European Political Science

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 402–415 | Cite as

Online Discussion Forums

  • Fiona Buckley
Teaching and Training
First Online:

Abstract

It has been suggested that interaction in online learning programmes promotes student-centred learning, encourages wider student participation, and produces more in-depth and reasoned discussions than traditional face-to-face programmes (Karayan and Crowe (1997) and Smith and Hardaker (2000) cited in Davies and Graff (2005: 1)). In this article, the participation rates and usage patterns by undergraduate political science students of online discussion forums are examined. The study is guided by a number of questions: (1) Are students willing to participate in online discussion forums? (2) Do students enjoy participating in such forums? (3) What discourages a student from participating in online discussion forums? (4) Is there a link between participation in discussion forums and grade performances in coursework? and (5) Does class size have an impact on forum participation rates? The study focuses on two groups of students studying introductory Irish politics courses in University College Cork, Ireland. The article considers student feedback on the use of online discussion forums, compares the level of participation with course grades, and finally presents an account of the author's reflections on the use of online discussion forums in teaching.

Keywords

curriculum design non-traditional students KWL problem based learning service learning 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

In preparing this article, I am in debt to the students who participated in my Online Discussion Forum experiment and who gave very generously of their time to complete the associated evaluations forms. I am also indebted to Marion McCarthy and Bettie Higgs of Ionad Bairre, University College Cork, who guided me through my Postgraduate Diploma in Teaching and Learning, and encouraged me to develop the Enquiry Portfolio submitted for that degree into this article.

References

  1. Citera, M. (1988) ‘Distributed teamwork: The impact of communication media on influence and decision quality’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 49 (9): 792–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Davies, J. and Graff, M. (2005) ‘Performance in e-learning: Online participation and student grades’, British Journal of Educational Technology 36 (4): 657–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Duffy, T.M. and Cunningham, D.J. (1996) ‘Constructivism: Implications for the Design and Delivery of Instruction’, in D.H. Jonassen (ed.) Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, New York: Simon & Schuster/Macmillan, pp. 170–198.Google Scholar
  4. Gilbert, P.K. and Dabbagh, N. (2005) ‘How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: A case study’, British Journal of Educational Technology 36 (4): 5–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gokhale, A.A. (1995) ‘Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking’, Journal of Technology Education, http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v7n1/pdf/gokhale.pdf; accessed 13 December 2009.
  6. James, R., McInnis, C. and Devlin, M. (2002) Assessing Learning in Australian Universities, Melbourne, Australia: Center for Study of Higher Education and the Australian Universities Teaching Committee.Google Scholar
  7. Karayan, S. and Crowe, J. (1997) ‘Student perspectives of electronic discussion groups’, THE Journal: Technological Horizons in Education 24 (9): 69–71.Google Scholar
  8. Laurillard, D. (1993) Rethinking University Education: A Framework for the Effective use of Educational Technology, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Martin, P.W. (2003) ‘Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in Arts’, Humanities and Social Sciences in H. Fry, S. Ketteridge and S. Marshall (eds.) A Handbook of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 2nd edn. UK: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  10. Mason, R. (1998) ‘Models of online courses’, Asynchronous Learning Networks Magazine 2, No. 2, http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/JUL01_Issue/article02.html, accessed 21 December 2010.
  11. McKenzie, W.A. (2002) ‘Using online discussion in teaching undergraduate psychology’, http://science.uniserve.edu.au/pubs/callab/vol8/mckenzie.html accessed 13 December 2009.
  12. Murphy, M. and Reidy, T. (2007) ‘Political science's signature pedagogy’, Academic Exchange Quarterly 10 (4).Google Scholar
  13. Olsen, J. and Statham, A. (2005) ‘Critical thinking in political science: Evidence from the introductory comparative politics course’, Journal of Political Science Education 1 (3): 323–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Palmer, S., Holt, D. and Bray, S. (2007) ‘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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rovai, A.P. (2002) ‘Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks’, Internet and Higher Education 5: 319–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Scriven, M. and Paul, R. (2001) ‘Defining critical thinking: A draft statement for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking’, http://www.criticalthinking.org/university/defining.html, accessed 13 December 2009.
  17. Smith, D. and Hardaker, G. (2000) ‘e-Learning innovation through the implementation of an Internet supported learning environment’, Educational Technology and Society 3: 1–16.Google Scholar
  18. Trudeau, R.H. (2005) ‘Get them to read, get them to talk: Using discussion forums to enhance student learning’, Journal of Political Science Education 1 (3): 289–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Warschauer, M. (1997) ‘Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice’, Modern language Journal 8 (4): 470–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Consortium for Political Research 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fiona Buckley
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of GovernmentO’Rahilly Building, University College CorkCorkIreland

Personalised recommendations