Logistical flexibility of the asynchronous and quasi-synchronous modalities supported behavioral engagement, while the synchronous modality's scheduling demands disrupted participation¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Scheduling an hour-long synchronous window caused session swaps and absences, producing one lopsided team of one affirmative versus five negative and preventing two students from participating as intended. → Duncan Culbreth · Florence Martin 2025

Evidence¶

Duncan Culbreth · Florence Martin 2025¶

Duncan Culbreth · Florence Martin. (2025). Exploring the role of synchrony in asynchronous, synchronous, and quasi-synchronous online learner engagement. Education Tech Research Dev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-025-10504-y

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Findings from the three-week debate study of 19 students; the article states these changes "fundamentally altered behavioral data" and that Discord was the only modality to receive positive comments about flexibility.

"As the synchronous modality was less logistically flexible, some students swapped or missed sessions resulting in one session with a lopsided team structure of one affirmative versus five negative."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Behaviorally, the asynchronous and quasi-synchronous debates were more alike each other than either was to the synchronous debate — related
• The time students had to prepare responses before interacting was connected with all three dimensions of online learner engagement across asynchronous, synchronous, and quasi-synchronous debates — a broader claim this one bears on
• Several students voluntarily used Zoom's recording and transcription features asynchronously after the live debate to support cognitive engagement — related
• Affectively, the quasi-synchronous Discord modality showed the most positive and least negative sentiment profile of the three modalities — related