Difference between revisions of "Garcia1998a"
(Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Angela Cora Garcia; Jennifer B. Jacobs |Title=The interactional organization of computer mediated communication in the college classroom...") |
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|Author(s)=Angela Cora Garcia; Jennifer B. Jacobs | |Author(s)=Angela Cora Garcia; Jennifer B. Jacobs | ||
|Title=The interactional organization of computer mediated communication in the college classroom | |Title=The interactional organization of computer mediated communication in the college classroom | ||
| − | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Ethnomethodology; Computer-mediated communication; Classroom; | + | |Tag(s)=EMCA; Conversation Analysis; Ethnomethodology; Computer-mediated communication; Classroom; Education; |
|Key=Garcia1998a | |Key=Garcia1998a | ||
|Year=1998 | |Year=1998 | ||
| + | |Language=English | ||
|Journal=Qualitative Sociology | |Journal=Qualitative Sociology | ||
|Volume=21 | |Volume=21 | ||
| Line 11: | Line 12: | ||
|Pages=299-317 | |Pages=299-317 | ||
|URL=http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1022146620473#page-1 | |URL=http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1022146620473#page-1 | ||
| + | |Abstract=This paper reports the results of a pilot study of computer-mediated classroom | ||
| + | discussions using a "quasi-synchronous" program called Aspects. The data | ||
| + | for this study are a discussion in a college classroom involving three students. | ||
| + | Each students' computer monitor was videotaped, and the information on all | ||
| + | three screens was collated onto a single transcript. This single case analysis | ||
| + | uses ethnomethodological conversation analysis to discover how participants | ||
| + | coordinate their actions in this new type of speech exchange system. In | ||
| + | quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communication participants do not | ||
| + | have access to each other's messages until they are completed and sent to a | ||
| + | group posting board. Thus, participants cannot rely on the ordinary means of | ||
| + | coordinating turn exchange and other conversational activities (e.g., monitoring | ||
| + | speakers' utterances-in-progress). We found that students' attempts to import | ||
| + | conventional procedures from oral conversation resulted in misunderstandings | ||
| + | and confusion. Specifically, we found that students experienced what we called | ||
| + | phantom responsiveness, phantom adjacency pairs, virtual simultaneity, and | ||
| + | the misinterpretation of silence. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 04:52, 31 January 2018
| Garcia1998a | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Garcia1998a |
| Author(s) | Angela Cora Garcia, Jennifer B. Jacobs |
| Title | The interactional organization of computer mediated communication in the college classroom |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Conversation Analysis, Ethnomethodology, Computer-mediated communication, Classroom, Education |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1998 |
| Language | English |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Qualitative Sociology |
| Volume | 21 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 299-317 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
This paper reports the results of a pilot study of computer-mediated classroom discussions using a "quasi-synchronous" program called Aspects. The data for this study are a discussion in a college classroom involving three students. Each students' computer monitor was videotaped, and the information on all three screens was collated onto a single transcript. This single case analysis uses ethnomethodological conversation analysis to discover how participants coordinate their actions in this new type of speech exchange system. In quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communication participants do not have access to each other's messages until they are completed and sent to a group posting board. Thus, participants cannot rely on the ordinary means of coordinating turn exchange and other conversational activities (e.g., monitoring speakers' utterances-in-progress). We found that students' attempts to import conventional procedures from oral conversation resulted in misunderstandings and confusion. Specifically, we found that students experienced what we called phantom responsiveness, phantom adjacency pairs, virtual simultaneity, and the misinterpretation of silence.
Notes
