Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Case Studies on Peer Facilitation: What Motivates Participants to Contribute?

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Student Participation in Online Discussions

  • 1351 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, we describe four studies that examined the possible factors which could motivate students to contribute in peer facilitated online discussions. The first study examined peer facilitators’ habits of mind, while the other three studies examined other possible factors. We offer the following findings or main lessons learned from the four studies: peer facilitators should display the habits of open-mindedness and awareness of own thinking more frequently, efforts to foster relational capital among participants before the discussion should be emphasized, participants should be reminded to help others first to increase the chance of reciprocity, controversial and relevant topics should be chosen for discussion, and that peer facilitators should periodically summarize the main points of a discussion and follow up with relevant questions after the summary.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agre, P. (1998). Networking on the network. Crosswords, 4(4), 14–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Becker, H. P. (1956). Man in reciprocity. New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheung, W. S., Hew, K. F., & Ng, S. L. C. (2008). Toward an understanding of why students contribute in asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 38(1), 29–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, A. L. (2000). Describing the habits of mind. In A. L. Costa & B. Kallick (Eds.), Book 1: Discovering and exploring habits of mind (pp. 21–40). Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2000). Assessing the Habits of Mind. In A. L. Costa & B. Kallick (Eds.), Book 3: Assessing and reporting on habits of mind (pp. 29–53). Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the education process. New York: D. C. Heath.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R. H. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In J. B. Baron & R. S. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp. 9–26). New York: W. H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Facione, P. A., Sanchez, C. A., Facione, N. C., & Gainen, J. (1995). The disposition toward critical thinking. Journal of General Education, 44(1), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. S. (1992). Problems of explanation in economic sociology. In N. Nohria & R. Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form and action (pp. 25–56). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hara, N. (2009). Communities of practice: Fostering peer-to-peer learning and informal knowledge sharing in the workplace. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2009). Participation in student-facilitated discussion forums: An empirical analysis of facilitators’ habits of mind. In B. H. Tan & S. R. Galea (Eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Thinking 2009 (pp. 268–279). Kuala Lumpur: Universiti Putra Malaysia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., & Jumain, S. N. (2010a). Critical thinking in asynchronous online discussions: Examining the role of the student facilitator. In Z. Abas, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Global Learn Asia Pacific 2010 (pp. 4210–4215). Chesapeake: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., Cheung, W. S., & Ng, C. S. L. (2010b). Student contribution in asynchronous online discussion: A review of the research and empirical exploration. Instructional Science, 38(6), 571–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2011b). Student facilitators’ habits of mind and their influences on higher-level knowledge construction occurrences in online discussions: A case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 48(3), 275–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hewitt, J. (2005). Toward an understanding of how threads die in asynchronous computer conferences. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(4), 567–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45(1), 65–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitchener, K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition, and epistemic cognition: A three-level model of cognitive processing. Human Development, 26, 222–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J., & McTighe, J. (1993). Assessing student outcomes: Performance assessment using the dimensions of learning model. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molm, L. D., Schaefer, D. R., & Collett, J. L. (2007). The value of reciprocity. Social Psychology Quarterly, 70(2), 199–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neo, C. E., & Cheung, W. S. (2007). A framework for enculturating thinking dispositions. The Korean Journal of Thinking and Problem Solving, 17(2), 67–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, M. A., & Sigmund, K. (2000). Shrewd investments. Science, 288, 819–820.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tishman, S. (2000). Why teach habits of mind? In A. L. Costa & B. Kallick (Eds.), Habits of mind: A developmental series (pp. 41–52). Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tishman, S., Perkins, D. N., & Jay, E. (1995). The thinking classroom: Learning and teaching in a culture of thinking. USA: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tu, C.-H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uzzi, B. (1996). The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: The network effect. American Sociological Review, 61, 674–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2000). “It is what one does:” Why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9, 155–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 247–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Education, Learning Sciences, and Technologies, Nanyang Technological University, 1 Nanyang Walk, Singapore, 637616, Singapore

    Khe Foon Hew & Wing Sum Cheung

Authors
  1. Khe Foon Hew
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wing Sum Cheung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Khe Foon Hew .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hew, K.F., Cheung, W.S. (2012). Case Studies on Peer Facilitation: What Motivates Participants to Contribute?. In: Student Participation in Online Discussions. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2370-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation