Broadening the notion of participation in online discussions: examining patterns in learners’ online listening behaviors
While a great deal of research has studied the messages students contribute to electronic discussion forums, productive participation in online learning conversations requires more than just making posts. One important pre-condition for productive interactivity and knowledge construction is engagement with the posts contributed by others. In this study, these actions (how learners interact with the existing discussion; which posts they attend to, when, and how) are conceptualized as “online listening behaviors” and are studied in the context of a large undergraduate business course taught in a blended format. Clickstream data was collected for 96 participants from 3 week-long online discussions to solve organizational behavior challenges in groups of 10–13. Listening behaviors accounted for almost three-quarters of the time learners spent in the discussions, and cluster analysis identified three distinct patterns of behavior: (1) Superficial Listeners, Intermittent Talkers; (2) Concentrated Listeners, Integrated Talkers; and (3) Broad Listeners, Reflective Talkers. The clusters differed in the depth, breadth, temporal contiguity, and reflectivity of their listening as well as in their patterns of speaking. An illustrative case study of how the listening behaviors were enacted by one student from each cluster over time was used to deepen the characterization and interpretation of each cluster. The results indicate that online listening is a complex phenomenon and a substantial component of students’ participation in online discussions. Findings are compared to the previous work on student learning approaches and implications for practice and future research are discussed.
KeywordsOnline learning Computer mediated communication Asynchronous discussion groups Learning strategies Student participation Mixed methods
This work was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Council of Canada.
- Allen, I. E., Seaman, J., & Garrett, R. (2007). Blending in: The extent and promise of blended education in the United States. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved month date, year, from http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/survey/pdf/Blending_In.pdf. Accessed 25 April 2012.
- del Valle, R. (2006). Online learning: Learner characteristics and their approaches to managing learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Indiana University, Bloomington Indiana.Google Scholar
- Entwistle, N. (2009). Teaching for understanding at university: Deep approaches and distinctive ways of thinking. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Herring, S. (1999). Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(4). Retrieved month date, year, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol4/issue4/herring.html. Accessed 25 April 2012.
- Hewitt, J. (2001). Beyond threaded discourse. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(3), 207–221.Google Scholar
- Mayes, T. (2001). Learning technology and learning relationships. In J. Stephenson (Ed.), Teaching and learning online: New pedagogies for new technologies (pp. 16–26). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
- Muller, M., Shami, N. S., Millen, D. R., & Feinberg, J. (2010). We are all lurkers: Consuming behaviors among authors and readers in an enterprise file-sharing service. In Proceedings of GROUP’10 (pp. 201–210), New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- Nonnecke, B., Preece, J., Andrews, D., & Voutour, R. (2004). Online lurkers tell why (pp. 1–7). New York: Proceedings of the Tenth American Conference on Information Systems.Google Scholar
- Poole, D. M. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-oriented online course: A case study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 162–177.Google Scholar
- Rafaeli, S., Ravid, G., & Soroka, V. (2004). De-lurking in virtual communities: A social communication network approach to measuring the effects of social and cultural capital. Proceedings of the HICSS-37, Big Island, Hawaii.Google Scholar
- Shank, G., & Cunningham, D. (1996). Mediated phosphor dots: Toward a post-cartesian model of CMC via the semiotic superhighway. In C. Ess (Ed.), Philosophical perspectives on computer-mediated communication. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
- Statistics Canada. (2007). Language highlight tables, 2006 Census. Retrieved month date, year from http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement/2006/dp-pd/hlt/97-555/Index-eng.cfm. Accessed 25 April 2012.
- Sutton, L. A. (2001). The principle of vicarious interaction in computer-mediated communications. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(3), 223–242.Google Scholar
- Wise, A. F., Hsiao, Y. T., Marbouti, F., Speer, J., & Perera, N. (2012a). Initial validation of “listening” behavior typologies for online discussions using microanalytic case studies. In Proceedings of the international conference of the learning sciences 2012. Sydney, Australia: International Society of the Learning Sciences (in press).Google Scholar
- Wise, A. F., Marbouti, F., Speer, J., & Hsiao, Y. T. (2011). Τowards an understanding of ‘listening’ in online discussions: A cluster analysis of learners’ interaction patterns. In H. Spada, G. Stahl, N. Miyake & N. Law (Eds.), Connecting computer supported collaborative learning to policy and practice: CSCL2011 conference proceeding (Vol. I), Long papers (pp. 88–95), International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
- Wise, A. F., Perera, N., Hsiao, Y., Speer, J., & Marbouti, F. (2012b). Microanalytic case studies of individual participation patterns in an asynchronous online discussion in an undergraduate blended course. Internet and Higher Education, 15(2), 108–117.Google Scholar