Assessing Student Perceptions of the Benefits of Discussions in Small-Group, Large-Class, and Online Learning Contexts

College Teaching

Volumn 60, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 65-75

  Hamann, Kerstin ^a   Pollock, Philip H ^a   Wilson, Bruce M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84894452773     PISSN: 87567555     EISSN: 19308299     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/87567555.2011.633407     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Arbaugh, J. B., 2000. Virtual classroom versus physical classroom: An exploratory study of class discussion patterns and student learning in an asynchronous Internet-based MBA course. Journal of Management Education, 24 (2): 213–233.
2. Barrett, E., and Lally, V., 1999. Gender differences in an on-line learning environment. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15: 48–60.
3. Bender, T., 2003. Discussion-based online teaching to enhance student-learning, Sterling, VA: Stylus.
4. Bloom, Benjamin S. 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I, cognitive domain, New York & Toronto: Longmans, Green.
5. Blum, K. D., 1999. Gender differences in asynchronous learning in higher education: Learning styles, participation barriers and communication patterns. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 3 (1): 46–66.
6. Botsch, C. S., and Botsch, R. E., 2001. Audiences and outcomes in online and traditional American government classes: A comparative two-year case study. PS: Political Science & Politics, 34 (1): 135–141.
7. Caspi, A. E. Chajut, and Saporta, K., 2008. Participation in class and in online discussions: Gender differences. Computers & Education, 50: 718–724.
8. Caspi, A., Gorsky, P., and Chajut, E., 2003. The influence of group size on nonmandatory asynchronous instructional discussion groups. Internet and Higher Education, 6: 227–240.
9. Chang, N., 2006. E-discussions as a complement to traditional instruction: Did the students like online communication and why?. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 27: 249–264.
10. Clawson, R. A., Deen, R. E., and Oxley, Z. M., 2002. Online discussion across three universities: Student participation and pedagogy. PS: Political Science & Politics, 35 (4): 713–718.
11. The critical thinking community.n.d. Defining critical thinking. www.criticalthinking.org/aboutCT/define_critical_thinking.cfm(accessed May 12, 2011)
12. Dallimore, E. J., Hertenstein, J. H., and Platt, M. B., 2008. Using discussion pedagogy to enhance oral and written communication skills. College Teaching, 56 (3): 163–172.
13. Davis, T. M., and Murrell, P. H., 1993. Turning teaching into learning: The role of student responsibility in the collegiate experience, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 8. Washington, D.C.: The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development.
14. DeLoach, S. B., and Greenlaw, S. A., 2005. Do electronic discussions create critical thinking spillovers?. Contemporary Economic Policy, 23 (1): 149–163.
15. Diller, A., Houston, B., Pauly Morgan, K., and Ayim, M., 1996. The gender question in education: Theory, pedagogy, and politics, Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
16. Drew, T. L., and Work, G. G., 1998. Gender-based differences in perception of experiences in higher education: Gaining a broader prospective. Journal of Higher Education, 69: 542–556.
17. Ellis, R. A., Calvo, R., Levy, D., and Tan, K., 2004. Learning through discussions. Higher Education Research and Development, 23 (1): 73–93.
18. Ennis, R. H., 2003. “ Critical thinking assessment ”. In Critical thinking and reasoning: Current research, theory, and practice, Edited by: Daniel, Fasko, Jr. 293–314. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.
19. Fay, N., Garrod, S., and Carletta, J., 2000. Group discussion as interactive dialogue or as serial monologue: The influence of group size. Psychological Science, 11 (6): 481–486.
20. Gall, J. P., and Gall, M. D., 1990. “ Outcomes of the discussion method ”. In Teaching and learning through discussion: The theory, research and practice of the discussion method, Edited by: William, M. Wilen. 25–44. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
21. Garside, C., 1996. Look who's talking: A comparison of lecture and group discussion teaching strategies in developing critical thinking skills. Communication Education, 45 (3): 212–227.
22. Gunn, C., McSporran, M., Macleod, H., and French, S., 2003. Dominant or different? Gender issues in computer supported learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7 (1): 14–30.
23. Halpern, D., 2003. “ The ‘how’ and ‘why’ of critical thinking assessment ”. In Critical thinking and reasoning: Current research, theory, and practice, Edited by: Daniel, Fasko, Jr. 355–366. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press.
24. Hamann, K., Pollock, P. H., and Wilson, B. M., 2009. Learning from ‘listening’ to peers in online political science classes. Journal of Political Science Education, 5 (1): 1–11.
25. Ho, S. S., and McLeod, D. M., 2008. Social-psychological influences on opinion expression in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 35 (2): 190–207.
26. Huerta, J. C., 2007. Getting active in the large lecture. Journal of Political Science Education, 3 (3): 237–249.
27. Hum, S., 2002. Performing gendered identities: A small-group collaboration in a computer-mediated classroom interaction. Journal of Curriculum Theorizing, 18 (2): 19–38.
28. Johnson, G. M., Howell, A. J., and Code, J. R., 2005. Online discussion and college student learning: Toward a model of influence. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14 (1): 61–76.
29. Kramarae, C., 2001. The third shift: Women learning online, Washington, D.C.: American Association of University Women Educational Foundation.
30. Krentler, K. A., and Willis-Flurry, L. A., 2005. Does technology enhance actual student learning? The case of online discussion boards. Journal of Education for Business,: 316–321. (July/August)
31. Laurillard, D., 2002. Rethinking university teaching. 2nd ed, London:Routledge: A conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies.
32. Lyon, D. C., and Lagowski, J. J., 2008. Effectiveness of facilitating small-group learning in large classes. Journal of Chemical Education, 85 (11): 1571–1576.
33. Lowry, P. B., Roberts, T. L., Romano, N. C., Jr., Cheney, P. D., and Hightower, R. T., 2006. The impact of group size and social presence on small-group communication: Does computer-mediated communication make a difference?. Small Group Research, 37 (6): 631–661.
34. Mayo, A., Sharma, M. D., and Muller, D. A., 2009. Qualitative differences between learning environments using videos in small groups and whole class discussions: A preliminary study in physics. Research in Science Education, 39 (4): 477–493.
35. McCarthy, J. P., and Anderson, L., 2000. Active learning techniques versus traditional teaching styles: Two experiments from history and political science. Innovative Higher Education, 24 (4): 279–294.
36. Meyer, Katrina A. 2003. Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7: 55–65.
37. NSSE (National Survey of Student Engagement). 2008. Promoting engagement for all students: The imperative to look within, Bloomington, IN: National Survey of Student Engagement. http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2008_Results/docs/withhold/NSSE2008_Results_revised_11–14-2008.pdf
38. Nicol, D. J., and Boyle, J. T., 2003. Peer instruction versus class-wide discussion in large classes: A comparison of two interaction methods in the wired classroom. Studies in Higher Education, 28: 457–473.
39. Occhipinti, J. D., 2003. Active and accountable: Teaching comparative politics using cooperative team learning. PS: Political Science & Politics, 36 (1): 69–74.
40. Phillips, R., 2005. Challenging the primacy of lectures: The dissonance between theory and practice in university teaching. Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice, 2 (1): 1–12.
41. Pollock, P. H., Hamann, K., and Wilson, B. M., 2005. Teaching and learning online: Assessing the effects of gender context on active learning. Journal of Political Science Education, 1 (1): 1–16.
42. Pollock, P., Hamann, K., and Wilson, B., 2011. Learning through discussions: Comparing the benefits of small-group and large-class settings. Journal of Political Science Education, 7 (1): 48–64.
43. Prince, M., 2004. Does active learning work? A review of the research. Journal of Engineering Education, 93 (3): 223–232.
44. Rabow, J., Charness, M. A., Kipperman, J., and Radcliffe-Vasile, S., 1994. William Fawcett Hill's learning through discussion, 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
45. Thomas, M. J. W., 2002. Learning with incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18 (3): 351–366.
46. Tiene, D., 2000. Online discussions: A survey of advantages and disadvantages compared to face-to-face discussions. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 9: 371
47. U.S. Department of Education. 2009. Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning. A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies, Washington, D.C. Available at http://www.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
48. Wickersham, L. E., and Dooley, K. E., 2006. A content analysis of critical thinking skills as an indicator of quality of online discussion in virtual learning environments. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7 (2): 185–193.
49. Wilen, W. M., 1990. “ Forms and phases of discussion ”. In Teaching and learning through discussion: The theory, research and practice of the discussion method, Edited by: William, M. Wilen. 3–24. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
50. Williams, L., and Lahman, M., 2011. Online discussion, student engagement, and critical thinking. Journal of Political Science Education, 7 (2): 143–162.
51. Wilson, B. M., Pollock, P. H., and Hamann, K., 2007. Does active learning enhance learner outcomes? Evidence from discussion participation in online classes. Journal of Political Science Education, 3 (2): 131–142.
52. Windschitl, M., 1999. Using small-group discussions in science lectures. College Teaching, 47 (1): 23–28.
53. Wolfe, J. L., 1999. Why do women feel ignored? Gender differences in computer-mediated classroom interactions. Computers and Composition, 16: 153–166.
54. Wolfe, J. L., 2000. Gender, ethnicity, and classroom discourse. Written Communication, 17 (4): 491–519.