Challenges: Findings from Previous Empirical Research
Although asynchronous online discussions may afford certain advantages, such benefits can only be enjoyed if students choose to participate in the discussions. While students could participate by merely reading messages, such an act does not really encourage the exchange of ideas in the online discussion because if no messages are posted in the first place there will be no messages in the discussion for students to read. Unfortunately, students who actively contribute in online discussions are usually few in numbers. This chapter discusses the various factors or reasons that could lead to limited student contribution. Limited student contribution is defined as students making few postings, students exhibiting surface-level thinking, or students displaying low-level knowledge construction in online discussions. A comprehensive literature search across six electronic databases was conducted. Ten main factors that could lead to limited student contribution were identified after a review of more than 110 empirical research studies.
KeywordsAsynchronous online discussion Limitations of online discussion Online contribution Literature review Surface thinking Critical thinking Knowledge construction Online posting Problems of online discussion Limited contribution
- Alavi, M., & Leider, D. E. (1999). Knowledge management systems: Issues, challenges, and benefits. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 1(7), 1–37.Google Scholar
- Arend, B. (2009). Encouraging critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(1). Retrieved February 15, 2012 from http://www.thejeo.com/Archives/Volume6Number1/Arendpaper.pdf.
- Bodzin, A., & Park, J. (2000). Factors that influence asynchronous discourse with preservice teachers on a public, web-based forum. Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 16(4), 22–30.Google Scholar
- Bullen, M. (1998). Participation and critical thinking in online university distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 13(2). Retrieved February 23, 2012 from http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/140/394.
- Burt, M.T., Grady, M. and McMann, G. (1994). Interaction analysis of an inter-university computer conference. Paper presented at the Distance Learning Research Conference, College Station, Texas.Google Scholar
- Chai, C. S., & Khine, M. S. (2006). An analysis of interaction and participation patterns in online community. Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 250–261.Google Scholar
- Chen, S.-J., & Caropreso, E. J. (2004). Influence of personality on online discussion. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 3(2). Retrieved July 9, 2007, from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/index.cfm.
- Chen, C.-Y., Pedersen, S., & Murphy, K. L. (2012). The influence of perceived information overload on student participation and knowledge construction in computer-mediated communication. Information Science, 40(2), 325–349.Google Scholar
- Cheong, C. M., & Cheung, W. S. (2008). Online discussion and critical thinking skills: A case study in a Singapore secondary school. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(5), 556–573.Google Scholar
- Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2006). Examining students’ creative and critical thinking and student to student interactions in an asynchronous online discussion environment: A singapore case study. Asia-Pacific Cybereducation Journal, 2(2). Retrieved June 11, 2010 from http://www.acecjournal.org/current_issue_current_issue.php.
- Feenberg, A. (1987). Computer conferencing and the humanities. Instructional Science, 16(2), 169–186.Google Scholar
- Garrison, D. R. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: Social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61–72.Google Scholar
- Gerbic, P. (2006). To post or not to post: Undergraduate student perceptions about participating in online discussions. In Who’s learning? Whose technology? Proceedings Ascilite Sydney 2006. Retrieved January 27, 2012 from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney06/proceeding/pdf_papers/p124.pdf.
- Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2003a). Evaluating the participation and quality of thinking of pre-service teachers in an asynchronous online discussion environment: Part II. International Journal of Instructional Media, 30(4), 355–366.Google Scholar
- Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2003c). An exploratory study of the use of asynchronous online discussion in hypermedia design. Journal of Instructional Science & Technology, 6(1). Retrieved from http://www.usq.edu.au/electpub/e-jist/docs/Vol6_No1/contents2.htm.
- Hew, K. F., Knapczyk, D., & Frey, T. (2005). Electronically training teachers at a distance: What We’ve learned from an analysis of six different online pedagogical activities. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2005 (pp. 414–419). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
- Hewitt, J. (2001). Beyond threaded discourse. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(3), 207–221.Google Scholar
- Hewitt, J., & Teplovs, C. (1999). An analysis of growth patterns in computer conferencing threads. In C. Hoadley & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Proceedings of the Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL) 1999 Conference, December 12–15. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University.Google Scholar
- Jamaludin, A., & Quek, C. L. (2006). Using asynchronous online discussions in primary school project work. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 22(1), 64–87.Google Scholar
- Jeong, A. (2004). The combined effects of response time and message content on growth patterns of discussion threads in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 36–53.Google Scholar
- Kanuka, H., & Anderson, T. (1998). Online Social Interchange, Discord, and Knowledge Construction. The Journal of Distance Education, 13(1). Retrieved September 30, 2008 from http://www.jofde.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/137/412.
- Khan, S. (2005). Listservs in the college science classroom: Evaluating participation and ‘‘richness’’ in computer-mediated discourse. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 13(2), 325–351.Google Scholar
- Lim, S. C. R., Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2011). Critical thinking in asynchronous online discussion: An investigation of student facilitation techniques. New Horizons in Education, 59(1), 52–65.Google Scholar
- Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Liu, X., Doore, B. & Li, L. (2008). Scaffolding knowledge co-construction in web-based discussions through message labeling. In K. McFerrin et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 3041-3046). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar
- Maor, D. (2010). Examining cognitive attributes in student-teacher and student–student online interactions. In Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific 2010 (pp. 4247-4252). AACE.Google Scholar
- McLoughlin, C. & Luca, J. (2000). Cognitive engagement and higher order thinking through computer conferencing: We know why but do we know how? In A. Herrmann and M.M. Kulski (Eds.), Flexible Futures in Tertiary Teaching. Proceedings of the 9 th Annual Teaching Learning Forum, 2-4 February 2000. Perth: Curtin University of Technology. Retrieved November 7, 2008 from http://lsn.curtin.edu.au/tlf/tlf2000/mcloughlin.html.
- Meyer, K. A. (2003). Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: The role of time and higher-order thinking. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 55–65.Google Scholar
- Murphy, E., & Coleman, E. (2004). Graduate students’ experiences of challenges in online asynchronous discussions. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 30(2). Retrieved August 5, 2011 from http://www.cjlt.ca/index.php/cjlt/article/view/128/122.
- Nandi, D., Hamilton, M., Harland, J., & Warburton, G. (2011). How active are students in online discussion forums. In J. Hamer & M. de Raadt. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 13 th Australasian Computing Education Conference 2011. Google Scholar
- Newman, D. R., Webb, B., & Cochrane, C. (1995). A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning. Interpersonal Computing and Technology, 3(2), 56–77.Google Scholar
- Ng, C. S. L., & Cheung, W. S. (2007). Comparing face to face, tutor led discussion and online discussion in the classroom. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(4), 455–469.Google Scholar
- Oliver, M., & Shaw, G. P. (2003). Asynchronous discussion in support of medical education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 56–67.Google Scholar
- Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. J. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: Regents of the University of Michigan.Google Scholar
- Quek, C. L. (2010). Analysing high school students’ participation and interaction in an asynchronous online project-based learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(3), 327–340.Google Scholar
- Schafersman, S. D. (1991). An introduction to critical thinking. Retrieved August 26, 2011 from http://smartcollegeplanning.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Critical-Thinking.pdf.
- Shakirova, D. M. (2007). Technology for the shaping of college students’ and upper-grade students’ critical thinking. Russian Education & Society, 49(9), 42–52.Google Scholar
- Swartz, R. J., & Parks, S. (1994). Infusing the teaching of critical and creative thinking into content instruction. Pacific Grove, CA: A lesson design handbook for the elementary grades. Critical Thinking Press & Software.Google Scholar
- Whittaker, S., Terveen, L., Hill, W., & Cherny, L. (1998). The dynamics of mass interaction. In Proceedings of ACM’s Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, (pp. 257–264), Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
- Winiecki, D. J., & Chyung, Y. (1998, August). Keeping the thread: helping distance education students and instructors keep track of asynchronous discussions. In Proceedings of the 14 th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning, 98 (pp. 451-460). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-Madison.Google Scholar
- Yeh, H.-T., & Lahman, M. (2007). Pre-service teachers’ perceptions of asynchronous online discussion on blackboard. The Qualitative Report, 12(4), 680–704.Google Scholar
- Zhao, N., & McDougall, D. (2005). Cultural factors affecting Chinese students’ participation in asynchronous online learning. In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education 2005 (pp. 2723–2729).Chesapeake, VA: AACE.Google Scholar