Top

Education and Information Technologies

Published in:

19-09-2017

Inclusive dyslexia-friendly collaborative online learning environment: Malaysia case study

Authors: Loren Pang, Chen Chwen Jen

Published in: Education and Information Technologies | Issue 3/2018

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config

AI-assisted search

Off

Abstract

Currently available web page accessibility guidelines focus more on reading and writing, with inadequate attention to other aspects of online learning such as computer-mediated communication. This study aims to explore the engagement of Malaysia secondary school students with dyslexia and students without dyslexia on various synchronous and asynchronous communication interaction technologies in an online collaborative learning environment. Multiple case within subject qualitative study was employed to investigate the engagement of students using a semi structured interview guideline. The findings revealed that (1) text chat is unsuitable for learning discussion for all learners, (2) forum affords self-paced and organized formal discussion for most learners and (3) video conferencing is suitable for interactive face-to-face, verbal discussion for most learners.

previous article On the issues of digital competence in educational contexts – a review of literature

next article Effective instruction for persisting dyslexia in upper grades: Adding hope stories and computer coding to explicit literacy instruction

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Anderson, T., & Rourke, L. (2005). Videoconferencing in kindergarten-to-grade 12 settings : A review of the literature. Edmonton: Alberta Education.

Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1970.tb01257.x.

Avrahami, D., Fussell, S. R., & Hudson, S. E. (2008). IM waiting: Timing and responsiveness in semi-synchronous communication. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 285–294). doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/1460563.1460610.

Balaji, M. S., & Chakrabarti, D. (2010). Student interactions in online discussion forum: Empirical research from ‘media richness theory’ perspective. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(1), 1–22.

Blackmon, S. J. (2012). Outcomes of chat and discussion board use in online learning : A research synthesis. Journal of Educators Online, 9(2), 1–19.CrossRef

Bober, M. J., & Dennen, V. P. (2001). Intersubjectivity: Facilitating knowledge construction in online environments. Educational Media International, 38(4), 241–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523980110105150.CrossRef

Borstorff, P. C., & Lowe, S. K. (2007). Student perceptions and opinions toward e-learning in the college environment. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 11(2), 13–29 Retrieved from http://ezproxy.lib.swin.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=29964167&site=ehost-live&scope=site.

British Dyslexia Association. (2007). Definition of dyslexia. Retrieved from http://www.bdadyslexia.org.uk/dyslexic/definitions.

Burgoon, J., Buller, D. B., Hale, J. L., & DeTurck, M. A. (1984). Relational messages associated with nonverbal behaviors. Human Communication Research, 10(3), 351–378.CrossRef

Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2005). How can we facilitate students’ in-depth thinking and interaction in an asynchronous online discussion environment? A case study. In Proceedings of the AECT International Convention. Orlando.

Cook, D. A., Garside, S., Levinson, A. J., Dupras, D. M., & Montori, V. M. (2010). What do we mean by web-based learning? A systematic review of the variability of interventions. Medical Education, 44(8), 765–774. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03723.x.CrossRef

Davidson-shivers, G. V., & Tanner, E. J. (2001). How do students participate in synchronous and asynchronous online discussions ? Journal of Educational Computing Research, 25(4), 351–366.CrossRef

Derks, D., Fischer, A. H., & Bos, A. E. R. (2008). The role of emotion in computer-mediated communication: A review. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3), 766–785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2007.04.004.CrossRef

Doggett, A. M. (2008). The videoconferencing classroom: What do students think? Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 44(4), 29–41 Retrieved from http://ezproxy.massey.ac.nz/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip,cookie,url,uid&db=eric&AN=EJ830487&site=ehost-live.

Donnelly, R., & McSweeney, F. (2009). Applied e-learning and e-teaching in higher education. Hersey: Information Science Reference. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-59904-814-7.CrossRef

Evett, L., & Brown, D. (2005). Text formats and web design for visually impaired and dyslexic readers—Clear text for all. Interacting with Computers, 17(4), 453–472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2005.04.001.CrossRef

Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P. C., & Paris, A. H. (2004). School engagement: Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74(1), 59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059.CrossRef

Gellevij, M., Van Der Meij, H., De Jong, T., & Pieters, J. (2002). Multimodal versus unimodal instruction in a complex learning context. The Journal of Experimental Education, 70(3), 215–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220970209599507.CrossRef

Goi, C. L., & Ng, P. Y. (2009). E- learning in Malaysia : Success factors in implementing E-learning program. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 20(2), 237–246.

Gonzales, C. L., & de Montes, L. S. (2001). Using interaction content analysis instruments to assess distance learning. Computers in the Schools, 18(2), 61–67. https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v18n02.CrossRef

Guzdial, M., & Turns, J. (2000). Effective discussion through a computer-mediated anchored forum. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(4), 437–469.CrossRef

Habib, L., Berget, G., Sandnes, F. E., Sanderson, N., Kahn, P., Fagernes, S., & Olcay, A. (2012). Dyslexic students in higher education and virtual learning environments: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(6), 574–584. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2012.00486.x.CrossRef

Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., Towler, A., The, S., Feb, N. J., & Taylor, P. (2005). A measure of college student engagement. The Journal of Education Research, 98(3), 184–191.CrossRef

Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2000). Students’ frustrations with a web-based distance education course. Information, Communication & Society, 3(4), 557–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180010002297.CrossRef

Hara, N., Bonk, C. J. A. Y., & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115–152. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003764722829.CrossRef

Harmon, S. W., & Jones, M. G. (2001). An analysis of situated web-based instruction. Educational Media International, 38(4), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523980110105123.CrossRef

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2008). Attracting student participation in asynchronous online discussions : A case study of peer facilitation. Computers & Education, 51, 1111–1124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.11.002.CrossRef

Hrastinski, S. (2008a). Asynchronous and synchronous E-learning. Educause Quarterly, 31(4), 51–55.

Hrastinski, S. (2008b). Information & management the potential of synchronous communication to enhance participation in online discussions : A case study of two e-learning courses. Information Management, 45, 499–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2008.07.005.CrossRef

Jimerson, S. R., Campos, E., & Greif, J. L. (2003). Toward an understanding of definitions and measures of school engagement and related terms. The California School Psychologist, 8, 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03340893.CrossRef

Kear, K. (2004). Peer learning using asynchronous discussion systems in distance education. Open Learning, 19, 151–164. https://doi.org/10.1080/0268051042000224752.CrossRef

Khanlarian, C. J., & Singh, R. (2014). An exploratory study of the online learning environment. Issues in Accounting Education, 29(1), 117–147. https://doi.org/10.2308/iace-50614.CrossRef

Kiesler, S., Zubrow, D., Moses, A. M., & Geller, V. (1985). Affect in computer-meditated communication: An experiment in synchronous terminal-to-terminal discussion. Human Computer Interaction, 1, 77–104. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327051hci0101_3.CrossRef

Kock, N. (2005). Media richness or media naturalness? The evolution of our biological communication apparatus and its influence on our behavior toward E-communication tools. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(2). https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2005.849649.

Kubey, R. W., Lavin, M. J., & Barrows, J. R. (2001). Internet use and collegiate academic performance decrements: Early findings. Journal of Communication, 51(2), 366–382. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/51.2.366.CrossRef

Lawson, T., Comber, C., Gage, J., & Cullum-Hanshaw, A. (2010). Images of the future for education? Videoconferencing: A literature review. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 19(3), 295–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2010.513761.CrossRef

Lee, L. (2002). Synchronous online exchanges: A study of modification devices on non-native discourse. System, 30(3), 275–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00015-5.CrossRef

Luaran, J. A. E., Samsuri, N. N., Nadzri, F. A., & Rom, K. B. M. (2014). A study on the student’s perspective on the effectiveness of using e-learning. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 123, 139–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.1407.CrossRef

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. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15389286ajde2002_4.CrossRef

McCarthy, J. E., & Swierenga, S. J. (2009). What we know about dyslexia and web accessibility: A research review. Universal Access in the Information Society, 9(2), 147–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-009-0160-5.CrossRef

Mcisaac, M. S., Blocher, J. M., Mahes, V., & Vrasidas, C. (1999). Student and teacher perceptions of interaction in online computer-mediated communication. Educational Media International, 36(3), 121–131.CrossRef

Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions : The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 55–65.

Michel, J. J. H., Kerry, F. M., Kirstin, C. A., Philip, S., Nicole, A. Y., & Elke, U. W. (2012). Web-conferencing as a viable method for group decision research. Judgment and Decision making, 7(5), 659–668.

Murphy, E., & Ciszewska-Carr, J. (2007). Instructors’ experiences of web based synchronous communication using two way audio and direct messaging. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(1), 68–86.CrossRef

Nardi, B. A., Whittaker, S., & Bradner, E. (2000). Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action. In Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 79–88). doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/358916.358975

Ng, K. C. (2007). Replacing face-to-face tutorials by synchronous online technologies: Challenges and pedagogical implications. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 8(1), 1–15.

Ng, C. S. L., & Cheung, W. S. (2007). Comparing face to face, tutor led discussion and online discussion in the classroom. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(4), 1–13.

Osman, G., & Herring, S. C. (2007). Interaction, facilitation, and deep learning in cross-cultural chat: A case study. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(2), 125–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.03.004.CrossRef

Oztok, M., Zingaro, D., Brett, C., & Hewitt, J. (2013). Exploring asynchronous and synchronous tool use in online courses. Computers & Education, 60(1), 87–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.007.CrossRef

Pullen, J. M. (2002). Synchronous internet distance education : Wave of the future or wishful thinking ? In Proceedings of the 2002 E-Technologies in Engineering Education Conference (pp. 174–179). Davos, Switzerland.

Qiyun, W., & Huay, L. W. (2007). Comparing asynchronous online discussions and face-to-face discussions in a classroom setting. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 272–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2006.00621.x.CrossRef

Rainger, P. (2003). A dyslexic perspective on e-content accessibility. Retrieved from https://www.texthelp.com/media/39360/USDyslexiaAndWebAccess.PDF.

Rello, L. (2015). Dyslexia and web accessibility. In Proceedings of the 12th web for all conference on - W4A ‘15 (pp. 1–4). New York: ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/2745555.2746655.

Robert, L. P., & Dennis, A. R. (2005). Paradox of richness: A cognitive model of media choice. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 48(1), 10–21. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2003.843292.CrossRef

Rotgans, J. I., & Schmidt, H. G. (2011). Cognitive engagement in the problem-based learning classroom. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 16(4), 465–479. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9272-9.CrossRef

Saade, G., & Huang, Q. (2009). Meaningful learning in discussion forums: Towards discourse analysis. Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 6, 87–99 Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=qLqIK3HomoEC&oi=fnd&pg=PA87&dq=Meaningful+Learning+in+Discussion+Forums+:+Towards+Discourse+Analysis&ots=PmdiWa_umU&sig=Zp2yP4otNGmI1Xp3-IxqAxnMll8.CrossRef

Saenz, B. (2002). Student perceptions of social presence and its value in an asynchronous web-based master’s instructional program. (Doctoral dissertation). Blacksburg: Virginia Polytechnic Institute State University.

Sallnäs, E. (2002). Collaboration in multi-modal virtual worlds: Comparing touch, text, voice and video. In R. Schroeder (Ed.), The Social Life of Avatars (Vol. 28, pp. 172–187). London: Springer London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0277-9_10.CrossRef

Salter, N. P., & Conneely, M. R. (2015). Structured and unstructured discussion forums as tools for student engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 46, 18–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.037.CrossRef

Satar, H., & Özdener, N. (2008). The effects of synchronous CMC on speaking proficiency and anxiety: Text versus voice chat. The Modern Language Journal, 92(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00789.x/full.

Schultz, R. A. (2003, June). The effectiveness of online synchronous discussion. In Proceedings of the informing science and information technology joint education conference, Finland (pp. 547–558).

Singer, E. (2005). The strategies adopted by Dutch children with dyslexia to maintain their self-esteem when teased at school. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 38(5), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194050380050401.CrossRef

Skinner, E. A., Wellborn, J. G., & Connell, J. P. (1990). What it takes to do well in school and whether I’ve got it: A process model of perceived control and children’s engagement and achievement in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.1.22.CrossRef

So, H.-J., & Brush, T. A. (2008). Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: Relationships and critical factors. Computers & Education, 51(1), 318–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.05.009.CrossRef

Spencer, D. H., & Hiltz, S. R. (2003). A field study of use of synchronous chat in online courses. In Proceedings of the 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2003. (pp. 1–10). IEEE. doi: https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2003.1173742.

Teng, T.-L., & Taveras, M. (2004). Combining live video and audio broadcasting, synchronous chat, and asynchronous open forum discussions in distance education. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 33(2), 121–129.CrossRef

Thomas, M. J. W. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(3), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.03800.x.CrossRef

Thong, J. Y. L., Hong, S. J., & Tam, K. Y. (2006). The effects of post-adoption beliefs on the expectation-confirmation model for information technology continuance. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 64(9), 799–810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2006.05.001.CrossRef

Thorpe, R. (1998). The use of personal video conferencing with special needs pupils from three schools serving rural areas : A case of successful adoption of new technology. Journal of Information Techology for Teacher Education, 7(3), 395–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759399800200044.CrossRef

Tu, C. H. (2001). How Chinese perceive social presence: An examination of interaction in online learning environment. Educational Media International, 38(1), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523980010021235.CrossRef

Tu, C. H., & Mcisaac, M. (2010). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. Communication, 16(3), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15389286AJDE1603.

Vandoorn, G., & Eklund, A. a. (2013). Face to Facebook : Social media and the learning and teaching potential of symmetrical, sychronous communication. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 10(1), 1–14.

Vonderwell, S. (2003). An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspectives of students in an online course: A case study. The Internet and Higher Education, 6(1), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00164-1.CrossRef

Vonderwell, S., Liang, X., & Alderman, K. (2007). Asynchronous discussions and assessment in online learning. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2007.10782485.CrossRef

Wallen, M., & Burke, S. (2014). Using asynchronous and synchronous audio communication platforms to enhance online learning and student connectedness. International Journal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning, 6(11), 1–10.

Woodfine, B. P., Nunes, M. B., & Wright, D. J. (2008). Text-based synchronous e-learning and dyslexia: Not necessarily the perfect match! Computers & Education, 50(3), 703–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.08.010.CrossRef

Yamada, M. (2009). The role of social presence in learner-centered communicative language learning using synchronous computer-mediated communication: Experimental study. Computers & Education, 52(4), 820–833. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.007.CrossRef

Yanguas, Í. (2010). Oral computer-mediated interaction between L2 learners: It’s about time! Language, Learning and Technology, 14(3), 72–93.

Young, A. (2008). Structuring asynchronous discussions to incorporate learning principles in an online class: One professor’s course analysis. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(2), 217–225 Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol4no2/young0608.pdf.

Zhu, E. (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: An analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34(6), 451–480. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-006-0004-0.CrossRef

Zumbach, J., Hillers, A., & Reimann, P. (2004). Supporting distributed problem-based learning: The use of feedback mechanisms in online learning. Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice. Retrieved from http://books.google.es/books?hl=es&lr=&id=MwKfrjcDI_0C&oi=fnd&pg=PA86&dq=Zumbach+2004&ots=58Dxagw-NQ&sig=GgRD2dKVMXhh18ibEWE-m965IEM%5Cnhttp://books.google.es/books?hl=es&lr=&id=MwKfrjcDI_0C&oi=fnd&pg=PA86&dq=Zumbach+2004&ots=58Dxagw-NQ&sig=GgRD2dKVMXhh18.

Title: Inclusive dyslexia-friendly collaborative online learning environment: Malaysia case study
Authors: Loren Pang
Chen Chwen Jen
Publication date: 19-09-2017
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Education and Information Technologies / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 1360-2357
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7608
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9652-8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Please log in to get access to your license.

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

Digital competencies among student populations in Kosovo: the impact of inclusion, socioeconomic status, ethnicity and type of residence

Educational electronic book activity supports language retention among children at risk for learning disabilities

Examining gender issues in perception and acceptance in web-based end-user development activities

Measuring ICT orientation: Scale development & validation

Teachers’ perceptions towards using Web 2.0 in language learning and teaching

Examining pre-service teachers’ opinions about digital story design

Premium Partner