Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Online Discussion Forums

  • Teaching and Training
  • Published:
European Political Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

It has been suggested that interaction in online learning programmes promotes student-centred learning, encourages wider student participation, and produces more in-depth and reasoned discussions than traditional face-to-face programmes (Karayan and Crowe (1997) and Smith and Hardaker (2000) cited in Davies and Graff (2005: 1)). In this article, the participation rates and usage patterns by undergraduate political science students of online discussion forums are examined. The study is guided by a number of questions: (1) Are students willing to participate in online discussion forums? (2) Do students enjoy participating in such forums? (3) What discourages a student from participating in online discussion forums? (4) Is there a link between participation in discussion forums and grade performances in coursework? and (5) Does class size have an impact on forum participation rates? The study focuses on two groups of students studying introductory Irish politics courses in University College Cork, Ireland. The article considers student feedback on the use of online discussion forums, compares the level of participation with course grades, and finally presents an account of the author's reflections on the use of online discussion forums in teaching.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Blackboard is a web-based course management system designed to enable educational innovations by connecting people and technology, and to allow students and teachers to participate in classes delivered either online or use online materials and activities to complement face-to-face teaching (Learning Technologies Unit, UCC: 2009; http://www.ucc.ie/en/staffitservices/BlackboardInformation).

  2. The decision not to attach grades was essentially an administrative issue. I decided to use online discussion forums after the assessment procedures for the modules were developed and distributed. As UCC is very strict about these and frowns upon any late changes, especially any changes after the assessment weightings are distributed to students, I could not attach grades to the online discussion forums.

  3. The BSc Government is an undergraduate political science degree in UCC. Please see http://www.ucc.ie/en/study/undergrad/what/businesslaw/government/ for course description.

  4. Please see http://www.ucc.ie/en/government/CertificateCourses/CertificateinPoliticalIssuesinIrelandToday/ for course description.

  5. In UCC, a 1H grade refers to marks between 70 and 100 per cent; a 2H1 grade refers to marks between 60 and 69 per cent; a 2H2 grade refers to marks between 50 and 59 per cent; a 3H grade refers to marks between 45 and 49 per cent; a PASS grade refers to marks between 40 and 44 per cent; and a FAIL grade refers to marks between 0 and 39 per cent.

  6. The Leaving Certificate is an examination that students in Ireland complete at the end of their second-level education. The results of this exam determine the course of study a student pursues at university level.

References

  • Citera, M. (1988) ‘Distributed teamwork: The impact of communication media on influence and decision quality’, Journal of the American Society for Information Science 49 (9): 792–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, J. and Graff, M. (2005) ‘Performance in e-learning: Online participation and student grades’, British Journal of Educational Technology 36 (4): 657–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, T.M. and Cunningham, D.J. (1996) ‘Constructivism: Implications for the Design and Delivery of Instruction’, in D.H. Jonassen (ed.) Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, New York: Simon & Schuster/Macmillan, pp. 170–198.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, P.K. and Dabbagh, N. (2005) ‘How to structure online discussions for meaningful discourse: A case study’, British Journal of Educational Technology 36 (4): 5–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gokhale, A.A. (1995) ‘Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking’, Journal of Technology Education, http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JTE/v7n1/pdf/gokhale.pdf; accessed 13 December 2009.

  • James, R., McInnis, C. and Devlin, M. (2002) Assessing Learning in Australian Universities, Melbourne, Australia: Center for Study of Higher Education and the Australian Universities Teaching Committee.

  • Karayan, S. and Crowe, J. (1997) ‘Student perspectives of electronic discussion groups’, THE Journal: Technological Horizons in Education 24 (9): 69–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurillard, D. (1993) Rethinking University Education: A Framework for the Effective use of Educational Technology, London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, P.W. (2003) ‘Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in Arts’, Humanities and Social Sciences in H. Fry, S. Ketteridge and S. Marshall (eds.) A Handbook of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 2nd edn. UK: Routledge Falmer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R. (1998) ‘Models of online courses’, Asynchronous Learning Networks Magazine 2, No. 2, http://www.usdla.org/html/journal/JUL01_Issue/article02.html, accessed 21 December 2010.

  • McKenzie, W.A. (2002) ‘Using online discussion in teaching undergraduate psychology’, http://science.uniserve.edu.au/pubs/callab/vol8/mckenzie.html accessed 13 December 2009.

  • Murphy, M. and Reidy, T. (2007) ‘Political science's signature pedagogy’, Academic Exchange Quarterly 10 (4).

  • Olsen, J. and Statham, A. (2005) ‘Critical thinking in political science: Evidence from the introductory comparative politics course’, Journal of Political Science Education 1 (3): 323–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, S., Holt, D. and Bray, S. (2007) ‘Does the discussion help? The impact of a formally assessed online discussion on final student results’, British Journal of Educational Technology 39 (5): 847–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A.P. (2002) ‘Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks’, Internet and Higher Education 5: 319–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scriven, M. and Paul, R. (2001) ‘Defining critical thinking: A draft statement for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking’, http://www.criticalthinking.org/university/defining.html, accessed 13 December 2009.

  • Smith, D. and Hardaker, G. (2000) ‘e-Learning innovation through the implementation of an Internet supported learning environment’, Educational Technology and Society 3: 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trudeau, R.H. (2005) ‘Get them to read, get them to talk: Using discussion forums to enhance student learning’, Journal of Political Science Education 1 (3): 289–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warschauer, M. (1997) ‘Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice’, Modern language Journal 8 (4): 470–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

In preparing this article, I am in debt to the students who participated in my Online Discussion Forum experiment and who gave very generously of their time to complete the associated evaluations forms. I am also indebted to Marion McCarthy and Bettie Higgs of Ionad Bairre, University College Cork, who guided me through my Postgraduate Diploma in Teaching and Learning, and encouraged me to develop the Enquiry Portfolio submitted for that degree into this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Government, O’Rahilly Building, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland

    Fiona Buckley

Authors
  1. Fiona Buckley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Appendix A

Appendix A

MAKING AN ONLINE CONTRIBUTION TO BLACKBOARD DISCUSSION FORUMS

To post a message, log onto Blackboard, open this course (only students registered in this course can access the blackboard site for this module).

Find the current discussion forum topics by clicking the Discussion Forum tab that is listed on the left-hand side of the site.

The discussion forum topics will be listed in chronological order advising the total number of ‘posts’, the number of ‘posts’ read by you and the number of participants contributing to each discussion forum topic.

Before preparing a message for posting, visit the appropriate discussion forum for specific instructions and/or questions to answer in your message.

Remember, only students enrolled in this course can post messages on these discussion forums.

You might want to click on a ‘thread’ to see who has responded to whom.

To make a posting, click on the topic to which you wish to contribute and either click on ‘add thread’ or simply click on the name of one of your fellow students and respond to what they have said.

I recommend preparing your message in Word Document, and when you are finished copy and paste the message into the discussion board's text box, but if you wish, simply compose the message directly in the text box.

When you are finished making your contribution, simply click the ‘submit’ button.

The date and time of your ‘posting’ will be logged automatically by Blackboard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Buckley, F. Online Discussion Forums. Eur Polit Sci 10, 402–415 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2010.76

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/eps.2010.76

Keywords

Search

Navigation