Discussion Board Assessment of Effectiveness

1. Discussion BoardAssessment of Effectiveness Scotty Dunlap, EdD, CSP Eastern Kentucky University College of Justice and Safety

2. Our Program • MS in Safety, Security and Emergency Management • Concentrations and certificates in: • Occupational Safety • Ergonomics • Homeland Security • Emergency Management • Fire and Emergency Services

3. Our Students

4. Our Students

5. Our Students

6. Our Students

7. Our Students

8. Our Students

9. Our Students

10. Class Format

11. Class Format 8 weeks – 8 weeks 8 weeks – 8 weeks

12. Class Format 8 weeks – 8 weeks 8 weeks – 8 weeks 6 weeks – 6 weeks

13. Our Course Design

14. Our Course Design

15. Our Course Design

16. Our Course Design

17. Discussion Board • One Instructor of Record • Eight Facilitators • 156 registered students subdivided into eight groups ?

18. Discussion Board • Previous • Two scripted questions each week • Paralleled lecture or textbook reading • Required one substantial initial post and two responses to peers • Under study • One open-ended question • Based on related article • Required one substantial initial post and two responses to peers • Added critical thinking resource

19. Discussion Board • Effectiveness of Discussion Board use: • Measured by student survey • Measured by rating posts in the course under study with those from the previous time the course was taught

20. Findings • Journal Article Discussion vs. Scripted Questions • 62% agreed or strongly agreed that the journal articles helped them to have quality interaction with their fellow students (14.2% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 60.2% agreed or strongly agreed that they liked discussing the journal articles (11.5% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 32.7% agreed or strongly agreed that they would prefer to discuss material from the video lectures (33.6% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 25.1% agreed or strongly agreed that they would prefer to discuss material from the textbook (12.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed)

21. Findings • Critical Thinking Information • 52.2% agreed or strongly agreed that accessing the critical thinking information improved the quality of their communication (10.7% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 62.8% agreed or strongly agreed that they preferred open-ended dialogue rather than scripted questions (15.1% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 74.3% agreed or strongly agreed that open-ended dialogue helped them to better share their thoughts (6.2% disagreed or strongly disagreed)

22. Findings • Student Learning • 82.3% agreed or strongly agreed that they preferred focusing on one discussion thread rather than multiple discussion threads (6.4% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 62.8% agreed or strongly agreed that they could not learn as effectively if the discussion board were not a component of the course (18.6% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 69% agreed or strongly agreed that engaging in the discussion board increased their level of learning (10.7% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 64.6% agreed or strongly agreed that the shared experience of their classmates was a critical part of their learning (13.2% disagreed or strongly disagreed)

23. Findings • Student Motivation • 59.3% agreed or strongly agreed that the quality of interaction in the discussion board motivated them to post comments (16.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 70.8% agreed or strongly agreed that the work experience of their fellow students motivated them to post comments (13.3% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 69.7% agreed or strongly agreed that they were motivated to post due to the percentage of their grade that the activity represented (11.6% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 79.6% agreed or strongly agreed that requiring a certain number of posts was a good way to get students to engage in the discussion (8.9% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 49.5% agreed or strongly agreed that they participate in the discussion board because they have to (28.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 55.8% agreed or strongly agreed that they participate in the discussion board because they want to (16.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed)

24. Findings • Facilitator Engagement • 69.9% agreed or strongly agreed that the role of the Facilitator was critical in establishing quality interaction in the discussion board (13.2% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 73.2% agreed or strongly agreed that the discussion board should not be limited to students only with no Facilitator interaction (2.7% disagreed or strongly disagreed) • 69.9% agreed or strongly agreed that the discussion board should be a graded activity (9.8% disagreed or strongly disagreed)

25. Findings • Quality • 0-3 rating • Evaluated 13,511 posts • 2.03 - Current • 1.67 - Previous

26. Conclusions • Students preferred open-ended discussion • Scripted questions can limit discussion due to establishing a pre-determined path • Access to critical thinking information was helpful • Cannot assume graduate students have critical thinking skills (“Academically Adrift”) • Students preferred one discussion question • Multiple questions can divide focus in addition to other weekly activities that must be accomplished • Consider intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors • “Want to” and “have to” participate • Students appreciated Facilitator presence • Not a “student-only” forum

27. Questions or comments?