Discussion Forum Efficacy in an Online Course:
Dialogue vs Interaction
PROCEEDINGS
Emmanuelle Bernardin, Audencia Nantes, France
E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Las Vegas, NV, USA ISBN 978-1-939797-05-6 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA
Abstract
The objective of this research was to assess the effect that the introduction of regular dialogue, as opposed as simple interaction could have on students’ participation to ADFs and on the quality level of the content of their posts. To do so, two groups were observed in the context of an online graduate course on Project Management, developed and delivered by an American University. The first group was engaged into constant dialogue by its facilitator and the second group had a more simple interaction with its facilitator. Students’ posts were analyzed using the framework of Davidson-Shivers et al (2012). Results show that engaging dialogue with students makes them more active and more attentive to the quality of their work.
Citation
Bernardin, E. (2013). Discussion Forum Efficacy in an Online Course: Dialogue vs Interaction. In T. Bastiaens & G. Marks (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2013--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 264-273). Las Vegas, NV, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 28, 2024 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/114844/.
© 2013 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)
Keywords
References
View References & Citations Map- Berge, Z.L. (1995). "Facilitating Computer Conferencing: Recommendations From the Field." Educational Technology& Society 35(1): 22-30.
- Brannon, R. & Essex, C. (2001). Synchronous and asynchronous communication tools in distance education. TechTrends, 45(1), 36-42. Http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02763377Bures,E.,Abrami,P.,Barclay,A.& Bures, E. (2010). Assessing Online Dialogue in Higher Education. In J. Sanchez& K. Zhang (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2010 (pp. 438-448). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
- Davidson-Shivers, G.V., Ellis, H.H., & Amarasing, P.K. (2010). “How do females participate in online debates?” International Journal of E-Learning, 9(2), 169-183.
- Davidson-Shivers, G.V., Ellis. H.H., & Amarasing, K. (2005). “How do female students perform in online debates and discussion?” In G. Richards (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and High-er Education 2005. (pp.1972-1977). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
- Davidson-Shivers, G.V., Luyegu, E. & Kimble, B.E. (2012). An Analysis of Asynchronous Discussions: A Case Study of Graduate Student Participation in Online Debates. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 21(1), 29-51. Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
- Moore, M.G. (1993). Theory of Transactional Distance. In Keegan, D. (Ed.) Theoretical Principles of Distance Education. Routledge: New York
- Wagner, E.D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-26.
- Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. (2004) Theory and Practice of Online Learning, Terry Anderson and Faith Elloumi, Editors, Athabasca University, 2004 (online book), 421 pp.
- Bruner, J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Cazden, C. (1986). Classroom discourse. In M.C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp.432463).
- Gumperz, J. (1982). Discourse Strategies. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University
- Herring, S. (1996). Posting in a different voice. In C. Ess (Ed.), Philosophical perspectives on computermediated communication (pp. 115-145). NY:SUNY.
- Herring, S., Johnson, D., & DiBenedetto, T. (1992). Participation in electronic discourse in a “feminist” field. In M. Bucholtz, K. Hall, & B. Moonwomon (Eds.), Locating power: Proceedings of the second Berkeley women and language conference (pp.250-62). Berkeley,CA: Berkeley Women and Language Group.
- Mazzolini, M. & Maddison, S. (2007). When to Jump in: The Role of the Instructor in Online Discussion Forums. Computers& Education, 49(2), 193-213.
- Sher, A. (2009). "Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in Web-based Online Learning Environment." Journal of Interactive Online Learning 8(2): 102-120.
- Schiffrin, D. (1995). Approaches to discourse. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers.
- Tannen, D. (1994). Talking from 9 to 5. NY: Avon Books
- Wertsch, J. (1990). The voice of rationality in a sociocultural approach to mind. In L.C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp.111-126).
These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.
Suggest Corrections to References