The document discusses the implementation of asynchronous online discussion boards to enhance student engagement and promote peer-assisted learning in higher education courses. Two case studies are presented, showing significant activity levels, with students benefiting from peer support and contributing more effectively in their learning through anonymous posts. Data analysis indicates that the approach reduced reliance on academic staff for answers, improved student confidence, and generated a collaborative learning environment.

1. Enhancing Engagement and Promoting
Peer-Assisted Learning through the
Implementation of Asynchronous Online
Discussion Boards
Dr Hayley McGrice Ms Trisha Franceschilli
Dr Terry Bennett Dr Karina Riggs

2. 2
• Course and study design
• Case Study One: Faculty of Science Undergraduates
– 2nd Year Genes and Inheritance Students
• Analytics of student usage and behaviours
• Analysis of Student Survey Data
• Case Study Two: Discussion Board implementation in a large class
– 1st year Statics course; Faculty of Engineering Computing and Mathematical
Sciences
Presentation Outline

3. Rationale
• As a result of the 24/7 accessibility to information and student LMS platforms, student
email reliance on academics has significantly increased in recent years
– Students often having unrealistic expectations in terms of the response times
– Many of the questions sent to academics could easily be answered by their peers.
• Peer assisted learning is the concept of students teaching other students, a concept that is
not new and has probably been occurring in all streams of higher education since time
immemorial.
– It is widely recognised that students often learn more efficiently from their peers.
– Largely due to students relating to the language employed by peers
“it was pitched at exactly the right level”.
• Students construct and acquire in-depth knowledge by participating in discussions,
debating, questioning, inquiring and explaining,
– Leads to active and engaged learning and helps to create and sustain a learning community.
3
(Glynn et al. 2006, Topping 2008)
Glynn, L. G., MacFarlane, A., Kelly, M., Cantillon, P., & Murphy, A. W. Helping each
other to learn--a process evaluation of peer assisted learning. BMC Med Educ, 6,
18, 2006
Topping K. Peer-assisted learning: a planning and implementation framework.
Guide supplement 30.1--viewpoint. Medical teacher 30(4):440, 2008.

4. Case Study One: Design
• Course: Genes and Inheritance n=170
• The Roseworthy and Waite Campuses
– Four degree programs in the Faculty of Science
• Agricultural Science
• Animal Science
• Veterinary Science
• Viticulture and Oenology
• Students instructed to post all questions and comments related to their lecture,
tutorial and practical content on the discussion board.
– Only confidential matters to be emailed to course coordinator
• Students surveyed and data on student usage captured by learning technologies
team.
– Likert scales from surveys analysed using GLM and Clonbach’s (alpha)
– HREC approval #: H2014-210
4

5. Thread topic Total Posts Total Participants
General course questions 32 16
Practicals 234 30
Workshops 2 2
Exam 143 38
• Total of 412 posts made to the discussion board
• 67% by students
• Viewed over 15,000 times
• Highest usage prior to the exam period
• Lowest usage in the first 3 weeks of the course
Discussion Board Structure

6. Total hits= 15,257
General Discussion Board Usage
• 412 posts
– 60% posts made
anonymously
Practicals
59%
Other forums
6%
Exam
35%

7. Student Survey Questions: Likert Scale
1) Online discussion boards help me in my learning.
2) I would not have posted on the discussion board if I could
not have done so anonymously.
3) The questions and/or responses posted by my peers were
helpful in my learning.
4) Peer support on the online discussion board was useful in
the time frame close to assignment due dates.
7

8. Study Design cont.
• Data also collected on:
– sex
– age
– international student status
– years at university
– degree program
8

9. Survey Analysis: Sum of Likert questions
9
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
BSCAGRIC BSCANISCI BSCVETBIO BVITIANDOEN
SUMofLIKERTSCALE
18-20
21-25
25-30
• Females significantly higher than males (p=0.001)
• Significant age * degree interaction (p=0.012)

10. Students posting questions anonymously in practicals forum n=83
0
20
40
60
80
Anonymous Name
Totalnumber
posts
90.4%
9.6%
Students answering questions anonymously n=77
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Anonymous Name
Totalnumber
posts
93.5%
6.5%
• The students who choose
to be identified by name
often posted more than
once to the discussion
board.
• Anonymous students
would often refer to the
identifiable poster by
name and send a thank
you message.
Anonymity

11. Anonymity
11
I would not have posted on the discussion board if I could not have
done so anonymously.
• No significant differences between degree or age
• The analysis indicted that the removal of question 2 increases
the Cronbach’s (alpha)
– The corrected item-total correlation is low.
– Question worded poorly
– Students more confident in theory than in practice
– 60% of posts were made anonymously
Sex Mean Std Error
Female 3.786 .144
Male 3.021 .142

12. Students answering posts vs academic staff n= 148
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Students Academics
Numberof
responses
49.3%50.7%
Posts for individual practicals 1 and 3 showed that more students answered posts
than academics for practical 3.
0
20
40
60
80
Students Academics
Numberof
responses
63.4%
36.6%
Practicals:
forum analysis
Evidence of PAL

13. 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2-Nov 3-Nov 4-Nov 5-Nov 6-Nov 7-Nov 8-Nov 9-Nov 10-Nov 11-Nov 12-Nov
Numberofposts
Date prior to exam
Exam
revision
lectures
Day before
exam
Analysis of Exam Forum

14. Day and time of student usage
14
0
5
10
15
20
Sa Su M T W T F
Numberofposts
Day
Practicals
0
5
10
15
20
Sa Su M T W T F
Numberofposts
Day
Exams
Final exam
was on a
Thursday
Prac reports
due Tues
and Wed.
Highest
activity on
weekends

15. 24/7 Availability of Peer Support
15
Discussion board post
time varied but
majority of access
occurred in normal
business hours
9.30am – 7.30pm
Does not account for
students reading the
board and not posting

16. 0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Anonymous Name
Numberofstudent
responses
Students answering questions anonymously n= 49
77.6%
22.4%
Only 3.5% of students posted exam questions using their name
Exam Forum: Usage and Anonymous postings

17. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Students Academics
Numberofposts
40.7%
Posts to the discussion board answered by students n= 81
59.3%
Later in the semester
students are:
• learning from each
other,
• gaining confidence in
the online environment
• Evidence of PAL
Exam forum

18. Case Study Two: Dr Terry Bennet; School of Engineering
Ground Rules:
• No email unless medical or personal
• Don’t post in FAQs
• Anonymous posting, but expect adult standards of behaviour

19. F.A.Q’s

20. Ask Terry

21. Ask a peer

22. This student sat on his own in
class, but was very good with
online interaction

23. Summative assessments
Any clarification regarding questions is open to all
students

24. Maintaining a tangible online presence
• Respond in a reasonable time frame
– Allow time for students to answer each others questions
– Encourage students with positive feedback posts
• Incorrect answers/posts from students
– Delete or constructively correct?
• Make posts and encourage participation
24

25. To moderate of not….
• How many emails do you really want??
• Be upfront about what you expect from your students
• Guide their posts using appropriate forums
– Reduce frustration
– Improve buy in
25

26. Coinage??
• What are you trying to achieve?
– Improve online engagement
– Reduce email traffic to academics
• Marks = motivation
– Do you want to force students to post
• Overall we found no need to force students to participate
26

27. Selling the System
• Benefits to students
– Help outside of contact hours, esp. weekends before assignments due.
– Everyone has access to the same information
– No such thing as a dumb question
• Pay off to the Academics
– We observed a massive reduction in email traffic
– Answer each question ONCE!!! (in theory anyway)
– Students often find the answers without having to ask or post
• See one…….do one……teach one
27

28. Acknowledgements
• Dr Michelle Hebart (statistical analysis)
• Ms Trisha Franceschilli, eLearning advisor (our blackboard muscle)
• Mr Jason Chan eLearning advisor (our data ninja)
• Department of the Vice-Chancellor (Academic)
– Expanded practice in online learning innovative
– eAssessment by design initiative
– eAssessment community of practice; DVCA
• Students of the 2014 G&I course.
28

29. Discussion
Comments
Contributions
29