Analysis of language used in discussion forum

We have argued that the form of online collaborative learning described here facilitates deeper learning in that students must learn to critique one another's work, critique and summarize these peer critiques, and finally assess their own and their peers contributions to the online discussions. We have provided evidence for this in a variety of ways, but it is also interesting to note that there is further evidence that this form of learning achieves these objectives when one studies the language employed by the students in the discussion forum. To demonstrate this, we have employed a simple-to-use method which is commonplace in a field known as Corpus Linguistics (see Sinclair, 1991, 2004) for more details). First, we collected together all of the online postings and generated a word frequency lists for single words and then combinations of words (from 2-word combinations to 5-word combinations). We then compared these frequency lists with frequency lists for general English language usage (Sinclair, 1991). The differences found may then be attributed to the specialized nature of the online discussions versus general language usage. This comparison confirms our claims and a selection of the findings are detailed below.

When the frequency lists for the 110 most frequent words are compared, we find a higher frequency of words associated with the giving of opinions and the expression of causal and adversative relationships in the online discussions than in general English usage, for example, think (ranked 16th versus 69th) agree (ranked 40th versus unranked ¹), mean (ranked 104th versus unranked), because (ranked 48th versus 83rd), therefore (ranked 87th versus unranked), however (ranked 99th versus unranked), etc. Some of these words then recur in multiple-word combinations which serve to express agreement and disagreement, and others which tentatively introduce opinions (i.e. hedged opinion markers) or seek the opinions of others, which are unranked in the top 110 frequency lists for general English usage. Examples of 3-word combinations include I agree with ... (ranked 1st), do you think ... (ranked 4th), I would like ... (ranked 15th), I don't think ... (ranked 20th), I agree that ... (ranked 30th ), it seems that ... (ranked 42nd), but I think ... (ranked 59th), but I don't ... (ranked 63rd), it looks like ... (ranked 77th), it should be ... (ranked 83rd), and you haven't tried ... (ranked 85th). Examples of 4-word combinations include I am not sure ... (ranked 21st), I also think that ... (ranked 56th), I don't think you ... (ranked 79th), etc. Finally 5 word combinations include as I agree with you that ... (ranked 7th), I don't think you need ... (ranked 37th), but I don't think you ... (ranked 60th), and do you agree with me ... (ranked 86th).

The frequency with which words and phrases associated with the expressions of agreement, disagreement, and the giving of opinions occur in the online discussions further supports the case that this learning and assessment methodology facilitates critical thinking, interpersonal skills and other attributes from the list in our students.

¹ 'Unranked' means not in the top 110.

اخر الاخبار

اخبار العتبة العباسية المقدسة

قسم العلاقات العامة يختتم فعاليات محطات فتية الكفيل الثقافية في محافظة نينوى

ما الخدمات التي قدّمها موكب أشبال الطفّ لزائري عاشوراء؟

العتبة العباسية المقدسة تنظّم مسيرات عزائية لإحياء ذكرى عاشوراء في نينوى

قسم الشؤون الفكرية يحيي ذكرى استشهاد الإمام الحسين (عليه السلام) في القارة الإفريقية

المزيد

الآخبار الصحية

تناول الجبن.. مفيد للجسم أم خطر يهدد صحتك؟

طبيبة أسنان تحذر.. لا تتجاهل هذه العلامة بعد التنظيف

يجب أن تأكل المزيد من الشمام هذا الصيف.. إليك السبب ؟

تأثير صحي كبير.. كم بيضة يجب أن تتناول يوميا؟

المزيد

الآخبار التكنلوجية

أداء خلايا البيروفسكايت الشمسية تحت الماء قد يزيد كفاءة تحويل الكهرباء

مسافة الأمان: أساس القيادة الآمنة وتجنب الحوادث

هل القيادة السريعة تعني استهلاك اكثر للوقود؟

لماذا يعتبر كوكب المريخ غير صالح للحياة؟

المزيد

مواضيع ذات صلة

Appendix Taxonomy for Design Assessment

Conclusions of The Impact of Assessment Modes on Collaborative Group Design Projects

A SOLO taxonomy of achievement in student design projects

The collaborative structures of Atelier Geelong teams

Atelier Geelong The assessment of a group design project

The Impact of Assessment Modes on Collaborative Group Design Projects Establishing best-practice principles for the teaching and assessment of group design projects

Conclusions and implications of Online Collaborative Learning and Assessment

Analysis of reflective texts

Content analysis of forum discussions

Students suggestions

Comparing first and third-year students

Overall positive experiences