In the online, constructivist learning environment, rich and robust collaborative knowledge construction occurs on the discussion board. The constructivist approach shifts the focus from the instructor to the students, and the students are teachers as they share their experiences, expertise, and worldviews (Rovai, 2004). The student-centered classroom is a place where the instructor becomes a facilitator or coach who encourages active student engagement by guiding, questioning students to help them construct knowledge, and modeling interactions in the online classroom (Rovai, 2004). Students are urged to become engaged learners (Hooks, 1994) rather than passive receptacles where instructors deposit information into students in a banking model of education (Friere, 1970/2000).
To promote better participation, we must explore the role of the instructor as course designer—who encourages peer participation by engaging in the effective design of discussion boards—and as a facilitator who observes student behaviors and interactions to ensure that peer participation and quality engagement. Specific tips to improve peer participation and collaborative knowledge construction on discussion boards are included as take out tips.
Collaborative Knowledge Construction
The online constructivist classroom is a dynamic environment that utilizes curricula customized to students’ prior knowledge, backgrounds, and experiences (Rovai, 2004). The online instructor facilitates and guides collaborative knowledge construction through discussions and small groups to foster communication and learning among the students. According to Brooks and Brooks (1995), the constructivist approach incorporates respecting students as learners and allowing them to share their knowledge through activities. Using the Community of Inquiry Model (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000) instructors can analyze how cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence influence the community of learners’ success.
Discussion Board Design
Student-to-student engagement using online discussion boards and group activities leads to greater student satisfaction and perceived learning. For example, Jiang and Ting (2000) found that instructor-to-student interaction, online discussions, time on course, and written assignments were the four key variables that predicted students’ perceived learning. Furthermore, Wu and Hiltz (2004) reported that students liked online discussion and believed they enhanced their learning.
Discussions that were clear, consistent, and included feedback from instructors were perceived more favorably by students. Students with positive relationships student-to-student interactions report greater levels of satisfaction with the course (Swan, 2002). However, creating discussion prompts that can foster interaction can be challenging at times (Clark & Mayer, 2011).
Jonassen (1994) suggests that the online design should focus on knowledge construction and not reproduction by presenting authentic tasks that provide real-world learning opportunities. Seven key instructional strategies can be used in the design of discussion prompts: what I know, response to lectures and readings, research and investigate, application, role play, question the expert, and computer-supported collaborative learning.
Discussion boards which focus on the “what I know” prompt allow instructors to probe students’ prior knowledge by having students make connections, survey students, or model reflections (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). There are a number of strategies that instructors can use in their design to provide students the opportunity to respond to lectures and readings. Using common classroom assessment techniques such asking for the most important point, the muddiest point, or one-sentence summaries are common practices. Instructors may also ask students to write sample test questions and model answers for specific topics (Rovai, Ponton, & Baker, 2008). Instructions may also use a “research and investigate” strategy which incorporates activities that require students to use resources to respond to an established question extending beyond the required course material. Something as simple as searching the web (Bonk & Zhang, 2008) can spark interesting discussions among students. An application strategy for discussion boards may include case studies or actual data analysis (Bonk & Zhang, 2008). The strategy of role-playing encourages a great deal of participation among peers. Something as simple as a debate based on the pros and cons of an issue to assigning stakeholder roles for students to play out a scenario related to the course content (Smith, 2008) can be effective role-playing processes in the online classroom. A question-the-expert strategy is used to enable students to generate meaningful questions. Depending on the topic, selected students could serve as experts (Horton, 2006), or students could submit questions to the instructor in an attempt to “Stump the Professor.” Computer-supported collaborative learning is a common usage of discussion boards in the online classroom. Using groups to process a discussion to develop a group response, to build a case reflection, or build a case history are just a few ways collaborative learning can be facilitated using discussion boards as long as the task is clearly defined for the group (Clark & Mayer, 2011).
However, having good discussion prompts is only one part of ensuring success in using discussion boards in online learning. The students’ active participation in the discussion boards is crucial for the success of the learning process. In order to get students engaged, instructors must obtain buy-in to the learning process from the student, which often requires interaction between the student and the instructor (Hay, Hodgkinson, Peltier, & Drago, 2004, p. 196). Thus, we will discuss the importance of discussion boards for students’ satisfaction and perceived learning, designing discussion board prompts as well has how we can obtain buy-in from students. Examples from data will be incorporated throughout the chapter as it connects to specific concepts. A more detailed explanation of the data analysis will be included as footnotes or Nerd Notes.
Social Presence
Social presence is the “ability of learners to project themselves socially and emotionally in a community of inquiry” (Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 2001, p. 4). Social presence is impacted by peer interactions (Swan, 2003) and found to be significantly related to students’ perceptions of learning (Picciano, 2002). The analysis of online discussions by Lu and Jeng (2006) found that students stayed mostly in the first phase of knowledge construction (sharing and comparing) and only moved to higher phases when the instructor engaged the students.
Social presence is like a feeling of community in the online classroom (Tu & McIsaac, 2002).
Examples from data will be incorporated to provide examples of how self-disclosure by the
instructor and between peers has a positive influence on developing social presence in the online learning environment.
Teaching Presence
There are three components of teaching presence: instructional design, facilitation of discourse, and direct instruction (Shea, Pickett, and Pelz, 2003). Garrison and Cleveland-Innes (2005) found that deep approaches of learning that engaged students in few assignments and discussion— but provided a high level of reflectivity and level of interaction between instructors and students—produced greater gains in students’ perception of learning. Essentially, students in classes with instructors who provide active leadership and engagement in the discussions felt that their learning was enhanced compared to students with low or medium levels of learning.
As Rovai (2002) notes, constructivist approaches rely on active participation in the learning situation. Interaction and participation are crucial ingredients in the learning process. But interactivity, as a specific learning concept that underlies the general notions of interaction and participation, is not easily tracked and evaluated. Rovai found that instructors in higher education can encourage students to have a more positive attitude through effective ways of increasing interaction, such as structuring the learning environment in such a way achieve a “conversational learning community,” a learning model that promotes informal, relaxed, and interactive communities of learners and teachers. In our analysis of our data, we explore how the teaching presence can be built with self-disclosure on discussion boards and provide a contrast of an online classroom that missed the mark because of a lack of facilitation and direct interaction in the online learning environment.
Take Out Tips
- Include a list of discussion ideas for each of the seven types of discussion prompts discussed in the Discussion Board Design section of the proposal (see next page for example).
- Ask students to list their favorite professional book with a short description and the author. At the end of the week, the students have created a resource list of professional books that pertain to their career path. (Most learning management systems allow for the discussion board to be printed or exported into Excel.)
- Group students weekly in order to collaborate and post several questions. Reassign these groups to allow interactions with other students.
- Effectively engage students in arguments to improve critical-thinking skills. Post a debatable topic and divide the students into groups to defend or oppose the topic.
- Post a superior, average, and poorly written discussion board posts in order to model the desired level of scholarly writing that is expected.
Discussion Design
Role Play
- Provide activities that encourage active participation. Assign or allow students to select roles in discussion. For example, one student can be assigned to be the sumarizer for a group. Another can be the questioner who asks for clarification.
Pros/Cons
- To encourage lively debate on an important issue, divide the class into groups and have one group take the pro side and the other the con side. Such conflict-intensive debates foster continued student reading of the positions of others.
Apprenticeship
- Have students listen to online conferences and seminars in the field. Before the event, provide students with guide sheets or learning scaffolds. Have students reflect on the experience (Bonk & Zhang, 2008).
Stakeholder Roles
- Assign roles based on the stakeholders in a scenario you have presented. In a hospital scenario, stakeholders could include physicians, nurses, the patient, family members of the patient, hospital staff, the billing office, the medical supplies department, and the pharmacy (Smith, 2008).
Invented Dialogues
- Ask students to synthesize knowledge of issues, persons, or events into a structured and illustrated conversation.
Reflect
- Once students have engaged in role playing, have them reflect on what they’ve learned by playing the role. These reflections can prompt discussion questions.
References
Bonk, C.J., & Zhang, K. (2008). Empowering online learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brooks, M., & Brooks, J. (1995). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Clark, R., & Mayer, R. (2011). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (3rd Edition). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Freire, P. (1970/2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed: 30th Anniversary Edition. New York: Continuum.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15 (1), 7-23.
Garrison, R. D., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 133-148. doi: 10.1207/s15389286ajde1903_2
Hay, A., Hodgkinson, M., Peltier, J. W., & Drago, W. A. (2004). Interaction and virtual learning. Strategic Change, 13, 193–204. doi: 10.1002/jsc.679
hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge.
Horton, W. (2006). E-Learning by design. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer
Jiang, M., & Ting, E. (2000). A study of factors influencing students’ perceived learning in a web-based course environment . International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6 (4), 317-338.
Jonassen, D. H. (1994). Computers in schools: Mindtools for critical thinking. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Lu, L-F. L., & Jeng, I (2006). Knowledge construction in inservice teacher online discourse: Impacts of instructor roles and facilitative strategies. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39, 183-202. Retrieved http://www.iste.org
Picciano, A. G. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6 (1). Retrieved http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/jaln-vol6issue1.htm
Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R. & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14 (2).
Rovai, A. (2004). A constructivist approach to online college learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 7, 79-93. doi: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2003.10.002
Rovai, A. P. (2002). A preliminary look at structural differences in sense of classroom community between higher education traditional and ALN courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6 (1).
Rovai, A., Ponton, M., & Baker, J. (2008). Distance learning in higher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Shea, P., Fredericksen, E., Pickett, A. Pelz, W. & Swan, K. (2001).Measures of learning effectiveness in the SUNY Learning Network. In J. Bourne & J. Moore (Eds.), Online
Education: Proceedings of the 2000 Sloan Summer Workshop on Asynchronous Learning Networks, Volume 3. Needham, MA: Sloan-C Press.
Smith, R. M. (2008). Conquering the content. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness: what the research tells us. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education, 13-45.
Swan, K. (2002). Immediacy, social presence, and asynchronous discussion. In J. Bourne & J. C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education, volume 3. Olin and Babson Colleges: Sloan Center for Online Education.
