A Study of Online Discourse at The Chronicle of Higher Education

Given the explosive growth of online communications, new forms of discourse are an intriguing topic of study. This research focused on ten online discussions hosted by The Chronicle of Higher Education, using content and discourse analysis of the postings to answer several questions. What is the “conversational scaffolding” used by posters in higher education-related online discussions? Are academic online discussions more like speech or writing? Additional questions dealt with how posters identify themselves, who their audience is, what motivates them, how accurate and political they are, and what the experience of reading these online discussions is like. Based on the analyses, these posters were more likely to write correctly although with diary-like personal insights. Through the analysis I also identified both positive and negative aspects of the online discussion experience.     

When Topics are Controversial: Is it Better to Discuss Them Face-to-Face or Online?

Ten students in a graduate-level course on Historical and Policy Perspectives in Higher Education held face-to-face and online discussions on five controversial topics: diversity, academic freedom, political tolerance, affirmative action, and gender. Upon completion of each discussion, they assessed their comfort, honesty, concern for others’ feelings, similarity of feelings to others, and willingness to disagree and then compared the face-to-face and online discussions on these measures. Students’ assessments are complex and indicate that some topics did elicit feelings of discomfort, concern for others’ feelings, and willingness to disagree in the face-to-face discussions. However, despite these feelings, the majority of students continued to prefer the face-to-face discussions. Online discussions were valued to a lesser extent, but a consistent minority of students were more comfortable in that setting. The age and race of the student also created differences in responses. Dr. Katrina Meyer is an associate professor of Higher and Adult Education at The University of Memphis. Her Ph.D. is from the University of Washington, and her research interests include online learning and virtual universities.     

Where Theories of Mind Meet Magic: The Development of Children's Beliefs about Wishing

In two studies, we probed children's beliefs about wishing. In Study 1, we gathered initial data on 50 3- to 6-year-old children's concepts of wishing and beliefs about its efficacy, with both a semistructured interview and a variety of tasks. Results revealed considerable knowledge about wishing in young children, along with an age-related decrease in beliefs about its efficacy. Parents were not found to encourage differently the beliefs of children at different ages, nor were they found to begin actively discouraging such beliefs at any particular age. A moderate relation was found between environmental supports for wishing and children's beliefs in its efficacy. In Study 2, we continued to probe these issues and also address the nature of the broader conceptual context in which children situate their beliefs about wishing. Participants were 92 3- to 6-year-old children. Results of this study suggest that children may reconcile beliefs in the efficacy of wishing with knowledge about everyday mental-physical relations by situating these beliefs more within their emerging beliefs about magic than within their theories of mind.     

Assessing team-based instructional design problem solutions of hierarchical versus heterarchical Web-based hypermedia cases

For this study, we examined the cogency, comprehensiveness, and viability of team-based problem solutions of a Web-based hypermedia case designed to promote student understanding of the practice of instructional design. Participants were 14 students enrolled in a graduate course on advanced instructional design. The case was presented to students using two hypermedia structures, hierarchical (tree-like structure) and heterarchical (network-like structure). Results from analyses of four data sources revealed that problem solutions developed in response to the heterarchical case design were more cogent and convincing than problem solutions developed in response to the hierarchical case design. Specifically, the heterarchical case solutions provided evidence of a heuristic problem-solving process facilitating the identification of an expert-like solution to the case and the articulation of learners' understanding and application of grounded and engaging instructional designs.