Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorVlachopoulos, Panos
dc.contributor.authorCowan, John
dc.date.accessioned10/17/2013 15:56
dc.date.available10/17/2013 15:56
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifier.issn1741-2625
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12799/2021
dc.descriptionActive Learning in Higher Education, 11(3), pp. 213–224es_ES
dc.description.abstractMuch has been published in recent years about the desirable nature of facilitated interactions in online discussions for educational purposes. However, little has been reported about the roles that tutors actually adopt in real-life learning contexts, how these range between ‘tutoring, ‘managing’ and ‘facilitating’, and what the distinctions between these three roles may be. In this article choices of priorities in e-moderation, which were made in three naturalistic (real-life) case studies by three higher education practitioners, are identified and discussed. These contrasting approaches were captured and analysed using grounded theory principles. The article also discusses the occasions when the facilitation was less effective than might have been desired. It finally summarizes the potential of various approaches within e-moderation – and some of the attendant risks. The finding is that principles and practices developed for face-to-face support of student-directed learning were found equally applicable in e-moderated online group work, despite several significant differences between the two types of setting.es_ES
dc.language.isoenes_ES
dc.publisherSAGEes_ES
dc.subjectAprendizaje en líneaes_ES
dc.subjectEducación superiores_ES
dc.subjectEducación a distanciaes_ES
dc.subjectTeoría de la educaciónes_ES
dc.titleChoices of approaches in e-moderation: Conclusions from a grounded theory studyes_ES
dc.typeArticlees_ES


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record