From posts to patterns: A metric to characterize discussion board activity in online courses

Journal of Asynchronous Learning Network

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 15-32

  Bliss, Catherine A ^a   Lawrence, Betty ^a  

^a SUNY EMPIRE STATE COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

Asynchronous learning; Discussion board; Distance learning; Educationally valuable talk; Instructor roles; Mathematics; Metric; Online learning; Student participation

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956284047     PISSN: 19395256     EISSN: 19395256     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Garrison, D. R., T. Anderson, & W. Archer. Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2(2/3): 87-105, 1999.
2. Swan, K. Learning effectiveness online: What the research tells us. In J. Bourne and J. C. Moore (Eds.) Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction. Needham, MA: Sloan-C, 13-45, 2003.
3. Shea, P. J., A. M. Pickett, & W. E. Pelz. A follow-up investigation of 'teaching presence' in the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(2): 61-80, 2003. www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v7n2/pdf/v7n2_shea.pdf.
4. Chickering, A. W. & Z. F. Gamson. Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. The American Association for Higher Education Bulletin 39(7): 3-7, 1987. http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/7princip.htm.
5. Rourke, L., T. Anderson, D. R. Garrison & W. Archer. Assessing Social Presence in Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing. Journal of Distance Education 14(2): 50-71, 1999.
6. Brown, R. E. The process of community building in distance learning classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 5(2): 18-35, 2000. www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/pdf/v5n2_brown.pdf.
7. Rovai, A. P. A constructivist approach to online college learning. Internet and Higher Education 7: 79-93, 2004.
8. Fredericksen, E., A. Pickett, P. Shea, W. Pelz & K. Swan. Student satisfaction and perceived learning with online courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY Learning Network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 4(2): 7-41, 2001. www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v4n2/pdf/v4n2_fredericksen.pdf.
9. Jiang, M. & E. Ting. A study of factors influencing students' perceived learning in a web-based course environment. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications 6(4): 317-333, 2000.
10. Greenlaw, S. A. & S. B. DeLoach. Teaching critical thinking with electronic discussion. The Journal of Economic Education 34(1): 36-53, 2003.
11. Meyer, K. A. The ebb and flow of online discussions: What Bloom can tell us about our students' conversations. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 9(1): 53-63, 2005. www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v9n1/pdf/v9n1_meyer.pdf.
12. Muilenburg, L. & Z. L. Berge. A framework for designing questions for online learning. DEOSNEWS 10(2): 2000. www.emoderators.com/moderators/muilenburg.html.
13. Vygotsky, L. S. Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1978.
14. Bloom B. S. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook 1: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc., 1956.
15. Aviv, R. Educational performance of ALN via content analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 4(2): 53-72, 2000. http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v4n2/pdf/v4n2_aviv.pdf.
16. Meyer, K. A. Face-to-Face Versus Threaded Discussions: The Role of Time and Higher-Order Thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7(3): 55-65, 2003. http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v7n3/pdf/v7n3_meyer.pdf.
17. Picciano, A.G. Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interactions, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 6(1): 21-40, 2002. http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v6n1/pdf/v6n1_picciano.pdf.
18. Kay, R. H. Developing a comprehensive metric for assessing discussion board effectiveness. British Journal of Educational Technology 37(5): 761-783, 2006.
19. Anderson, T., L. Rourke, D. R. Garrison, & W. Archer. Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 5(2): 1-17, 2001. http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v5n2/pdf/v5n2_anderson.pdf.
20. Blignaut, A. S. & S. R. Trollip. Measuring faculty participation in asynchronous discussion forums. Journal of Education for Business 78(6): 347-353, 2003.
21. Dennen, V. P. From message posting to learning dialogues: Factors affecting learner participation in asynchronous discussion. Distance Education 26(1): 127-148, 2005.
22. Li, Q. Would we teach without technology? A professor's experience of teaching mathematics education incorporating the internet. Educational Research 45(1): 61-77, 2003.
23. Mazzolini, M. & S. Maddison. Sage, guide or ghost? The effect of instructor intervention on student participation in online discussion forums. Computers and Education 40: 237-253, 2003.
24. th, 2000.
25. Wu, D. & S. R. Hiltz. Predicting learning from asynchronous online discussion. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 8(2): 139-152, 2004. http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v8n2/pdf/v8n2_wu.pdf.
26. Benigno, V. & G. Trentin. The evaluation of online courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 16: 259-270, 2000.
27. Hazari, S. Strategy for assessment of online course discussions. Journal of Information Systems Education 15(4): 349-355, 2004.
28. Roblyer, M. D. & W. R. Wiencke. Design and use of a rubric to assess and encourage interactive qualities in distance courses. The American Journal of Distance Education 17(2): 77-98, 2003.
29. Dennen, V. P. Pedagogical lurking: Student engagement in non-posting discussion behavior. Computers in Human Behavior 24: 1624-1633, 2008.
30. Gulati, S. Compulsory participation in online discussions: Is this constructivism or normalization of learning? Innovations in Education and Teaching International 45(2): 183-192, 2008.
31. Kay, R. H. Using asynchronous online discussion to learn introductory programming: An exploratory analysis. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology/La revue canadienne de l'apprentissage et de la technologie [online] 32(1): 2008. www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/64/61.
32. Nisbet, D. Measuring the quantity and quality of online discussion group interaction. Journal of eLiteracy 1(2): 122-139, 2004.
33. Bali, M. & A. R. Ramadan. Using rubrics and content analysis for evaluation online discussion: A case study from an environmental course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 11(4): 19-33, 2007. http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v11n4/pdf/v11n4_bali.pdf.
34. Marra, R. M., J. L. Moore & A. K. Klimczak. Content analysis of online discussion forums: A comparative analysis of protocols. Educational Technology Research and Development 52(2): 23-40, 2004.
35. Meyer, K. A. Evaluating online discussions: Four different frames of analysis. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 8(2): 101-114, 2004. http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v8n2/pdf/v8n2_meyer1.pdf.
36. Christopher, M., J. A. Thomas & M. K. Tallent-Runnels. Raising the bar: Encouraging higher level thinking in online discussion forums. Roeper Review 26(3): 166-171, 2004.
37. Kramarski, B. & N. Mizrachi. Online discussion and self-regulated learning: Effects of instructional methods on mathematical literacy. The Journal of Educational Research 99(4): 218-231, 2006.
38. Meyer, K.A. The method (and madness) of evaluating online discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 10(4): 83-97, 2006. http://www.sloanconsortium.org/publications/jaln/v10n4/pdf/v10n4_meyer1.pdf.
39. Savage, L. B. Eliciting critical thinking skills through questioning. Clearing House 71(5): 291-293, 1998.
40. Gilbert, P. K. & N. Dabbagh. How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: a case study. British Journal of Educational Technology 36(1): 5-18, 2005.
41. Meyer, K. A. Does feedback influence student postings to online discussions? Journal of Educators Online 4(1): 1-17, 2007.
42. Benigno, V. & G. Trentin. The evaluation of online courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 16: 260, 2000.
43. Uzuner, S. Educationally valuable talk: A new concept for determining the quality of online conversations. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 3(4): 400-410, 2007.
44. Pena-Shaff, J. B. & C. Nicholls. Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions. Computers and Education 42: 243-265, 2004.
45. Liu, C. C. & C. C. Tsai. An analysis of peer interaction patterns as discoursed by on-line small group problem-solving activity. Computers and Education 50: 627-638, 2008.
46. Rovai, A. P. Strategies for grading online discussions. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 15(1): 89-107, 2003.
47. Ramos, C. & E. Yudko. 'Hits' (not 'discussion posts') predict student success in online courses: A double cross-validation study. Computers and Education 50: 1174-1182, 2008.
48. th Australasian Bridging Mathematics Network, Auckland; UNITEC, pg 67-74, 2002.
49. Toledo, C. A. "Does your dog bite?" Creating good discussion questions for online discussions. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education 18(2):150-154. 2006.
50. Smith, G. G. Student attrition in mathematics e-learning. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 21(3): 323-334, 2005.
51. Loch, B. & C. McDonald. Synchronous chat and electronic ink for distance support in mathematics. Innovate 3(3): 2007. www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=374.
52. Smith, G.G. & D. Ferguson. Diagrams and math notation in e-learning: growing pains of a new generation. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 33(5): 681-695.