What More Can They Say? Encouraging Good Online Discussion Without the Workload Dale Vidmar Information Literacy and Instruction Coordinator/ Education, Communication, Health and Physical Education Librarian Southern Oregon University Library campus.sou.edu/~vidmar/pnw-wabug2007/vidmar.ppt PNW/WABUG Pacific Northwest/Washington Blackboard Users Group Eugene, Oregon October 19, 2007

Objectives: What We are Learning At the end of the workshop, IWBAT: Outline online discussion models and conditions necessary for student participation and learning. Distinguish qualities of responses in discussion forums. Adapt the structure of student- monitored discussion forums into their own class using the rubric as a guide to student self- assessment.

“... the virtual learning space of an online forum did not promote the coherent and interactive dialogue necessary to conversational modes of learning.... “Learning within Incoherent Structures: The Space of Online Discussion Forums” Matthew J. W. Thomas incoherent structure....”

So How Do We Encourage and Inspire Good Online Discussion? Do it Without the Workload? and

“99% of success is just showing up....” Woody Allen

“If students perceived the online discussion as valuable, interesting, and enjoyable, they were more likely to participate.” “Extending the Traditional Classroom Through Online Discussion: The Role of Student Motivation” Xie, DeBacker, and Ferguson Intrinsic Motivation

Conditions to Support Online Discussion Create a Conducive Learning Environment Establish Rules Pose Meaningful Questions and Activities Stimulate Participation Be Sensitive to Nonparticipation Encourage Reflection Summarize Discussions and Key Ideas Encourage More Reflection “The Online Discussion Board” S. Joseph Levine

“Grading student discussions motivated students to increase the number of weekly messages....” “Strategies for Grading Online Discussions” Alfred P. Rovai

“Connectedness and learning were also significantly higher for courses in which discussions were graded and in which students posted on average over three messages per week....” “Strategies for Grading Online Discussions” Alfred P. Rovai

Brief List of Online Discussion Models Introductions Personal Goal Setting Coffee House, Technology Bar, Water Cooler General Discussion: Question – Response Peer Evaluation and Feedback Group Work – 3 to 1: Three students define and discuss topic and post as one Starter/Wrapper – Initial Posting/Summary Self-Evaluation or Personal Reflections

Elements of Structure to Guide Online Discussions Protocol for Posting Responses Participation Grammar Counts – Well-written, organized Builds and furthers discussion Moderator Guidelines Examples of questions How to facilitate discussions Evaluation (Rubrics) Criteria for assessing the discussion

What is a “Good” Response? What Criteria Can We Use to Evaluate Responses? What are the Qualities that Make a “Good” Response?

“Instructor presence... is important in moderation, and that can be achieved in different ways.” “From Message Posting to Learning Dialogues: Factors Affecting Learner Participation in Asynchronous Discussion” Vanessa Paz Dennen

Student Facilitated Discussion Model 1.Students are grouped in diads or triads. 2.Each group moderates a discussion based on their own question using the starter/wrapper model. 3.All students will be evaluated based on a rubric. 4.After all discussion forums are ended, students choose their best hits based on the rubric. 5.Students write reflection of why the responses are their best hits by applying the criteria in the rubric.

References and Resources Dennen, V. P. (2005). From message posting to learning dialogues: factors affecting learner participation in asynchronous discussion. Distance Education, 26 (1), Edelstein, S. and J. Edwards (2002). If you build it, they will come: building learning communities through threaded discussions. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5 (1), Retrieved on September 15, 2007, from edelstein51.html. Gilbert, P. K. and N. Dabbagh. (2005). How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36 (1), Levine, S.J. (2007). The online discussion board. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2007 (113), Markel, S.L. (2001). Technology and education online discussion forums: it's in the response. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration. 4, (2): Retrieved September 14, 2007, from markel42.html.

References and Resources Mazzolini, M. & S. Maddison. (2007). When to jump in: the role of the instructor in online discussion forums. Computers in Education, 49(2), Rovai, A. P. (2003). Strategies for grading online discussions: effects on discussions and classroom community in internet- based university courses. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(1), Seo, K.K. (2007). Utilizing peer moderation in online discussions: addressing the controversy between teacher moderation and nonmoderation. American Journal of Distance Education, 21 (1), Thomas, M. J. W. (2002). Learning within incoherent structures: the space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, Xie, K., DeBacker, T.K., & C. Ferguson. (2006). Extending the traditional classroom through online discusion: the role of student motivation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34 (1),

What More Can They Say? Encouraging Good Online Discussion Without the Workload Dale Vidmar Information Literacy and Instruction Coordinator/ Education, Communication, Health and Physical Education Librarian Southern Oregon University Library campus.sou.edu/~vidmar/pnw-wabug2007/vidmar.ppt PNW/WABUG Pacific Northwest/Washington Blackboard Users Group Eugene, Oregon October 19, 2007