Effective asynchronous online discussion: What the research shows

Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., & Ng, C. S. L. (2010). Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: A review of the research and empirical exploration. Instructional Science: an International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 38(6), 571-606.

This article offers a comprehensive overview of how to employ asynchronous online discussions effectively.  Hew, Cheung & Ng begin by noting that the tool has great potential but can be limited by weak participation. To address this problem, they made a lengthy but comprehensive meta-analysis of the empirical research.   They began with an extensive database search for articles. Out of an initial 860 articles, 50 involved empirical research and served as the foundation for their meta-analysis. Using a grounded approach, the authors examined each of these studies for emergent themes, eventually narrowing these down to seven categories, namely, “not seeing the need for online discussion, behavior of other participants, personality traits, keeping up with the discussion, not knowing what to contribute, lack of critical thinking skills or being content in merely answering queries, and technical aspects” (p. 573).  In the article, the authors take each factor in turn, explaining the findings from the relevant studies.  This is accompanied by a helpful table summarizing the factors and the studies.  In the next section, they return to the research for solutions for the seven factors.  Once again, the authors accompany the discussion with a table summarizing the solutions and showing which studies identified them.  The final investigation from the meta-analysis is a list of what the author call “guideline dilemmas”, or in other words, common solutions that cause a new set of problems.  There are three of these: problems with using grading to stimulation participation, problems with using posting quotas, and problems with instructor facilitation.  In the final major section of their paper, Hew, Cheung & Ng depart from the meta-analysis framework and offer their own preliminary research for a less-researched area—using students as facilitators.  They conducted two case studies.  Both used multiple data sources including questionnaires, interviews and analysis of posting threads to examine student perceptions of student facilitation.  The discussion of this research offers another rich source of data for instructors.  Since it does a good job of suggesting what factors students found motivating from the student facilitators, it can be useful whether the instructor wants to personally improve as a facilitator or teach students how to facilitate effectively.

All in all, I found this a very useful article with numerous practical suggestions for any online teachers who use asynchronous discussion.  The fact that it is undergirded by most of the research out there reassures me that the ideas have a strong empirical basis. In addition, it offers an exceptional overview of the topic. Besides the discussion, the studies are listed in an appendix chart, a reference almost as good as an annotated bibliography.  Incidentally, when I was looking for citation data, I also happened to learn that two of the three authors have since collaborated on a book, which could prove to be another helpful source:

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2012). Student participation in online discussions: Challenges, solutions, and future research. New York: Springer.