In this section, we'll focus on the following:

A brief history of discussion groups
The advantages of discussion groups
The limitations of discussions groups
Compensating for these limitations

A Brief History of Discussion Groups

Asynchronous electronic discussions have been around for decades. The earliest form was developed in the late 1970s and was called a computer bulletin board system. Other common names for online discussion activities are computer conferences, electronic conferences, discussion boards, discussion groups, threaded discussions, computer forum, web conferencing, and discussion forum. Regardless of the name, most discussion groups operate in the same fundamental manner. They are asynchronous, primarily text-based electronic communications forums. Messages are displayed in an organized structure, typically in chronological order.

Let’s think about threaded discussions. A thread is a series of linked messages, or a sequence of postings, within a discussion. A thread represents a dialogue or interchange about a common subject. A thread begins with an individual posting and includes responses to the original posting. Replies can be posted to the responses as well as to the original posting.

Most learning management software systems (e.g., WebCT and Blackboard) support threaded-type discussions. Threaded discussions provide a useful visual representation of the dialogue. Each message in a threaded discussion system is stored on its own page.

Thread example:

Advantages of Discussion Groups

Discussion groups support a variety of interactive activities, from informal exchanges to in-depth discourses. They are an effective tool for learner-instructor and learner-learner interaction. Many distance educators feel that discussions are one of the most important tools in their online course tool bag. Laurel Branen, professor of Nutrition and Dietetics at the University of Idaho, believes discussion groups are effective in her online course, Eating Disorders.

Branen on benefits of discussion groups (1:10)

Click here for text-only version.

As Branen points out, well-designed discussions promote active participation by all students in the course. Participation in online discussions can be more equitable and widespread than in face-to-face settings. Students who are shy and reluctant to speak out in face-to-face settings may express themselves more freely in discussion groups.

Online discussions are egalitarian; Participants are typically unaware of the age, gender, ethnic background, or physical characteristics of their distant classmates. The online setting helps minimize the bias that sometimes arises in face-to-face settings.

Discussions encourage critical thinking. Online discussions are available anytime and anywhere a participant has Internet access. Students can participate in a discussion at the time and place of their choice. The asynchronous or delayed nature of discussion allows participants to take time to reflect on the subject matter, and to organize and refine their thoughts before posting.

Discussions produce other learner benefits including:

• Exposing learners to differing points of view.
• Facilitating group activities.
• Providing open access to student assignments and critiques, enabling students to learn from each other.
• Supporting participation of guest “speakers” or outside experts.
• Supplying an electronic archive of the discourse and a record of student performance.

Limitations of Discussion Groups

Although discussion groups offer wonderful interactive capabilities, they are far from perfect. There are some drawbacks to online discussions that create additional challenges for instructors and instructional designers. Let's examine limitations of online discussions:

1. Discussion software is complicated and not always very user-friendly. Some people describe discussion groups as clunky and messy.

William Klemm writes that “threaded-topic design typically requires the cumbersome process of opening and closing many messages.” He concludes that the term "discussion" “is probably the wrong word to use for this activity, because posted messages are more like monologues”(The Technology Source, September/October 2002, http://ts.mivu.org/default.asp?show=article&id=1015).

2. Users sometimes lose the thread, or lose track of a discussion sequence. In a live, face-to-face discussion participants take turns talking, and they use visual and verbal cues to aid the exchange of messages. In an online discussion, there is little control over participant turn-taking and there are no visual or verbal cues for guidance. As a result, some discussions become fragmented as postings are made out of sequence or placed in the wrong location.

3. The sequence of the discussion may become disjointed. Students can read messages in any order in a discussion group. Even when messages are posted in the proper sequence, participants may choose to read the messages in a non-sequential manner.

4. "Thread monopoly” can occur in discussions. Just as in live, face-to-face discussions, some participants can dominate the online discussion.

5. Other limitations are related to characteristics of individual learners. For example, some students may fear the “public” display of their writing skills. Other students may be reluctant to be assertive, or they may be unwilling to openly express their opinions and ideas.

Compensating for the Limitations

Instructors and instructional designers can compensate for the limitations that they encounter with discussion groups. Here are some solutions:

Clunkiness of Technology:

• Provide explicit instructions for participants.
• Ensure that participants have adequate opportunity to practice and develop skills with the software before they have a graded activity.

Losing a Thread:

• Assign participants to small discussion groups to maintain a reasonable number of messages.
• Limit the number of topics or “threads”.
• Move misplaced postings to the proper thread (most learning management systems allow this).

Reading Messages Out of Sequence:

• In the discussion guidelines, recommend that participants read all messages in chronological order.

Thread Monopoly:

• Communicate privately with the participant who is dominating the discussion.
• Privately encourage those who are not participating.

Student Fear of Public Writing:

• Offer private encouragement.
• Offer to review a student’s posting before it goes out.

Student Reluctance to Voice Opinions:

• Offer private encouragement and support.
• Provide examples.
• Model appropriate behavior.

Now that we've discussed what discussion groups and their advantages and limitations, how do you use them? Read on.

Or you may review what you've learned.

Destination 5: 15 of 18