Students assume the mantle of moderating computer conferences: A case study

Abstract

The article presents an analysis of six semester-long computer conferences moderated by university students to discover how students perceived and used the conferences. The two purposes of the conferences were to provide a meaningful, authentic context for preservice teachers to learn about technology and collaborative learning and to provide an opportunity for graduate students to learn to moderate computer conferences in an authentic context. A qualitative analysis of the conference data yielded the following findings: 1) student moderator roles reflect the influence of both instruction and personal communication styles, and 2) participants adopted behaviors that fostered communication in a text-based environment and led to positive attitudes about computer conferencing. We conclude by identifying the critical tasks of moderators and participants in student-moderated computer conferences.

Using Peer Teams to Lead Online Discussions

“…Our students added that the peer teams were more responsive and more interesting. Our results are also consistent with those of Murphy et al (1996) who found that students gained a better understanding of how to lead online discussion. The results are somewhat consistent with those reported by Harrington and Hathaway (1998) who questioned the value of student-led online discussions that produced little challenging or critical discussion among the students.…”

“…The goals of the discussion were to identify and reflect on taken-for-grantedassumptions. Harrington and Hathaway's results were not as positive as Tagg's (1994) or Murphy et al's (1996). They found that unsupported opinions dominated the discussion, the homogeneity of group members prevented the production of the multiple perspectives, and taken-for-granted-assumptions were rarely questioned.…”

“…We compare the performance of peer teams to the performance of the instructor on their ability to satisfy the three teaching presence roles of instructional design and organisation; discourse facilitation; and direct instruction. The results will shed light on the contradictory results presented in the literature (Tagg, 1994;Murphy et al, 1996; Harrington and Hathaway, 1998) and further our understanding of how computer conferencing can be used in a manner that proves satisfying and valuable to both students and instructors. …”

“…He found that this improved the structure and coherence of the discussions, increased participation, and resulted in a much higher proportion of students reporting that the conference helped them understand the content. Murphy et al (1996) implemented a similar system in one of their computer conferences. The context was an undergraduate education course composed of students who had no previous experience with computer conferencing.…”

“…Beach (1974) provides a description of the environment in a peer-led discussion that is opposite to Kremer and McGuiness' (1988) description of the instructor led discussion: "Student-led discussions provide a free and relaxed atmosphere for discussion, which makes students feel uninhibited in asking questions and challenging the statements of others" (p. 192). This type of environment supports the beneficial processes associated with discussion and leads to positive evaluations from the students (Bluxom et al, Tagg, 1994;Kremer and McGuinness;Murphy et al, 1996). A final benefit is the increased depth of understanding that comes from leading the discussion.…”