teaching and learning. However, 1 participant did not engage freely online and believed CMD unnecessary. This lack of engagement exemplifies limits of using CMD with student teachers. Conclusions focus on the possibilities and limits of using an online discussion forum for supporting student teachers during their school-based field practicum.

Student teaching is so stressful. Once you get into your student teaching it is overwhelming and you start to feel isolated and discouraged that you can't do this. I mean you are struggling. You are trying to survive and get through everything. It was such a hard time. I'm drowning in all the responsibilities and confusion. I felt totally lost . . . in dire straits.

-Carrie, a student teacher

Like Carrie, many student teachers complete their last teacher education course and enter the phase of student teaching feeling overwhelmed by their classroom responsibilities. Student teachers are often isolated from others with whom they might share ideas, reflect on their teaching, receive support, and discuss the professional and personal struggles of becoming a new teacher (Goodlad, 1990). Despite research on the value of grouping students in cohort structures (Beck & Kosnik, 2001) and the importance of collaboration among student teachers and university faculty (Arends & Winitzky, 1996; Bullough & Gitlin, 1995; Goodlad, 1990), many traditional teacher education programs continue to place student teachers in schools away from peers and university support (Lortie, 1975; Tom, 1997). In such cases, student teaching becomes an isolated event where student teachers experience confusion and frustration and tend to perceive teaching as a highly individualistic experience (Lortie).

School-based fieldwork such as a classroom practicum can be one of the most powerful forces in developing a teacher's abilities and skills (Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2002), yet isolating student teachers from their peers and university supervisors during school-based fieldwork can rob student teachers of opportunities to collaborate with their peers and discuss specific techniques and strategies necessary to teach in complex, dynamic, and diverse classroom settings on a daily basis (Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann, 1987; Lortie, 1975). Once isolated in their field-based experiences, student teachers rarely talk with peers and have limited interactions with university supervisors (Schlagal, Trathen & Blanton, 1996). Connections between practical experiences and earlier methods courses occur haphazardly, if at all. When student teachers are not given opportunities to discuss their ideas, beliefs, or difficulties, they can unintentionally create meanings and practices in idiosyncratic and uncritical ways (Schlagal et al., 1996), retaining traditional, "common sense," and often ineffective teaching practices (Kagan, 1992). Computer-mediated discussion (CMD) is one way to connect student teachers with university faculty and fellow teacher candidates, creating opportunities for support and extended learning in the face of frustrations related to school- based fieldwork. The primary purpose of this study is to illustrate how four student teachers perceived using an online discussion board during their school-based field practicum.

Theoretical Framework

A social constructivist perspective posits that learning is a process of constructing meaning about, or making sense of, one's experiences and social interactions with others. A key tenet of social constructivist theory is that learning is dialogic and social. Simply said, learning is largely derived from a social environment in which individuals experience events and use language to communicate those experiences (Vygotsky, 1978). Language used with others in social situations organizes one's experiences and thoughts. Within a social context such as a teacher education program, language serves to simultaneously create and reflect the learning that occurs within this context. Writing, an important language tool, can serve to create and reflect individual and group learning (Vygotsky, 1978). CMD can facilitate the use of written language and serve as a cognitive tool to support learning (Ferdig & Roehler, 2004). CMD can help prospective teachers collaborate virtually and "actively construct knowledge by formulating ideas into words that are shared with and built upon through the reactions and responses of others" (Harasim, 1993, p. 120).

Review of Literature

Electronic mail, electronic bulletin boards, and computer conferencing are just a few examples of asynchronous CMD where individuals use language to interact socially. An increasing interest in using CMD with student teachers has produced a number of studies in recent years (Edens & Gallini, 2000; Edens & Hult, 2000; Ferdig & Roehler, 2004; Palloff & Pratt, 1999). Educational researchers have examined the potential for using CMD with student teachers during various phases of their teacher education programs. Many of these studies have illustrated that within supportive learning communities, student teachers can examine their educational experiences, develop practical and theoretical connections (Edens & Hult, 2000; Harrington, 1991, 1992), and extend professional collaboration (Johnson, 1997).

In the early 1990s, Harrington (1991, 1992) examined the use of computer conferencing by student teachers enrolled in an educational psychology course at the University of Michigan to understand how they connected their educational theories to practical, classroom situations. By analyzing online written discussions and assignments and field experiences, Harrington (1991, 1992) and Harrington and Hathaway (1994) discovered that student teachers extended their understanding of theory and practice by considering multiple perspectives voiced by their peers. They often posed questions and expressed concerns in response to theories practiced in their fieldplacement classrooms. Harrington's research suggests that online discussions served as a tool to help student teachers delve deeper into concepts and classroom issues that were overlooked in face-to-face meetings.

Similar findings from Edens and Huit (2000) described how online discussions between student teachers and university faculty enabled student teachers to integrate theoretical knowledge into a wide variety of teaching situations. In order to illustrate how online discussions might enhance student teachers' classroom practice and understanding of literacy instruction, Thomas and Clift (1996) studied e-mail messages from 11 preservice teachers during their student teaching practicum. Student teachers sent e-mails to every class member and were required to raise one question a week relating to their classroom experiences. Findings suggest that student teachers extended their content knowledge of literacy practices and related theories and were able to make connections between their classroom instruction and university course content.

Other research using CMD with student teachers suggests that electronic discussion forums offer unique opportunities for student teachers to informally share their ideas (Ferdig & Roehler, 2004). In turn, the text-based nature of online discussions allows student teachers to review their own thoughts and become metacognitively aware of their own thinking as their knowledge grows. Ferdig and Roehler (2004) warned, however, that CMD is not for everyone. Some student teachers may use the online discussions as a positive way to enhance their learning and classroom experiences, but others may use it merely to complete required assignments.

One of the primary findings from studies of the use of CMD is that student teachers have the opportunity to collaborate with their peers (Knowlton & Knowlton, 2001). A study by Johnson (1997) examined the online discussions between student teachers and practicing teachers in a university reading course. Student teachers were required to communicate with "e-pals" (experienced reading teachers) about their reading instruction. ?-pals were located across the country and had volunteered to mentor student teachers. Through online collaboration with e-pals, student teachers gained a thorough understanding of different reading philosophies and developed professional connections with practicing teachers. These professional connections alleviated feelings of isolation during student teaching and created supportive learning communities between schools and the university. In a similar study, Sernak and Wolfe (1998) partnered student teachers from two different multicultural education classes and examined their e-mail correspondence. Some student teachers enjoyed collaborating online,whereas others found it difficult to write to an unknown person. One student teacher wrote, "I thought it would be easy to write to a stranger about textbook topics. I guess that I am more willing to open up to a person than I am to a blank computer screen" (Sernak & Wolfe, 1998, p. 307).

In order to get the most out of CMD, teacher educators must understand the advantages and limitations of using online discussions. One positive outcome is that CMD can increase interactivity among students (Romiszowski & Ravitz, 1997). This interactivity can be as simple as providing feedback, making connections, or reflecting on others' opinions (Dutt-Doner & Powers, 2000). When student teachers are limited by time and distance, CMD has the potential to unite them with peers and university faculty at the student teacher's convenience (Romiszowski & Ravitz, 1997; Tiene, 2000). When student teachers arrive home, for example, they can use e-mail or an electronic bulletin board to discuss their school-based field experiences with others and learn about their peers' classroom happenings. Such written conversations could promote stronger relationships between students and instructors (Bonk & King, 1998) and help students feel connected (Romiszowski & Ravitz, 1997) beyond the singular experience of the classroom.

Although a number of positive implications have been noted for CMD, some disadvantages also exist. Because electronic discussions are generally accessible utilizing a computer with Internet access, student teachers can be left out of the conversation if they do not have ready access to a computer or the Internet at their home or school. Another disadvantage is the discomfort some individuals feel using online technology. Because online conversations lack visual and intonational clues found in face-to-face discussions, student teachers may feel unmotivated or uncomfortable discussing difficult issues online (Falser, 2002). Ferdig and Roehler (2004) suggested that the quality of online conversations and student teachers' interest levels drop when student teachers become confused about the purpose of the online discussion, leading to a lack of motivation to interact with others online.

Methods

Description and Research Questions

This qualitative study examined the perspectives and experiences of four student teachers from a reading specialization program who used an asynchronous online discussion board during their school- based field practicum. The overarching research question that guided this study was as follows: How did student teachers in a reading specialization program perceive their participation on an online discussion board during their field placement? Phenomenological methodology (Patton, 1990) was used in order to depict how four student teachers made sense of their experiences communicating online with peers and university faculty. To understand the positive and negative perceptions associated with using CMD, this study focused on how four student teachers (currently 1st-year teachers) perceived their use of an online discussion forum during their school-based field practicum. Focusing on a small number of participants allowed more in-depth descriptions of participants' particular perspectives and insights from using CMD.

Setting and Background

Organized as a cohort, the reading specialization program is one of many different programs at a large southwestern university that allows students to specialize in an area of interest. If a student chooses to join the program, he or she is required to take additional literacy courses and extended fieldwork beyond the requirements of the general education program. Reading specialization students follow a three-semester cohort plan. Students enrolled in the reading specialization program are loaned a laptop computer from the university and communicate through a university-supported communication network system designed to allow individual users to send and receive e-mails, share files, use electronic conferencing to exchange ideas, and link to the Internet.

During the first two semesters of the program, student teachers in the reading specialization program are expected to send and receive e-mails, post online responses related to course assignments, and read and respond to each other's comments. All electronic messages are asynchronous, and course responses are virtually organized in electronic discussion boards according to the course title. Non-course postings are placed in a general electronic discussion board where students and university faculty post personal and professional announcements and questions. During the third semester of the program, student teachers take an intensive language arts methods course for 4 weeks and then begin their 16-week school- based field practicum. By this time in the program, student teachers are no longer required to communicate online as they were in earlier courses, but they are encouraged to check in for cohort announcements. During the 16-week field practicum, online discussion topics included messages, such as personal concerns, lesson ideas, book talks, individual celebrations, and job search questions, and involved the entire group of student teachers.

Participants

The study participants were 4 female student teachers who were members of the reading specialization program from January 2000 to May 2001. They interned in four different elementary schools surrounding a moderate-sized, urban city located in the Southwest. The researcher served as their student teacher supervisor and observed them weekly. This study took place after the 4 participants graduated from the reading specialization program and began their 1st year as elementary teachers. They were asked to reflect on their experiences using an online discussion forum during their school- based field practicum and explain how communicating online influenced their student teaching experiences.

Participants were purposively chosen for this study (Erlandson, Harris, Skipper, & Allen, 1993) because they offered information- rich cases that were central to the focus of this study. Three participants-Carrie, Linda, and Madison (all names are pseudonyms)- represented the average to above average use of the online discussion board compared to other student teachers in the reading program. Most student teachers in the reading program posted between five and seven times a week, averaging 80 to 102 messages per person. Carrie, Linda, and Madison read and responded to over 100 electronic messages from the program's general electronic bulletin board between February 14 and May 5, 2001. They each had varied experiences using online technology, much like other student teachers in the program. Tracy, the 4th participant, read and responded to less than 15 electronic messages during the same time period. Although Tracy had ready access to the Internet and a laptop computer like her peers, she frequently shared her dislike for communicating online. Tracy did not represent the majority of student teachers in the reading specialization program using the online discussion board. Tracy was included in this study to allow for the examination of a very different experience compared to the other participants and to determine whether low use and a negative perspective towards CMD might be limiting.

Data Collection and Analysis

The primary data collected for this study included three 1-hour interviews with each participant and one 2-hour focus group. Other secondary data included individual concept maps, personal e-mail correspondence, and electronic archived messages. Individual and focus group interviews were tape recorded and transcribed.

Constant comparative analysis as described by Lincoln and Guba (1985) was used in this study. Data analysis began during the first interviews. Even before the interviews were transcribed, thoughts, ideas, and ongoing reflections were recorded in the researcher's journal. After the interviews were transcribed, each phrase or unit of words that stood alone in meaning was separated and coded as suggested by Erlandson et al. (1993). To best illustrate each code, participants' words were used as much as possible. Coding was completed for each transcript, concept map, e-mail correspondence, and online bulletin board posting. Codes were then reexamined, redefined, and combined with other similar codes and organized into categories for each case. The researcher summarized and then reexamined categories for each case, looking at recurring patterns and themes across cases. As themes emerged, new patterns were reexamined and redefined. The themes discussed below emerged mainly from the individual and group interviews.

Findings and Discussion

With this process, three themes emerged from the data: support, relationships, and learning from each other. The following section describes the themes that evolved across participants, closely examines Tracy's differing stance towards responding online, and concludes with implications for using CMD in teacher education programs.

Theme 1: It Was Literally a Lifeline for Me

Communicating online through the cohort's electronic messaging board allowed Madison, Carrie, and Linda to feel supported, while they in turn gave emotional support to their peers. Through constant online interaction with peers, professors, and teaching assistants, communicating online was a lifeline that helped participants make it through student teaching. For example, when thinking back about her student teaching semester, Carrie repeatedly described how her peers empathized with her frustrations in learning to teach. She shared,

My friends helped me through my struggles. We all came together online and helped one another when we were feeling overwhelmed or stressed out. Just to know that other people are in the same place you were, and then there is always someone online to talk to.

Linda and Madison felt comforted knowing th\ey were as "lost and overwhelmed as everyone else." This online encouragement and emotional support was immediate and available when participants needed it the most. As Madison remembered, "If you had a problem or if you were upset about something, you could send a message to a T.A. or a friend." Discussing problems with peers online helped the participants feel they were part of a learning community.

Online support came in many forms such as questions, stories, and motivational comments. Some messages were empathetic to the concerns and struggles of the participants, and other messages were complimentary or offered encouragement through stories of learning. Carrie explained that she often printed out encouraging messages and kept "them in a binder titled notes of encouragement." She shared,

I printed out the online comments from my T.A.s, the professor, and from my peers and would go back and look at them when I was feeling discouraged. I would go back and say to myself, OK, you are not a horrible teacher. You are doing a good job. I just felt so overwhelmed because there was so much to do when you are student teaching and going back to those comments was encouraging.

Reflecting on her text-based messages gave Carrie the confidence to continue learning in her student teaching role and served as a physical reminder that she was not alone. However, this online support was only available for participants who regularly utilized the discussion forum or who had friends online.

Tracy did not believe that online discussions were a valuable tool for receiving support from her peers or university faculty. Although she felt comfortable using the online technology, she found communicating online a "nuisance and a bother." When classmates would "go on and on" about their problems online, Tracy felt frustrated because these messages "brought me down" and "depressed me." Instead of finding connections and support online, Tracy stopped communicating online and found support from a classmate placed at the same school. She recalled, "Alyssa and I carpooled and we talked about all the things that others wrote about online-I just didn't need to hear everyone else's problems." Tracy may have experienced unfavorable feelings about using the online discussion forum because she did not feel isolated from her classmates like Madison, Carrie, and Linda did. Since she had a classmate with whom she could talk at her convenience, getting support from others online was not necessary. Yet every so often, Tracy admitted that she felt less isolated when she read her peer's online comments. She explained, "I didn't want to hear about other people's problems-but reading about them helped me appreciate that I wasn't alone."

Theme 2: Strong Friendships and Intimate Relationships

Linda, Madison, and Carrie felt that online discussions helped them develop intimate relationships with their peers and university faculty. These online relationships contributed to the feelings of support, comfort, and belonging they needed in order to make it through the isolation of student teaching. According to Linda, seeing everybody's names on the online discussion board allowed her to get to know her classmates more quickly. She recalled,

Because I saw their names on there all the time, I felt comfortable saying anything. And it was like we had a little electric community where people fall in love with each other over e- mail. It just helped us stay close.

Madison took more risks online and shared things about herself that she would not have said in a regular face-to-face class. She recalled,

It is kind of like when you are in those large lecture classes and you know the answer and you have an opinion on something and you could raise your hand and say it but you don't. But on our bulletin board, I cared about everyone. I wanted them to hear my opinions, and I wanted to hear theirs.

Madison seemed more motivated to participate online than face-to- face. Much like Tao and Reinking (1996) suggested, Madison may have had more time to reflect before responding online and a higher level of confidence that comes from writing rather than speaking in front of peers. In another example, Carrie shared that communicating online allowed her to get to know the program professor better. She explained, "I would send him (the professor) personal e-mails about questions and concerns. He always wrote me back. That helped me to know him better, on a personal level."

Building caring, trusting relationships online did not happen quickly. All the participants agreed that meeting face-to-face as well as meeting online nurtured intimate friendships, although it required the experience of working through a group conflict to bring the student teachers closer together. Thinking back before her school-based practicum, Linda described how she and others used the online discussion board to solve a conflict among her peers in the reading program and ultimately develop closer friendships.

We had a fight in the cohort and Carrie used the online bulletin board to talk about the situation. This message went to everybody, and I think it brought us closer together. I learned about how everyone had different perspectives concerning this issue and that helped me to get closer to others.

Solving disagreements online helped Linda communicate her frustrations, come to understand others' experiences, and build stronger connections with her peers. Additionally, as individuals grew together, they projected unique identities within the group. For example, Madison recalled a classmate who always made connections between her experiences as a migrant worker and learning to teach. Madison explained, "I really cared what Edith had to say. She was like the mother in the group, and she helped me better understand her experiences and come to appreciate differing perspectives." As identities emerged online, participants became more willing to trust their peers and share with them, creating an online space that supported participants' professional growth and emotional well being.

Tracy, however, did not believe that communicating online allowed her to build close, personal relationships. She rarely posted messages during her school-based practicum. When asked why she did not communicate online, Tracy explained that she was a shy and quiet person who didn't feel comfortable writing to a large group of people. She believed that "the online discussion board was meant for the others, not me." Tracy felt different from her classmates because "other students had come into the reading specialization program with many more personal experiences of teaching." She shared, "Their moms or aunts are teachers. They knew more than I did. So that affected why and how I responded online." Her belief that she was different from the others created an emotional distance between Tracy and her peers; she expressed that communicating online was "for others, not for me." She became frustrated when classmates wrote about their problems and instructional needs. Tracy explained, "I didn't understand when people posted their problems . . . so I became an onlooker . . . and never really participated or made close friends online." During the focus group meetings, Tracy admitted that using the online discussion board undoubtedly helped her classmates build strong relationships, but it was never a useful tool for her. The fact that Tracy did not feel compelled to build strong relationships with her peers may have been because she had a close friend at the same school where she was interning. Trying to develop friendships online would have taken time away from building her face-to-face relationship.

Theme 3: Stealing From Others

Learning from others by exchanging or "stealing" ideas was another important aspect of communicating online. All 4 participants exchanged teaching strategies, shared reading lessons, and learned from others' experiences while participating in their school-based practicum. Carrie recalled starting an author study in her classroom and writing to her classmates about other literature studies:

I knew that somebody else chose the same author as I did, so we shared a lot online about not only how we were going to approach it but how we would change it to get the kids more engaged and to make it more exciting.

In another instance, Linda exchanged many ideas with her classmates and often applied their ideas to her own lessons. She explained, "When others wrote about their teaching, I would play off their ideas and use their ideas to jump into other things. Seeing what others were doing helped me try something new." For example, when a classmate wrote about a creative writing lesson using character sketches, Linda changed the original idea to improve her own writing lesson:

I thought it would be a great idea to take that idea and change it just a little bit and have my students use an index box with card files where they could create different characters throughout different points of the year . . . I changed it just a little bit so my writing program is more interesting.

Madison also learned about reading instruction from the discussions shared online. Because she completed her student teaching in a fourth-grade classroom, she felt she had little knowledge of teaching reading to younger children. By reading peers' comments and their experiences in younger classrooms, Madison felt she was able "to get a better understanding of what goes on in the early grades." She explained that when she interviewed for a first- grade teaching position at the end of her student teaching, she used her peers' words to articulate beginning reading instruction.

Because you hear other people saying it or writing it and you just get the language . . . so when I interviewed for the job at Briarwoods I knew the language of first grade and all of the stuff that they did.

Using the online discussion forum during their schoo\l-based practicum helped Carrie and Madison build on their own understanding of teaching and learning. They both seemed to go beyond a surface level of sharing ideas to a personal level of re-creating instructional ideas for their own purpose. These examples illustrate the social constructive nature of learning with CMD.

In much the same way as the other participants, Tracy used her peers' ideas and different perspectives as "starting points for my own teaching," borrowing instructional and classroom management activities and using them with her own students. Still, Tracy believed her peers were more knowledgeable about teaching and therefore had more to share online. Because of this self- perception, Tracy did not share her ideas with others online but merely borrowed from others. She explained, "They knew more and I didn't, so I never wrote to give my ideas, I only read to learn." Tracy believed that she learned more from her cooperating teachers then from her peers, explaining, "Frankly, I got advice from my teachers, not from other students."

Conclusions and Implications

This study had some limitations. Foremost, the participants reflected on their student teaching experiences 4 months after they graduated from the reading specialization program. Recalling past experiences may reflect unrealistic, perhaps overly positive memories. Because the study relied on self-reports, individual online messages posted to the discussion board were not considered. The sample size for this study is quite small, with 3 participants who frequently used CMD and 1 who did not. The negative perspective of the 1 non-user participant cannot be considered a realistic representative of the entire group of people who did not use the online discussion board. The reasons other student teachers do not use CMD may vary dramatically.

Despite these limitations, this study provides meaningful insight into the use of CMD with student teachers. It revealed that CMD as used by these student teachers helped alleviate feelings of isolation, assisted in building personal and professional relationships, and extended practical teaching experiences. Like subjects in Poole's (2000) study, participants felt connected with their classmates and believed that communicating online provided a lifeline that helped them survive the struggles of student teaching. As reported by Brown (2001) and Johnson (1997), CMD established an electronic community where frequent users shared personal struggles and experienced camaraderie with peers and university faculty. Three of the 4 participants who frequently used the online discussion board believed online communication helped create stronger relationships. Creating stronger relationships online enhanced the participants' desire to use the online discussion board and to share their own teaching ideas with peers. Participants shared lesson ideas and grade-level specific reading tips, extending their understanding of being a teacher. Sharing ideas online gave participants an additional opportunity to reflect on their teaching practices with others (Edens & Hult, 2000; Ferdig & Roehler, 2004), thus making student teaching a more collaborative and reflective learning experience.

Tracy, the participant who rarely communicated online, did not believe the online discussion board supported her development as a student teacher. She expressed a lack of "belonging" online and believed that CMD was a tool for other, more knowledgeable peers. Tracy's feelings of alienation online may have been influenced by her lack of use and motivation to connect with others online. Despite the fact that Tracy did not feel connected or supported by using CMD, she did benefit from the online environment. Tracy rarely shared her own ideas online, but she did read many of her peers' ideas and used them in her teaching. These informal online exchanges illustrate the importance of giving student teachers opportunities to learn from their peers, even when their participation is limited.

Tracy's lack of online engagement and negative perception as an outsider are illustrative of benefits and limits of using CMD with student teachers. If CMD is not used frequently or authentically, individuals can feel alienated and disconnected. To enhance the possible benefits of CMD, the importance of communicating online with peers and university faculty should be emphasized by teacher educators early in teacher education programs. Authentic reasons for communicating online, such as brainstorming solutions for a classroom management issue or identifying an appropriate author to study, should be identified to validate the strategy's importance. Finally, teacher educators need to encourage individuals to take risks by nurturing online relationships to enhance the level of trust among users. Traditional teacher education programs that are forced to separate their teacher candidates by assigning them to various placements can use CMD as a tool to create spaces where student teachers exchange valuable teaching ideas and discuss the challenges and joys of becoming a teacher.

References

Arends, R., & Winitzky, N. (1996). Program structures and learning to teach. In F. B. Murry (Ed.), The teacher educator handbook. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Beck, C., & Kosnik, C. (2001). From cohort to community in a preservice teacher education program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(8), 925-948.

Bonk, C. J., & King, K. S. (1998). Computer conferencing and collaborative writing tools: Starting a dialogue about student dialogue. In C. J. Bonk & K. S. King (Eds.), Electronic collaborators: Learner centered technologies for literacy, apprenticeship, and discourse (pp. 3-24). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Brown, R. E. (2001). The process of community building in distance learning cases. JALN, 5(5), 18-35.

Bullough, R., & Gitlin, A. (1995). Becoming a student of teaching: Methodologies for exploring self and school context. New York: Garland.

Dutt-Doner, K. M., & Powers, S. M. (2000). The use of electronic communication to develop alternative avenues for classroom discussion. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 8(2), 153- 172.

Edens, K. M., & Gallini, J. K. (2000). Developing a discourse community of preservice teachers in a technology-mediated context. The Teacher Educator, 34(4), 64-82.

Edens, K. M., & Hult, R. E. (2000, April). Toward bridging the great divide of theory and practice through electronic conferencing. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.

Erlandson, D. A., Harris, E. L., Skipper, B. L., & Allen, S. D. (1993). Doing naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1987). When is student teaching teacher education? Teaching and Teacher Education, 3, 255- 273.

Ferdig, R. E., & Roehler, L. (2004). Student uptake in electronic discussions: Examining online discourse in literacy preservice classrooms. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 36(2), 119-136.

Goodlad, J. (1990). School-university partnerships for educational renewal: Rationale and concepts. In K. Sirontinik & J. Goodlad (Eds.), School-university partnerships in action: Concepts, cases and concerns. New York: Teachers College Press.

Harasim, L. (1993). Collaborating in cyberspace: Using computer conferences as a group-learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 3(2), 119-130.

Harrington, H. L. (1991). Using technology in teacher education: Facilitating development or maintaining the status quo? In Technology and Teacher Education Annual: 1991 (pp. 338-343). Greenville, NC: Society for Technology and Teacher Education.

Harrington, H. L. (1992). Fostering critical reflection through technology: Preparing prospective teachers for a changing society. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 1(1), 67- 82.

Harrington, H. L., & Hathaway, R. S. (1994). Computer conferencing, critical reflection, and teacher development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(5), 543-554.

Johnson, D. (1997). Extending the educational community: Using electronic dialoguing to connect theory and practice in preservice teacher education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 5(2/ 3), 163-170.

Kagan, D. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129-169.

Knowlton, D., & Knowlton, H. (2001). The context and content of online discussions: Making cyber discussions viable for the secondary school curriculum. American Secondary Education, 29(4), 38- 42.

Lincoln, Y. G., & Cuba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. London: Sage.

Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University Press.

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Palser, B. (2002). Not for everyone. Online forums are not the best aspect of the Web. American Journalism Review, 24(1), 58.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Poole, D. M. (2000). Student participation in a discussion- oriented online course: A case study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 112-130.

Romiszowski, A. J., & Ravitz, J. (1997). Computer-mediated communication. In C. R. Dilles & A. Romiszowski (Eds.), Instructional development paradigms (pp. 745-768). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.

Schlagal, B., Trathen, W., & Blanton, W. (1996). Structuring telecommunications to create instructional conversations about student teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 47(3), 175-183.

Sernak, K. S., & Wolfe, C. S. (1998). Creating multicultural understanding and community in preservice education classes via email. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 6(4), 303-329.

Tao, L., & Reinking, D. (1996, October-November). What research reveals about email in education. Paper presented at the40th Annual Meeting of the College Reading Association, Charleston, SC.

Thomas, L., & Clift, R. T. (1996). Telecommunication, student teaching, and methods instruction: An exploratory investigation. Journal of Teacher Education, 47(1), 165-175.

Tiene, C. D. (2000). Understanding and harnessing the power of the cohort model in preparing educational leaders. Peabody Journal of Education, 72(2), 66-85.

Tom, A. (1997). Redesigning teacher education. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wilson, S. M., Floden, R. E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2002). Teacher preparation research: An insider's view from the outside. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(3), 190-204.

Lori Czop Assaf

Curriculum and Instruction, Texas State University, San Marcos

Copyright Ball State University Spring 2005

Source: Teacher Educator, The

More News in this Category