You are here:

Critical Thinking in Asynchronous Online Discussions: A Systematic Review
ARTICLE

français, langue française/French La pensée critique dans les discussions asynchrones en ligne : examen systématique

,

CJLT Volume 43, Number 2, ISSN 1499-6677 e-ISSN 1499-6677 Publisher: Canadian Network for Innovation in Education

Full Text

Abstract

Enhancing critical thinking is a common goal of higher education. Designing and facilitating learning environments in which critical thinking may develop is a key responsibility for instructors. In this paper, we seek to inform future research and practice by investigating instructional strategies that could be used to promote critical and reflective thinking in asynchronous online discussions. Our literature review was qualitative and systematic, and focused specifically on strategies that were effective in fully-online higher education contexts. Thematic analysis was used to synthesize the findings and conclusions from the various studies into recurrent themes and sub-themes. The results of the analysis indicated that practitioners should employ a multi-step approach to facilitating critical thinking and reflection in asynchronous online discussions. Implications for future research and practice are discussed.

français, langue française/French:

Améliorer la pensée critique est un objectif courant de l’éducation supérieure. Concevoir et faciliter des environnements d’apprentissage dans lesquels la pensée critique peut se développer est une responsabilité importante pour les instructeurs. Dans cet article, nous cherchons à renseigner les études et les pratiques futures en examinant les stratégies didactiques qui pourraient être utilisées pour promouvoir une pensée critique et réfléchie dans les discussions asynchrones en ligne. Notre examen des publications a été qualitatif et systématique. Il a été particulièrement axé sur les stratégies qui étaient efficaces dans les contextes d’éducation supérieure entièrement en ligne. L’analyse thématique a servi à synthétiser les résultats et les conclusions des différentes études en thèmes et thèmes sous-jacents récurrents. Les résultats de l’analyse indiquent que les intervenants devraient se servir d’une approche en plusieurs étapes pour promouvoir la pensée critique et réfléchie dans les discussions asynchrones en ligne. Une discussion de ce que cela implique pour les recherches et la mise en pratique est incluse.

Citation

DiPasquale, J. & Hunter, W. (2017). Critical Thinking in Asynchronous Online Discussions: A Systematic Review. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology / La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et de la technologie, 43(2),. Canadian Network for Innovation in Education. Retrieved March 26, 2023 from .

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in a computer conferencing context. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 1.
  2. Bearman, M., & Dawson, P. (2013). Qualitative synthesis and systematic review in health professions education. Medical Education, 47(3), 252-260.
  3. Bearman, M., Smith, C.D., Carbone, A., Slade, S., Baik, C., Hughes-Warrington, M., & Neumann, D.L. (2012). Systematic review methodology in higher education. Higher Education Research& Development, 31(5), 625-640.
  4. Breivik, J. (2016). Critical thinking in online educational discussions measured as progress through inquiry phases: A discussion of the cognitive presence construct in the community of inquiry framework. International Journal of E-Learning& Distance Education, 32(1), 1. Retrieved from: https://munin.uit.no/handle/10037/10768
  5. Buraphadeja, V., & Dawson, K. (2008). Content analysis in computer-mediated communication: Analyzing models for assessing critical thinking through the lens of social constructivism. The American Journal of Distance Education, 22(3), 1-28.
  6. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 297-298.
  7. Cook, D.A., & West, C.P. (2012). Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: A stepwise approach. Medical Education, 46(10), 943-952.
  8. Curtis, J.N. (2006). Using online discussion forums to promote critical reflection among pre and in-service HIV/AIDS educators and service providers. International Electronic Journal of Health Education, 9, 166-179. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ794135
  9. Darabi, A., Arrastia, M.C., Nelson, D.W., Cornille, T., & Liang, X. (2011). Cognitive presence in asynchronous online learning: A comparison of four discussion strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(3), 216-227. Doi:10.1111/J.1365-2729.2010.00392.x
  10. Darabi, A., Liang, X., Suryavanshi, R., & Yurekli, H. (2013). Effectiveness of online discussion strategies: A meta-analysis. American Journal of Distance Education, 27(4), 228-241.
  11. De Leng, B.A., Dolmans, D.H.J.M., Jöbsis, B., Muijtjens, A.M.M., & Vander Vleuten, C.P.M. (2009). Exploration of an e-learning model to foster critical thinking on basic science concepts during work placements. Computers& Education, 53(1), 1-13.
  12. De Wever, B., Van Winckel, M., & Valcke, M. (2008). Discussing patient management online: The impact of roles on knowledge construction for students interning at the paediatric ward. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 13(1), 25-42. Doi:10.1007/s10459-0069022-6
  13. DeLotell, P.J., Millam, L.A., & Reinhardt, M.M. (2010). The use of deep learning strategies in online business courses to impact student retention. American Journal of Business Education, 3(12), 49-56. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1058303
  14. DiPasquale, J. (2017). Transformative learning and critical thinking in asynchronous online discussions: A systematic review (Unpublished master’s project). The University of Ontario Institute of Technology, Oshawa, Canada. Retrieved from: https://ir.library.dcuoit.ca/handle/10155/891
  15. Dixon-Woods, M., Agarwal, S., Jones, D., Young, B., & Sutton, A. (2005). Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research& Policy, 10(1), 45-53.
  16. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87-105. Doi:10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
  17. 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. Doi:10.1080/08923640109527071
  18. Gašević, D., Adesope, O., Joksimović, S., & Kovanović, V. (2015). Externally-facilitated regulation scaffolding and role assignment to develop cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussions. The internet and higher education, 24, 53-65.
  19. Hand, K.G. (2015). Descriptive post titles as advance organizer: Effects on critical thinking and cognitive load in asynchronous threaded discussions (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from: https://search.proquest.com/openview/4a4ddd218238470f42a22af671380d94/1?pqorigsite=gscholar & Cbl=18750 & Diss=y
  20. Hemphill, L.S., & Hemphill, H.H. (2007). Evaluating the impact of guest speaker postings in online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 287-293.
  21. Jeong, A. (2005). A guide to analyzing message-response sequences and group interaction patterns in computer-mediated communication. Distance Education, 26(3), 367-383.
  22. Kanuka, H., & Garrison, D.R. (2004). Cognitive presence in online learning. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(2), 21-39. Doi:10.1007/BF02940928
  23. Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2), 260-271.
  24. Lee-Baldwin, J. (2005). Asynchronous discussion forums: A closer look at the structure, focus and group dynamics that facilitate reflective thinking. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education (CITE Journal), 5(1), 93-115. Retrieved from: http://www.citejournal.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/04/v5i1currentpractice2.pdf
  25. Liu, C., & Yang, S.C. (2014). Using the community of inquiry model to investigate students' knowledge construction in asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 51(3), 327-354.
  26. Marra, R. (2006). A review of research methods for assessing computer-mediated discussion forums. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(3), 243-267. Retrieved from: https://www.learntechlib.org/p/6290/
  27. Maurino, P.S.M. (2007). Looking for critical thinking in online threaded discussions. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(3), 241-260. Doi:10.2190/P4W3-8117-K32G-R34M
  28. Morueta, R.T., López, P.M., Gómez, A.H., & Harris, V.W. (2016). Exploring social and cognitive presences in communities of inquiry to perform higher cognitive tasks. Internet and Higher Education, 31, 122-131. Doi:10.1016/J.iheduc.2016.07.004
  29. Newman, D.R., Johnson, C., Webb, B., & Cochrane, C. (1997). Evaluating the quality of learning in computer supported co-operative learning. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 48(6), 484-495. Doi:10.1002/(SICI)10974571(199706)48:6<484::AID-ASI2>3.0.CO;2-Q
  30. Ng, C.S.L., Cheung, W.S., & Hew, K.F. (2010). Solving ill-structured problems in asynchronous online discussions: Built-in scaffolds vs. No scaffolds. Interactive Learning Environments, 18(2), 115-134. Doi:10.1080/10494820802337629
  31. Noblit, G.W., & Hare, R.D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  32. Oh, E.G., & Kim, H.S. (2016). Understanding cognitive engagement in online discussion: Use of a scaffolded, audio-based argumentation activity. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(5), 28-48. Retrieved from: http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/2456
  33. Olesova, L., & Lim, J. (2017). The impact of roles assignment on cognitive presence in asynchronous online discussion. In P. Vu, S. Fredrickson, & C. Moore (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Innovative Pedagogies and Technologies for Online Learning in Higher Education (pp. 19-39). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. Retrieved from: https://www.igiglobal.com/chapter/the-impact-of-role-assignment-on-cognitive-presence-in DASHDASH
  34. Rew, L. (2011). The systematic review of literature: Synthesizing evidence for practice. Journal for Specialists in Pediatric Nursing, 16(1), 64-69.
  35. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 8-22. Retrieved from: https://telearn.archivesouvertes.fr/hal-00197319/
  36. Sadaf, A., & Olesova, L. (2017). Enhancing cognitive presence in online case discussions with questions based on the practical inquiry model. American Journal of Distance Education, 31(1), 56-12.
  37. Schindler, L.A., & Burkholder, G.J. (2014). Instructional design and facilitation approaches that promote critical thinking in asynchronous online discussions: A review of the literature. Higher Learning Research Communications, 4(4), 11-29.
  38. Seers, K. (2012). What is a qualitative synthesis? Evidence Based Nursing, 15(4), 101-101.
  39. Weltzer-Ward, L. (2011). Content analysis coding schemes for online asynchronous discussion. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 28(1), 56-74. Doi:10.1108/10650741111097296
  40. Yang, Y.C., Newby, T.J., & Bill, R.L. (2005). Using socratic questioning to promote critical thinking skills through asynchronous discussion forums in distance learning environments. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 163-181.
  41. Zydney, J.M., deNoyelles, A., & Seo, K.K. (2012). Creating a community of inquiry in online environments: An exploratory study on the effect of a protocol on interactions within asynchronous discussions. Computers& Education, 58(1), 77-87.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References