Facilitator presence and identity in online discourse: use of positioning theory as an analytic framework
Tóm tắt
In this study, positioning theory was used as a theoretical framework for analyzing facilitator presence and identity in online discussion transcripts. The study has two purposes. First, the study provides a description of naturally occurring facilitator positioning by facilitators and students in two online and two blended classes. Second, it confirms and demonstrates positioning theory’s usefulness, for both research and pedagogical purposes, as framework through which presence and identity in asynchronous forums may be evaluated. Findings show that facilitator positioning was more likely to occur through facilitator-written messages than through student-written ones, and to be either tacit or performative in nature. Accountative facilitator positioning tended to occur infrequently and only as a second order discourse act in response to a student request. More notably, students infrequently positioned facilitators, relying on tacit assumptions that traditional roles would be supported through the discourse.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Anagnastopoulos, D., Basmadjian, K., & McCrory, R. (2005). The de-centered teacher and the construction of social space in the virtual classroom. Teachers College Record, 107(8), 1699–1729.
Ashton, S., Roberts, T., & Teles, L. (1999). Investigating the role of the instructor in collaborative online environments. Paper presented at the CSCL ’99.
Berge, Z. L. (1995). Facilitating computer conferencing: Recommendations from the field. Educational Technology, 35(1), 22–30.
Bonk, C. J., Kirkley, J. R., Hara, N., & Dennen, V. P. (2001). Finding the instructor in post-secondary online learning: Pedagogical, social, managerial, and technological locations. In J. Stephenson (Ed.), Teaching and learning online: New pedagogies for new technologies. London: Kogan Page.
Bullough, R. V., Jr., & Draper, R. J. (2004). Making sense of a failed triad: Mentors, university supervisors, and positioning theory. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(5), 407–420.
Choy, S., McNickle, C., & Clayton, B. (2003). Learner expectations and experiences: Student views in support of online learning. In H. Guthrie (Ed.), Online learning: Research readings (pp. 106–122). Leabrook, Australia: National Centre for Vocational Education Research.
Cook-Sather, A., & Young, B. (2007). Repositioning students in initial teacher preparation: A comparative descriptive analysis of learning to teach for social justice in the United States and in England. Journal of Teacher Education, 58(1), 62–75.
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20, 43–65.
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1999). Positioning and personhood. In R. Harré & L. van Langenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. 32–52). Oxford: Blackwell.
De Fina, A. (2006). Group identity, narrative, and self-representations. In A. De Fina, D. Schiffrin, & M. Bamberg (Eds.), Discourse and identity (pp. 351–375). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
De Laat, M., Lally, V., Lipponen, L., & Simons, R.-J. (2007). Online teaching in networked learning communities: A multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher. Instructional Science, 35, 257–286.
Dennen, V. P. (2005). From message posting to learning dialogues: Factors affecting learner participation in asynchronous discussion. Distance Education, 26(1), 127–148.
Dennen, V. P. (2006). Shaping learners’ online dialogues: The role of discourse models. Technology, Instruction, Cognition & Learning, 3, 3–4.
Dennen, V. P. (2007). Presence and positioning as components of online instructor persona. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40(1), 95–108.
Drewery, W. (2005). Why we should watch what we say: Position calls, everyday speech and the production of relational subjectivity. Theory & Psychology, 15(3), 305–324.
Given, L. M. (2002). Discursive constructions in the university context: Social positioning theory & mature undergraduates’ information behaviors. The New Review of Information Behaviour Research, 3, 127–142.
Gunawardena, C. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferencing. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 2–3, 147–166.
Harré, R., & van Langenhove, L. (Eds.). (1999). Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional actions. Oxford: Blackwell.
Herring, S. C. (2005). Computer mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling, & J. H. Gray (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning (pp. 338–376). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Holmes, J. (2006). Workplace narratives, professional identity and relational practice. In A. De Fina, D. Schiffrin, & M. Bamberg (Eds.), Discourse and identity (pp. 166–187). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Housley, W., & Fitzgerald, R. (2009). Membership categorization, culture and norms in action. Discourse & Society, 20(3), 345–362.
Howie, D., & Peters, M. (1996). Positioning theory: Vygotsky, Wittgenstein and social constructionist psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 26(1), 51–64.
Linehan, C., & McCarthy, J. (2000). Positioning in practice: Understanding participation in the social world. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 30(4), 435–453.
Mandernach, B. J., Forrest, K. D., Babutzke, J. L., & Manker, L. R. (2009). The role of instructor interactivity in promoting critical thinking in online and face-to-face classrooms. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 5(1), 49–62.
Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. (2003). Sage, guide or ghost? The effect of instructor intervention on student participation in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 40(3), 237–253.
Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. (2007). When to jump in: The role of the instructor in online discussion forums. Computers & Education, 49(2), 193–213.
McVee, M. B., Baldassarre, M., & Bailey, N. (2004). Positioning theory as lens to explore teachers’ beliefs about literacy and culture. In 53rd National Reading conference yearbook, Oak Creek, WI.
Miles, C., & Mikulec, E. (2008). Negotiating teacher identity and power in online poly-synchronous environments: A heuristic inquiry. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 5(2), 17–27.
Ou, C., Ledoux, T., & Crooks, S. M. (2004). The effects of instructor presence on critical thinking in asynchronous online discussion. In C. Crawford et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of society for information technology and teacher education international conference (pp. 2989–2993). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
Psathas, G. (1999). Studying the organization in action: Membership categorization and interaction analysis. Human Studies, 22(2/4), 139–162.
Ribeiro, B. T. (2006). Footing, positioning, voice: Are we talking about the same things? In A. De Fina, D. Shiffrin, & M. Bamberg (Eds.), Discourse and identity (pp. 48–82). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ritchie, S. M. (2002). Student positioning within groups during science activities. Research in Science Education, 32(1), 35–54.
Ritchie, S. M., & Rigano, D. L. (2001). Researcher–participant positioning in classroom research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education (QSE), 14(6), 741–756.
Riva, G. (2003). The sociocognitive psychology of computer-mediated communication: The present and future of technology-based interactions. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5(6), 581–598.
Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 77–88.
Russo, T. C., & Campbell, S. (2004). Perceptions of mediated presence in an asynchronous online course: Interplay of communication behaviors and medium. Distance Education, 25(2), 215–232.
Salmon, G. (2002). Mirror, mirror, on my screen: Exploring online reflections. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33(4), 379–391.
Shieh, R. S., Gummer, E., & Niess, M. (2008). The quality of a Web-based course: Perspectives of the instructor and the students. TechTrends, 52(6), 61–68.
Stahl, G. (2004). Building collaborative knowing: Elements of a social theory of CSCL. In P. Dillenbourg, J. W. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner, & R. L. Martens (Eds.), Computer supported collaborative learning: What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education (Vol. 3, pp. 53–86). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
Torronen, J. (2001). The concept of subject position in empirical social research. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 31(3), 313–329.
Tsai, I.-C., Kim, B., Liu, P.-J., Goggins, S. P., Kumalasari, C., & Laffey, J. M. (2008). Building a model explaining the social nature of online learning. Educational Technology & Society, 11(3), 198–215.
Tunstall, P. (2003). Definitions of the subject: The relations between the discourses of educational assessment and the psychology of motivation and their constructions of personal reality. British Educational Research Journal, 29, 505–520.
van Langenhove, L., & Harré, R. (1994). Cultural stereotypes and positioning theory. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 24(4), 359–372.
van Langenhove, L., & Harré, R. (1999). Introducing positioning theory. In R. Harré & L. van Langenhove (Eds.), Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action (pp. 14–31). Oxford: Blackwell.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The genesis of higher mental functions. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 144–188). Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.
Wooffitt, R. (2005). Conversation analysis and discourse analysis: A comparative and critical introduction. London: Sage.