Using CTL-based Online Discussion Strategies to facilitate Higher Level Learning

Background Online discussion has become a major instructional component of face-to-face, online and blended instruction. It has been found to enhance students’ learning by supporting social learning (Wells, 1992), mindfulness and reflection (Hiltz, 1994; Poole, 2000), and idea sharing and collaborative thinking (Ruberg, Moore, & Taylor, 1996). Scholars have reported student perceived learning to be correlated with the use of online discussion (Picciano, 1998, Jiang & Ting, 2000). Yet, lack of higher level learning (Bloom, 1956) in online discussion has been a drawback reported in many studies focusing on the effectiveness of this strategy (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2001, Gunawardena, Lowe, & Anderson, 1997; Schellens & Vackle, 2005; Sing & Khine, 2006). Given the complexity of today’s instructional and training tasks, the latest strategies used in face-to-face or online instruction should be designed to bring about all levels of learning. Participating meaningfully in an online discussion is a complex cognitive task. In the conventional online discussion format currently used in higher education, learners are provided with a discussion topic and some participation rubrics before they are immersed in the assigned discussion task. They are then expected to apply the participation rules, read and respond to other participants’ postings, figure out the interrelationships of materials being posted, deal with different styles in which the materials are presented, and finally cope with the technological problems that may arise during the discussion. Learners experience great amount of extraneous load within these activities, as well as germane and intrinsic cognitive load (Chandler & Seweller, 1991; Sweller, van Merrienboer, & Paas, 1998) presented by the instructional content of the discussion. Learners not only face new elements of information (e.g., the concepts, their theoretical framework, and identified information from other resources) that they need to learn, they also have to deal with the interactions among these new elements throughout the enumerated activities. Furthermore, as a result of encouraging participation in online discussion (Ruberg, Moore, & Taylor, 1996), a large number of postings are created by students in the same class. Ideally, individuals should read each other’s posting, comment or reflect on them, and provide each other with responses. The cognitive resources needed in the process is far beyond the capacity of human working memory (Miller, 1956). In the present study we investigated the effectiveness of several cognitive load theory (CLT)-based strategies in facilitating higher level learning in online discussion. These strategies have been designed to reduce learners’ cognitive load in order to improve their learning performance. We applied these strategies in an online discussion and contrasted the outcomes with a conventional online discussion strategy. Following is a description of the online learning environment and the discussion tasks. Online Learning Environment An online course on Stress and Resilience in Families and Children was used in this experimental study. The course provided undergraduate majors in Family & Child Sciences with an introduction to family-based theories about the responses of children, adults, and families to stress. It examined ways of applying those theories to understanding the process of coping with stress and ways for professionals to intervene to help families in distress. The course objective was for the students to learn the techniques of working with families and children dealing with distress and supporting them in resolving the disruptions they were experiencing. The Family Distress Model (FDM) was grounded in research on social support and family problem solving (Cornille & Boroto, 1992). Families, based on this model, will cope with distress, depending on whether the stressor is a crisis or “just a problem”, following a predictable set of steps. The Family Outreach Model (FOM) was developed to identify specific strategies that persons can use to be supportive and effective when they form working relationships with families during times of distress (Cornille, Meyer, Mullis, Mullis, & Boroto 2008; Nalls, Mullis, Cornille, Mullis, & Jeter, 2009 ). This model grew out of the Family Distress Model and research about common factors of helping relationships (Hubble, Duncan, & Miller, 2002). In particular, the FOM links the stages of coping of families with the various styles and quality of helping relationships, suggesting the most effective style of helping relationship for each of the five stages, and strategies for using those specific styles. For this experiment, we selected the topic of Working Professionally with Families in Distress. This topic was on the course agenda for the week of 13 of a 16 week semester and focused on students understanding how persons who work with families in a professional capacity, such as teachers or health care providers, can develop effective helping relationships with children and their families. During this week, the participants learned how the Family Outreach Model and Family Distress Model could be used to help both the child and their family deal with