Techniques for Online Discussions

Literature

A BRIEF INTRODUCTION TO THE USEOF ONLINE DISCUSSION IN LEARNING

CONTENT

IntroductionCan synchronous and asynchronous discussion do the same things?What are the advantages / disadvantages of asynchronous discussion?What are the advantages / disadvantages of synchronous discussion?So is it online discussion worth it?What do I have to think about before I start?How many students should be in a discussion group?How do I engage the students?What makes a good online discussion?What is an effective moderator?How can I evaluate my online discussions?But this will take all my time...ReferencesURL listing

1. INTRODUCTION

1st Generation correspondence print

2ndGeneration multimedia print, audio, videotape

3rd Generation telelearning teleconferencing, broadcastTV

4th Generation flexible learning CMC,CD

Flexible learning has been through four generations. In its first iteration,distance learning, hardcopy course packs and black box videos werephysically posted out to off campus students. Over time the concept ofthe open university developed with the use of images and text sent outover broadcast television. The fourth generation has been termedcomputer mediated communication (CMC) and has been a `quietrevolution' in education (Meeks, 1987). In its early days text based CMCwas provided by a asynchronous information transfer (ie. computerconferencing, special interest groups, electronic mail, list servers, bulletin

Techniques for Online Discussions http://www.phys.unsw.edu.au/ITET/literature.html

1 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

boards). In more recent times CMC has developed a more real timeinteractive format termed synchronous communication (ie chat). Overtime both synchronous and asynchronous forms of CMC have developedinto useful student centred learning tools and are now generically calledonline discussion. A list of the learning activities that can be achievedusing online discussion is given below.

Group discussionsGuest lecturers (international)Small group discussionsExtend in-class discussionsExpand course contentInter-group discussionsReaction postingsCase scenariosBrainstormingRole-playingPolling

TABLE 1: Learning activities that can be performed using online discussions(Gallupe, 1991; ÿstbye, 1989; Masys, 1991; ÿstbye, 1991; Dirksen, 1989).

2. CAN SYNCHRONOUS AND ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSION DOTHE SAME THINGS?No. Each form of online discussion is more suitable to particular tasks.Synchronous discussions are more useful for informal chats and sharinginformation. The asynchronous discussion is more suited for longer anddeeper interactive learning where reflection is required. A list of thedifferent uses of both types of online discussion is given in Table 2.

SYNCHRONOUS ASYNCHRONOUS

Sharing information during classesWriting to discover and discusscontentSaving transcripts for review andstudyMeeting online when studentscannot meet face to face PlanningprojectsInformal discussionStudy sessions

Extending discussions amongstudents and faculty betweenclassesBuilding learning teamsindependent of time and placeAllowing time to read and reflect inclass or between classes|Recording information or ideasEncouraging various types of"public discourse"

TABLE 2: Target uses for the two major types of online discussion


2 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

2. WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES / DISADVANTAGES OFASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSION?Asynchronous discussion has been widely used in learning communities tofoster social interactive learning. It is however important to understandthe advantages and disadvantages of this method. A reasonable summaryis given in Tables 3 and 4.

Students can study at own pacePromotes collaborative workSelf-directedSocially interactive learning (constructivist)Learning fits in with modern workplace requirementsCan join discussion at times best for themOpens access to world wide resourcesMedium encourages non native language speakers to participateTyping :-1) forces student to be reflective2) slows the pace and allows time to think3) provides a record of knowledge construction

TABLE 3: Learning advantages of asynchronous discussions

Technical problems (server crashes, network drop outs)Lack of access to computer or networkDisjointed discussionsInformation overload (too much print to read)Many voices but little meaningTakes time to get used to application and processNo non-verbal cuesFeedback can be slowLack of communityTakes more time to reach a consensusMore administration money and time needed

TABLE 4: Learning disadvantages of asynchronous discussions(Harasim, 1989: Bates, 1995; Harasim et al., 1995: Mason & Weller, 2000:

Levin, Kim & Riel, 1990; Collings & Walker, 2000; Morgan, 2001)

3. WHAT ARE THE ADVANTAGES / DISADVANTAGES OFSYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSION?Synchronous discussion is a more recent development. The advantagesand disadvantages of this method are given in Tables 5 and 6.

Create dynamic collaborative learning environmentsPromote actively engagement in reflective thinking


3 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

Increased flexibility in time and place of learningPromotes brainstormingBuilds a sense of social presence and community

TABLE 5: Learning advantages of synchronous discussions

Small time window for repliesDifficult to take turns in a discussionGives an advantage for fast typists, native language speakers and thoseexperienced in softwareNot appropriate for content delivery (eg lecture)Participants can become "unruly" if anonymous (eg excessive joking,flaming)Development of jargon to increase speed of typing (eg. emoticons)

TABLE 6: Learning disadvantages of synchronous discussions(Aoki, 1995; Reid, 1991).

4. SO IS ONLINE DISCUSSION WORTH IT?Yes. A quote from a lecturer summarises a lot of the personal feedbackconcerning online discussions.

'Frankly, the quality of the discussion and the level of understandingamong my students in my Web Board groups are far superior than in myin class sessions...the outcomes of my asynchronous discussions exceedmy expectations...With peer and mentor led study, anyone at anymoment may find themselves in the role of 'teacher'(Terry Dugas, Florida Gulf Coast University).

5. WHAT DO I HAVE TO THINK ABOUT BEFORE I START?

i. GROUP BUILDINGOnline discussion is a group activity and plagued with all the problems ofgroup dynamics. See the excellent discussion on surviving the groupproject at www.cba.neu.edu/~ewertheim/teams/ovrvw2.htm#effect

ii. STUDENT ACCESSYou eill need to consider how your students will access the onlinediscussion. Some questions to answer are given below;

Who are your students?Where are they?What resources are available to both staff and students?Do all students have access to the web?Are any groupware products (eg WebCT or Blackboard) accessible?


4 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

Should you send out written instructions before the first class?

TABLE 7: Access questions

6. HOW MANY STUDENTS SHOULD BE IN A DISCUSSION GROUP?

8 - 20 seems to be the answer...

"A critical mass of about twelve students is necessary to maintain aninteresting online discussion. If the course drops below eightparticipants, all that happens in the VC conference is usually related to adirect input of the lecturer. On the other end of the spectrum, I do notbelieve that a course with more than twenty students can be conductedat the level of quality we would like to see. Such a course would have tobe split into sections and a "coach" should be assigned to each section inaddition to the lecturer who is responsible for the complete course." (HiltzR, 1997)

7. HOW DO I ENGAGE THE STUDENTS?

(the following is mostly taken from "Eight Ways to Get Students MoreEngaged in Online Conferences" William Klemm 1998)

a. FORCE THEM TO LOG ONAs a mean of 'attendance' verification and to increase interaction,students were required to submit a weekly 'class participation'assignment. This assignment consisted of the student posting aconference comment critiquing the subject matter discussed in the videoand weekly reading. Students were encouraged to comment on thediscussions submitted by fellow students and to encourage thiscommunication the instructor commented on each student's weeklydiscussion. This requirement proved very successful. Students rarely'missed' classes, and when they did the work was made up with classparticipation.

Don't let it be optional. Set aside a portion of the grade allocation forparticipation in the online discussions. Tell the students that they mustpost x-number of items each week or for each topic. Critics will say thatthis approach does nothing to ensure quality of input. But it at least getsthe students engaged, and hopefully, once they get caught up in theactivity, they will strive to improve the relevance and quality of theirwork, because now they are on display. No longer can they hide. Formany students, it is more embarrassing to make public postings thathave no value. As another incentive for quality work, the teacher shouldgrade on quality of the postings. That is highly subjective, but no more sothan grading of term papers or essays.


5 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

b. REPLY FASTTimely responses to student questions is important. One of the mainobjectives of the instructor in a virtual class is to keep the students'interest alive at all times if possible. It is easy for someone to loseinterest in something when they feel ignored. When a student poses aquestion to the instructor it is because they seek an explanation orclarification on some idea. But the student's interest may not be the sameand will in fact diminish if the instructor's response is not prompt, saywithin 24 hours.

c. GET THE QUIET ONES TO TALKInstructors should take note of everyone's participation. In particular, aninstructor should look for any passive students who may be logging inregularly but not participating actively in the discussions (Lurkers). A lackof participation can be an indication that the student is slowly losinginterest in the course. This may be due to personal factors, unrelated tothe course, or it may be a consequence of lack of interest in the subjectmatter of the course or perhaps the topic being discussed in a givenweek. The role of the instructor is to interact with the student andencourage them to participate. The use of a tutor to prod discussion isuseful.

d. FORM LEARNING TEAMSIt is good to ask for an initial comment asking everyone in the course topost a message introducing themselves and sharing any appropriateinformation with their classmates. The idea is not only to find out ifanybody is having difficulty with using the system but also to develop afeeling among students that they know who is in the classroom and tobring people closer together. In some ways this may allow the students toknow about each other more than in a traditional classroom, as littleinteraction often taking place among student in a regular class.Familiarity with members of the class and developed friendships canmirror the same effects that influence how groups are formed in a face toface class.

e. MAKE THE ACTIVITY INTERESTING.If it is a discussion topic, make it one that students have a reason to getengaged in. Appeal to their life experiences, vested interests andambitions. It might even be a good idea to let the students create someof the topics, especially if you provide an overall academic framework toguide them where you want them to go. If it is a group-created paper orproject, let the students pick the subject within the bounds of theacademic objectives.

f. DON'T SETTLE FOR OPINIONS.Everybody has opinions… It is not surprising that many classroom


6 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

discussion groups online are dominated by opinion messages, rather thanrigorous analysis and creative thought. Teachers should insist thatopinions alone are not sufficient. They must be supported with data andrational discourse and even re-examined in light of what others in theonline group are thinking.

g. STRUCTURE THE ACTIVITY.Give students guideposts to help them think of things to say that areacademically meaningful. Topics should be organized around an academictheme that serves course objectives. Topics should not be so open-endedthat students digress. Debates can be structured by requiring students topost a position, to which others respond with pro or con supportingarguments, followed by critique of the arguments. Brainstorming can bestructured by having students first generate a list of alternatives; re-thinkthe list by creating new ordering, structure, or relationships,systematically evaluating each item to produce a "short list" of viablealternatives; and then reaching consensus decision on the best choices,followed by prioritization.

h. REQUIRE A HAND-IN ASSIGNMENT (DELIVERABLES).To extend structuring to its logical conclusion, you should requirestudents to do something besides just express ideas and opinions. Theyshould produce a deliverable from the conference. This kind of activitycapitalises on all the advantages of constructivist theory, which holds thatstudents learn best when they have to integrate, synthesise and applyinformation by creating a deliverable piece of work. Such a deliverablecan include idea generation and analysis, decisions, plans and designs,proposals, case studies, problem solution, research projects, term papersor reports, portfolios or role playing.

i. ENSURE QUALITY WORKIrrespective of the specific learning activity, the teacher should knowwhat quality work is and should intervete as the work is being developedto steer students in the right direction. When the teacher participates in aconference, providing extensive critique, feedback, and encouragement,students cannot help but become more involved.

j. PEER GRADING.Tell students at the beginning of the conference that at the end of theactivity they will be asked to rate each other on the value of eachperson's contribution. This can be a powerful incentive for students to doquality work in the conference. However, most students do not like tograde each other. This is especially a problem if they have bonded as aresult of operating in a learning team. One possible solution is to havestudents grade the contributions of another group, which also gives themadded learning experiences. Another possibility is to structure the ratingsso that they don't translate directly into A, B, C, etc. The ratings might be


7 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

in the form of "superior, good, fair, poor," or some equivalent. Anotherpossibility is to have each student name the one student in the group whohelped them the most. Students who are named more than once mightget bonus points on the final grade. A similar approach could be usedwith a ranking scheme. Students with the best ranks get the most bonuspoints on the final grade.

8. WHAT MAKES A GOOD ONLINE DISCUSSION?

An effective online discussion enables students to create knowledge in asocial environment. A summary of the characteristics of a good onlinediscussion is given in Table 8.

Have an Effective ModeratorEncourage Students to Introduce ThemselvesCreate a Community of PracticeMake Objectives and Expectations ClearClearly link criteria for an acceptable response with any grading criteriaUse user-friendly language and humourProvide helpful directions for technical supportKeep the length of message short (75-150 words, for example)Develop clear naming conventions (topic or subject lines to help youand students manage the messages-for example, include Message 1,Message 2, etc. in the name)Lurkers are communicated with directly via personal e-mailLagging conversation is re-energisedSupportive e-mail is used by the moderator to supplement onlinediscussionActivities are designed in order to foster interdependency and weavingof ideas.Develop directions that will lead students to think about the topics in away that generates and demonstrates understanding.Guest discussants are invitedSub-groups debate on different course issuesInclude information generated through these discussions on examsDo provide an alternative space for very informal discussion (Gossip orCoffee Shop)

TABLE 8: Characteristics of a good online discussion

9. WHAT IS AN EFFECTIVE MODERATOR?The moderator drives the discussion like s/he would drive a car. S/heaccelerates it when it is going too slow, brakes it when it is going too fastand steers it into interesting places. What are the characteristics of agood moderator? A summary of these characteristics is given in Table 9.


8 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

Role model responsesSet an easy initial questionKeep the structure simpleSet an interesting agendaProvide multiple simultaneous topics. Keep students active.Promote a degree of social comfort. Role model this.Promote comraderie and mutual caringEncourage introductions initiallyChange subjects when things lag.Ensure dynamic and interesting discussionsRole model how to weave the contributions.Deal with difficult individual issues through personal e-mail, not forgroup display.Raise key questions. Maintain a sense of conversational dialogue.Suggest threads of discussion.Introduce new materials. Provide web links toward further informationGet the discussion un-stuck when necessaryGive feedback.Summarise discussionsTry to remain the moderator, not the leader. Students will rise to takethe leadership role.Summarise and reflect on ideas which students have contributed.Allow time for responses to be posted and don't rush in to fill the silenceRespond quickly to contributionsMonitor students' communications for breaches of "netiquette,"(flaming, etc.)Get student feedback about the group process and activities.

TABLE 9: Characteristics of a good moderator

10. HOW CAN I EVALUATE MY ONLINE DISCUSSIONS?

a. ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOURAL DATAIn this method individual speech transactions between teachers andstudents are coded into defined behaviours and counted. It is not widelyused today and is considered prescriptive, narrowly defined and notsufficiently able to assess a dynamic group environment (eg Flanders,1970; Nastasi & Clements, 1992).

b. COGNITIVE CONTENT ANALYSISDiscussion transcripts can be analysed according to cognitivecharacteristics. One commonly cited method (Henri, 1992) codesdiscussions into five dimensions; these being participative, interactive,


9 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

social, cognitive and metacognitive. Henri's approach is grounded in acognitive view of learning, focusing on the level of knowledge and skillsevident in the learners' communications. Aspects of this model have beentaken up and expanded upon by others interested in comparing the levelof critical thinking in face to face seminars and computer conferences (eg.Henri 1992 and 1993: Newman, Johnson, Webb, & Cochrane, 1997). Thismethod has a lot of intuitive appeal but can be quite clumsy to apply, isfocussed on individual knowledge and is very subjective.

c. SOCIAL CONSTRUCTIVISMSocial constructivism theories based on the work of Vygotsky (1978,1986) are widely accepted in education, including the application oftechnology to teaching and learning. The emphasis on learning as sociallygrounded is particularly relevant to online discussions where learning hasa large social quality. ( eg. McLoughlin C, Lucawww.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/mcloughlinluca.pdf).The cognitive model developed by Henri (1992) has been used as thebasis of a recent widely cited social constructionism assessment tool(Gundwardena et al, 1997 and 1998). In this method the text of thediscussion is analysed in a five phase analytic model which proposes thatknowledge construction moves through five levels from sharing &comparing, discovery & exploration, negotiation & co-construction, testing& revision and awareness of constructed knowledge. This analysis methodovercomes some of the concerns with Henri's cognitive model iby beingparticularly designed for evaluation of the social and collaborative aspectsof student centred online discussions.

11. BUT THIS WILL TAKE ALL MY TIME...The most commonly encountered problem with online discussion is timemamangement. How do I read all that stuff? Two possible answers to thisquestion are given below.

a. MONITORING MESSAGE BOARDSMonitoring and moderating Bulletin Boards may appear time consuming,but visiting the site once a day and responding to all messages in onesitting can be more efficient than being frequently interrupted by phonecalls or emails. Alternatively, you can also assign responsibility topart-time staff or tutors to do BB 'site visits'.Tutors or part-time staff canact as 'duty officers' monitoring the BB and responding to queries.

b. POST ONLINE OFFICE HOURSScheduling online office hours can be a very efficient way of meeting withstudents and being available for consultation. A time can be nominatedwhen either the Subject Coordinator or tutor/s will be in the Chatroom torespond synchronously to student questions. This allows both you andyour students to be less office bound, and can minimise travel time


10 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

(particularly for students). Students can also schedule one-to-oneappointments with you at other times (an online booking diary is useful).

c. HOW DO I MANAGE A CLASS OF 200?

d. ARE THERE ANY DISCIPLINE SPECIFIC ONLINE DISCUSSIONSOUT THERE?

REFERENCES

Aoki, K. (1995). Synchronous multi-user textual communication ininternational tele-collaboration. Electronic Journal of Communication(EJC/REC) 5(4) - np. [Online] http://www.cios.org/getfile\AOKI_V5N495Bates, A. T. (1995). Technology, Open Learning and Distance Education.London: RoutledgeCollings P, Walker D (2000). Applications to Support Student Group Work.www-cscl95.indiana.edu/cscl95/collings.htmlComputing Research, 17(4), 397-431.Dirksen, C.J. & ÿstbye, T. (1989) Effective computer conferencing inuniversity education. Journal of Education for Business, 64(8), 348-351.Flanders, N. (1970). Analysing teaching behaviour. Reading. Mass:Addison Wesley.Gallupe, R.B., Bastianutti, L.M. & Cooper, W.H. (1991). Unblockingbrainstorms. J Appl Psych, 76(1), 137-142.Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1998). Transcriptanalysis of computer-mediated conferences as a tool for testingconstructivist and social-constructivist learning theories. In DistanceLearning 1998: Proceedings of the Annual Conference on DistanceTeaching & Learning, (pp. 139-145). August 5-7, Madison, WI.Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a globalon-line debate and the development of an interaction analysis model forexamining the social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing.Journal of EducationalHarasim, L. (1989). Online education: A new domain. In R. Mason & A.Kaye (Eds), Mindweave: Communication, computers and distanceeducation, 50-57. Oxford: Pergamon Press. http://www-icdl.open.ac.uk/mindweave/chap4.html [verified 11 Nov 2000]Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learningnetworks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge,Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Henri, F. (1992). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R.Kaye (Ed), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: TheNajaden Papers, 117-136. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Henri, F. (1993). The Virtual University: Collaborative learning throughcomputer conferencing. Workshop, Monash University, July, 1993.Hiltz R (1997) Impacts of college-level courses via Asynchronous Learning


11 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

Networks: Some Preliminary Results. Journal Of Asynchronous LearningNetworks.Klemm W (1998). Eight Ways to Get Students More Engaged in OnlineConferences. www.thejournal.com/magazine/vault/A1997.cfmLevin, J. A., Kim, H., & Riel, M. M. (1990). Analyzing instructionalinteractions on electronic message networks. In L. M. Harasim (Ed.),Online Education: Perspectives on a new environment, 185-213. NewYork: Praeger.Mason , R. & Weller, M. (2000). Factors affecting students' satisfaction ona web course. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(2),173-200. http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet16/mason.htmlMasys, D.R.(1991) The national research and education network. AcadMed, 66(7), 397-8.Meeks, B.N. (1987) The quiet revolution. Byte, 12, 183-190.Morgan MS (2001) Online Discussion in the FY Writing Classroom.cal.bemidji.msus.edu/english/morgan/onlinediscussion/discussInFYW.htmlNastasi, B. K., & Clements, D. H. (1992). Social-cognitive behaviours andhigher order thinking in educational computer environments. Learningand Instruction, 2, 215-238.Newman, D. R., Johnson, C., Webb, B., & Cochrane, C. (1997).Evaluating the quality of learning in computer supported cooperativelearning. Journal of the American Society of Information Science, 48,484-495.Reid, E. M. (1994). Cultural formations in text-based virtual realities. MAThesis, University of Melbourne. [Online]. http://www.ee.mu.oz.au/papers/emr/cult-form.htmlVygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higherpsychological processes. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.(Original material published in 1930, 1933 and 1935).Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.ÿstbye, T., Boj·n, F., Rennert, G., Hurlen, P. & Garner, B. (1991).Establishing an international computer network for research and teachingin public health and epidemiology. European Journal of Epidemiology, 7,34-38.

URL LISTINGS

WHY DO ON LINE DISCUSSIONS?W McKenzie & D Murphy "I hope this goes somewhere": Evaluation of anonline discussion group. Australian Journal of Educational Technology2000, 16(3), 239-257. cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet16/mckenzie.htmlJC Taylor Distance education technologies: The fourth generation.Australian Journal of Educational Technology 1995, 11(2), 1-7.cleo.murdoch.edu.au/gen/aset/ajet/ajet11/su95p1.htmlAn analysis of text based conferencing as a tool to support learning.


12 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/mcloughlinluca.pdfOverview of web-based teaching and learningDiscussion Patterns for Interactive Electronic Communicationonlinelearning.tc.cc.va.us/resource/discpatt.htm

WORKING IN TEAMSSurviving the Group Project: A Note on Working in Teamswww.cba.neu.edu/~ewertheim/teams/ovrvw2.htm

ASYNCHRONOUS ROLE PLAYMA. Freeman & JM. Capper . Exploiting the web for education: Ananonymous asynchronous role simulation. Australian Journal ofEducational Technology 1999, 15(1), 95-116.cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet15/freeman.html

FACILITATING ONLINE DISCUSSIONSA point list of good ideas.www.plymouth.edu/psc/infotech/webct/facilitate.shtmlFacilitating Online Discussionsinterwork.sdsu.edu/courses/distance/facilitator/lessons/online_facilitation.html

ENGAGING STUDENTSEight Ways to Get Students More Engaged in Online Conferencesminerva.stkate.edu/ithelpguides.nsf/bf25ab0f47ba5dd785256499006b15a4/2a100d58a1cd672c86256a1c00728ae3?OpenDocument

ACCESSAudio online chats www.aln.org/alnweb/onlinediscussions.htm

VIDEO CONFERENCINGJ Tennant .Teleteaching with large groups: A case study from the Monashexperience. Australian Journal of Educational Technology1999, 15(1),80-94. cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet15/tennant.html

OTHER RESOURCESAsynchronous Learning Network www.aln.org/index.htmOnline Tutoring e-book otis.scotcit.ac.uk/onlinebook/Australian Journal of Educational Technology cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet.html

WHY DO ON LINE DISCUSSIONS?W McKenzie & D Murphy "I hope this goes somewhere": Evaluation of anonline discussion group. Australian Journal of Educational Technology2000, 16(3), 239-257.cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet16/mckenzie.html


13 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

JC Taylor Distance education technologies: The fourth generation.Australian Journal of Educational Technology 1995, 11(2), 1-7.cleo.murdoch.edu.au/gen/aset/ajet/ajet11/su95p1.html

IS IT ANY GOOD?An analysis of text based conferencing as a tool to support learning.www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/mcloughlinluca.pdf

GENERAL INTRODUCTIONOverview of web-based teaching and learningwww.com.unisa.edu.au/online/

Discussion Patterns for Interactive Electronic Communicationonlinelearning.tc.cc.va.us/resource/discpatt.htm

Online Discussion in the FY Writing Classroomcal.bemidji.msus.edu/english/morgan/onlinediscussion/discussInFYW.html

Guidelines for Online Discussionsonlinelearning.tc.cc.va.us/faculty/tcmoorj/general/discuss.htm

Online Moderator Guidelines and Community-Building Tipswww.well.com/confteam/hosting.html

WORKING IN TEAMSWorking in Small Groups.www.mdfaconline.org/mdfaconline/Presentations/Giles-groupwork.html

Surviving the Group Project: A Note on Working in Teamswww.cba.neu.edu/~ewertheim/teams/ovrvw2.htm

SYNCHRONOUS versus ASYNCHRONOUS DISCUSSIONSDevelopment of Communication Conventions in Instructional ElectronicChatsdisted.tamu.edu/aera97a.htm

Successful Online Teaching Using An Asynchronous Learner DiscussionForumwww.aln.org/alnweb/journal/Vol3_issue2/Rossman.htm

Computer-Mediated Cooperative Learning: Synchronous andAsynchronousCommunication Between Studentswww.cybercorp.net/rhiggins/thesis/higlitb.html

Synchronous activities


14 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

www.com.unisa.edu.au/online/Interactive.htm#Synchronous%20and%20asynchronous%20interactions

MA. Freeman & JM. Capper . Exploiting the web for education: Ananonymous asynchronous role simulation. Australian Journal ofEducational Technology 1999, 15(1), 95-116.cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet15/freeman.html

FACILITATING ONLINE DISCUSSIONS

A point list of good ideas.www.plymouth.edu/psc/infotech/webct/facilitate.shtml

Facilitating Online Discussionsinterwork.sdsu.edu/courses/distance/facilitator/lessons/online_facilitation.html

Keys to Facilitating Successful Online Discussionswww.uwsa.edu/olit/ttt/raleigh.htm

ENGAGING STUDENTSEight Ways to Get Students More Engaged in Online Conferencesminerva.stkate.edu/ithelpguides.nsf/bf25ab0f47ba5dd785256499006b15a4/2a100d58a1cd672c86256a1c00728ae3?OpenDocument

GUIDING ONLINE DISCUSSIONSGuiding Online Discussions: A Social Argument Frameworkcal.bemidji.msus.edu/english/morgan/docs/TOHE/tohePresentation.html

Guiding Online Discussionsas1.ipfw.edu/2000tohe/papers/morgan.htm

ONLINE ASSESSMENTTracking online assessmenrwww.com.unisa.edu.au/online/trackprogress.htm

ACCESSAudio online chatswww.aln.org/alnweb/onlinediscussions.htm

VIDEO CONFERENCINGInteractive Videoconferencing in Distance Educationwww.uidaho.edu/evo/dist10.html

J Tennant .Teleteaching with large groups: A case study from the Monashexperience. Australian Journal of Educational Technology1999, 15(1),80-94.


15 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet15/tennant.html

J Schiller & J Mitchell. Interacting at a distance: Staff and studentperceptions of teaching and learning via video conferencing AustralianJournal of Educational Technology 1993, 9(1), 41-58.

OTHER RESOURCESAsynchronous Learning Networkwww.aln.org/index.htm

Online Tutoring e-bookotis.scotcit.ac.uk/onlinebook/

Australian Journal of Educational Technologycleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet.html


16 of 16 4/23/2013 11:40 AM

Documents

Techniques for Online Discussions