AECT-online discussion and higher level learning

ONLINE DISCUSSION AND HIGHER LEVEL LEARNING: CONTRIBUTIONS OF CLT-BASED DISCUSSION STRATEGIES
Short Description:

In an online discussion of a particular topic, cognitive load theory (CLT)-Based discussion strategies using worked examples, filtered messages, limited number of postings, and combination of the three are contrasted against the conventional online discussion approach. Based on Bloom’s taxonomy (1956), higher level learning outcomes of each discussion strategy will be analyzed using content analysis. Instructional efficiency of each strategy will also be examined using participant’s performance and mental effort invested in each strategy.
Abstract: (Click here to view other format again)

Research Problem Lack of higher level learning presented in online discussion has been documented in many studies (Gunawardena, Lowe, & Anderson, 1997; Schellens & Vackle, 2005; Chai & Khine, 2006). Higher level learning, as defined by Bloom (1956), is activities demonstrating analysis, synthesis and evaluation of knowledge (Bloom, 1956). As a broadly used tool in online and blended instruction, online discussion is expected to enhance students’ learning. The more the higher level learning occurs as a result of discussion, the more successful the online discussion facilitates learning. Thus how to facilitate higher level learning in online discussion has been the focus of many studies (Christopher, Thoman, & Tallent-Runnels, 2004, Jeong, 2004, Spaturiu, Quinn, & Hartley, 2007, Rose, 2004). We contend that use of CLT-based learning strategies in online discussion will enhance participants’ higher level learning.Theoretical Foundation Cognitive Load Theory (Paas, Renkl, & Sweller, 2003; Sweller, 1988, 1999; Sweller, van Merrienboer, & Pass, 1998) provides a framework for designing effective instructions that enhance learning. CTL suggests that due to the limited capacity of working memory, learners must be exposed to new information through an efficient design of instruction. The mental load of instructional material in a learning condition is due to intrinsic and germane load (Paas, et al, 2003; Sweller, 1988, Sweller, et al., 1998). Toward this end, well-designed instructions are employed to reduce the extraneous cognitive load of a learning condition so that learners can focus their mental effort on relevant instructional activities. (Chandler & Sweller, 1991). Worked example has been found as an effective strategy in enhancing learning (Cooper & Sweller, 1987; Paas, 1992; Paas & van Merrienboer, 1994; Tuovinen & Sweller, 1999; Darabi & Nelson, 2007; Darabi, Nelson & Sikorski, 2006). When the learner is provided with worked example, his attention is directed to problem states and useful solution steps (van Merrienboer & Sweller, 2005) thus reducing cognitive load.Another principle suggested by CLT for an effective design is to display interactive elements together to reduce unnecessary cognitive load (Chandler & Sweller, 1992; Sweller, et al., 1998; Sweller, Chandler, Tieney, & Cooper, 1990). In online discussion, in order for higher level learning to occur, learner should process multiple messages at same time, find the general theme of them, and develop opinions or critiques. If the elements of the learning task are scattered, learner will allocate their mental effort to make the connection. When the mental effort exceeds working memory, they will understand them as isolated elements. Under either condition, higher level learning is less likely to occur. One approach to this problem in online discussion could be allowing the user to filter posted messages so that related information will be displayed together.The third instructional structure applied in this study is limiting the number of new information presented to learner at once. According to CLT, when learners are exposed to new and unfamiliar information, the number of piece of information should not exceed the working-memory capacity (Sweller, et al., 1998). Miller (1956) suggests 7 +-2 principles of human judgment limitations when there is only one dimension of stimuli, like text-based online discussion. In the mostly used online discussion board layout, the default setting is displaying 20 messages in each page. If all the 20 messages provide new information, they will obviously exceed learner’s working-memory capacity. Furthermore, if any of the 20 messages do not contribute to the construction of new knowledge, then the relevant elements are isolated by these non-contributing elements that results in higher cognitive load. Learner’s level of expertise is found influencing the effectiveness of worked example as well as learners’ capacity to handle split-source information and amount of new components (Kalyuga, Chandler, & Sweller, 1998; Sweller, 2008; Ward & Sweller, 1990). Learner’s pre-knowledge and skill level is measured and included in the analysis of learning outcome to identify its potential effects. Purposes of the study In this study, we compared the percentage of higher levels learning demonstrated in online discussions constructed with four CLT-based strategies against a conventional discussion approach. Higher level learning outcomes of the five discussion conditions (worked examples, filtered messages, limited number of postings, a combination of the three, and the conventional discussion) will be analyzed and compared using content analysis. Furthermore, participant’s performance and mental effort invested in these activities will be used to examine the instructional efficiency of the strategies.Given the principles of CLT, We hypothesize that inclusion of these discussion conditions facilitates construction of higher level learning compared to conventional discussion board design. We also hypothesize that inclusion of the three structures in one discussion condition will produce a better result in facilitating higher level learning than including only one structure. Methodology Participants. Sixty undergraduate students enrolled in an online class participate in this study. They discuss on two topics of how to professional work with families in distress. Procedure. In a controlled experimental condition, the participants will be randomly assigned to 5 discussion groups as follows: (1) Using discussion board that has worked example; (2) Using discussion board with simulated filtered message display; (3) Using discussion board with 7 messages displayed in one page; (4) Using discussion board that has all these three structures ( worked example + filtered message + 7 messages each page) and finally (5), Using conventional discussion board (no worked example + no filtering feature + 20 messages each page).Measures. Pre-knowledge and skill level is measured by a questionnaire. Mental effort is measured using 9-scale instrument developed by Paas, Van Merrienboer, and Adam (1994). Higher level learning demonstrated in discussion is measured via content analysis based on the 6 levels of learning defined by Blooms (1956). A performance test is also provided at the end of the discussion. Results & Discussions Statistical measures will be used to analyze the data collected on all the conditions. Our hypotheses stated at the outset will be tested and the results will be reported in tables, charts, and graphs. The findings and their implications will be presented and discussed at the conference. ReferencesBloom. B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives, Handbook I: The cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co. Inc. Chai, C. C., & Khine, M.S. (2006). An analysis of interaction and participation patterns in online community. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 9(1), 250-261. Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1991). Cognitive load theory and the format of instruction. Cognitive and Instruction, 8(4), 293-332. Chandler, P. & Sweller, J. (1992). The split-attention effect as a factor in the design of instruction. The British Journal of Educational Psycholgoy, (62), 233-246.Christopher, M. M., Thomas, J. A., & Tallent-Runnels, M. K.(2004). Raising the bar: encouraging higher level thinking in online discussion forums. Roeper Review, 26(3), 166-171.Cooper, G., & Sweller, J. (1987). Effects of schema acquisition and rule automation on mathematical problem-solving transfer. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79(4), 347-362. Darabi, A., Nelson, D. W., & Palanki, S., (2007). Acquisition of troubleshooting skills in a computer simulation: Worked example vs. conventional problem solving instructional strategies. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(4), 1809-1819.Darabi, A., Sikorski, E. G., Nelson, D. W., & Palanki S. (2006). Efficient, motivational, and effective strategies for complex learning: Computer-based simulation experiments in troubleshooting. Technology, Instruction, Cognition, and Learning, (3), 233-247.Gunawardena, C., Lowe, C., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397-431. Jeong, A. (2004). The combined effects of response time and message content on growth patterns of discussion threads in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. Journal of Distance Education, 19(1), 36-53. Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1998). Levels of expertise and instructional design. Human Factors, (40), 1-17. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review. (63)2, 81-97. Pass, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 429-434.Paas, F. G. W. C., & van Merrienboer, J. (1994). Variability of worked examples and transfer of geometrical problem-solving skills: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(1), 122-133. Paas, F. G. W. C., van Merrienboer, J., & Adam, J. (1994). Measurement of cognitive load in instructional research. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 79, 419-430. Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2005). Collaborative learning in asynchronous discussion groups: what about the impact on cognitive processing? Computers in Human Behavior, 21(6), 957-976. Sweller, J. (1988). Cognitive load during problem solving: Effects on learning. Cognitive Science, 12, 257-285. Sweller, J. (1999). Instructional design in technical areas. Australian Education Review, (43). Sweller, J. (2008). Cognitive load theory and educational technology. Educational Technology, January-February, 32-35.Sweller, J., Chandler, P., Tierney, P., & Cooper, M. (1990). Cognitive load as a factor in the structuring of technical material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 176-192. Sweller, J., van Merrienboer, J., & Paas, F. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educantional Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.Tuovinen, J. E. & Sweller, J. (1999). A comparison of cognitive load associated with discovery learning and worked examples. Journal of Educational Psycholgoy, (91)2, 334-341. Paas, F., Renkl, A., and Sweller, J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4. Rose, M. A. (2004). Comparing productive online dialogue in two group styles: Cooperative and collaborative. American Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 73-88. Spatariu, A., Quinn, L. F., & Hartley, K. (2007). A review of research on factors that impact aspects of online discussion quality. TechTrends, 51(3), 44-48. Van Merrienboer, J. & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-177. Ward, M. & Sweller, J. (1990). Structuring effective worked examples. Cognition and Instruction, 7(1), 1-39.