Discussion: An Instructor's Role in the Discussion Forum

Required Readings: 

Easton, S. S. (2003). Clarifying the instructor's role in online distance learning. Communication Education, 52(2), 87-105.

Horton, W. (2006). E-learning by design. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. (2007). When to jump in: The role of the instructor in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 49(2), 193-213.

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (2007). Building online communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Discussion Post:  An Instructor’s Role in the Discussion Forum 

In this week’s readings we learnt about the role of the instructor in discussion threads and how important the instructor’s level of interaction is.  This level of interaction can help to determine how responsible students become for their own learning as they become interdependent learners in the learning community.

Using your past experiences of using a discussion forum, consider the following:

Are there any specific responses that your instructor has used that have probed you to deepen your responses?

Are there responses that your instructor or peers have used that have made you feel like you have posted a strong initial post?

How much participation do you believe an instructor should have in the discussion threads?

By Wednesday, post your thoughts on the role you believe an instructor should play in an online discussion and the level of interaction you believe he/she should have. List two best practices that have helped deepen your responses to the discussion thread. Be sure to cite this week’s learning resources and include your personal experience.

By Sunday, respond to at least two of your classmates by building on your classmate’s ideas, offering and supporting an opinion, or agreeing or disagreeing and offering resources to support your view.

Your discussion post will be graded using the following rubric:

 

Quality of Work Submitted	A: Exemplary Work	B: Graduate Level Work	C: Minimal Work	F: Work Submitted but Unacceptable
Contribution to the Learning Community	The student’s contribution meets all assigned criteria and frequently prompts further discussion of a topic. The student takes a leadership role in discussions. Regularly contributes to collaborative learning. The student demonstrates exemplary awareness of the community’s needs.	The student’s contribution satisfactorily meets the assigned criteria for contributions to the discussions. The student interacts frequently and encourages others in the community. The student demonstrates an awareness of the community’s needs.	The student’s contribution is minimal to the posting and response deadlines. Occasionally, the student makes an additional comment. The student makes minimal effort to become involved within the  community.	The student’s contribution does not meet the assigned criteria The student does not respond or responds late to postings. The student does not make an effort to participate in the  community as it develops.
Initial Posting: Critical Analysis of Issues **May include, but are not limited to, scholarly articles, collegial discussions; information from conferences, in service, faculty development, and/or meetings.	Demonstrates critical thinking to analyze and relate key points. Supports content with required readings or course materials, and may use creditable sources** in addition to those materials.	Relates to the assigned discussion topic with satisfactory evidence of critical thinking.  Summarizes and supports content using information from required readings and course materials.	Summarizes or restates discussion topic components with minimal evidence of critical thinking skills. Post is off topic.  Post has minimal or no connection to course materials.	Does not relate to the assigned discussion topic. Post does not summarize or contain a connection to required readings or course materials.
Responses: Quality of Learning for Colleagues and Self	Provide specific, constructive, and supportive feedback to extend colleagues’ thinking. Respond to two or more colleagues and all responses to own post. Encourage continued and deeper discussion.  Offer additional resources or experiences. Demonstrate exemplary evidence of personal learning as a result of interaction with colleagues.	Provide constructive and supportive feedback to colleagues. Respond to two colleagues and some responses to own post. Refer to sources from required readings and course materials. Demonstrate satisfactory evidence of personal learning as a result of interaction with colleagues.	Provide general feedback with minimal or no connection to required readings or course materials.   Respond to only one colleague. Demonstrate minimal evidence of personal learning as a result of interaction with colleagues.	Provide agreement without substance or connection to required readings or course materials. Respond to only one colleague. Demonstrate no evidence of personal learning as a result of interaction with colleagues.
Expression	Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English. Includes appropriate APA-formatted citations and reference list for outside sources and direct quotes.	Provides clear opinions and ideas written in Standard Edited English. Includes satisfactory APA-formatted citations and reference list for outside sources and direct quotes.	Expression is unclear or interrupted by errors. Includes minimal or no APA-formatted citations and reference list for outside sources and direct quotes.	Unacceptable written expression. May include outside sources and direct quotes that lack appropriate citations.
Final Assignment Grade	A: Exemplary Work	B: Graduate Level Work	C: Minimal Work	F: Work Submitted but Unacceptable

Reference:

Walden University Discussion Rubric, located at http://inside.waldenu.edu/c/Student_Faculty/StudentFaculty_15198.htm