How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: a case study

This study examined the impact of structuredness of asynchronous online discussion protocols and evaluation rubrics on meaningful discourse. Transcripts of twelve online discussions involving 87 participants from four sections of a graduate course entitled Instructional Technology Foundations and Learning Theory were analysed across four semesters. Protocols and evaluation rubrics guiding online discussions in this course ranged from minimal structure or loosely defined protocols in the first section, to high sructure or well defined and comprehensive protocols and evaluation criteria in the fourth section. The analyses revealed that some elements of structure had a significant impact on meaningful discourse. Particularly, guidelines that assisted the facilitation and evaluation of online discussions increased the cognitive quality of student postings promoting a deeper and more meaningful understanding of course content. Overview of problem Asynchronous communication is a form of computer-mediated communication (CMC) that supports information exchange and group interactions through a variety of electronic communication tools such as electronic mail (email), bulletin boards, class listservs, and online discussion forums (Bodzin & Park, 2000). In a 2000 National Education Association (NEA) survey, 62 percent of distance learning faculties reported using asynchronous communication tools in their courses to support student–teacher interactions and class discussions (National Education Association, 2000). Despite a growing body of research on the instructional benefits of asynchronous communication 6 British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 36 No 1 2005 © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2005. (Vonderwell, 2003; 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 (a) relating course content to prior knowledge and experience, (b) interpreting content through the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of others’ understanding, and (c) making inferences. Meaningful discourse is one of the main goals of constructivist learning because it supports knowledge construction through articulation, reflection, and social negotiation (Jonassen et al , 1995). In web-based or online learning environments, articulation, reflection, and social negotiation can be promoted through asynchronous online discussions (Dabbagh & Bannan-Ritland, in press). Initial studies on the instructional benefits of asynchronous online discussions indicate that the protocol or structure of an online discussion has a significant impact on the quality of the discussion (Hewitt, 2003; Vonderwell, 2003; Swan, Shea, Fredericksen, Pickett & Pelz, 2000; Vrasidas & McIsaac, 1999). Yet, the research literature does not discuss what type and degree 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. Theoretical framework Meaningful discourse can be defined as a process of collaboration and social negotiation where the goal is to share different viewpoints and ideas and collaborate on problem solving and knowledge building activities (Duffy & Cunningham, 1996). When students are engaged in collaboration and social negotiation, they are articulating what they know by explaining it to others, and reflecting on what they know by analysing their performance and comparing it with that of experts and peers (Collins, 1991). Articulation and reflection support knowledge construction by allowing students to relate course content to prior knowledge and experience and interpret content through the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of others’ understandings. As Jonassen et al (1995) contend ‘knowledge construction occurs when students explore issues, take positions, discuss those positions in an argumentative format and reflect on and reevaluate their positions’ (p. 16). Additionally, articulation and reflection allow students to make inferences by generalising their understanding and knowledge so that it is applicable in different contexts (Collins, 1991). To encourage articulation, reflection and social negotiation, instructors are increasingly using asynchronous communication technologies to augment in-class discussions about course topics and readings with online dialogue allowing students to continue these discussions beyond the classroom context. Gunawardena, Lowe and Anderson (1997) describe asynchronous communication as an important pedagogical tool that ‘enables groups that are separated in time and space to engage in the active production of shared knowledge’ (p. 410). An important instructional benefit of asynchronous communication therefore is its potential to support the co-construction of knowledge through discourse. How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse 7 © British Educational Communications and Technology Agency, 2005. In addition, Hara, Bonk and Anjeli (2000) reported that the asynchronous or delayed capabilities of electronic communication tools provide opportunities for reflective learning and meaningful processing of information. This finding is further supported by Tiene (2000) who found that students responded positively to the asynchronous aspect of online discussions because ‘it allowed them to participate at their own convenience when they had the time to read the comments and the time to develop their own responses’ and ‘there was also time to think about the point made by their peers and time to decide how they felt about certain issues’ (p. 382). Although asynchronous communication tools have the potential to support knowledge construction, there are few research-supported models to assist instructors in the design of effective online discourse. Brannon and Essex (2001) suggest that instructors ‘provide students with clear communication protocols’ and ‘clear requirements for posting and reading discussion entries’ to guard against potential pitfalls of asynchronous communication such as ‘feelings of social disconnection’ that could result from (a) lack of immediate feedback, (b) lack of daily participation in discussions, and (c) lack of time necessary for students to develop thoughtful discussions (p. 36). This study addresses these issues by examining the impact of the structuredness of online discussion protocols and evaluation rubrics on meaningful discourse in order to inform instructors how to effectively design asynchronous online discussions. Figure 1 summarises the theoretical framework for this study. Figure 1 suggests that in order for meaningful discourse to occur, an effective interaction between structuredness, asynFigure 1: Factors influencing meaningful discourse in online discussions Structuredness