How to Structure Online Discussions for Meaningful Discourse


Patricia K. Gilbert
Harvard University
13 Appian Way
Cambridge, MA 02138
E-mail: Patty_Gilbert@harvard.edu


Nada Dabbagh
George Mason University
4400 University Drive, MS 5D6
Fairfax, VA 22030-4444
E-mail: ndabbagh@gmu.edu

This article is currently under review for publication in the British Journal of Educational Technology


 
Overview of Problem

In a 2000 National Education Association (NEA) survey, 62% of distance learning faculty reported using asynchronous communication tools in their courses to support student-teacher interactions and class discussions (NEA, 2000). Despite a growing body of research on the instructional benefits of asynchronous communication (Bodzin & Park, 2000; Jonassen, Davidson, Collins, Campbell, & Bannan-Haag,1995; Henri, 1992; Kaye, 1992), there is little research about the impact of the protocols and criteria that guide online discussions on meaningful discourse. Meaningful discourse is defined in this study as the ability of learners to demonstrate critical thinking skills by (1) making inferences, (2) relating course content to prior knowledge and experience, and (3) interpreting content through the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of others' understandings. Meaningful discourse is one of the main goals of constructivist learning because it supports the principles of articulation, reflection, and internal and social negotiation. Initial studies (Vrasidas & McIsaac, 1999; Swan, Shea, Fredericksen; Pickett & Pelz, 2000) indicate that the protocol or "structure" of asynchronous online discussions has a significant impact on the quality of the discussion. Yet, the literature does not discuss what level and type of structure is most effective in promoting meaningful discourse. Therefore, a major challenge facing the instructor in distance learning settings is how to structure online discussions in order to engage students in meaningful discourse.

Purpose of Study

The purpose of this study was to test the effectiveness of online discussion protocols on meaningful learning. More specifically, the study investigated whether the degree and type of structure imposed on participants in online discussions impacted the cognitive quality of postings. The main research question addressed in this study was: How does the structuredness of online discussion protocols influence meaningful discourse in asynchronous online discussions? More specifically, how does the structuredness of online discussion protocols influence the ability of students to (1) make inferences, (2) relate new knowledge to prior knowledge and experience, and (3) interpret content through the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of others' understandings? Structuredness of online discussion protocols is defined in this study as the combination of factors that contribute to participating in and evaluating online discussions. These factors include the nature of online discussion activity (e.g., nature of topic discussed, number of topics discussed, number of participants, length of discussion, degree of instructor participation, degree and nature of facilitation, etc.), grade weight, posting protocols, and evaluation rubrics.

Method

In order to study the impact of protocol structuredness on meaningful discourse, transcripts of twelve online discussions involving a total of 87 participants, from four sections of a graduate course entitled "Instructional Technology Foundations and Learning Theory" were analyzed across four semesters. Since there were multiple sections of the course under investigation, the research design was be a multiple- case study design where the unit of analysis is a single course (Yin, 1994). Therefore, there were two layers of data analysis, course-by-course analysis and cross-course analysis. Online protocols and evaluation rubrics guiding these discussions ranged from minimal structure and loosely defined protocols in the first semester to well defined and comprehensive protocols and evaluation criteria in the fourth semester.

A Model to Structure Asynchronous Online Discussion Forums

The overarching research question for this study was how does the structuredness of online discussion protocols influence meaningful discourse in asynchronous online discussions. The data revealed that some elements of structure had a significant impact on meaningful discourse. Particularly, guidelines that assist the facilitation and evaluation of online discussions increased the cognitive level of student postings promoting a deeper understanding of course content. Therefore, the results of this study informed the development of the following model that consists of the most significant elements of online discussion structure that would assist students to discuss and think critically about a topic. The model represented in Figure 1 will inform instructors and facilitators of online discussions on how to structure online discussions in order to promote a deeper understanding of course materials by engaging learners in meaningful discourse.

Figure 1. A Model to Structure Asynchronous Online Discussion Forums

Figure 1 highlights three elements of structure that proved to be the most influential on meaningful discourse in the online discussion forums examined in this study; 1) facilitator guidelines; 2) evaluation rubrics; 3) content protocol items. The first influential element of structure, facilitator guidelines, was shown to increase the number and quality of student facilitator postings in the online discussion forums. In addition, the online discussion threads increased in multiple levels in the sections of the course that were provided additional facilitator guidelines. This allowed students to think and discuss the course material in greater detail (Tiene, 2000).
The second influential structure element on meaningful discourse is evaluation rubrics. Examples of evaluation rubric items include guidelines regarding the timeliness of student postings, the distribution of online discussion postings and grade weight of the postings. The evaluation rubric analyzed in this course not only indicated how the instructor would assess the quality of the student postings, but mandated that the highest grade could only be achieved if students posted 5-6 times throughout the six day discussion period. As a result the discussion threads reached deeper levels of interaction and were balanced throughout the discussion period.
The third influential structure element is online discussion protocols that guide the content of the student postings. Samples of excellent posting guidelines and tips to help students compose online discussion postings are examples of these types of content protocol items. In addition, these protocol items should deal with the quality of the posting and not limit the word length of the students' thought processes. The protocols introduced to the students in this study combined both content and message length guidelines. As a result, the data revealed a decrease in high cognitive quality postings in the two semesters in which students were introduced the online discussion protocols. An analysis of a sample of forums from all four semesters indicated that students were inhibited by a two paragraph posting guideline that required the students to cite the course reading. Therefore these postings were mostly of a reading citation, which demonstrate a low level of the student's comprehension of the material. Therefore, instituting online discussion content protocol items that stress to the students the need to develop their thought process beyond citing the course readings, could result in a more meaningful asynchronous online discussion.

Recommendations for Further Research

The use of computer mediated communication, and in particular, asynchronous online discussion forums in education, is a recent phenomenon that requires a substantial amount of future research. This multiple case study examined a narrow situation in which the results cannot be widely generalized. Yet, from these results emerged a number of suggestions to instructors on how to structureasynchronous online discussion forums in educational settings. However, a number of secondary questions emerged from this study that were addressed by the data analysis. These questions include:

Therefore the recommendations for further research suggest the collection of additional information beyond online discussion transcripts and course materials. Examples include the collection of student background such as their knowledge and experience both in the content area and the technology tools. This could involve the distribution of a survey with open-ended questions in which participants can describe in detail their experiences with online discussion forum. A second type of recommended data collection would be the real time observation and participation in the online discussion forums. The researcher can then conduct follow up interviews with students and facilitators about their experiences, and recommendations to improve the online discussion dialogue. Lastly, there needs to be a closer examination of the students' themselves. This examination would give a picture of the type each student's learning style, demographic make up and their access and familiarity with asynchronous online communications technologies.
Finally, this study analyzed a course with complex and interpretive subject matter: learning theories. Because there are multiple interpretations of learning theories, students were able to discuss this subject matter in great detail. Therefore, future researchers of asynchronous communication technologies should select subject matter that would be most appropriately applied to the online discussion format.
In conclusion, the adoption of asynchronous communication technologies will continue to grow in educational environments. This study is significant because it provides an online discussion model in which instructors can integrate these new technologies in their teaching that is based on sound pedagogy. The results of this study will assist in creating an alternative instructional paradigm that will help guide teachers and learners into the new digital communication landscape.

References

Bodzin, A.M., & Park, J.C. (2000). Dialogue Patterns of Preservice Science Teachers Using Asynchronous Computer-Mediated Communications on the World Wide Web. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19(2), 161-194.

Henri, F. (1992). Computer Conferencing and Content Analysis. In A.R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative Learning Through Computer Conferencing: The Najaden Papers (pp. 117-136). New York: Springer.

Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, A., Campbell, J., & Bannan-Haag, B. (1995). Constructivism and Computer-Mediated Communication in Distance Education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-26.

Kaye, A. (1992). Learning Together Apart. In A.R. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative Learning Through Computer Conferencing: The Najaden Papers (pp. 1-24). New York: Springer.

National Education Association. (2000). A Survey of Traditional and Distance Learning Higher Education Members (NEA Publication No. FGK56700). Washington DC: National Education Association.

Swan, K., Shea, P., Fredericksen, E.E., Pickett, A.M. & Pelz, W.E. (2000). Course Design Factors Influencing the Success of Online Learning. Proceedings of the WebNet 2000 World Conference on the WWW and Internet, USA, 513-518

Tiene, D. (2000). Online Discussions: A Survey of Advantages and Disadvantages Compared to Face-to-Face Discussions. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9(4), 371-384.

Vrasidas, C. & McIsaac, M.S. (1999). Factors Influencing Interaction in an Online Course. American Journal of Distance Education, 13(3), 22-36.

Yin, R. (1994). Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2nd. Ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.