Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T14:28:37.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Online Discussion Forums

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Fiona Buckley
Fiona Buckley*
Affiliation:
Department of Government, O’Rahilly Building, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

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.

Keywords

curriculum designnon-traditional studentsKWLproblem based learningservice learning

Information

Type
Teaching and Training
Information
European Political Science , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , September 2011, pp. 402 - 415
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 European Consortium for Political Research

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

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 3.0.CO;2-K>CrossRefGoogle 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 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2005.00542.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy, T.M. and Cunningham, D.J. (1996) Constructivism: Implications for the Design and Delivery of Instruction, in Jonassen, D.H. (ed.) Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, New York: Simon & Schuster/Macmillan, pp. 170–198Google 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 CrossRefGoogle 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.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
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: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
Martin, P.W. (2003) ‘Key Aspects of Teaching and Learning in Arts’, Humanities and Social Sciences, in Fry, H., Ketteridge, S. and Marshall, S. (eds.) A Handbook of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education UK: Routledge FalmerGoogle 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.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. and Reidy, T. (2007) ‘Political science's signature pedagogy’, Academic Exchange Quarterly 10 (4).Google Scholar
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 10.1080/15512160500261186CrossRefGoogle 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 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00780.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rovai, A.P. (2002) Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks, Internet and Higher Education 5: 319–332 10.1016/S1096-7516(02)00130-6CrossRefGoogle 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.Google Scholar
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 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warschauer, M. (1997) Computer-mediated collaborative learning: Theory and practice, Modern language Journal 8(4): 470–481 Google Scholar