Skip to main content

Case Studies on Peer Facilitation: How to Foster Higher Levels of Knowledge Construction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 1274 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents three studies that dealt with the challenge of understanding what factors may influence students’ higher level knowledge construction in peer facilitated online discussion environments. We defined higher level knowledge construction occurrences as the sum of the number of phases II–V measured using interaction analysis model. The findings of the three studies overall suggested that groups of about 10 participants may be an optimum discussion size, higher level knowledge construction occurrences are not correlated to the duration of the online discussion, and the use of certain peer facilitation techniques, such as pointing, summarizing, and fostering an open environment for arguments, may foster higher knowledge construction levels in asynchronous online discussions.

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

Buying options

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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Knowledge Management and knowledge management systems: Conceptual foundations and research issues. MIS Quarterly, 25(1), 107–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alavi, M., & Leider, D. E. (1999). Knowledge management systems: Issues, challenges, and benefits. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 1(7), 1–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Van Keer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers and Education, 46, 6–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. Journal Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Hara, N. (2007). Knowledge sharing in online environments: a qualitative case study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(14), 2310–2324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010a). Fostering higher knowledge construction levels in online discussion forums: An exploratory case study. International Journal of Web-based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 5(4), 44–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2010b). The relationship between group size and advanced level knowledge construction in asynchronous online discussion environments. In C.H. Steel, M.J. Keppell, P. Gerbic & S. Housego (Eds.), Curriculum, technology & transformation for an unknown future. Proceedings ascilite Sydney 2010 (pp.428–432). Sydney.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2011). Higher-level knowledge construction in asynchronous online discussions: An analysis of group size, duration of online discussion, and student facilitation techniques. Instructional Science, 39(3), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollock, P., & Smith, M. (1996). Managing the virtual commons: cooperation and conflict in computer communities. In S. Herring (Ed.), Proceeding of Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 109–128). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lally, V. (2001). Analysing teaching and learning interactions in a networked collaborative learning environment: issues and work in progress. In Euro CSCL 2001 (pp. 397–405). Retrieved on August 7, 2008 from http://www.ll.unimaas.nl/euro-cscl/Papers/97.doc

  • Liu, X., Doore, B., & Li, L. (2008). Scaffolding Knowledge Co-Construction in Web-based Discussions through Message Labeling. In K. McFerrin, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2008 (pp. 3041–3046). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marra, R., Moore, J., & Klimczak, A. (2004). Content analysis of online discussion forums: a comparative analysis of protocols. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52, 23–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2000). Lurker demographics: counting the silent. In CHI 2000: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 73–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schellens, T., Keer, H. V., & Valcke, M. (2005). The impact of role assignment on knowledge construction in asynchronous discussion groups. Small Group Research, 36(6), 704–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2006). Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Computers & Education, 46, 349–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

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: How to Foster Higher Levels of Knowledge Construction . In: Student Participation in Online Discussions. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2370-6_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics