While
asynchronous online discussions (AOD) are a key aspect of online learning, limited
student participation may cause AOD to fall short of its pedagogical potential. To deepen understanding of the factors
involved, Lee designed an empirical study to look at the relationship between student
learning approaches and their perceptions of the online discussions in which they
are engaged. This study from Taiwan surveyed 111 students
in a blended general education ecology course, where AOD was used to reinforce concepts.
Lee used two questionnaires, one to look at learning approach and motivation,
and the other to examine perceptions from four angles:
affective, cognitive, skill, and efficacy. In other words, she looked at emotional
affect, the perceived learning value, the degree to which reading, writing, and
analysis skills were perceived to improve, and finally, satisfaction with contributions.
Lee also examined the corpus of responses, coding each as Initiation, Elaborated
Response (ER), and Response with Resources (RWR). Finally, Lee used statistical tests to tease
out the correlations between factors. One
of her key findings was that students who identified as employing deep learning
approaches and who scored higher in the four perception constructs did better
in the course than those who used shallower learning approaches or those who failed
to combine deep learning approaches with positive perceptions of AOD. In other words, learners who are motivated
and cognitively engaged apparently still need to have positive attitudes
towards AOD for optimal performance in a course that employs it. Another interesting finding was a strong correlation between deep learning
approaches, RWR and critical thinking. That is, students with deeper motivation
and deeper cognitive engagement showed the tendency to bolster arguments with resources.
I
chose this article because I hoped to compare learning strategies with cognitive
engagement in an online context. However, by learning approaches Lee meant an
engagement mindset rather than learning strategies. This was important in understanding both the
strengths and limitations of the article. The use of empirical data certainly was a strength. While my knowledge of statistics is thin, the study appeared
carefully done. On the other hand, the
results seemed to have limited explanatory power. Supplementing the quantitative data with
qualitative data such as interviews could be valuable. This study leaned heavily on student
perceptions, but the data could only reveal correlations; it failed to capture the
nuances of the students’ experience.
This also means that we know little about the specific strategies
students used to deepen engagement.
The
article does add to the research conversation about a vital aspect of online
pedagogy. The findings suggest that instructors who highlight the pedagogical
value of AOD and who encourage elaborated responses, whether initiating,
elaborated or responses drawing on sources, can help students deepen their
engagement, and thus, achieve better grades.
However, to be pedagogically useful, the findings need to be elaborated
with further research. For that reason, the
article serves best as another piece in the research puzzle rather than as a
pedagogical resource.
Asynchronous discussions, I believe, are a wonderful tool in online writing pedagogy. As Lee’s study seems to suggest, a positive perception of AOD does indeed seem to be a powerful aspect of its success. In my own experience, AODs should be constructed to engage deeper levels of thought and/or interaction amongst the participants. If the prompts are poorly constructed, the students may view them as mere “busy work,” and thus participate in a very shallow, uninvolved manner. I agree with you, that Lee’s essay would have been more effective had the author provided examples of the student’s actual responses and perhaps suggested ways to encourage that positivity in student regard. That would have allowed readers to consider those perspectives when creating their own AOD prompts to the student’s best benefit, rather than relying on quantitative data and terminology. A more practical reporting and application of these results would have been more beneficial to online writing instructors.
ReplyDeleteBut, as you suggest, the information is still quite valuable, and I believe that transparency in explaining “why” we’re asking students to participate in this activity, as well as providing prompts that require deeper thought and engagement will not only create a stronger sense of “community” for the students in online courses, but will also assist them in developing critical thinking and effective writing strategies that they can use throughout their academic and professional lives.