Referring to other participants in asynchronous online discussions: Citation patterns in a higher education context

Abstract The effectiveness of asynchronous online discussions as a learning tool in higher education critically depends on the participants’ ability to create a cohesive social space. Referring to one another’s messages is a key way to display a sense of affiliation and solidarity, and contribute to the consolidation of the learning community. However, research has shown that students often fail to adequately exploit this dimension of the online forum, as it requires considerable involvement in the activity and is very time-consuming.In the current study, we examined references to previous posts in a set of online discussions held during a one-term undergraduate course. The overall frequency of citations was low, with slightly over half of the 885 analyzed posts containing at least one reference. While this seems to indicate that a large number of participants conceived the activity as hardly interactive, for those who did quote their classmates, the preferred practice was using their first names, although the more formal name+surname pattern increased in the second half of the course, possibly indicating an awareness of the academic character of the activity. If the frequency and kind of mutual references can be taken as a measure of how successful asynchronous online discussions can prove as a collaborative learning tool, our results invite deep reflection regarding task design to ensure that students and instructors understand their goals in the same way.

[1]  Min Kyu Kim,et al.  Learner participation profiles in an asynchronous online collaboration context , 2019, Internet High. Educ..

[2]  R. Garrison,et al.  The Development of a Community of Inquiry Over Time in an Online Course: Understanding the Progression and Integration of Social, Cognitive and Teaching Presence , 2019, Online Learning.

[3]  Alyssa Friend Wise,et al.  Attending to others’ posts in asynchronous discussions: Learners’ online “listening” and its relationship to speaking , 2014, Int. J. Comput. Support. Collab. Learn..

[4]  Richard E. Mayer,et al.  Five facets of social presence in online distance education , 2012, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[5]  Jim Hewitt,et al.  An investigation of student practices in asynchronous computer conferencing courses , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[6]  Margarita Vinagre,et al.  Politeness strategies in collaborative e-mail exchanges , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[7]  Fleur Ruth Prinsen,et al.  Gender-related differences in computer-mediated communication and computer-supported collaborative learning , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[8]  Alan Durndell,et al.  'I totally agree with you': gender interactions in educational online discussion groups , 2006, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[9]  Elizabeth Murphy,et al.  Recognising and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion , 2004, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[10]  Karen Swan,et al.  Building Learning Communities in Online Courses: the importance of interaction , 2002 .

[11]  Dawn M. Poole Student Participation in a Discussion-Oriented Online Course , 2000 .

[12]  P. Burke,et al.  Identity theory and social identity theory , 2000 .

[13]  Kathleen Ferrara,et al.  Interactive Written Discourse as an Emergent Register , 1991 .

[14]  K. Cook,et al.  Social Exchange Theory , 1989, Theoretical Sociology.

[15]  E. Deci,et al.  Self-Determination Theory: Basic Psychological Needs in Motivation, Development, and Wellness , 2017 .

[16]  Peter R. R. White,et al.  The language of evaluation , 2005 .