Evaluation Of Online Learning

An Instructor’s Methods of Facilitating Students’ Participation in Asynchronous Online Discussion This study by: Department of Educational Technology University of Northern Colorado United States Abstract: The purpose of this study is to investigate the methods that an instructor can use to facilitate students’ participation in online discussion. Four methods were used in this study: 1) post the discussion question and encourage students to participate 2) give the students a clear explanation of the purpose and advantages of participating in online discussion along with teacher’s expectations 3) participate as an instructor and give feedback 4) grade the discussion. 112 undergraduate students from four sections of the same class were involved in this study. A discussion question was posted on the discussion board under four different treatments. Treatment 2 and 4 successfully enhanced students’ participation. Treatment 4 was the best among the four treatments. In addition, the result also indicated a pattern of the students’ participation in the online discussion on Blackboard

Research Questions The purpose of this study is to investigate the methods that an instructor can use to facilitate students’ participation in online discussion. Three questions are asked in this study: 1. Does the instructor play an important role in facilitating students’ participation in the asynchronous online discussion? 2. What is the best method among the four treatment groups (instructor’s posting the question only, instructor's explanation and expectation, instructor's participation and feedback, and the instructor's use of grading) to facilitate students' participation in the asynchronous online discussion? 3. What is the students’ pattern of participating in the asynchronous online discussion?

Discussion Students’ motivation is very important for successful, effective, and efficient learning. For those who lack a strong motivation, an instructor’s intervention is a powerful tool in the stimulus of student work. In this study, the instructor explained the purpose and advantages of participating in online discussion, and showed high expectations

for students in group 2. The postings in group 2 far surpassed those in group 1 where the instructor did not intervene in students’ participation in the discussion. In group 4, the instructor announced that the discussion would be graded. The number of postings had a substantial increase when compared to group 1, 2, and 3. According to Hew and Cheung (2003), the lack of an active role of moderator may cause the paucity of message postings. Instructors are moderators, and therefore, instructors play an important role in enhancing students’ participation in online discussion. Among the four treatments, treatment 4 (grading) had the most effect in enhancing students’ participation in online discussion because the grading made students regard the discussion activity as an important requirement for the class, and they did not want to have a lower grade. Positive feedback is also clearly effective in producing behavioral changes (Ormrod, 1999). However, the number of responses in group 3 was about the same as group 1. This indicated that providing feedback did not facilitate students’ participation in the online discussion. The reason why providing feedback did not work much was that the students did not know that the instructor also participated in

the discussion. The instructor did not announce his participation. Students did not go to discussion board again to read classmates’ responses after they posted their own responses. Announcing the instructor’s participation to students might result in a different outcome in group 3. This would be a research question for future study. In the four groups, only 40% of the responses were replies to other students’ responses. 60% of responses were direct replies to the discussion question. 77% of the replies to classmates’ responses were in group 4, in which the participation was graded. This online discussion generated little interaction among students . A high proportion of the interaction was one-way interaction; that is, the student who received replies from other students did not respond to the replies. This supports the inference of Hew and Cheung (2003) that students may only be interested in telling the instructor that they have participated in the discussion. In other words, students thought that they had already done their part regardless of the number of the postings so that they would not get a bad grade. This may be the reason why 80% of students in group 4 posted only one or two responses (see Table 2) and the interaction was low. As for the distribution of responses within the two-week duration, many students posted their responses either

on or several days prior to the day when class met. This indicated the pattern of the students’ use of Blackboard and participation in asynchronous online discussion in the class that adopted Blackboard as the course supplement. The reason why a majority of students got online and posted their responses several days prior to the class meeting days might be that they logged onto Blackboard to see if there was any announcement from the instructor or if any assignment had been posted before the class met. By checking Blackboard regularly, the students read the announcement about the discussion activity, and they decided to post their responses immediately since they had already logged onto Blackboard. The reason why 39% of the responses were posted on the class meeting days within the two-week discussion duration might be that the students did not have any regular opportunity to log onto Blackboard before they came to the class. The students logged onto Blackboard several minutes prior to the class or right after the class. When the students received the information about the discussion activity, they decided to posttheir responses on the same day when they came to the class. The participants in this study were students who took Educational Technology Applications for Elementary

Grades (ET347), in which the Blackboard was adopted as the course supplement. The participants were not from a complete online class, in which teachers and students do not have to meet in the real classroom. This online discussion was expected to stimulate replies to a discussion question, and students were supposed to respond to some fellow students’ responses. The result might be different if the researcher provided a generalized topic, and then asked students to begin the discussion by expressing their ideas and opinions, and defending their own stance. Under this condition, the combination of treatment 2, 3, and 4 in this study might result in the best outcome. Many different treatments can be implemented in a similar design. There is much to be explored and tested on this topic for the future studies. Refrence: http://www.google.com.om/search?q=grading+online+ discussion+participation&hl=ar&start=10&sa=N