Both systems were usable with no significant differences in technical difficulties, practicality, or reading of messages¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2006 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Students reported no significant differences between the tools in technical difficulties, practicality, or percentage of messages read, and both were frequently used. → van der Pol 2006

Evidence¶

van der Pol 2006¶

van der Pol, J., Admiraal, W., & Simons, P.R.J. (2006). The affordance of anchored discussion for the collaborative processing of academic texts. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1(3), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-006-9657-6

q2 · i? · causal · r2

Usage and questionnaire check (111 questionnaires) for confounds: task-related message shares (90% vs 92%), technical difficulties (means 1.34 vs 1.70), practicality (3.57 vs 3.34), and messages read (4.43 vs 4.43) showed no significant differences. Some technical issues with the anchored system were noted but did not seem to have hindered constructive use.

"even though most students had no experience with either of the systems and their participation was voluntary, both discussion systems were frequently used, resulting in 514 messages in the system for forum discussion and 782 in the system for anchored discussion"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• No significant differences between VR-based and conventional training in operational understanding, technical skills, or system usability
• System usability was rated low in both conditions, with no significant difference between them — related
• Anchored discussion strengthens referrals to content and prompts rereading of relevant passages — related