Comparisons of Synchronous and Asynchronous Discussions in an Online Roleplaying Simulation to Teach Middle School Written Argumentation Skills
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i4.3468Keywords:
asynchronous interactions, synchronous interactions, educational simulation game, online game, written argumentation, virtual learning, distance learning, social simulation, social presence, scientific explanation, problem-based learning, social studies,Abstract
In this study, different degrees of synchronous and asynchronous online social interactions are investigated in the context of an online educational roleplaying simulation game that is played across multiple classrooms simultaneously to teach argumentation skills and social studies. Results from 45 K–12 middle school social studies teachers and 867 students over 3 study conditions were compared based on the degree of real-time discussion that was embedded in each condition’s version of game (i.e., two scheduled live conferences, one scheduled live conference, and asynchronous-only interactions or zero live conferences). All conditions exhibited significant small to moderate-level pre-post effect sizes, including the condition featuring asynchronous-only discussions. Additionally, the “mid-range” 1 live conference condition exhibited the greatest pre-post effect size in comparison to the other two conditions. This study demonstrates evidence for the benefits of implementing asynchronous-only discussions in digital interventions in comparison to live discussions when synchronous interaction may not be feasible. For designers, implementing both asynchronous and synchronous interactions based on available resources and feasibility can be used to maximize social presence among participants in educational roleplaying games and other virtual learning environments.
References
Andriessen, J., Baker, M., & Suthers, D. (2003). Argumentation, computer support, and the educational context of confronting cognitions. In J. Andriessen, M. Baker, & D. Suthers (Eds.), Arguing to learn (pp. 1-25). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Applebee, A. N., & Langer, J. A. (2006). The state of writing instruction in America’s schools: What existing data tell us. Albany, NY: Center on English Learning and Achievement.
Asterhan, C. S., & Schwarz, B. B. (2016). Argumentation for learning: Well-trodden paths and unexplored territories. Educational Psychologist, 51(2), 164-187.
Bathgate, M., Crowell, A., Schunn, C., Cannady, M., & Dorph, R. (2015). The learning benefits of being willing and able to engage in scientific argumentation. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1590-1612.
Brom, C., Stárková, T., Bromová, E., & Děchtěrenko, F. (2019). Gamifying a simulation: Do a game goal, choice, points, and praise enhance learning?. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(6), 1575-1613.
Cavagnetto, A. R. (2010). Argument to foster scientific literacy: A review of argument interventions in K–12 science contexts. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 336-371.
CCSS: Common Core State Standards. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Common Core State Standards Initiative.
Chen, Y. C., Park, S., & Hand, B. (2016). Examining the use of talk and writing for students' development of scientific conceptual knowledge through constructing and critiquing arguments. Cognition and Instruction, 34(2), 100-147.
Chinn, C.A., & Malhotra, B.A (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86(2), 175-218.
Coffin, C., Hewings, A., & North, S. (2012). Arguing as an academic purpose: The role of asynchronous conferencing in supporting argumentative dialogue in school and university. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(1), 38-51.
Crowell, A., & Kuhn, D. (2014). Developing dialogic argumentation skills: A 3-year intervention study. Journal of Cognition and Development, 15(2), 363-381.
Cui, G., Lockee, B., & Meng, C. (2013). Building modern online social presence: A review of social presence theory and its instructional design implications for future trends. Education and Information Technologies, 18(4), 661-685.
Darabi, A., Arrastia, M. C., Nelson, D. W., Cornille, T., & Liang, X. (2011). Cognitive presence in asynchronous online learning: A comparison of four discussion strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(3), 216-227.
Devlin-Scherer, R., & Sardone, N. B. (2010). Digital simulation games for social studies classrooms. The Clearing House, 83(4), 138-144.
Foo, S. Y., & Quek, C. L. (2019). Developing Students' Critical Thinking through Asynchronous Online Discussions: A Literature Review. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 7(2), 37-58.
Garrison, D. R. (2016). E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice (3rd Ed.). New York: Routledge.
Gašević, D., Adesope, O., Joksimović, S., & Kovanović, V. (2015). Externally-facilitated regulation scaffolding and role assignment to develop cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. The Internet and Higher Education, 24, 53-65.
Gredler, M. E. (2013). Games and simulations and their relationships to learning. In D. Jonassen & M. Driscoll (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (2nd Ed.), (pp. 571-581). New York: Routledge.
Henderson, J. B., McNeill, K. L., González‐Howard, M., Close, K., & Evans, M. (2018). Key challenges and future directions for educational research on scientific argumentation. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 55(1), 5-18.
Iordanou, K., Kuhn, D., Matos, F., Shi, Y., & Hemberger, L. (2019). Learning by arguing. Learning and Instruction, 63, 101207.
Jeong, A., & Frazier, S. (2008). How day of posting affects level of critical discourse in asynchronous discussions and computer‐supported collaborative argumentation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 875-887.
Jeong, A., & Joung, S. (2007). Scaffolding collaborative argumentation in asynchronous discussions with message constraints and message labels. Computers & Education, 48(3), 427-445.
Kanuka, H., & Garrison, D. R. (2004). Cognitive presence in online learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(2), 21.
Kozan, K., & Richardson, J. C. (2014). Interrelationships between and among social, teaching, and cognitive presence. The Internet and Higher Education, 21, 68-73.
Kuhn, D., Hemberger, L., & Khait, V. (2016). Tracing the development of argumentive writing in a discourse-rich context. Written Communication, 33(1), 92-121.
Larrain, A., Freire, P., López, P., & Grau, V. (2019). Counter-arguing during curriculum-supported peer interaction facilitates middle-school students’ science content knowledge. Cognition and Instruction, 37(4), 453-482.
Lawless, K. A., Brown, S. W., Rhoads, C. H., Lynn, L. J., Newton, S. D., Brodowinska, K., Oren, J., Riel, J., Song, S., & Wang, M. (2018). Promoting students science literacy skills through a simulation of international negotiations. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 389-396.
Lawless, K. A., Brown, S. W., Lynn, L. L., Riel, J., Brucianelli, K. B., & Oren, J. B. (2019). Efficacy of a socioscientific simulation on students’ written argumentation. Presented at the 2019 American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, April 2019.
Lin, H. S., Hong, Z. R., & Lawrenz, F. (2012). Promoting and scaffolding argumentation through reflective asynchronous discussions. Computers & Education, 59(2), 378-384.
Liu, C. C., Cheng, Y. B., & Huang, C. W. (2011). The effect of simulation games on the learning of computational problem solving. Computers & Education, 57(3), 1907-1918.
Loncar, M., Barrett, N. E., & Liu, G. Z. (2014). Towards the refinement of forum and asynchronous online discussion in educational contexts worldwide: Trends and investigative approaches within a dominant research paradigm. Computers & Education, 73, 93-110.
Lowenthal, P. R., & Dunlap, J. C. (2020). Social presence and online discussions: A mixed method investigation. Distance Education, 41(4), 490-514.
McNeill, K. L., Lizotte, D. J., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. W. (2006). Supporting students' construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153-191.
Mercier, H., Boudry, M., Paglieri, F., & Trouche, E. (2017). Natural-born arguers: Teaching how to make the best of our reasoning abilities. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 1-16.
Milner IV, H. R. (2014). Culturally Relevant, Purpose-Driven Learning & Teaching in a Middle School Social Studies Classroom. Multicultural Education, 21(2), 9-17.
NCSS: National Council for the Social Studies (2010). National curriculum standards for the social studies: A framework for teaching, learning, and assessment. Silver Spring, MD: NCSS.
Newcombe, N. S., Ambady, N., Eccles, J., Gomez, L., Klahr, D., Linn, M., ... & Mix, K. (2009). Psychology’s role in mathematics and science education. American Psychologist, 64(6), 538.
Nieuwoudt, J. E. (2020). Investigating synchronous and asynchronous class attendance as predictors of academic success in online education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36(3), 15-25.
NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
Noroozi, O., Dehghanzadeh, H., & Talaee, E. (2020). A systematic review on the impacts of game-based learning on argumentation skills. Entertainment Computing, 35, 100369.
NRC: National Research Council. (2014). Literacy for Science: Exploring the Intersection of the Next Generation Science Standards and Common Core for ELA Standards: A Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Nussbaum, E. M. (2021). Critical integrative argumentation: Toward complexity in students’ thinking. Educational Psychologist, 56(1), 1-17.
Özdem Yilmaz, Y., Cakiroglu, J., Ertepinar, H., & Erduran, S. (2017). The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: science teachers’ instructional practices. International Journal of Science Education, 39(11), 1443-1464.
Riel, J., & Lawless, K. A. (2022). Developing written argumentation skills with an educational simulation game (ESG): The design and implementation of the GlobalEd ESG. In P. Sullivan, B. Sullivan, & J. Lantz (Eds.), Cases on Innovative and Successful Uses of Digital Resources for Online Learning. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Squazzoni, F., Jager, W., & Edmonds, B. (2014). Social simulation in the social sciences: A brief overview. Social Science Computer Review, 32(3), 279-294.
Sauvé, L., Renaud, L., Kaufman, D., & Marquis, J. S. (2007). Distinguishing between games and simulations: A systematic review. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(3), 247-256.
Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2006). Knowledge building: Theory, pedagogy, and technology. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 97-118). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Scogin, S. C., Kruger, C. J., Jekkals, R. E., & Steinfeldt, C. (2017). Learning by experience in a standardized testing culture: Investigation of a middle school experiential learning program. Journal of Experiential Education, 40(1), 39-57.
Squazzoni, F., Jager, W., & Edmonds, B. (2014). Social simulation in the social sciences: A brief overview. Social Science Computer Review, 32(3), 279-294.
Suephatthima, B., & Faikhamta, C. (2018). Developing students’ argument skills using socioscientific issues in a learning unit on the fossil fuel industry and its products. Science Education International, 29(3).
Van Laar, E., Van Deursen, A. J., Van Dijk, J. A., & De Haan, J. (2017). The relation between 21st-century skills and digital skills: A systematic literature review. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 577-588.
Vlachopoulos, D., & Makri, A. (2017). The effect of games and simulations on higher education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 1-33.
Waring, S. M., & Robinson, K. S. (2010). Developing critical and historical thinking skills in middle grades social studies. Middle School Journal, 42(1), 22-28.
Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2014). Blending online asynchronous and synchronous learning. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(2), 189-212.
Yeh, K. H., & She, H. C. (2010). On-line synchronous scientific argumentation learning: Nurturing students' argumentation ability and conceptual change in science context. Computers & Education, 55(2), 586-602.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
