CALICO 2008
San Francisco
Fostering Cohesion and
Community
in
Asynchronous
Online Courses
Dorothy Chun, David Hiple, Stephen Tschudi
Fostering cohesion
and community

Community and cohesion

Chinese 332: the study

Results – lessons learned
Communities:
social contexts for learning

Individuals (re)construct identity through
community experiences

Experiences accumulated by participation
in social contexts

Social participation as learning process
Wenger 1998
Communities of practice

A group of individuals participating in a
communal activity
Wenger

Social learning groups that form when people
have a common interest and collaborate over
time…
Lave and Wenger 1991

In CoPs co-constructed knowledge – larger
than individual knowledge – is developed
through discussion and collaboration
Johnson 2001
Sociocultural theory


Human activities take place in cultural
contexts mediated by language and other
symbol systems
Emphasizes interdependence of social
and individual processes in the
“co-construction of knowledge”
Vygotsky
Constructionism
Learning happens especially well
when people are engaged in constructing
a product such as a machine, a computer
program or a book…
Papert
Constructivism

(Piaget)
Learners with different skills/backgrounds
collaborate to arrive at shared
understanding
Duffy and Jonassen 1992

Learners arrive at own version of the “truth”
based on background, culture, world view
Gredler 1997

Students produce and analyze their own
data
Furstenberg 2001
Inquiry based-learning

A student-centered, active learning
approach focusing on questioning, critical
thinking, and problem-solving.

Associated with the idea "involve me and
I will understand."
Bass
Using technology
in teaching and learning




Slow down the learning experience
Make thinking visible
Create a culture and context of reflective
practice
Virtual communities of practice
Bass
Viability of online
communities of practice

Access (++)

Asynchronous (+)

Archived (+)

Nonthreatening (+)

Disconnected (-)  lack of community
Nurturing CoPs online

Share opinions and feelings

Group knowledge developed

Cohesion - Wenger
 reference to other postings
 low redundancy
Online pedagogy

Task: relevant/personally important

Task: clearly defined with clear outcome

Teacher: prime the pump

Teacher: share
responsibility/management
BRIX course management system

WHAT

Dynamic Web pages: Cold Fusion processes code,
reads and updates database, outputs HTML


SQLServer database stores, modifies, retrieves
user input from learning community
WHY

Commercial courseware does not support

Pedagogical priorities

Needed charsets

Voice postings
BRIX courseware tools
Chinese 332: the course
•16 weeks; 8 instructional units
•Curriculum built around CD-ROM
•Lessons: authentic Chinese texts
(Int-High / Adv)
•CD-ROM published as
independent CALL tool
•Course designed as
“community of users” of CD-ROM
Chinese 332: the course
•Flow of activities
preparatory activities together
independent use of CD-ROM
text-based communicative group activities
related to CD-ROM content
Chinese 332: the course
Small Group Forum
•first activity after return from
individual CD-ROM use
•tasks blend intermediate-level
and advanced-level functions
•builds towards an endpoint essay
in current unit
•Small groups of 5 or 6 interact in task; can only
post in own group but can read all
Chinese 332: the course
Chinese 332: the study
Objective: identify behaviors and strategies
that foster or hinder cohesion and
community in online forums in courses
1. Threads with high and low indicators of cohesion and
community identified using quantitative methodology
2. Interesting exemplars of both kinds of threads “thickly
described” and compared using qualitative
methodology
3. Three distinct patterns discerned in threads of
interest, used as sources for identifying behaviors
and strategies
Chinese 332: the study
Cohesion & Community: Quantitative Indices
Cohesion
•postings per participant, MLU
•references to content of other postings
Community
•direct address; references to other participants
Chinese 332: the study
Quantitative Methodology
•Structured query language (SQL) used to
extract data from course database
•Data passed through scripts to obtain reliable
word and utterance counts
•Nonlinguistic operating definitions used for “word”
and “utterance” for purposes of the study
•Forums closely read and scored for
references to other people and to other
postings in the forum
Chinese 332: the study
Qualitative Methodology
•Overall pattern of interaction described:
“broken,” or whole? Rich, or impoverished?
Drive toward consensus or (at least)
clarification?
•Roles of participants described:
proactive, or reactive? Involved, or distant?
•Interactions in forum described as a series
of turns or communicative “events”
with consequences
Chinese 332: the study
Focus of Analysis
2 Small Group Forum discussions from
Spring 2003 semester
•Unit 2 (weeks 3 and 4), early in the course
6 small groups – negotiation task
•Unit 6 (weeks 11 and 12), late in the course
4 small groups – narration task
Chinese 332: the study
Unit 2: quantitative analysis
Small Group #
1
2
3
4
5
6
Number of postings
12
7
7
17
11
6
Mean postings per active
participant (teacher
postings not counted)
2.40
1.75
1.75
4.00
3.33
2.50
Total word count
(excluding teacher
postings)
550 (550)
331 (331)
238 (238)
800 (730)
735 (682)
221 (197)
Mean length of utterance
11.22
10.68
10.82
10.13
10.07
12.28
Rate of ref to other
participants/number of
postings
.17
.43
.14
1.12
1.45
.67
Rate of ref to other
postings/number of
postings
.75
.57
.86
1.06
.91
.67
Chinese 332: the study
Unit 2: qualitative analysis
Pattern 1
•Higher participation in Group 4 connected with
higher
personal interest in topic
•Higher interest associated with “topic drift”
towards actual favorite restaurants in Honolulu
•Teacher strategy: “go with the flow” and
exploit increased interest
Unit 2: Group 4 transcript
Hannah
Let’s have Taiwan cuisine today! I have never had authentic Taiwanese cuisine before. I’ve heard
that Taiwan cuisine is very distinctive. What do you all think?
Wendy
Okay! (rep) What restaurant do you want to go to? I have also never eaten authentic Taiwanese
cuisine. Do you know what dishes from Taiwan are good?
Flora
I have also never eaten Taiwanese cuisine. I’ve heard their snacks are very good. I have only ever
had Cantonese cuisine. I would also like to try Sichuan cuisine because I like spicy food. But it
doesn’t really matter. I can eat anything, whatever you like.
Robert
I think Taiwan cuisine is delicious. Their beef noodles are the best. And their snacks are very
popular too. So let’s have Taiwan cuisine, OK?
Wendy
I know that many people are of the opinion that Taiwan’s snacks are delicious. So I would like to eat
with you guys. Doesn’t the "Hometown Diner" specialize in Taiwan cuisine? We could go there to
eat. How about it?
Qin_laoshi
Wendy, where is the "Hometown Diner"?
Have you have noticed that during the last lesson Tsu-hou said that the restaurant his parents run,
the K.C. Kitchen, is a Taiwan-style diner and their food is delicious! Besides these two, what other
places are there?
Flora
I am not quite sure where there might be a Taiwan restaurant, because I have never eaten Taiwan
cuisine. So wherever you all decide to go, I will go with you.
Hannah
O.K., so we’ll go have Taiwan cuisine. I think K.C.'s beef noodles are good. I heard that there was
another Taiwan-style diner in the Cultural Plaza called "Elegant Orchid" that also serves Taiwan
snacks. Have you all ever been there? …
Chinese 332: the study
Unit 2: qualitative analysis
Pattern 2
•Student leader consistently made conversational moves to
“shepherd” other students in the group towards task closure
•Communication style fits “active participation paradigm” of
persuasive communication (Burgoon & Miller, 1985)
•Active participation by one such student may mean the difference
between success and failure for a group
•Such students not categorically the best performers; other students
may even contribute more, but these leaders focus and energize the
discussion in a distinct way
Unit 2: Group 4 transcript
Hannah
Let’s have Taiwan cuisine today! I have never had authentic Taiwanese cuisine before. I’ve heard
that Taiwan cuisine is very distinctive. What do you all think?
Wendy
Okay! (rep) What restaurant do you want to go to? I have also never eaten authentic Taiwanese
cuisine. Do you know what dishes from Taiwan are good?
Flora
I have also never eaten Taiwanese cuisine. I’ve heard their snacks are very good. I have only ever
had Cantonese cuisine. I would also like to try Sichuan cuisine because I like spicy food. But it
doesn’t really matter. I can eat anything, whatever you like.
Robert
I think Taiwan cuisine is delicious. Their beef noodles are the best. And their snacks are very
popular too. So let’s have Taiwan cuisine, OK?
Wendy
I know that many people are of the opinion that Taiwan’s snacks are delicious. So I would like to eat
with you guys. Doesn’t the "Hometown Diner" specialize in Taiwan cuisine? We could go there to
eat. How about it?
Qin_laoshi
Wendy, where is the "Hometown Diner"?
Have you have noticed that during the last lesson Tsu-hou said that the restaurant his parents run,
the K.C. Kitchen, is a Taiwan-style diner and their food is delicious! Besides these two, what other
places are there?
Flora
I am not quite sure where there might be a Taiwan restaurant, because I have never eaten Taiwan
cuisine. So wherever you all decide to go, I will go with you.
Hannah
O.K., so we’ll go have Taiwan cuisine. I think K.C.'s beef noodles are good. I heard that there was
another Taiwan-style diner in the Cultural Plaza called "Elegant Orchid" that also serves Taiwan
snacks. Have you all ever been there? …
Unit 2: Group 4 transcript
Wendy
The "Hometown Diner" is in Chinatown. I have not been to the K.C. Kitchen, but if you all want to
go, then I will go with you. When do you all want to go?
Robert
Which of the three -- the "Hometown Diner", the "Elegant Orchid", and K.C. Kitchen – have you
all been to? Which one has the best beef noodles? I can go anytime.
Flora
I have also heard that the Taiwanese restaurant inside the Cultural Plaza is very good. When you all
decide, just tell me what time to go.
Hannah
I think K.C. Kitchen and the "Elegant Orchid" both have good beef noodles. So it does not really
matter which one we go to. Which one do you all want to eat at? You decide.
Flora
It doesn’t really matter to me either; I can go to whichever. So if you say that you have been to both
restaurants, then we’ll go to whichever one that you think is best, OK?
Hannah
Since Robert said he likes to eat beef noodles, let’s go to K.C. Kitchen to try their Taiwan snacks.
How about it, you all?
Flora
Good! I have no problem with that! I have been wanting to try Taiwan cuisine for a long time now!
So when are we going?
Robert
Where is the K.C. Kitchen? Can anyone go with me?
Hannah
K.C. Kitchen is in the Cultural Plaza in Chinatown. Do you know where that is?
Chinese 332: the study
Unit 6: quantitative analysis
Small Group #
1
2
3
4
Number of postings
7
10
9
9
Mean postings per active
participant (teacher
postings not counted)
1.50
2.00
1.60
1.80
Total word count
910
538
465
535
Mean length of utterance
19.78
13.79
10.29
14.86
Chinese 332: the study
Unit 6 Group 3 thread list
Chinese 332: the study
Unit 6: qualitative analysis
Pattern 3
•Poor cohesion when students failed to participate
in a single thread
•Highly redundant content of postings showed
students not paying attention to others’ postings 
low group cohesion
•Students had to intuit division of labor from model
postings labeled “background,” “description,” and
“narration”
Chinese 332: the study
Unit 6: qualitative analysis
Pattern 3
•Teacher expectations regarding division of labor in
the group not met; instructions did not make
individual requirements clear enough
•Teacher “rescue” strategy: create new thread with
subject line only (no content):
“Students, please make your postings
together in one thread!”
Analysis and Discussion

Teaching implications of the 3 striking patterns
in the data:

(1) Increase of participation, direct
interaction, and personal involvement
when the topic closely related to students’
daily lives points to two important principles

(a) instructor flexibility

(b) fostering of connections to students’
lives and interests
Analysis and Discussion

(2) The second pattern, the emergence of a
student leader suggests that instructors
should:

(a) promote leadership in the group

(b) provide guidelines for interaction among
students
Analysis and Discussion

(3) The third pattern, the decrease in
interaction and cohesion points to:

(a) importance of clear instructions

(b) sustained leadership from the instructor

(c) clear definitions of task completion
Analysis and Discussion

To conclude, we return to the principles of
online pedagogy mentioned at the beginning
(which are also important in traditional/F2F
language teaching):

Two principles deal with tasks:

(1) Tasks must be clearly defined and include an
identifiable outcome or conclusion

(2) When possible, tasks should ideally be relevant
to the students’ lives and important to them
personally
Analysis and Discussion

Two principles deal with teachers:

(1) A key role for instructors is that they
“prime the pump” in the initial stages but also
be flexible and adaptive to students’ input

(2) Instructors should share the responsibility
of discourse management whenever
possible, i.e., they should designate student
leaders to help keep their classmates on
task (Poole, 2000)
Conclusion

The four principles are in line
with those presented in the
Community of Practice
framework for fostering
coherence in virtual learning
communities (Wenger), whose
goal is to create “learning
communities in which students
are willing, even enthusiastic,
to share the responsibility
of learning.”
Bibliography
Bass, R. (2000). Hyperactivity and underconstruction: Learning culture in a wired world.
http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/bassr/hauc3-00_files/v3_document.htm
Burgoon, M & Miller, G. R. (1985). An expectancy interpretation of language and persuasion. In Recent Advances in
Language, Communication, and Social Psychology. Ed. Howard Giles and Robert N. St. Clair. NJ: Erlbaum. 199-229.
Duffy, D & Jonassen, D.H. (1992). Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. NJ: Erlbaum.
Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., English, K., & Maillet, K. (2001). Giving a voice to the silent language of culture: The
Cultura Project. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 55-102. http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/furstenburg/default.html
Gredler, M. E. (1997). Learning and Instruction: Theory and Practice (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Johnson, C. (2000). A survey of current research on online communities of practice.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W4X-44BMD1R-4&_user=996227&_rdoc=1&_fmt=
&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000059603&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=996227
&md5=66be95a2289db4d50707fb4a6d43703c
Lave, J & Wenger E (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.
Piaget, Jean. (1950). The Psychology of Intelligence. New York. Routledge.
Poole, D. M. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-oriented online case: A case study. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education, 33, 167-177.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge MA: Harvard
University Press.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Aloha!
to see this presentation…
nflrc.hawaii.edu/CALICO/2008.ppt/