Promoting Critical Thinking in Online Discussion Threads: Lessons from Teaching Economics

1. Promoting Meaningful Discussion Posts & Critical Thinking in Online Discussion Threads: Lessons learned teaching Economics in online courses Grace Onodipe PhD&Femi Ayadi PhD Gulf Coast Economics Association Conference, New Orleans, October 28 and 29, 2011

2. Online enrollment is growing! Sloan Foundation, 2010

3. INTRODUCTION • Online courses have become very popular • Online discussions are a core component of asynchronous online learning • Yet, much of online discussions are unstructured and ineffective

4. Benefits of Asynchronous discussion threads • Enables groups separated in time and space to engage in active production of shared knowledge • Equal Opportunity to participate • Students maintain a community of learners when and where they choose • Students have more time to think about topic, and read what others have contributed • Ability to support their argument with scholarly work • Opportunity to develop critical thinking skills (Olt, 2009)

5. Asynchronous online discussion thread • Can work very well in Online Principles of Economics Courses • An avenue for students to apply course content to real life events • Work/Life experience • Current news events • Personal decision-making • Demonstrate understanding of newly learned Economics Vocabulary

6. Literature Review • Students discuss at their convenience, encourages reflective learning (Gilbert, 2005) • Students participate at their own pace (Tiene, 2000) • Equal opportunity to participate (Vonderwall et al, 2007) • Online discussion can go beyond simple exchange of information to higher level of cognitive thinking (Garrison and Cleveland-Innes, 2005) • Students need to be aware of characteristics of acceptable responses to cultivate critical thinking (Bai, 2009)

7. Literature Review • Facilitated discourse is critical to creating a community of inquiry (Anderson, 2004; Easston, 2003; Bullen, 1998). • Questions and thought coexist. Good questions must be sound in learning theory (Hunkins, 1989) • Knowledge of evaluation criteria increases quality of students participation in online discussions (Gilbert and Dabbagh, 2005; Schenker, Arnold and Kuo, 2007) • Unlike wine, critical thinking does not improve as we age, nor does it increase as we accumulate more information (Glaser, 1941); therefore, our job is to increase students’ critical thinking with deliberate instruction.

8. Research Questions • What factors promote meaningful discussion and support critical thinking in online discussion threads? • Does using more specific and meaningful discussion questions influence critical thinking in online discussion? • Does placing more structure on Facilitator Questions influence student participation in online discussions? • Does including a “By Wednesday” Requirement increase participation in online discussions?

9. Hypotheses • Increasing the structure of discussion board assignments increases frequency and quality of student posts Level of critical thinking in online discussion threads is greatly improved. 2. Improved Facilitator presence in the form of Comments and Questions increases substantive student posts

10. Hypotheses 3. Having a “By Wednesday” Post requirement improves student posting pattern. • Skews posting toward earlier in the week • Allows for more interaction throughout the week

11. Methods • Content analysis and case study analysis methodology • 2 Undergraduate Principles of Economics online courses (2008, 2011) • Week 2 Discussion Thread • Week 7 Discussion Thread

12. CREST+ Template • CREST+ template for creating good discussion questions • (Akin & Neal, 2007) • Cognitive Nature • Reading Basis • Experiential Element • Style of Question • Type of Question • +

13. What is a meaningful post? Defines a key concept from the week’s material Asks for clarification of a difficult concept Answers another student’s or instructor’s question Relates relevant key concepts to work or life issues Respectfully disagrees with another student’s post Appropriately summarizes or refers the class to a textbook chapter or credible and useful Internet Source for further explanation of concepts, or Generally demonstrates that the student understands the key concept being addressed by the Core Learning Outcomes.

14. Bloom’s taxonomy

15. Bloom’s Taxonomy } Higher order thinking } Lower levels of thinking

16. Coding Student Posts, Gilbert & Dabbagh, 2005

17. Comparison to bloom’s

18. Descriptive statistics

19. Type of Student Posts

20. NS = Not Substantive LO = Lower Order Thinking (RC to PK) HO = Higher Order Thinking (RW to MI)

21. By Wednesday Requirement

22. Sample Student Post

23. Sample Student Post

24. Sample Student Posts

25. Sample Student Post

26. Sample Student Post

27. Sample Student Post

28. Sample Student Post

29. Sample Facilitator Questions/Posts

30. Sample Facilitator Question

31. Sample Facilitator Question

32. Sample Facilitator Question

33. Sample Facilitator Question

34. Sample Facilitator Question

35. What’s Next? • Add more weeks of data • Tests of significance • Add Hypothesis: Improved Facilitator presence in the form of Comments and Questions increases substantive student-to-student interaction and facilitator-to-student interaction.

36. Recommendations • By Wednesday Requirement • Facilitator Participation – 5 days at least • Have a game plan • Use Course Objectives as a guide to creating discussable questions • Welcome post – Beginning of the week • Spark off question – 1st day of the week • Friday post – Recall Core Learning Objectives • Ask questions that bring out discussions • End-of-Chapter calculation questions on discussion board? Only one answer • Wrap Up Post

37. Thank You! • Q & A