Asynchronous Electronic Discussion Group: Analysis of Postings and Perception of In-service Teachers

Year 2007, Volume: 8 Issue: 1, 33 - 42, 01.03.2007

Tina Lim Swee Kım Wong Kiet Wah Tan Ai Lee

Abstract

This paper examines the practice of online discussion in a course specially tailored for in-service teachers who are pursuing their basic degree qualification at a teacher training institute. Analyses of postings to the asynchronous electronic discussion group were made according to the type of postings as proposed by Poole (2000). Four focus areas were looked into, that is, content, technical, procedural, or non-academic. Analyses were done for each quarter of the 12 weeks of interaction. At the end of the learners’ participation in the EDG and before their end-of-course examination, the participants were then given a paper-based questionnaire asking their perceptions on the use of EDG as part of their coursework on the whole. Six aspects of EDG were examined, these are; Ø technical aspects, Ø motivation to use the EDG, Ø quality of interaction, Ø tutor’s response, Ø perceived learning, and Ø attitude towards EDG. Analyses on postings for the EDG showed that the bulk of the postings were made in the last quarter of the online discussions. Further, 97.8% of the postings were on content and the types of content posting registered were predominantly questions (41.19%) and those that sought clarification/elaboration (37.48%). Findings from this study suggest that overall the participants were satisfied with the six aspects of EDG examined. The aspect that recorded the highest mean was ‘motivation to read tutor’s responses’ whilst the lowest mean (and the only one with negative perception) was for ‘worthiness of time spent on online discussions’.

Keywords

Asynchronous Electronic Discussion Groups; Online Discussion; Postings.

References

• Harasim, L. (Ed.). (1990). On-line education: Perspectives on a new environment. New York: Praeger.
• Hisham Dzakiria & Rozhan Mohammed Idrus (2003). Teacher-learner interactions in distance education: A case of two Malaysian universities. Turkish Online Journal of
• DistanceEducation, 4(3). http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/tojde11/articles/idrus.htm MacKinnon, G. R. (2000). The dilemma of evaluating electronic discussion groups.
• Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 125 – 131. Murphy, E., & Coleman, E. (2004). Graduate students’ experiences of challenges in online asynchronous discussions. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 30(2). online]. www.cjlt.ca/content/vol30.2/cjlt30-2_art-2.html
• Murphy, R., & Loveless, J. (2005). Students’ self-analysis of contributions to online asynchronous discussions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(2), 155
• – 172. [online]. www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet21/murphy.html Oliver, M., & Shaw, G. P. (2003). Asynchronous discussion in support of medical education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1). [online]. www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v7n1/v7n1_oliver.asp
• Open University Malaysia. (2003). The open and distance learning tutor: A practical guide. (2nd ed.). Shah Alam: OUM.
• Poole, D. M. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-oriented online course: A case study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33(2), 162 – 177.
• Tennet, B., & Hyland, P. (2004). The WebCT discussion list and how it is perceived.
• Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 5(3). [online]. http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/tojde15/articles/tennet.htm Warren, K., & Rada, R. (1998). Sustaining computer-mediated communication in university courses. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14, 110 – 119.
• Wu, D., & Hiltz, S. R. (2004). Predicting learning from synchronous online discussions.
• Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 8(2), 139 – 152.