at UWindsor

To statistically model large data sets of knowledge processes during asynchronous, online forums, we must address analytic difficulties involving the whole data set (missing data, nested data and the tree structure of online messages), dependent variables (multiple, infrequent, discrete outcomes and similar adjacent messages), and explanatory variables (sequences, indirect effects, false positives, and robustness). Statistical discourse analysis (SDA) addresses all of these issues, as shown in an analysis of 1,330 asynchronous messages written and self-coded by 17 students during a 13-week online educational technology course. The results showed how attributes at multiple levels (individual and message) affected knowledge creation processes. Men were more likely than women to theorize. Asynchronous messages created a micro-sequence context; opinions and asking about purpose preceded new information; anecdotes, opinions, different opinions, elaborating ideas, and asking about purpose or information preceded theorizing. These results show how informal thinking precedes formal thinking and how social metacognition affects knowledge creation.

[1]  Mary K. Tallent-Runnels,et al.  Teaching Courses Online: A Review of the Research , 2006 .

[2]  Alyssa Friend Wise,et al.  Analyzing temporal patterns of knowledge construction in a role-based online discussion , 2011, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[3]  M. Scardamalia,et al.  Designs for Collective Cognitive Responsibility in Knowledge-Building Communities , 2009 .

[4]  Carl Bereiter,et al.  Education and Mind in the Knowledge Age , 2002 .

[5]  H. Goldstein.  Multilevel Statistical Models , 2006 .

[6]  G. Box,et al.  On a measure of lack of fit in time series models , 1978 .

[7]  Craig K. Enders,et al.  Missing Data in Educational Research: A Review of Reporting Practices and Suggestions for Improvement , 2004 .

[8]  Stephen S. Colvin,et al.  Some Recent Results Obtained from the Otis Group Intelligence Scale , 1921 .

[9]  Peter E. Kennedy.  A Guide to Econometrics , 1979 .

[10]  P. Winne,et al.  Handbook of educational psychology , 2015 .

[11]  P. Thagard,et al.  Explanatory coherence , 1993 .

[12]  M. Chiu,et al.  Rudeness and status effects during group problem solving: Do they bias evaluations and reduce the likelihood of correct solutions? , 2003 .

[13]  Ming Ming Chiu,et al.  Effects of argumentation on group micro-creativity: Statistical discourse analyses of algebra students’ collaborative problem solving , 2008 .

[14]  Ming Ming Chiu,et al.  Group Problem-Solving Processes: Social Interactions and Individual Actions , 2000 .

[15]  M. Chiu,et al.  A New Method for Analyzing Sequential Processes , 2005 .

[16]  Robert E. Ployhart,et al.  Hierarchical Linear Models , 2014 .

[17]  M. Scardamalia.  Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge , 2002 .

[18]  Ming Ming Chiu,et al.  EXPLORING THE ORIGINS, USES, AND INTERACTIONS OF STUDENT INTUITIONS: , 2016 .

[19]  S. Green.  How Many Subjects Does It Take To Do A Regression Analysis. , 1991, Multivariate behavioral research.

[20]  C. Bereiter,et al.  Liberal education in a knowledge society , 2002 .

[21]  Ming Ming Chiu,et al.  Social metacognition and the creation of correct, new ideas: A statistical discourse analysis of online mathematics discussions , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[22]  Yair Neuman,et al.  Pupils' evaluation and generation of evidence and explanation in argumentation. , 2005, The British journal of educational psychology.

[23]  R. Luppicini.  Review of computer mediated communication research for education , 2007 .

[24]  Marlene Scardamalia,et al.  Computer Support for Knowledge-Building Communities , 1994 .

[25]  B. Nijstad,et al.  Cognitive stimulation and interference in idea generating groups , 2003 .

[26]  Ming Ming Chiu,et al.  Online Discussion Processes: Effects of Earlier Messages’ Evaluations, Knowledge Content, Social Cues and Personal Information on Later Messages , 2006, Sixth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT'06).

[27]  Marlene Scardamalia,et al.  Education for the Knowledge Age: Design-Centered Models of Teaching and Instruction , 2006 .

[28]  Carol K. K. Chan,et al.  Students assessing their own collaborative knowledge building , 2006, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[29]  Tania B. Huedo-Medina,et al.  Assessing heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Q statistic or I2 index? , 2006, Psychological methods.

[30]  J. Borkowski,et al.  Metacognitive Theory , 1992, Journal of learning disabilities.

[31]  H Goldstein,et al.  Multilevel time series models with applications to repeated measures data. , 1994, Statistics in medicine.

[32]  Peter Reimann,et al.  Time is precious: Variable- and event-centred approaches to process analysis in CSCL research , 2009, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[33]  ChenGaowei,et al.  Online discussion processes , 2008 .

[34]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate , 2006 .

[35]  K. Hakkarainen.  Emergence of Progressive-Inquiry Culture in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning , 2003 .

[36]  David P Mackinnon,et al.  Confidence Limits for the Indirect Effect: Distribution of the Product and Resampling Methods , 2004, Multivariate behavioral research.

[37]  Earl Woodruff,et al.  Collaborative Knowledge Building: Preservice Teachers and Elementary Students Talking To Learn. , 1999 .

[38]  Nancy Law,et al.  Collaborative argumentation and justifications: A statistical discourse analysis of online discussions , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[39]  B. Nijstad,et al.  Group creativity : An introduction , 2003 .

[40]  Shawn Van Etten,et al.  Big theories revisited , 2004 .

[41]  Curtis J. Bonk,et al.  Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course , 2000 .

[42]  M. J. W. Thomas,et al.  Learning within incoherent structures: the space of online discussion forums , 2002, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[43]  Charlotte N. Gunawardena,et al.  Analysis of a Global Online Debate and the Development of an Interaction Analysis Model for Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in Computer Conferencing , 1997 .

[44]  Nobuko Fujita,et al.  Group Processes Supporting the Development of Progressive Discourse in Online Graduate Courses , 2009 .

[45]  G. Box,et al.  The likelihood function of stationary autoregressive-moving average models , 1979 .

[46]  J. Gill.  Hierarchical Linear Models , 2005 .

[47]  Gary King,et al.  Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data , 2001, Political Analysis.

[48]  Xiaodong Lin,et al.  Supporting Learning of Variable Control in a Computer-Based Biology Environment: Effects of Prompting College Students to Reflect on Their Own Thinking , 1999 .

[49]  C. Bereiter.  Implications of postmodernism for science, or, science as progressive discourse , 1994 .

[50]  Simon Buckingham Shum,et al.  Discourse-centric learning analytics , 2011, LAK.

[51]  A. Columbus.  Advances in Psychology Research , 2005 .

[52]  M. Chiu.  Flowing Toward Correct Contributions During Group Problem Solving: A Statistical Discourse Analysis , 2008 .

[53]  Christine Howe,et al.  Collaborative Group Work in Middle Childhood , 2009, Human Development.