REAPING THE AFFORDANCES AND CONSTRAINTS OF CANVAS-DRIVEN ASYNCHRONOUS ONLINE DISCUSSION BOARDS (AODBs)

Anisa Sofarini, Vina Aini Salsabila

Abstract


Abstract: Asynchronous online discussion board (AODB) has turned into a crucial tool for online and blended learning, as well as some in-class teaching contexts, in higher education (HE). Despite not being initially designed for teaching, it is now prominently featured as a learning autonomy promoter. This research is henceforth crucial due to the dearth of comprehensive assessments of how a technology enables lecturers to tote out the AODB-related activities. Employing technology affordance framework helped shape this study’s discoveries. Via the 16-week observations on the five lecturers’ AODBs in Canvas LMS, this study put together four supporting features, enabling this study to capture lecturers’ efforts to set up AODBs for pedagogical process. There are instruction pages, settings, search entries for authors, replies and likes. These features led this study to lump together the interview data from three lecturers into four affordances of Canvas-mediated AODB (consisting of collaboration, flexibility, knowledge record, and monitoring and assessment) and two constraints (mobile accessibility and usability for grading). The disclosure of Canvas-mediated AODBs’ affordances and constraints may introduce some brand-new details to the realm of discussion in education. Even so, further study scrutinizing various platforms and employing a variety of lecturer profiles is highly encouraged in order to result in a wider range of facts regarding AODB in HE.

Keywords


Asynchronous Online Discussion Board (AODB); Canvas LMS; Technology Affordance Framework

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ally, M., & Tsinakos, A. (2014). Increasing access through mobile learning. Vancouver: Commonwealth of Learning.

Bhattacharya, K. (2017). Fundamentals of qualitative research: A practical guide. Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-0945-7_4

Biesenbach-Lucas, S. (2003). Asynchronous discussion groups in teacher training classes: perceptions of native and non-native students. In JALN, 7(3).

Boud, D., & Symes, C. (2000). Learning for real: work-based education in universities. Working knowledge: The new vocationalism and higher education, 14-29.

Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis – Matching learning tasks with learning technologies. Educational Media International, 45(1), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523980701847115

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2013). Successful qualitative research: A practical guide for beginners. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Bucher, T., & Helmond, A. (2018). The Affordances of Social Media Platforms. In The SAGE handbook of social media (pp. 233–253).

Campbell, M., Gibson, W., Hall, A., Richards, D., & Callery, P. (2008). Online vs. Face-to-face discussion in a web-based research methods course for postgraduate nursing students. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45(5), 750–759.

Canvas Instructure. (2023, September 6). How do I enable a podcast feed for a discussion in a course? Retrieved from https://community.canvaslms.com/t5/Instructor-Guide/How-do-I-enable-a-podcast-feed-for-a-discussion-in-a-course/ta-p/1096

CARR, J. (2020). Teacher candidate perceptions on alternative asynchronous online discussion boards. Journal of Educational Technology and Online Learning, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.31681/jetol.752283

Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2004). Evaluating the extent of ill-structured problem-solving process among pre-service teachers in an asynchronous online discussion and reflection log learning environment. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 30(3), 197-227.

Cho, M. H., & Tobias, S. (2016). Should instructors require discussion in online courses? Effects of online discussion on community of inquiry, learner time, satisfaction, and achievement. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 17(2), 123–140. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i2.2342

Chun, J., & Cennamo, K. (2022). A Theoretical Model of Peer Learning Incorporating Scaffolding Strategies. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 33(3), 385–397. http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/

Clark, C., Strudler, N., & Grove, K. (2015). Comparing Asynchronous and Synchronous Video vs. Text Based Discussions in an Online Teacher Education Course. Online Learning, 19(3), 48–69.

Collins, K., Groff, S., Mathena, C., & Kupczynski, L. (2019). Asynchronous video and the development of instructor social presence and student engagement. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education-TOJDE, 20(1), 53–70. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7136-6418

Conole, G., & Dyke, M. (2004). What are the affordances of information and communication technologies? ALT-J, 12(2), 113–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/0968776042000216183

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE publications, Inc.

Dailey-Hebert, A. (2018). Maximizing interactivity in online learning: Moving beyond discussion boards. Journal of Educators Online, 15(3).

Danaher, M., Rhodes, A., & Kranov, A. A. (2021a). Assessment of learning outcomes through an asynchronous on-line discussion board. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 19(3), 299–305.

Danaher, M., Rhodes, A., & Kranov, A. A. (2021b). Student perceptions of an asychronous online discussion board used to assess the professional skills. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, 2021-April(April), 1247–1253. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON46332.2021.9453886

Dykman, C. A., & Davis, C. K. (2008). Online education forum: Part two-teaching online versus teaching conventionally. Journal of Information Systems Education, 19(2), 157.

Elmahdi, I., Al-Hattami, A., & Fawzi, H. (2018). Using Technology for Formative Assessment to Improve Students’ Learning. In TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 17(2).

Fehrman, S., & Watson, S. L. (2020). A Systematic Review of Asynchronous Online Discussions in Online Higher Education. American Journal of Distance Education, 35(3), 200–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2020.1858705

Galustyan, O. V., Vyunova, N. I., Komarova, E. P., Shusharina, E. S., Gamisonija, S. S., & Sklyarova, O. N. (2019). Formation of media competence of future teachers by means of ICT and mobile technologies. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 13(11), 184–196. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v13i11.11350

Gao, F., Zhang, T., & Franklin, T. (2013). Designing asynchronous online discussion environments: Recent progress and possible future directions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(3), 469–483. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01330.x

Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. Routledge

Garrison, D. 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.

Garrison, D. R., & Vaughan, N. D. (2008). Blended learning in higher education: Framework, principles, and guidelines. John Wiley & Sons.

Gerosa, M. A., Filippo, D., Pimentel, M., Fuks, H., & Lucena, C. J. P. (2010). Is the unfolding of the group discussion off-pattern? Improving coordination support in educational forums using mobile devices. Computers and Education, 54(2), 528–544.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.004

Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Green, T., & Green, J. (2018). Flipgrid: Adding Voice and Video to Online Discussions. TechTrends, 62(1), 128–130.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0241-x

Gupta, Y., Khan, F. M., & Agarwal, S. (2021). Exploring Factors Influencing Mobile Learning in Higher Education - A Systematic Review. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies, 15(12), 140–157. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i12.22503

Hara, N., Bonk, C. J., & Angeli, C. (2000). Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science, 28, 115–152.

Hartson, R. (2003). Cognitive, Physical, Sensory, and Functional Affordances in Interaction Design. Behaviour and Information Technology, 22(5), 315–338.

Hasani, L. M., Santoso, H. B., & Junus, K. (2022). Designing Asynchronous Online Discussion Forum Interface and Interaction Based on the Community of Inquiry Framework. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 23. http://thecommunityofinquiry.org/coi

Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., & Ng, C. S. L. (2010). Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: A review of the research and empirical exploration. Instructional science, 38, 571-606.

Instructure, Inc. (2019, February 20). University College Cork partners with Canvas to deliver its new strategic vision. Retrieved from https://www.canvaslms.com/news/pr/UniversityCollegeCorkPartnerswithCanvastoDeliveritsNewStrategicVision&122711

Iraj, H., Fudge, A., Faulkner, M., Pardo, A., & Kovanović, V. (2020). Understanding Students’ engagement with personalised feedback messages. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 438–447. https://doi.org/10.1145/3375462.3375527

Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2012). Affordances in HCI: Toward a Mediated Action Perspective. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 967–976.

Kayler, M., & Karen, W. (2007). Pedagogy, self-assessment, and online discussion groups. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 10(1), 136–147. http://www.ifets.info/

Kirk, J. J., & Orr, R. L. (2003). A Primer on the Effective Use of Threaded Discussion Forums. Eric. http://content.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.umb.edu/ContentServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=ED472738&S=R&D=eric&EbscoContent=dGJyMNLr40Sep7Y4zdnyOLCmr0meqLBSsqi4SbOWxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGrrk+vrLdMuePfgeyx44Dt6fIA%5Cnhttp://ezproxy.lib.umb.edu/login?url=http://sea

Koehler, A. A., Fiock, H., Janakiraman, S., Cheng, Z., & Wang, H. (2020). Asynchronous online discussions during case-based learning: A problem-solving process. Online Learning Journal, 24(4), 64–92. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v24i4.2332

Loeng, S. (2020). Self-directed learning: A core concept in adult education. In Education Research International (Vol. 2020, pp. 1–12). Hindawi Limited. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/3816132

Martin, F., & Bolliger, D. U. (2018). Engagement matters: Student perceptions on the importance of engagement strategies in the online learning environment. Online Learning Journal, 22(1), 205–222. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i1.1092

Matthew, B., & Ross, L. (2010). Research methods: A practical guide for the social sciences. Pearson Education Limited.

Mcgrenere, J., & Ho, W. (2000). Affordances: Clarifying and Evolving a Concept. Graphic Interface, 2000, 179–186.

McKinney, B. (2018). The impact of program-wide discussion board grading rubrics on students and faculty satisfaction. Online Learning Journal, 22(2), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v22i2.1386

Mosweu, O., & Ngoepe, M. (2019). Skills and competencies for authenticating digital records to support audit process in Botswana public sector. African Journal of Library, Archives & Information Science, 29(1), 17-28.

Nettles, B., & Futch, L. (2012). Instructure Canvas, UCF’s Next LMS!. Faculty Focus, 11(3), 2-3.

Norman, D. A. (1988). The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.

Osborne, D. M., Byrne, J. H., Massey, D. L., & Johnston, A. N. B. (2018). Use of online asynchronous discussion boards to engage students, enhance critical thinking, and foster staff-student/student-student collaboration: A mixed method study. Nurse Education Today, 70, 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2018.08.014

Paynter, K., & Barnes, J. (2021). Moving from Blackboard to Canvas: What the Research Says, Plus Two Professors’ Experiences. International Jl. on E-Learning, 20(1), 5–16. http://www.jsu.edu/online/canvasup/

Putman, S. M., Ford, K., & Tancock, S. (2012). Redefining online discussions: Using participant stances to promote collaboration and cognitive engagement. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24(2), 151-167.

Rabionet, S. E. (2011). How I learned to design and conduct semi structured interviews: An ongoing and continuous journey. The Qualitative Report, 16(2), 563-566. http://dx.doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2011-1070

Ringler, I. , S. C., Deem, J., Flores, J., Friestad-Tate, J., & Lockwood, R. (2015). Improving the Asynchronous Online Learning Environment Using Discussion Boards. I-Manager’s Journal of Educational Teachnology, 12(1), 15–27.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2021). Knowledge building: Advancing the state of community knowledge. International handbook of computer-supported collaborative learning, 261-279.

Smith, T. (2018, January 22). Finding the Right LMS for Your District. Retrieved from https://www.techlearning.com/tl-advisor-blog/finding-right-lms-for-district

Vaast, E., & Kaganer, E. (2013). Social media affordances and governance in the workplace: An examination of organizational policies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(1), 78–101. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12032

Wilcox, D., Thall, J., & Griffin, O. (2016, March). One canvas, two audiences: How faculty and students use a newly adopted learning management system. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1163-1168). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).

Wu, S. Y., Hou, H. T., Hwang, W. Y., & Liu, E. Z. F. (2013). Analysis of learning behavior in problem-solving-based and project-based discussion activities within the seamless online learning integrated discussion (SOLID) system. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(1), 61-82.

Xie, K., Durrington, V., & Ling Yen, L. (2011). Relationship between Students’ Motivation and their Participation in Asynchronous Online Discussions. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 17–29.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.25134/erjee.v12i1.8611

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2024 English Review: Journal of English Education