A sequential analysis of responses in online debates to postings of students exhibiting high versus low grammar and spelling errors

Given that grammatical and spelling errors have been found to influence perceived competence and credibility in written communication, this study examined how a student’s grammar and spelling errors affect how other students respond to the student’s postings in four online debates hosted in asynchronous threaded discussions. Message-response exchanges were sequentially analyzed to identify patterns in students’ replies to arguments and challenges with counter-challenges, explanations, and evidentiary support posted by students that exhibited low versus high number of grammatical and spelling errors. Although no causal inferences can be drawn from this study, the findings nevertheless suggests that: (a) arguments posted by high-error students are more likely to be challenged than arguments posted by low-error students; (b) exchanges between high-error students can amplify the effects of grammar/spelling errors; and (c) higher levels of argumentation can be achieved by placing students into groups that are heterogeneous in writing skills in general. The findings and methods used in this study lay the groundwork for further research on strategies for managing individual differences in students’ grammar and spelling (and other student behaviors in general) and increasing the level of critical discourse in online discussions.

[1]  Jim Hewitt.  Toward an Understanding of How Threads Die in Asynchronous Computer Conferences , 2005 .

[2]  Ziming Liu.  Perceptions of credibility of scholarly information on the web , 2004, Inf. Process. Manag..

[3]  Thomas M. Duffy,et al.  Using asynchronous conferencing to promote critical thinking: two implementations in higher education , 1999, Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences. 1999. HICSS-32. Abstracts and CD-ROM of Full Papers.

[4]  M. Baker.  ARGUMENTATION AND CONSTRUCTIVE INTERACTION , 2009 .

[5]  S. Toulmin.  The uses of argument , 1960 .

[6]  N. Mercer,et al.  From social interaction to individual reasoning: an empirical investigation of a possible socio-cultural model of cognitive development , 1999 .

[7]  Allan Jeong.  The Effects of Linguistic Qualifiers and Intensifiers on Group Interaction and Performance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation. , 2006 .

[8]  Karsten Stegmann,et al.  Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction with computer-supported collaboration scripts , 2007, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[9]  Christopher J. Carpenter.  A Meta-Analysis and an Experiment Investigating the Effects of Speaker Disfluency on Persuasion , 2012 .

[10]  Allan Jeong,et al.  The Combined Effects of Response Time and Message Content on Growth Patterns of Discussion Threads in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation. , 2004 .

[11]  D. Jonassen,et al.  Communication patterns in computer mediated versus face-to-face group problem solving , 2001 .

[12]  M. Lezak,et al.  Neuropsychological assessment, 4th ed. , 2004 .

[13]  Jerry Andriessen,et al.  Collaborative argumentation in academic education , 2002 .

[14]  Timothy Koschmann,et al.  Toward a dialogic theory of learning: Bakhtin's contribution to understanding learning in settings of collaboration , 1999, CSCL.

[15]  Dimitris Papadias,et al.  Computer supported argumentation and collaborative decision making: the HERMES system , 2001, Inf. Syst..

[16]  A. Ravenscroft,et al.  Ambient Pedagogies, Meaningful Learning and Social Software , 2009 .

[17]  Khe Foon Hew,et al.  Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: a review of the research and empirical exploration , 2010 .

[18]  Jennifer Wiley,et al.  Constructing arguments from multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and not just memory for text. , 1999 .

[19]  Michael J. Baker,et al.  Promoting reflective interactions in a CSCL environment , 1997, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[20]  Pieter J. Beers,et al.  Computer support for knowledge construction in collaborative learning environments , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[21]  Allan Jeong,et al.  The Effects of Conversational Language on Group Interaction and Group Performance in Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation , 2006 .

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

[23]  김용진.  Discourse in the Novel , 2006 .

[24]  Baruch B. Schwarz,et al.  The role of floor control and of ontology in argumentative activities with discussion-based tools , 2005, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[25]  Katrina A. Meyer,et al.  FACE-TO-FACE VERSUS THREADED DISCUSSIONS: THE ROLE OF TIME AND HIGHER-ORDER THINKING , 2019, Online Learning.

[26]  Scott Counts,et al.  Tweeting is believing?: understanding microblog credibility perceptions , 2012, CSCW.

[27]  D. Garrison.  ONLINE COMMUNITY OF INQUIRY REVIEW: SOCIAL, COGNITIVE, AND TEACHING PRESENCE ISSUES , 2019, Online Learning.

[28]  Eileen Scanlon,et al.  Combining interaction and context design to support collaborative argumentation using a tool for synchronous CMC , 2004, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[29]  Teemu Leinonen,et al.  Collaborative discovering of key ideas in knowledge building , 2002, CSCL.

[30]  Allan Jeong.  A Guide to Analyzing Message–Response Sequences and Group Interaction Patterns in Computer‐mediated Communication , 2005 .

[31]  Manu Kapur,et al.  Temporality matters: Advancing a method for analyzing problem-solving processes in a computer-supported collaborative environment , 2011, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[32]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Energizing Learning: The Instructional Power of Conflict , 2009 .

[33]  Frans H. van Eemeren,et al.  Dialectical Profiles and Indicators of Argumentative Moves , 2008, Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse.

[34]  Omid Noroozi,et al.  Argumentation-Based Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (ABCSCL): A Synthesis of 15 Years of Research. , 2012 .

[35]  Peggy A. Ertmer,et al.  Using Peer Feedback to Enhance the Quality of Student Online Postings: An Exploratory Study , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[36]  Heather Kanuka,et al.  Computer Conferencing and Distance Learning , 2012 .

[37]  J. Burgoon,et al.  Nonverbal Behaviors, Persuasion, and Credibility , 1990 .

[38]  Judith B. Pena-Shaff,et al.  Analyzing student interactions and meaning construction in computer bulletin board discussions , 2004, Comput. Educ..

[39]  David H. Jonassen,et al.  The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving , 2002 .

[40]  Roger Bakeman,et al.  Observing Interaction: An Introduction to Sequential Analysis , 1986 .

[41]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Argument and Decision Making in Computer‐Mediated Groups , 2004 .

[42]  The argument culture : moving from debate to dialogue , 1998 .