Participation and cognitive quality profiles in an online discussion forum

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 43, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 282-294

  Naranjo, Mila ^a,b   Onrubia, Javier ^c   Segués, Ma Teresa ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIC CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF CATALONIA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITAT OBERTA DE CATALUNYA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BARCELONA; CONTENT ANALYSIS; DISCUSSION FORUM; EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY; HIGH QUALITY; MULTI-METHOD APPROACH; ONLINE DISCUSSIONS; QUALITY PROFILE; QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS; SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS; TEACHER TRAINING; TWO-DIMENSION;

ONLINE SYSTEMS; PERSONNEL TRAINING;

CURRICULA;

EID: 84857573219     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01179.x     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Arvaja, M., Salovaara, H., Häkkinen, P., &, Järvelä, S., (2007). Combining individual and group-level perspectives for studying collaborative knowledge construction in context. Learning and Instruction, 17, 448-459.
2. Cheung, W. S., Hew, K. F., &, Ng, C. S. L., (2008). Toward an understanding of why students contribute in asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38, 1, 29-50.
3. Cho, H., Gay, G., Davidson, B., &, Ingraffea, A., (2007). Social networks, communication styles, and learning performance in a CSCL community. Computers & Education, 49, 309-329. (Pubitemid 46783967)
4. Coll, C., Engel, A., &, Bustos, A., (2009). Distributed teaching presence and participants' activity profiles: a theoretical approach to the structural analysis of asynchronous learning networks. European Journal of Education, 44, 4, 521-538.
5. Davies, J., &, Graff, M., (2005). Performance in e-learning: online participation and student grades. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36, 4, 657-663. (Pubitemid 43906782)
6. De Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., &, Simons, R. J., (2007). Online teaching in networked learning communities: a multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher. Instructional Science, 35, 257-286.
7. De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., &, Van Keer, H., (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: a review. Computers & Education, 46, 6-28. (Pubitemid 41562935)
8. Dennen, V. P., (2005). From message posting to learning dialogues: factors affecting learner participation in asynchronous discussion. Distance Education, 26, 1, 127-148. (Pubitemid 41664373)
9. Dillenbourg, P., Järvelä, S., &, Fischer, F., (2009). The evolution of research on computer-supported collaborative learning: from design to orchestration. In, N. Balacheff, S. Ludvigsen, T. de Jong, A. Lazonder, &, S. Barnes, (Eds), Technology enhanced learning: principles and products (pp. 3-19). Houten, Netherlands: Springer.
10. Dimitracopoulou, A., (2008). Computer based interaction analysis supporting self-regulation: achievements and prospects of an emerging research direction. Technology, Instruction, Cognition and Learning (TICL), 6, 4, 291-314.
11. Garrison, D. R., &, Anderson, T., (2003). E-learning in the 21st century. A framework for research and practice. London and New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
12. Gunawardena, L., Lowe, C., &, Anderson, T., (1997). Interaction analysis of a global online debate and the development of a constructivist interaction analysis model for computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17, 4, 395-429.
13. Hakkinen, P., (2004). What makes learning and understanding in virtual teams so difficult? Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 7, 2, 201-206. (Pubitemid 38507028)
14. Hara, N., Bonk, C. J., &, Angeli, C., (2000). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115-152.
15. Harasim, L., (2002). What makes online learning communities successful? The role of collaborative learning in social and intellectual development. In, C. Vrasidas, &, G. Glass, (Eds), Distance education and distributed learning (pp. 181-200). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing Inc.
16. Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., &, Ng, C. S. L., (2009). Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: a review of the research and empirical exploration. Instructional Science. [WWW Document]. Retrieved January 21, 2011, from
17. Hrastinski, S., (2008). What is online learner participation? A literature review. Computers & Education, 51, 1755-1765.
18. Janssen, J., Erkens, G., Kanselaar, G., &, Jaspers, J., (2007). Visualization of participation: does it contribute to successful computer-supported collaborative learning? Computers & Education, 49, 4, 1037-1065. (Pubitemid 47284631)
19. Jeong, A., &, Frazier, S., (2008). How day of posting affects level of critical discourse in asynchronous discussions and computer-supported collaborative argumentation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 5, 875-887.
20. Jermann, P., &, Dillenbourg, P., (2008). Group mirrors to support interaction regulation in collaborative problem solving. Computers & Education, 51, 1, 279-296. (Pubitemid 351680347)
21. Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., &, Laflamme, E., (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 2, 260-271. (Pubitemid 46325308)
22. Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., &, Jochems, W., (2003). Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 335-353.
23. Martínez, A., Dimitriadis, Y., Gõmez Sánchez, E., Rubia Avi, B., Jorrín Abellán, I., &, Marcos, J. A., (2006). Studying participation networks in collaboration using mixed methods. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 1, 383-408. (Pubitemid 44394682)
24. Mazza, R., &, Botturi, L., (2009). Monitoring an online course with the GISMO tool: a case study. In, C. H. Choquet, V. Luengo, &, K. Yacef, (Eds), Usage analysis in learning systems (pp. 99-113). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
25. Palmer, S., Holt, D., &, Bray, S., (2008). Does the discussion help? The impact of a formally assessed online discussion on final student results. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39, 5, 847-858.
26. Prinsen, F., Volman, M. L., &, Terwel, J., (2007). The influence of learner characteristics on degree and type of participation in a CSCL environment. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38, 6, 1037-1055. (Pubitemid 47480833)
27. Ramos, C., &, Yudko, E., (2008). 'Hits' (not 'Discussion Posts') predict student success in online courses: a double cross-validation study. Computers & Education, 50, 1174-1182. (Pubitemid 351483935)
28. Rochera, M. J., Mauri, T., Onrubia, J., &, De Gispert, I., (2007). The potential of online discussions for effective learning. Combining individual and social perspectives to study cognitive presence. 12th. EARLI Conference. Budapest, 27 August-1 September [WWW document]. Retrieved January 21, 2011, from
29. Rochera, M. J., Mauri, T., Onrubia, J., &, De Gispert, I., (2010). Dimensiones para el estudio de la presencia cognitiva en foros de discusiõn en línea. Una aproximaciõn individual, social y dinámica. Infancia Y Aprendizaje, 33, 3, 301-314.
30. Rourke, L., &, Kanuka, H., (2009). Learning in communities of inquiry: a review of the literature. Journal of Distance Education-Revue De l'Ãducation à Distance, 23, 1, 19-48.
31. Scardamalia, M., &, Bereiter, C., (2003). Knowledge building. In, J. W. Guthrie, (Ed.), Encyclopedia of education (2nd ed.). (pp. 1370-1373). New York: Macmillan Reference USA.
32. Schrire, S., (2006). Knowledge building in asynchronous discussion groups: going beyond quantitative analysis. Computers & Education, 46, 49-70. (Pubitemid 41562937)
33. Stacey, E., &, Rice, M., (2002). Evaluating an online learning environment. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 18, 3, 323-340.
34. Stahl, G., Koschmann, T., &, Suthers, D., (2006). Computer-supported collaborative learning. In, R. K. Sawyer, (Ed.), Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 409-426). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35. Strijbos, J. W., &, Fischer, F., (2007). Methodological challenges for collaborative learning research. Learning and Instruction, 17, 389-393.
36. Webb, E., Jones, A., Barker, P., &, van Schaik, P., (2004). Using e-learning dialogues in higher education. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 41, 1, 93-103. (Pubitemid 38361270)
37. Zhu, E., (2006). Interaction and cognitive engagement: an analysis of four asynchronous online discussions. Instructional Science, 34, 451-480. (Pubitemid 44651957)