Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Framework for asynchronous discussion design decisions: applied principles from special issue authors

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

After a discussion of the state of both misaligned and informative online and distance education research, the authors in this special issue (hereafter called the collective) extract evidence-based principles about strategies that work. Both are addressed in this article. First, their criticisms centered on the value of comparative research. Those discussions are compared to debates by the International Board of Standards for Training Performance and Instruction (ibstpi). Second, to summarize and synthesize the evidence-based principles on interactions of online distance learners with content, peers and instructors, I offer a framework for planning, developing, and executing online distance education learning activities. The guidelines from the collective are organized within this framework for making asynchronous discussion design decisions. Finally, a redesign of an existing online distance education course exemplifies how these evidence based principles may be applied in a real example.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Selected from among Debate, WebQuest Case Study and WebQuest Role Play (Kanuka 2011).

  2. Selected from Lower Level Divergent, Analytic Convergent (Ertmer et al. 2011).

  3. Forethought Stage for Participant Self-Regulation (Bol and Garner 2011; Ertmer et al. 2011).

  4. Abrami et al. (2011).

  5. Promoting positive interdependence (Abrami et al. 2011; Johnson and Johnson 2009).

  6. Phases 1: Triggering Event

    Phase 2: Problem Definition

    Phase 2: Exploration: searching for explanations, exploring ideas

    Phase 4: Integration: evidence of conceptualization, and judgments being made

    Phase 5: Resolution: evidence of confirmation of the problem solution.

References

  • Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R., Bures, E., Borokhovski, E., & Tamim, R. (2011). Interaction in distance education and online learning: Using evidence and theory to improve practice. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. doi:10.1007/s12528-011-9043-x.

  • Beaudoin, M., Kurtz, G., Jung, I., Suzuki, K., & Grabowski, B. (manuscript in preparation). Online learner competencies: Development and validation study.

  • Bol, L., & Garner, J. (2011). Challenges in supporting self-regulation in distance education environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. doi:10.1007/s12528-011-9046-7.

  • Ertmer, P. A., Sadaf, A., & Ertmer, D. J. (2011). Student content interactions in online courses: The role of question prompts in facilitating higher-level engagement with course content. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. doi:10.1007/s12528-011-9047-6.

  • Kanuka, K. (2011). Interaction and the online distance classroom: Do instructional methods effect the quality of interaction? Journal of Computing in Higher Education. doi:10.1007/s12528-011-9049-4.

  • Klein, J., Spector, M., Grabowski, B., & de la Teja, I. (2004). Instructor competencies: Standards for face-to-face, online and blended settings. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simonson, M., Scholsser, C., & Orellana, A. (2011). Distance education research: A review of the literature. Journal of Computing in Higher Education. doi:10.1007/s12528-011-9045-8.

References cited from this issue

  • Andrews, J. (1980). The verbal structure of teacher questions: Its impact on class discussion. POD Quarterly: Journal of Professional and Organizational Development Network in Higher Education, 2(3–4), 129–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (1999). Teaching for Quality Learning at University. Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.

  • Biggs, J. B., & Collis, K. F. (1982). Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy (Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: David McKay.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 368(5), 365–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2008). Learning and instruction (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pintrich, P. R. (2003). A Motivational science perspective on the role of student motivation in learning and teaching contexts. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95(4), 667–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Barbara L. Grabowski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Grabowski, B.L. Framework for asynchronous discussion design decisions: applied principles from special issue authors. J Comput High Educ 23, 187–199 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9048-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-011-9048-5

Keywords

Navigation