|
| Teaching and Learning Forum 2002 [ Proceedings Contents ] |
How do you encourage or facilitate online participation? What constitutes effective participation? This paper firstly examines selected theories about encouraging effective online participation and secondly, meta-surveys a range of qualitative and quantitative methods for assessing the effectiveness of students' online participation. The author aims to make informed recommendations on strategies to encourage online participation and relevant criteria for assessing participation in online discussions, based on an extensive literature review. Within the scope of this paper, online participation will be analysed in the context of discussions within online learning environments only.
In analysing how students approach learning, Laurillard (1993) identified the "Conversational framework" - where learning is mediated by the educator who persuades students to make sense of various phenomena using the accepted norms of their discipline (Laurillard as cited in Entwistle, 1995). For many educators, "courses must feature ongoing and substantive interaction" (Mabrito, 2000), articulating the ideas of Bandura, Vygotsky, Piaget, Dewey and Pask. Vygotsky (1978) states that social interaction plays a fundamental role in the development of cognition. Collaborative learning enables students to analyse, synthesise and evaluate ideas cooperatively. Vygotsky's theory is complementary to Bandura's (1971) social learning, and "situated learning" theory - where learning is an act of participation within communities of practice (Lave and Wenger, 1991). Piaget (1970) maintains that cognitive structures change through assimilation and accommodation. There are connections between the theories of Piaget and Bruner (1966), where educator and learner are engaged in active dialogue and information is arranged in a spiral manner so that the learner continually builds upon their existing knowledge. The fundamental idea of Pask's "conversation theory" (1975) is that learning occurs through conversations which serve to clarify and formulate understanding.
Ultimately, proponents view discussion as integral to developing understanding and facilitating good learning outcomes. Decisions about incorporating online discussions into curricula should not made lightly (Hopper and Harmon, 2000). Bunker and Ellis (2001) outline seven reasons (relating to the theories discussed) for making online discussions part of a learning program. Entwistle (1995) cautions that success depends on the context and the individuals concerned, emphasising the need to first identify teaching goals, students' prior knowledge and their intellectual stage of development, to enable the selection of appropriate teaching methods.
Of the fifteen research articles on analysing participation surveyed, eight utilise Bloom's Taxonomy (1956) to interpret online discussions. Participation is determined by reading and categorising messages using six objectives - knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis and evaluation (Gearhard, 1999). Knowledge requires basic recall of facts, procedures or rules. Comprehension is demonstrated through the interpretation of information. Application requires information to be used in a different context to that where it was learnt. Analysis is demonstrated through the discrimination of information. Synthesis requires combining information to find solutions to unfamiliar problems and evaluation involves the formulation of judgements about theories and methods for a given purpose. Levenburg and Major (2000) found a direct and positive relationship between the amount of time students spent in online discussions and their achievement of course objectives because they utilised higher level cognitive skills - analysis, synthesis and evaluation. This assumes that learners read and interpret postings, as well as formulate and articulate their own opinions. Without focus, high levels of participation creates confusion and information overload for learners (Muirhead, 2000). Furthermore "participation inequality" (Nielsen, 1997) diminishes the intellectual rigour of the discussions (Klemm and Snell, 1996) and the learning experience for students (Jones et al, 2000).
Eleven of the fifteen research articles use content analysis to study online discussions. McKenzie and Murphy (2000) and McLoughlin and Luca (1999) utilise Henri's content analysis model, which is based on the quality of messages and focuses on participation levels within the group. Discussions are analysed according to four educational dimensions - interactive, social, cognitive and meta-cognitive - as well as the frequency, structure and type of online participation. The content analysis methods in Jones et alia (2000), Lindeman (2001), Nelson (1998), Northcote and Kendle (2000) and Owen (2000), have similarities to both Henri's and Bloom's models. All approaches involve classifying comments from discussion transcripts. Content analysis can present implementation problems, McLoughlin and Luca (1999) found Henri's model unsuitable to constructivist student centred discussions - a view supported by McKenzie and Murphy (2000). Also, content analysis is subjective and interpretations may not be easily justified when challenged, limiting the validity of evaluation. McKenzie and Murphy (2000) found difficulties in assessing levels of critical thinking and meta-cognition because of Henri's vague description of their attributes. Frequency and duration of participation can be obtained using online learning software packages (Landon, 2000), and when used with content analysis - provides a reasonably accurate interpretation of participation.
Another technique is to negotiate online guidelines with students' (Dereshiwsky, 2001). Explaining the expected level of participation, acceptable mode of communication and providing constructive feedback are some of the strategies to facilitate online participation (Muirhead, 2000). Other approaches include logic structures or concept maps, as a stimulus for discussion (Klemm and Snell, 1996) and social or group contracts (Severn, 1998). Concept maps can help students to define their educational goals, as well as stimulating group discussions. Group contracts enable students and educators to develop a formal, written agreement about learning objectives, assessment procedures and measures, and methods of conflict resolution (Murphy et alia, 2000).
Levenburg and Major (2000) identify two reasons for assessing participation - to recognise students' workload and time commitment, and to encourage students to participate. Maznevski (1996) finds participation assessment useful - behavioural indicators can be evaluated more objectively than personality traits, such as enthusiasm, and can be assessed at frequent intervals, unlike final output. Schwartz and White, as cited in Dereshiwsky (2001) recommend that assessment be directed towards the informational needs of students and avoid focusing on individual personalities. Nelson (1998), Maznevski (1996) and Lindeman (2001) use behavioural indicators as evaluation criteria, in fact, of the fourteen articles on assessing online participation surveyed, all recommend the use of evaluation criteria. The benefits include providing guidelines for learning outcomes and quality of work - thus aligning learners and educators towards similar goals (Jones et alia, 2001). Dennen (2000) found that evaluation criteria contributed to students' extrinsic motivation and clarified tasks and deadlines, improving their performance and learning outcomes. However, Barrie et alia (1999) emphasise the need for educators to have a shared understanding - inconsistent and multiple interpretations of evaluation criteria creates difficulty in providing consistent advice to students about using criteria to direct their learning.
Some educators award grades for participation (Muirhead, 2000; Mabrito, 2000), based on predetermined standards, rather than in comparison to the performance of other students (Morgan, 2000; Nelson, 1998). Barnett and Maznevski (1996) use interim feedback, to provide students with options on improving participation, including increasing the intellectual depth of comments through critical analysis, and responding to peers' comments.
Both Davis (1999) and Lacoss and Chylack (1998) state that awarding grades for participation does not facilitate good learning outcomes. Students do not perceive "forced participation rules" to be of value, because students are "just talking for credit" (Lacoss and Chylack, 1998). Students are motivated to participate in discussions where free conversation is encouraged, as opposed to "passive answers" to educator directed questions - a concern shared by Davis (1999). Moreover, participation grades disadvantage introverted students (Davis, 1999). However, neither researcher paper present compelling empirical evidence to support their claims - Davis's (1999) contentions are reported without supporting research, and Lacoss and Chylack's study (1998) consisted of only nine students and it is unclear how they were selected. Further research into the effects of assessment on participation levels could help identify factors affecting students' motivation to participate in discussions.
The decision to grade participation will depend on the aims of the online discussions (Gosper, undated). Stecher et alia (1997) state that those who choose to participate, are often more engaged in the learning experience. Voluntary participation indicates a commitment to the task and often signals a high motivation to do well. On the other hand, Hallett and Cummings (as cited in Muirhead, 2000) found that students did not participate in online discussions beyond the assessed tasks. Also, compulsory participation can provide useful results for comparison - as a performance and accountability measure within the learning program (Stecher et alia, 1997).
Of the material on online discussion reviewed, all authors subscribe to the idea structuring assists students in maximising learning outcomes. The level of structuring depends on the appropriate discourse within a discipline. The question of whether online participation assessment stimulates participation is yet to be answered with certainty. I concur with Entwistle (1995) that planning prior to course commencement is crucial to ensure pedagogical and technical goals are met. Further experiments in the use of group learning contracts and concept maps to guide students will allow for more accurate comparisons between structuring techniques.
Usage statistics and content analysis are the only assessment procedures proposed in the material surveyed. McKenzie and Murphy's study (2000) involved thirty-eight participants, the intricacy of content analysis seems unfeasible for larger classes. Content analysis presents a considerable increase in workload for educators. Peer assessed content analysis would simply shift this workload to students, although Zariski (1996) suggests that peer assessment immerses students in "the standards by which relevant and valuable contributions to disciplinary knowledge are identified". I propose that personal reflection tasks requiring students to evaluate their participation against the aims of the online discussion, perform similar functions to content analysis. Assessing this would be less burdensome for educators and has the added benefit of promoting students' deeper learning through synthesis and reflection.
Barrie, S. et al. (1999). Qualitatively different conceptions of criteria used to assess student learning. [viewed 7 Jul 2001] http://www.aare.edu.au/99pap/bre99209.htm
Barnett, M. A. (Date unavailable). Encouraging students' participation in discussions. [viewed 7 Jul 2001 at http://minerva.acc.virginia.edu:80/~trc/Encourage.html] [verified 17 Dec 2001 at http://trc.virginia.edu/tc/1999/Encouraging.htm]
Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I, Cognitive domain. New York: Longman
Brown, A. (1997). Designing for learning: What are the essential features of an effective online course? Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 13 (2), 115-126. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet13/brown.html
Bruner, J. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Bunker, A. and Ellis, R. (2001). Using bulletin boards for learning: What do staff and students need to know in order to use boards effectively? In A. Herrmann and M. M. Kulski (Eds), Expanding Horizons in Teaching and Learning. Proceedings of the 10th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 7-9 February 2001. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2001/bunker.html
Comparison of online course delivery software products (1999). [viewed 24 Sep 2001] http://www.marshall.edu/it/cit/webct/compare/index.htm
Davies, J. (1999). Early history of research on group processes. [viewed 24 Sep 2001] http://www.ualberta.ca/~jedavies/edse502/theory-history.htm
Davis, B. G. (1999). Encouraging student participation in discussion. [viewed 21 Aug 2001] http://www.uga.berkeley.edu/sled/bgd/participation.html
Dennen, V. P. (2000). Task structuring for online problem based learning: A case study. Educational Technology & Society, 3(3). [viewed 16 Jun 2001] http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2000/d08.html
Dereshiwsky, M. I. (2001). 'A' is for assessment: Identifying online assessment practices and perceptions. Education at a Distance, 15(1). [viewed 7 Jul 2001] http://www.usdla.org/ED_magazine/illuminactive/JAN01_Issue/article02.html
Entwistle, N. (1995). The use of research on student learning in quality assessment. [viewed 21 Aug 2001] http://www.lgu.ac.uk/deliberations/ocsd-pubs/islass-entwistle.html
Gearhard, (1999). Assessment in online course: A case study. [viewed 7 Jul 2001] http://homepages.dsu.edu/gearhard/course_assessment.htm
Gosper, M. (undated). Assessment of online participation: Summary of the issues raised by the CFLTOM group. [viewed 4 Oct 2001] http://online.mq.edu.au/pub/CFLTOM/assess.html
Hopper, K. and Harmon, S. (2000). A multiple-case study of exemplary Internet courses. Education at a Distance. [viewed 20 Apr 2001] http://www.usdla.org/ED_magazine/illuminactive/SEP00_Issue/PDF/EdMagazine_SEP00.pdf
Jones, A. et al. (2000). Conferencing in communities of learners: Examples from social history and science communication. Educational Technology & Society, 3(3). [viewed 16 Jun 2001] http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2000/c02.html
Kearsley, G. (2001). Explorations in learning and instruction: The theory into practice database. [viewed 21 Aug 2001] http://tip.psychology.org/index.html
Klemm, W. R. and Snell, J. R. (1996). Enriching computer-mediated group learning by coupling constructivism with collaborative learning. Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 1(2). [verified 21 Aug 2001] http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs/old/vol1no2/article1.htm
Lacoss, J. and Chylack, J. (1998). What makes a discussion section productive? [viewed 7 Jul 2001 at http://minerva.acc.Virginia.EDU:80/~trc/discprod.htm] [verified 17 Dec 2001 at http://trc.virginia.edu/tc/1998/Discussion.htm]
Landon, B. (2000). Online educational delivery applications: A web tool for comparative analysis. [viewed 24 Sep 2001] http://www.c2t2.ca/landonline/compare2.html [revised URL 19 Oct 2002] http://www.edutools.info/
Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking university teaching. London: Routledge.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Levenburg, N. and Major, H. (2000). Motivating the online learner: The effect of frequency of online postings and time spent online on achievement of learning goals and objectives. [viewed 16 Sep 2001] http://as1.ipfw.edu/2000tohe/papers/Levenburg/levenburg.htm
Lindeman, M. (2001). Student assessment in online courses: discussion rubric. [viewed 24 Sep 2001] http://illinois.online.uillinois.edu/online/assessment/discussionRubric.html
Mabrito, M. (2000). Facilitating and evaluating student interaction in an online business writing course. [viewed 24 Sep 2001] http://as1.ipfw.edu/2000tohe/papers/mabrito.htm
Maznevski, M. (1996). Grading class participation. [viewed 7 Jul 2001 at http://www.virginia.edu/~trc/tcgpart.htm] [verified 17 Dec 2001 at http://trc.virginia.edu/tc/1996/Grading.htm]
McLoughlin, C. and Luca, J. (1999). Lonely outpourings or reasoned dialogue? An analysis of text-based conferencing as a tool to support learning. Proceedings ASCILITE '99. [viewed 2 Aug 2001] http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/mcloughlinluca.pdf
McKenzie, W. and Murphy, D. (2000). "I hope this goes somewhere": Evaluation of an online discussion group. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16 (3), 239-257. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet16/mckenzie.html
Morgan, M. (2000). Guiding online discussions: A social argument framework. [viewed 10 Apr 2001] http://as1.ipfw.edu/2000tohe/papers/morgan.htm
Muirhead, B. (2000). Enhancing social interaction in computer-mediated distance education. [viewed 5 May 2001] http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/ltsc/ifets/discussions/discuss_sept2000.html
Murphy, K. et al. (2000). Role of contracts in enhancing community building in web courses. Educational Technology and Society, 3(3). [viewed 7 Jul 2001] http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2000/e03.html
Nelson, G. (1998). Online evaluation: Multiple choice, discussion questions, essay and authentic projects. [viewed 16 May 2001] http://leahi.kcc.hawaii.edu/org/tcon98/paper/nelson.html
Nielsen, J. (1997). Community is dead; long live mega-collaboration. [viewed 7 Apr 2001] http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9708b.html
Northcote, M. and Kendle, A. (2001). Communication skills for online students: An evaluation of a website. In A. Herrmann and M. M. Kulski (Eds), Expanding Horizons in Teaching and Learning. Proceedings of the 10th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 7-9 February 2001. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2001/northcote1.html
Owen, M. (2000). Structure and discourse in a telematic learning environment. Educational Technology & Society, 3 (3). [viewed 20 Apr 2001] http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2000/b04.html
Pask, G. (1975). Conversation, cognition, and learning. New York: Elsevier.
Peat, M. (2000). Online assessment: The use of web based self assessment materials to support self directed learning. In A. Herrmann and M.M. Kulski (Eds), Flexible Futures in Tertiary Teaching. Proceedings of the 9th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 2-4 February 2000. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2000/peat.html
Piaget, J. (1970). The science of education and the psychology of the child. New York: Grossman.
Severn, K. (1998). Group learning contracts. [viewed 7 Jul 2001] http://disted.tamu.edu:8000/classes/glcontracts.html
Stecher, B. et al. (1997). Using alternative assessments in vocational education. [viewed 7 Jul 2001] http://nccte.com/publications/ncrve/mds-09xx/mds-946.html
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Zariski, A. (1996). Student peer assessment in tertiary education: Promise, perils and practice. In Abbott, J. and Willcoxson, L. (Eds), Teaching and Learning Within and Across Disciplines, p189-200. Proceedings of the 5th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, Murdoch University, February 1996. Perth: Murdoch University. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf1996/zariski.html
| Author: Suzanne Ho, Lecturer, Curtin University of Technology. Email: h_suzanne@iinet.net.au
Please cite as: Ho, S. (2002). Encouraging online participation? In Focusing on the Student. Proceedings of the 11th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 5-6 February 2002. Perth: Edith Cowan University. http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2002/ho.html |