Title: Roadmap to Thoughtful Online Discussion—Oxymoron or Reality?
Author: Janet de Vry
Co-Author: Barbara Frey
Co-Author: George Watson
Discipline: Faculty Development
Target Audience: Introductory, Faculty Technology Development Workshop
Keywords: Facilitating Online Discussions, Critical Thinking, Asynchronous Discussion, Rubric
Length of Time/Staging: The problem has five stages taking place shortly before and during a three-hour workshop. It could also be scheduled for two two-hour workshops with time between for research.
Abstract:
Online discussions have the potential to enhance learning in a significant and engaging manner, but there are few proven strategies for helping faculty to implement discussions with their students. This five-stage problem allows faculty to participate in online discussions as their students would in the context of a faculty development workshop. The workshop goals are tostimulatehigh levels of engagement, collaboration, and critical thinking, which participants transfer to the planning, implementation, and assessment of their online course discussions. The workshop also provides the opportunity to interact with an expert at a distance who can ask probing questions and make comments to identify assumptions, suggestalternatives, or summarize major contributions.
During the first stages of the problem,the workshop participants assume the roles of faculty members who are teamteaching an interdisciplinary course,Current Middle Eastern Issues. They have set up a discussion area for their class on “hot topics,” but are disappointed in the quality of the discussion that ensued. Their first assignment is to analyze the class discussion.In the workshop, the participants are divided into online groups of four to six participants. The collaborative groups use asynchronous online discussions to propose strategiesand select the best strategies for enhancing the quality of their class discussion. Near the end of the workshop, the faculty members assume their normal teaching roles and participate in a mini-lecture and discussion on rubrics for online discussions. In the final stage, the participants develop individual action plans to apply the principles to their own classes. The problem uses fictionalized real-world data, a mix of online and face-to-face discussion, mini-lecture and time to apply what they learned to their own “real-world classes.”
Stage 1—Analyzethe problems in an Online Current Discussion.
Participants receive an email several days before the workshop directing them to their learning management system course. Once logged into their course, Using Active Discussions, they see the following four icons: Description of Problem, Discussion for Analysis, Resources, and On-Going Support .
Example 1: Course Homepage.htm
Once logged into the course, participantsselect the “Description of problem” icon and read:
You are a teamof faculty membersteaching an interdisciplinary course of 50 students on Current Issues in the Middle East. You have decided to use discussions for the entireclass to engage students in thoughtful dialogue on issues such as women’s rights, Palestinian homeland, oil interests, and the war in Iraq. You announced that contributions would count toward a class participation grade. Despite the seemingly “hot topic” nature of the issues, you are disappointed in the number and quality of the responses. You see statements like “If you don’t support our troops in Iraq, you are not a good citizen.” One faculty member you know has abandoned the use of online discussions, saying they are unwieldy and do notcontribute anything substantial.
Review the postings in the “Current Issues in the Middle East” discussion topic. What are the difficulties with this discussion? Go to the discussion topic "Strategies and Resources" and post at least one significant comment about the Middle East discussion.
The examples below illustrate the fictionalized real-world discussion topics and postings that the participants were asked to analyze in Stage 1.
Example 2: Hot Topics.html
Example 3: Fictitious Real WorldPostings
In the first face-to-face gathering, the workshop facilitator asks for volunteers to summarize what was going on in the discussion and to suggest appropriate goals for various types of discussion. The class is then divided into collaborative groups that will interact in an asynchronous discussion. One of the challenges of this type of workshop is to distinguish the face-to-face session from the online sessions as participants move back and forth between the two modes of communication. One suggestion is to use the setting to encourage face-to-face discussion such as a round table when “in the classroom” and to use more individualized seating such as computer workstations when in the “online” world.
Example 4: WorkshopSpace
Stage 2—Formulate Strategies to Improve the Quality of the Online Discussion
The following instructions guide collaborative faculty groups as they brainstorm various improvement strategies for the online discussion:
Since you cannot get together at the same time, you have opened your own private WebCT discussion topic to sort through ways to improve the quality of student postings. Using your group’s private WebCT discussion, exchange your suggestions about different strategies that could be used to improve the quality of online discussions. As a group, come up with at least ten different strategies. As an individual within the group try to contribute at least two strategies.
Example 5: Sample Postings on Brainstorming Strategies
Stage 3—Post Your Best Solutions
This stage is a continuation of the online discussion, but the task is more complex. Participants must negotiate to decide their top three strategies. This requires cooperation, leadership, and building consensus. All three are exemplified in Example 6 below. Following are the online guidelines for faculty participants:
Evaluate the various strategies suggested. As a group select the top three strategies to share with the rest of the workshop participants. Post your group’s top three suggestions to the “Strategies and Resources” Discussion Topic.
Example 6: Sample Postings on NegotiatingBest Strategies
Between Stages 3 and 4, the facilitator brought participants back to the face-to-face classroom for discussion and a mini-lecture on grading rubrics. The class discussed how the online experience related to their actual experience in the classroom and what they still wanted to know.Most agreed that the strategies might vary according to the goals of the online discussion. Participants were eager to learn more about rubrics.
The facilitator defined a rubric as a set of criteria for assessing the effectiveness of postings with 3-4 levels of proficiency. Criteria included such elements as posting frequency, follow-up to other postings, and reference/support of comments. Levels of competency ranged from excellent to poor and can contain scores for achieving a level of competence. Some prefer a checklist for simplicity; others prefer more detailed criteria. This helps in grading as well as in setting standards for student work.
Example 7: Rubric for Asynchronous Discussion Participation
This would be a good place to end a two-hour session. The homework would be to complete the instructions in Stage 4. In an even longer workshop, the facilitator could add an additional stage in which participants would find resources on using online discussions and share them with the rest of the class, thus adding the research component that is missing in the three-hour workshop.
Stage 4 Stimulate more Discussion and Begin to Dialogue with Experts
In this stage, the faculty workshop participants resume their own identities and pose questions that will deepen the whole class discussion:
A.Working independently, respond to postings in the "Strategies and Resources" discussion topic. Try to develop responses and questions that will generate more in-depth discussion.
B. Develop questions you would like to pose to our experts regarding active learning and critical thinking. These can be on anything that might contribute to rich online discussions. Post your questions to the “Discuss with Experts” topic. Check back tomorrow for answers and further discussion.
Stage 5—Individual Action Plan
Participants reviewthe individual action plan and partner with another participant to share objectives for an actual class discussion and possible guidelines. The partners report back to the class before proceeding to fill out the plan. The facilitator offers assistance during the process.
Example 8: Blank Individual Action Plan
Example 9: Sample Individual Action Plan
Supporting Materials:
Student Learning Objectives
1