You are here:

Student Participation Patterns in Online Discussion: Incorporating Constructivist Discussion into Online Courses

, , Cleveland State University, United States

International Journal on E-Learning Volume 9, Number 1, ISSN 1537-2456 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA


The purpose of this article was to explore student participation patterns in online discussion boards related to their characteristics and question types. The characteristics of students enrolled in an online course and the impact of types of discussion questions on student posts were examined. During the 16 weeks of a course, the participation patterns of 14 students and their 469 posts were analyzed to examine levels of collaboration. Findings suggested that posts stating individual perspectives were dominant regardless of the type of discussion question asked. Higher-order thinking questions yielded more collaborative patterns among students than questions asking the knowledge at the literal level.


Kim, H.K. & Bateman, B. (2010). Student Participation Patterns in Online Discussion: Incorporating Constructivist Discussion into Online Courses. International Journal on E-Learning, 9(1), 79-98. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 26, 2019 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Abrams, Z. (2003). The effect of synchronous and asynchronous CMC on oral performance in German. The Modern Language Journal, 87, 157-167.
  2. Ahern, T.C., & El-Hindi, A.E. (2000). Improving the instructional congruency of a computermediated small-group discussion: A case study in design and delivery. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 32 (3), 385-400.
  3. Allen, I.E., & Seaman, J. (2005). Growing by degrees: Online education in the United States, 2005. The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved July 28, 2006 from
  4. Bonk, C.J., & Zhang, K. (2006). Introducing the R2D2 model: Online learning for the diverse learners of this world. Distance Education (27)2, 249-264.
  5. Brown, R. (2001). The process of community-building in distance learning classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 18-35.
  6. Bullen, M. (1998). Participation and critical thinking in online university distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 9(1), 1-32.
  7. Ellis, R.A., Goodyear, P., Prosser, M., & O’Hara, A. (2006). How and what university students learn through online and face-to-face discussions: conceptions, intentions and approaches, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 22, 244-256.
  8. Garrison, R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical Thinking, Cognitive Presence, and Computer Conferencing in Distance Education. American Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23.
  9. Gunawardena, C.N., Lowe, C.A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction model for examining the social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 395-429.
  10. Gunter, M.A., Estes, T.H., & Schwab, J. (1995). Instruction: A Models Approach (2nd. Ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  11. Hammond, M. (2005). A review of recent papers on online discussion in teaching and learning in higher education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 9-23.
  12. Hara, N., Bonk, C.J., & Angeli, C.(2000). Content analysis of online discussions in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional science 28: 115-152.
  13. Jeong, A.C. (2003). The sequential analysis of group interaction and critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The American Journal of Distance Education, 17(1), 25-43.
  14. Jeong, A.C. (2005). A guide to analyzing message-response sequences and group interaction patterns in Computer-mediated communication. Distance Education, 26(3). 367-383.
  15. Jiang, M., & Ting, E. (2000). A study of factors influencing students’ perceived learning in a webbased course environment. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 6(4), 317-338.
  16. Kerr, M., Rynearson, K., & Kerr, M. (2006). Student characteristics for online learning success. 96 Kim and Bateman
  17. Liu, C., & Lee, J. (2005). Prompting conceptual understanding with computer-mediated peer discourse and knowledge acquisition techniques. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(5), 821-837.
  18. Murphy, E. (2004). Recognizing and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4), 421-431.
  19. Palloff, R.M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating Online: Learning Together in Community. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  20. Picciano, A.G. (2001). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 64-74.
  21. Roblyer, M.D., & Wiencke, W.R. (2003). Design and use of a rubric to assess and encourage interactive qualities in distance courses. The American Journal of Distance Education, 17(2), 77-98.
  22. Rovai, A. (2007). Facilitating online discussion effectively. The Internet and Higher Education, 10, 77-88.
  23. Schrum, L., & Hong, S. (2002). Dimensions and strategies for online success: voices from experienced educators. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 57-67.
  24. Stephens, A.C., & Hartmann, C.E. (2004). A successful professional development project’s failure to promote online discussion about teaching mathematics with technology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 12(1), 57-73.
  25. Sujo de Montes, L.E., & Gonzales, C.L. (2000). More than having a connection: Qualitative factors that affect learning in a web-based university course. Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology& Teacher Education (SITE) International conference, San Diego, CA. 177-182.
  26. Swan, K. (2003). Learning effectiveness online: What the research tells us. In J. Bourne & J.C. Moore (Eds). Elements of Quality Online Education, Practice and Direction. Needham, MA: Sloan Center for Online Education, 13-45.
  27. Swan, K., & Shih, L.F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115-136.
  28. Vrasidas, C., & McIssac, M. (1999). Factors influencing interaction in an online course. The American Journal of Distance Education, 13(3), 22-36.
  29. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological process. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  30. Waschull, S.B. (2005). Predicting success in online psychology courses: Self-discipline and motivation. Teaching Psychology, 32(3), 190-192.
  31. Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & Del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 247-271.
  32. Wu, A. (2003). Supporting Electronic Discourse: Principles of Design from a Social Constructivist Perspective. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 14(2), 167-184.
  33. Wu, D., & Hiltz, S. (2004). Predicting learning from asynchronous online discussion. Journal of Student Participation Patterns in Online Discussion 97

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact