Abstract
Virtual forums are commonly used in higher education, yet they do not always yield desirable results. This study analyses whether the students' contributions are more elaborate when the categorisation of their messages prior to making a contribution is compulsory rather than optional. Using a coding scheme based on Stahl's (2000) model of collaborative knowledge building, the content of messages from 30 forums in different subjects was analysed. The results show that processes of explanation are used the most. In contrast, negotiations and formalisation are used very little, if at all. Furthermore, the results highlight that compulsory - as opposed to optional - assignation of a scaffold prior to making a contribution does not make discourse any more elaborate. However, it is confirmed that students learn merely by having labels available for use. Consequently, we suggest that scaffolds and other cognitive and communicative tools be incorporated into general forums.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
