This case study describes the design and implementation of a course that uses technology-mediated distributed small group discussions between two universities, one in the United States and the other in Hungary, as the primary teaching method in a graduate-level management course. Furthermore, it describes how students’learning outcomes in the learning environment were measured using an integrative complexity measure. To create a learner-centered active learning environment, various Internetbased communication tools were used to connect students in the two locations. The authors found that despite various hindrances due to technical breakdowns and geographic separations, students were able to produce complex and comprehensive arguments after three sessions. Several implications for future distance learning and the use of information technology in classrooms are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alavi, M.
(1994).Computer-mediated collaborative learning: An empirical evaluation. MIS Quarterly, 18(2), 159-174.
2.
Alavi, M.
, Wheeler, B. C., & Valacich, J. S. (1995).Using IT to reengineer business education: An exploratory investigation of collaborative telelearning. MIS Quarterly, 19(3), 293-312.
3.
Alavi, M.
, Yoo, Y., & Vogel, D. G. (1997).Using information technology to add value to management education. Academy of Management Journal, 40(6), 1310-1333.
4.
Baker-Brown, G.
, Ballard, E. J., Bluck, S., De Varies, B., Suedfeld, P., & Tetlock, P. E. (1992). The conceptual/integrative complexity scoring manual. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content (pp. 401-418). New York: Cambridge University Press.
5.
Bernstein, M.
(1998).The virtual classroom: A promising solution for teaching technology. HR Magazine, 43(6), 30-33.
6.
Bolster, A. S.
(1983). Toward a more effective model of research on teaching. Harvard Education Review, pp. 294-308.
7.
Carlson, J. R.
, & Zmud, R. W. (1999).Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of media richness perceptions. Academy of Management Journal, 42(2), 153-170.
8.
Chidambaram, L.
(1996).Relational development in computer-supported groups. MIS Quarterly, 20(2), 143-165.
9.
Christensen, C. R.
, Garvin, D. A., & Sweet, A. (1991). Education for judgement: The artistry of discussion leadership. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
10.
Green, S. G.
, & Taber, T. D. (1980).The effects of three social decision schemes on decision group process. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Performance, 25, 97-106.
11.
Gruenfeld, D. H.
, & Hollsingshead, A. B. (1993).Sociocognition in work groups: The evolution of group integrative complexity and its relation to task performance. Small Group Research, 24(3), 383-405.
12.
Henri, F.
(1991). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing. New York: Springer-Verlag.
13.
Hiltz, S. R.
(1997).Impacts of college-level courses via asynchronous learning networks: Some preliminary results. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 1(2), 1-19.
14.
Hiltz, S. R.
, & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation: Human communication via computer. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
15.
Ives, B.
, & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1996).Will the Internet revolutionize business education and research?Sloan Management Review, 37(3), 33-41.
16.
Johnson, D. W.
, & Johnson, R. T. (1975). Learning together and alone: Cooperation, competition, and individualization. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
17.
Johnson, D. W.
, Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. Washington, DC: The George Washington University, Clearing House on Higher Education.
18.
Leidner, D.
, & Fuller, M. (1997).Improving student learning of conceptual information: GSS supported collaborative learning vs. individual constructive learning. Decision Support Systems, 20(2), 149-163.
19.
Leidner, D. E.
, & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1993).The information age confronts education: Case studies on electronic classrooms. Information Systems Research, 4(1), 24-54.
20.
Leidner, D. E.
, & Jarvenpaa, S. L. (1995).The use of information technology to enhance management school education. A theoretical view. MIS Quarterly, 19(3), 265-291.
21.
Mason, R.
(1991). Evaluation methodologies for computer conferencing applications. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing (pp. 105-116). New York: Springer-Verlag.
22.
Nolan, R. L.
, & Croson, D. C. (1995). Creative destruction: A six-stage process for transforming the organization. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
23.
Nunamaker, J. F.
, Dennis, A. R., Valacich, J. S., Vogel, D. R., & George, J. F. (1991).Electronic meeting systems to support group work. Communications of the ACM, 34(7), 40-61.
24.
Schank, R.
(1997). Virtual learning—A revolutionary approach to building a highly skilled workforce. New York: McGraw-Hill.
25.
Short, J.
, Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: Wiley.
26.
Suedfeld, P.
, Tetlock, P. E., & Streufert, S. (1992). Conceptual/integrative complexity. In C. P. Smith (Ed.), Motivation and personality: Handbook of thematic content (pp. 393-400). New York: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Towl, A.
(1969). To study administration by cases. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
28.
Walther, J. B.
(1995).Relational aspects of computer-mediated communication: Experimental observations over time. Organization Science, 6(2), 186-203.
