Analyzing Responses, Moves, and Roles in Online Discussions

Abstract

There is much debate regarding the value and utility of grading discussions to ensure and assess full participation in the online classroom. Proponents of threaded discussions view it as an integral part of the learning process, where students seek knowledge and express understanding. Consequently, they deem it essential to assess participation. On the other hand, opponents of assessing or grading participation assert that an exceedingly active discussion can distract students from other equally or more important coursework, not to mention the impracticality of instructors responding to the vast number of submissions.This article examines a variety of grading rubrics used to promote critical thinking about course content and assess the quality of participation and contributions of online threaded discussions. We present the results of a study conducted at a historically Black institution that used Kneser's Exchange Structure Analysis (ESA) to analyze dialogue in order to understand student exchanges, moves, and roles as well as the influence of gender in online discussions during 3 consecutive summer sessions.

Analysis of an Asynchronous Online Discussion as a Supportive Model for Peer Collaboration and Reflection in Teacher Education

“…The students who were included in an online study environment, in which the teacher led a focused critical discussion, significantly progressed in their in-depth study approach. Moreover, Wishart and Guy (2009) confirm that the moderator presents an important model for the students' critical behaviour development. With their probing questions of statements of confirmation, they set an example for student exchange in the online discussion.…”

“…Grading of the student's frequency and level of contributions to the discussion, should also be considered. Wishart and Guy (2009) propose an appropriate model that could be followed in evaluating student's participation in the online discussion. The authors suggest the moderator should present evaluation criteria prior to opening the discussion, clearly stating the value of each post -e.g.…”

Open the Windows of Communication: Promoting Interpersonal and Group Interactions Using Blogs in Higher Education

“…Interactivity is defined as "a process-related variable concerning responsiveness" (Rafaeli & Ariel, 2007, p. 84). Research indicates that "with effective e-learning technologies we can create active, engaged, collaborative, and inquiry-based learning opportunities" (Wishart & Guy, 2009, Material published as part of this publication, either on-line or in print, is copyrighted by the Informing Science Institute. Permission to make digital or paper copy of part or all of these works for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage AND that copies 1) bear this notice in full and 2) give the full citation on the first page.…”

A CSCL Approach to Blended Learning in the Integration of Technology in Teaching

“…Students not only learn by doing, but also by seeing how other students learn and do. This extends a level of 'meaningful discourse' (Wishart & Guy, 2009) to the learning activity, where knowledge is constructed from an integration of reflection, prior experience, and existing knowledge (Ellis & Hafner, 2008). Ma (2009) extends this further through work by Engeström (1996) to the creation of 'communities of learning' with the augmentation of CSCL into the teaching curriculum.…”