Classroom discussions have long been an important part of traditional learning and it is commonly accepted that discourse is essential to the learning process (Hall, 2015). Discussions provide a forum in which instructors can share information and teaching stories to engage students and promote their critical thinking by posing dilemmas, questions, and case studies. While traditional lectures assume that cognition is a passive process, there is much research to support the active nature of learning and discussions are ideal for constructing knowledge (Reber, 2011). There is much research, as briefly reviewed here, to support the notion that students deepen their understanding of the material when they construct knowledge. Students can construct knowledge effectively in the online discussion format.

Shukor, Tasir, der Meijden, & Harun (2014) state that students construct knowledge when provided with a collaborative or cooperative learning environment in which students discuss evidence and solve problems. Similarly, Kalelioğlu & Gülbahar (2014) found in their research that critical thinking skills and critical thinking dispositions can be taught and cultivated, especially in problem-based learning scenarios presented in online discussions. They found that when students play mixed roles across the term (Six Thinking Hats, Socratic Questioner, Brainstorming, and so on), they express stronger critical thinking skills in the discussion. Alzahrani (2017) found significant correlations between levels of undergraduate student participation in online discussions and their final grade in the course.

From the work of Bloom and others (Krathwohl, 2002), we know that we want students integrating, applying, and evaluating information. Graham et al. (2001) found that online discussions were most effective for student learning when students were collaborating on a task and when that task resulted in a product, such as a solved problem. Shukor and colleagues (2014) found that pushing students into arguing for a particular point of view led to the use of higher levels of knowledge construction and that when students had to negotiate information, learning was also supported (based on their coding scheme of student comments). Kalelioğlu & Gülbahar (2014) also found that interactions based on contradictory viewpoints stimulated more student posts and critical thinking in those posts. Similarly, we know from Merrill (2002) that learning is promoted when students:

• Solve real-world problems

• Have their existing knowledge activated and use it to create new knowledge

• Have new knowledge demonstrated to them

• Have an opportunity to apply the new knowledge

• Can integrate new knowledge into their lived experience

Thus, effective discussions, in terms of students constructing knowledge and developing critical thinking skills, will utilize problems, cases, scenarios, or situations in which students collaboratively attempt to resolve ill-defined, real-world problems and are pushed to argue their solution based on different perspectives.

The notion that students construct knowledge is not a new one. While developmental psychologists draw on the work of Dewey, Vygotsky, and Piaget, we will look to more contemporary research, particularly in the higher education classroom, using asynchronous online discussion boards. Chickering & Gamson’s (1987) seminal work on the importance of student-student and faculty-student interaction for effective learning has been updated to the online classroom in Graham, Cagiltay, Lim, Craner, & Duffy’s 2001 article. They continue to emphasize the importance of student-student and faculty-student interaction for effective teaching. Schnell and Janicki (2012), in their review of applying Gagne’s nine conditions for learning to online discussions, find that following Gagne’s nine steps leads to successful online discussions that promote conditions for learning.

Gilbert & Dabbagh (2005) found that providing structure for students, such as guidelines for student participation and the inclusion of faculty assessment of their posts, promoted deeper and more meaningful understanding of the content. They stressed the importance of faculty evaluation of the students’ discussion posts in the gradebook including the use of a rubric that focuses on students’ process of critical thinking as well as written feedback that included compliments and critiques of students’ posts. Surprisingly, they also found that requiring the use of citations decreased the levels of critical thinking. However, that could be from the focus on ensuring the correction of the citation details. The concern mentioned in a few of the articles on how online discussions promote critical thinking was students’ reluctance to participate in online discussions. The next section focuses on how to engage students’ interest in the discussion through the development of a Community of Inquiry as well as asking questions that provoke students’ participation in the discussion.

Asking the right questions will allow instructors to promote engagement and critical thinking. Hall (2015) reminds us that we want to do more than just promote critical thinking in online discussions; we also want to promote a critical thinking disposition in the learner. Hall suggests that instructors should nurture critical thinking by modeling evidence-based inquiry in their participatory posts, providing opportunities for peer interaction, and evaluating students’ process in their discussion posts instead of just their results.

We want to create online discussion questions that draw on different ways of engaging students that allow students to answer questions based on their level of understanding: some students do best and are challenged with questions that can be answered based on the course materials. Other students do better when they can relate course materials to their lives, their careers, and their futures. While some students will find these two levels to be very challenging and interesting, other students will need the further challenge of being asked to relate the course materials to a broader social, business, scientific, or another context (Krathwohl, 2002). Based on this, it is helpful to ask tri-level questions that connect students to the material, their lives, and a broader social context.

Hall (2016) also notes, “topic(s) should engender ambiguity and the opportunity to scrutinize multiple viewpoints.” Krathwohl, in the review of Bloom’s work, also notes the importance of asking higher-order questions that promote evaluation and synthesis:

• Higher order questions

• Conditional phrasing (what might happen if)

• Application

• Reality-Based Learning

• Case decision-making

Besides supporting students’ cognitive development, we also want to engage the students’ interest. It is often best to grab students’ attention by providing:

• Provocative and relevant quotes or passages

• Poignant descriptions or images

• Engaging vignettes from the popular media

• Cartoons

• Teaching stories

• Dilemmas

• Connections to their lives - relevance

These hooks help engage student interests, while the requirements of the discussion – use of terminology, scaffolding questions, and replying to each other’s responses – help maintain the rigor of the discussion. Spouting off an opinion or stating agreement is not enough to earn points for a response.

With these more involved questions, you can still create canned or boilerplate text responses and scaffolding questions that you adjust/edit for the group of students you are responding to in the discussion. Students generally run into similar roadblocks and find similar topics challenging, so scaffolding posts and teaching stories used in one course can be adapted in later terms. It is easy to create canned responses after teaching the course a time or two.

Toledo (2006) following-up on Stepien’s (n.d.) work, notes that asking the right questions can support students’ engagement and their intellectual development. Toledo suggests that instructors model good questioning techniques in their posts to the discussions so that students can learn them, while Gilbert & Dabbhagh (2005) found that providing students with sample posts and questions could improve the cognitive quality of students’ posts. Toledo's questions can be found in this handout: Handouts: How-To Guide for Restructured Discussions.docx (same handout as on the previous page).

Note to eCORE instructors: You can add to any discussion question and you can modify questions as long as you still meet the module objective.

Given the importance of asking the right questions (Toledo, 2016), modeling critical thinking behavior (Hall, 2015), providing a strong teaching, social and cognitive presence (Lambert & Fisher, 2013), and creating a sense of immediacy or psychological closeness (Dixson, Greenwell, Rogers-Stacy, Weister, & Lauer, 2017), it is imperative that the instructor participate in each online discussion on a regular basis. Since provocative questions, contradictory viewpoints, and debates are helpful to get the students engaged in the discussion and push them into using higher critical thinking skills (Kalelioğlu & Gülbahar, 2014), it is especially helpful for the instructor to moderate the online discussion to ensure that students maintain collegial interactions. Garrison & Arbaugh (2007) and Lambert & Fisher (2013) state that the instructor plays a major role in helping students attain higher levels of critical thinking. Faculty who were engaged in a major institutional redesign of courses to create a CoI stressed the importance of taking a more instrumental role in the facilitation of online discussions (Vaughan, 2010 as reported in Lambert & Fisher, 2013).

For larger online classes (greater than 30 students), it can be helpful to have graduate teaching assistants (TAs) to help moderate multiple discussions after you divide the students into groups of 20-30 (optimal online discussions size (Bates & Poole, 2013)). It will be helpful to train the TAs regarding the importance of developing a Community of Inquiry, to learn the questions shared by Toledo (2016), and for keeping their posts helpful and positive as they provoke discussions and critical thinking (Acolatse, 2016; Hall 2015). It is important that an instructor’s posts maintain a positive tone and model critical thinking. Please save individual feedback and critique for the comments in the gradebook. Instructors, following simple behaviorist principles, try to avoid posting any negative comments in the discussion area and save those for emails, announcements, or the gradebook area. It is most helpful to focus on the first seven steps of Gagne’s events in the online discussion and to save steps 8 and 9 for the gradebook and other areas of the course (more details on Gagne’s 9 steps as applied to online (optional)).