High Wire Act: the Perils, Pitfalls and Possibilities of Online Discussions
Online discussions are an important component of
both blended and online courses. This paper examines the varieties of
online discussions and the perils, pitfalls and possibilities of this
rather new technological tool for enhanced learning. The discussion
begins with possible perils and pitfalls inherent in this educational
tool and moves to a consideration of the advantages of the varieties
of online discussions feasible for use in teacher education programs.
[1] J.C. Richardson and Ice, P. Investigating students- level of critical
thinking across instructional strategies in online discussions. Internet
and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 2010, pp. 52-59. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.009
[2] H.K. Kim and B. Bateman (2010). Student participation patterns in
online discussion: Incorporating constructivist discussion into online
courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 9(1), 2010, pp. 79-98.
Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/28165
[3] M. Valcke, B. De Wever, C. Zhu, and C. Deed. Supporting active
cognitive processing in collaborative groups: The potential of bloom's
taxonomy as a labeling tool. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3-4),
2009, pp. 165-172. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.003
[4] S. Vonderwell and S. Zachariah. Factors that influence participation in
online learning.Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38 (2),
2005, pp. 213-230.
[5] A.M. Bodzin and J.C. Park. Dialogue patterns of pre-service science
teachers using asynchronous computer-mediated communications on the
world-wide web. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science
Teaching, 19, 2, 2000, pp. 161-194
[6] K. Xie,T.K Debacker, C. Ferguson Extending the Traditional Classroom
through Online Discussion: The Role of Student Motivation. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 34, 2006, pp. 67-8.
[7] Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, A., Campbell, J., & Bannan-Haag,
(1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in
distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2),
pp. 7-26.
[8] J. Blankson and L. Kyei-Blanckson. Nontraditional Students- Perception
of a Blended Course: Integrating Synchronous Online Discussion and
Face-to-Face Instruction Journal of Interactive Learning Research
19(3), 2008, pp. 421-438.
[9] Bodzin, A. M., and Park, J. C. (2000). Dialogue patterns of pre-service
science teachers using asynchronous computer-mediated
communications on the world-wide web. Journal of Computers in
Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19, 2, 2000, pp. 161-194.
[10] Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, A., Campbell, J., and Bannan-
Haag, A. Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in
distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2),
1995, pp. 7-26.
[11] F. Henri. Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye,
Ed.. Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The
Najaden papers. New York: Springer, 1992, pp. 117-136.
[12] A. Kaye. (1992). Learning together apart. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.),
Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden
papers. New York: Springer, 1992, pp. 1-24.
[13] Armstrong, K and Manson, M. What is lost and what remains: an
exploration of the pedagogical challenges of online discussions in two
online teacher education learning communities. Language & Literacy: A
Canadian eJournal 12, 2, forthcoming, paging not yet available at:
http://www.langandlit.ualberta.ca/.
[14] Foucault, M. Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison trans. from
the French by A. Sheridan 1977 New York: Vintage Books 1995, pp.
195-228.
[15] Bentham, J. Panopticon (Preface). In Miran M. Bozovic, Ed. The
Panopticon Writings, London: Verso, 1995.
[16] Lang, S. B. "The Impact of Video Systems on Architecture", dissertion,
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 2004.
[17] Taylor, J. C. Teaching and learning online. The workers, the lurkers and
the shirkers. Paper presented at the 2002 Conference on Research in
Distance & Adult Learning in Asia.Available:
http://www.ouhk.edu.hk/CRIDAL/cridala2002/speeches/taylor.pdf
[18] W. Archer. (2010). Beyond online discussions: Extending the
community of inquiry framework to entire courses. Internet and Higher
Education, 13(1-2), 2010, p. 69. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.005
[19] H.J. So. When groups decide to use asynchronous online discussions:
collaborative learning and social presence under a voluntary
participation structure. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25, 2009,
pp. 143-160.
[20] W.S. Cheung and K.F. Hew. Examining facilitators' habits of mind in an
asynchronous online discussion environment: A two cases study.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 2010, pp. 123-
132. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet26/cheung.pdf
[21] K. Barkaoui, So, M., and Suzuki, W. Is it relevant? The role of off-task
talk in collaborative learning. Paper currently under review for
publication and originally presented at 2005 Second Language Research
Forum (SLRF), Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City,
New York.
[22] F.C. Chen and T.C. Wang. Social conversation and effective discussion
in online group learning. Education Tech Research Dev 57, 2009, pp.
587-612
[23] Salmon, G. (2002). Online Learning Workshop. Paper presented at the
ACEC 2002 conference proceedings, Hobart.
[24] S. Wade, J. Fauske, and A. Thompson. (2008). Prospective teachers-
problem solving in on-line peer-led dialogues. American Educational
Research Journal, 45(2), 2008, pp. 398-442
[25] J. Whipp. Scaffolding critical reflection in online discussions: helping
prospective teachers think deeply about filed experiences in urban
schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 4, 2003, pp. 321-333.
[26] H. K. Kim and B. Bateman. Student Participation Patterns in Online
Discussion: Incorporating Constructivist Discussion into Online
Courses. International Journal on E-Learning 2010 9 (1), 2010, pp. 79-
98
[27] L. Sutherland, S. Howard, and L.Markauskaite. Professional identity
creation: Examining the development of beginning preservice teachers-
understanding of their work as teachers. Teaching and Teacher
Education 26 2010, pp. 455-465.
[28] T. Gale and C. Jackson. (1997). Preparing professionals: student
teachers and their supervisors at work. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher
Education, 25, 2, 1997, pp. 177-191.
[29] N. Hatton and D. Smith. (1995). Reflection in teacher education:
towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 11, 1, 1995, pp. 33-49
[30] K. M. Zeichner and D.P. Liston. (1987). Teaching student teachers to
reflect. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1, 1987, pp. 23-48.
[31] M. L. Griffin. (2003). Using critical incidents to promote and assess
reflective thinking in preservice teachers. Reflective Practice, 4, 2, 2003,
pp. 207-220.
[32] N. Hatton and D. Smith. (1995). Reflection in teacher education:
towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 11, 1, 1995, pp. 33-49.
[33] P. M. A. Lyon and A. Brew. (2003). Reflection on learning in the
operating theatre. Reflective Practice, 4, 1, 2003, pp. 53-66.
[34] E. G. Pultorak. (1993). Facilitating reflective thought in novice teachers.
Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 4, 1993, pp. 288-295.
[35] J. Richardson and P. Ice. Investigating students' level of critical thinking
across instructional strategies in online discussions. Internet and Higher
Education 13, 2010, pp. 52-59.
[36] J. C.C. Chan, K.F. Hew and W.S.Cheung. Asynchronous online
discussion thread development: Examining growth patterns and peerfacilitation
techniques. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(5),
2009, pp. 438-452. Retrieved from http://www.blackwellsynergy.
com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00321.x
[37] M. Valcke, B. De Wever, C. Zhu, and C, Deed. Supporting active
cognitive processing in collaborative groups: The potential of bloom's
taxonomy as a labeling tool. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3-4),
2009, pp. 165-172. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.003
[1] J.C. Richardson and Ice, P. Investigating students- level of critical
thinking across instructional strategies in online discussions. Internet
and Higher Education, 13(1-2), 2010, pp. 52-59. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.009
[2] H.K. Kim and B. Bateman (2010). Student participation patterns in
online discussion: Incorporating constructivist discussion into online
courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 9(1), 2010, pp. 79-98.
Retrieved from http://www.editlib.org/p/28165
[3] M. Valcke, B. De Wever, C. Zhu, and C. Deed. Supporting active
cognitive processing in collaborative groups: The potential of bloom's
taxonomy as a labeling tool. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3-4),
2009, pp. 165-172. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.003
[4] S. Vonderwell and S. Zachariah. Factors that influence participation in
online learning.Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38 (2),
2005, pp. 213-230.
[5] A.M. Bodzin and J.C. Park. Dialogue patterns of pre-service science
teachers using asynchronous computer-mediated communications on the
world-wide web. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science
Teaching, 19, 2, 2000, pp. 161-194
[6] K. Xie,T.K Debacker, C. Ferguson Extending the Traditional Classroom
through Online Discussion: The Role of Student Motivation. Journal of
Educational Computing Research, 34, 2006, pp. 67-8.
[7] Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, A., Campbell, J., & Bannan-Haag,
(1995). Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in
distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2),
pp. 7-26.
[8] J. Blankson and L. Kyei-Blanckson. Nontraditional Students- Perception
of a Blended Course: Integrating Synchronous Online Discussion and
Face-to-Face Instruction Journal of Interactive Learning Research
19(3), 2008, pp. 421-438.
[9] Bodzin, A. M., and Park, J. C. (2000). Dialogue patterns of pre-service
science teachers using asynchronous computer-mediated
communications on the world-wide web. Journal of Computers in
Mathematics and Science Teaching, 19, 2, 2000, pp. 161-194.
[10] Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, A., Campbell, J., and Bannan-
Haag, A. Constructivism and computer-mediated communication in
distance education. The American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2),
1995, pp. 7-26.
[11] F. Henri. Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. R. Kaye,
Ed.. Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The
Najaden papers. New York: Springer, 1992, pp. 117-136.
[12] A. Kaye. (1992). Learning together apart. In A. R. Kaye (Ed.),
Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden
papers. New York: Springer, 1992, pp. 1-24.
[13] Armstrong, K and Manson, M. What is lost and what remains: an
exploration of the pedagogical challenges of online discussions in two
online teacher education learning communities. Language & Literacy: A
Canadian eJournal 12, 2, forthcoming, paging not yet available at:
http://www.langandlit.ualberta.ca/.
[14] Foucault, M. Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison trans. from
the French by A. Sheridan 1977 New York: Vintage Books 1995, pp.
195-228.
[15] Bentham, J. Panopticon (Preface). In Miran M. Bozovic, Ed. The
Panopticon Writings, London: Verso, 1995.
[16] Lang, S. B. "The Impact of Video Systems on Architecture", dissertion,
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 2004.
[17] Taylor, J. C. Teaching and learning online. The workers, the lurkers and
the shirkers. Paper presented at the 2002 Conference on Research in
Distance & Adult Learning in Asia.Available:
http://www.ouhk.edu.hk/CRIDAL/cridala2002/speeches/taylor.pdf
[18] W. Archer. (2010). Beyond online discussions: Extending the
community of inquiry framework to entire courses. Internet and Higher
Education, 13(1-2), 2010, p. 69. Available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.10.005
[19] H.J. So. When groups decide to use asynchronous online discussions:
collaborative learning and social presence under a voluntary
participation structure. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25, 2009,
pp. 143-160.
[20] W.S. Cheung and K.F. Hew. Examining facilitators' habits of mind in an
asynchronous online discussion environment: A two cases study.
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(1), 2010, pp. 123-
132. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet26/cheung.pdf
[21] K. Barkaoui, So, M., and Suzuki, W. Is it relevant? The role of off-task
talk in collaborative learning. Paper currently under review for
publication and originally presented at 2005 Second Language Research
Forum (SLRF), Teachers College, Columbia University, New York City,
New York.
[22] F.C. Chen and T.C. Wang. Social conversation and effective discussion
in online group learning. Education Tech Research Dev 57, 2009, pp.
587-612
[23] Salmon, G. (2002). Online Learning Workshop. Paper presented at the
ACEC 2002 conference proceedings, Hobart.
[24] S. Wade, J. Fauske, and A. Thompson. (2008). Prospective teachers-
problem solving in on-line peer-led dialogues. American Educational
Research Journal, 45(2), 2008, pp. 398-442
[25] J. Whipp. Scaffolding critical reflection in online discussions: helping
prospective teachers think deeply about filed experiences in urban
schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 4, 2003, pp. 321-333.
[26] H. K. Kim and B. Bateman. Student Participation Patterns in Online
Discussion: Incorporating Constructivist Discussion into Online
Courses. International Journal on E-Learning 2010 9 (1), 2010, pp. 79-
98
[27] L. Sutherland, S. Howard, and L.Markauskaite. Professional identity
creation: Examining the development of beginning preservice teachers-
understanding of their work as teachers. Teaching and Teacher
Education 26 2010, pp. 455-465.
[28] T. Gale and C. Jackson. (1997). Preparing professionals: student
teachers and their supervisors at work. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher
Education, 25, 2, 1997, pp. 177-191.
[29] N. Hatton and D. Smith. (1995). Reflection in teacher education:
towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 11, 1, 1995, pp. 33-49
[30] K. M. Zeichner and D.P. Liston. (1987). Teaching student teachers to
reflect. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1, 1987, pp. 23-48.
[31] M. L. Griffin. (2003). Using critical incidents to promote and assess
reflective thinking in preservice teachers. Reflective Practice, 4, 2, 2003,
pp. 207-220.
[32] N. Hatton and D. Smith. (1995). Reflection in teacher education:
towards definition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 11, 1, 1995, pp. 33-49.
[33] P. M. A. Lyon and A. Brew. (2003). Reflection on learning in the
operating theatre. Reflective Practice, 4, 1, 2003, pp. 53-66.
[34] E. G. Pultorak. (1993). Facilitating reflective thought in novice teachers.
Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 4, 1993, pp. 288-295.
[35] J. Richardson and P. Ice. Investigating students' level of critical thinking
across instructional strategies in online discussions. Internet and Higher
Education 13, 2010, pp. 52-59.
[36] J. C.C. Chan, K.F. Hew and W.S.Cheung. Asynchronous online
discussion thread development: Examining growth patterns and peerfacilitation
techniques. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25(5),
2009, pp. 438-452. Retrieved from http://www.blackwellsynergy.
com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2729.2009.00321.x
[37] M. Valcke, B. De Wever, C. Zhu, and C, Deed. Supporting active
cognitive processing in collaborative groups: The potential of bloom's
taxonomy as a labeling tool. Internet and Higher Education, 12(3-4),
2009, pp. 165-172. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2009.08.003
@article{"International Journal of Business, Human and Social Sciences:61532", author = "Karen Armstrong", title = "High Wire Act: the Perils, Pitfalls and Possibilities of Online Discussions", abstract = "Online discussions are an important component of
both blended and online courses. This paper examines the varieties of
online discussions and the perils, pitfalls and possibilities of this
rather new technological tool for enhanced learning. The discussion
begins with possible perils and pitfalls inherent in this educational
tool and moves to a consideration of the advantages of the varieties
of online discussions feasible for use in teacher education programs.", keywords = "online discussions, computer-mediatedcommunication (CMC), computer-supported collaborative learning(CSCL), e-learning, teacher education", volume = "4", number = "10", pages = "2098-5", }
