Assessing by Discussion Board

A discussion board is an online communication tool that lets students and teachers take part in discussion in a virtual environment.  It creates a virtual community of enquiry, allowing peer-to-peer discussions at any time and wherever Internet access is available. Students can post comments, questions and responses, and the discussion board constitutes a record of the discussion. Available as stand-alone applications or as built-in tools in learning-management systems such as Moodle, discussion boards typically allow multiple threaded discussions to be grouped into a forum.

Discussion boards can be used throughout a course and students' contributions assessed at the end of semester, or they can be set up as summative assessment activities. Conceptual discussions and group problem-solving tasks can be facilitated very effectively through discussion boards, while tasks requiring students to post personal reflections to the tutor or to showcase their individual performance are better fulfilled using tools such as a journal or blog.

To help you decide whether to use a blog, a wiki or a discussion forum, visit the page Blog, wiki or forum—which should you use?

Benefits

• A discussion board can be used to assess a broad range of learning outcomes, including conceptual understanding, generic skills (e.g. reasoning, communication) and interpersonal and teamwork skills.
• Because discussion can take place at any time and in any place, students have a chance to ponder the discussion and produce in-depth and considered reflections, and to review the evolving discussion as often as they like.
• Where the immediacy of a face-to-face discussion in a classroom may alienate some students – for example, those who are new to studying in an Australian university – a discussion board can feel more inclusive, in that students have time to read and review the exchanges of views.
• Students can see and evaluate their peers’ posts, which helps develop a community of enquiry and a more democratic assessment process.
• When their discussion board activities can earn them a mark, students are more inclined to contribute actively and productively to discussion. Richer class discussions result, as well as increased opportunities for students to demonstrate the depth of their learning.
• A discussion board provides a record of students' online contributions, so that assessors can review each student's performance.
• Discussion threads can be archived for future use, for example, as a stimulus for further discussion, or to justify marks in the case of appeals.

Challenges

• Assessing discussion board contributions sometimes results in students spending excessive time preparing polished contributions around assessment deadlines, rather than engaging in dynamic and generative discussion and debate throughout the semester.
• Contributing regularly to discussion boards can be time-consuming for students, particularly when it entails following the threads of multiple discussions.
• Online discussions do not suit all learning styles. Some students may be unfamiliar with this tool, or uncomfortable using it. For example, students whose first language is not English may be unsure what tone they should adopt in a discussion post.
• Technology-related issues such as system maintenance, outages or unreliable Internet access can disrupt discussion.
• Discussion-board formats may not be customisable to particular users' requirements; for example, the need to upload video presentations.

Strategies

Design for assessment with discussion boards

When designing assessments that use a discussion board, consider these basic questions:

• What is the objective of the assessment task? Is it, for example:
  • to engage students in creatively proposing and exploring ideas on a topic in preparation for a formal face-to-face class seminar?
  • to enable students within a small group to generate ideas towards the development of a group position paper on a topic?
• What learning outcomes will be assessed by the task, and in what combinations and proportions? You might be seeking, for example:
  • a demonstrated understanding of subject-related concepts
  • skill in communicating ideas effectively
  • the ability to contribute productively to a socially negotiated group outcome
  • demonstrated leadership in facilitating or moderating a group discussion.
• For assessment, what will you require of students, in terms of their engagement in the discussion board? For example:
  • How much, how regularly, how frequently and how spontaneously should students contribute?
  • Should students engage in the discussion as individuals or as representatives of a group?
• How will you prepare and support students to use the discussion board, particularly before a high-stakes marked assessment? For example, will you provide:
  • early practice with low-stakes discussion topics?
  • tutorial activities about discussion-board etiquette?
• Who will initiate, guide, maintain and moderate the discussions?
  • Will students be required to take the initiative in identifying topics or trigger questions?
  • Will the tutor act as an e-moderator, determining how discussions begin, develop and conclude?
  • Will e-moderators be rotated between groups to balance out differences in approach?
• What criteria will guide the assessment process? For example, will you focus on
  • the quantity of students' contributions?
  • the quality of their contributions?
  • a blend of quantity and quality?
• If the assessment is to be marked, who will interpret and mark students' contributions?
  • Will students assess their own or their peers' contributions?
  • If teachers assess, will they do so individually or in teams?
  • Will other people, such as workplace supervisors, assess the contributions? You might have to make the online discussion available to these other parties.
• How will assessment feedback on discussion-board tasks be provided?
  • As formative feedback using the discussion board tool to engage students in a reflective dialogue about the quality of their discussion?
  • As generic feedback to the class about the most common strengths and weaknesses in discussion board responses to tasks?

Manage assessment with discussion boards

The following table summarises strategies for discussion board based assessment. Most of these strategies are equally applicable to assessing participation in face-to-face classroom learning activities.

Table 1: Strategies to engage students in more active and productive discussion board tasks for assessment (adapted from Williams & Wache, 2005, p. 6)

Strategy	Action
Provide incentives to contribute.	Assign a proportion of the grade to discussion-board contributions.
Clarify assessment criteria and marking rubrics.	Be clear and unambiguous as to how you will assess contributions and what weight the discussion-board component will have in the overall mark.
Ensure that students have early access to the discussion board.	Provide opportunities to practise prior to summative assessment work. This will help students establish their own online identity and start building an online community. Technical and other access issues can also be identified and resolved in a low-stress context.
Plan a starter task to get students engaged early.	A simple and engaging starter task can get students socialising online and becoming familiar with the tool. Regular practice and formative feedback will help get students used to using a discussion board before you employ it in a summative (marked) assessment.
Clarify the role of the e-moderator.	The e-moderator must take care to ensure that groups are provided with equivalent levels of support and guidance. They may need to give specific direction to the discussion, such as providing trigger questions or prompts.
Invite students to reflect on discussions.	Students can be encouraged to reflect on the processes and outcomes of discussions as part of their assessment. You can incorporate self and peer assessment into the mark.
Prescribe a lifespan for discussion topics.	By planning when to conclude discussion on a topic, you can ensure that there is time for students to engage sufficiently deeply, without discussion dragging on for too long.
Explain expected standards of behaviour.	Define appropriate behaviour, giving examples and showing how behaviour is reflected in the assessment criteria.
Deal with unacceptable behaviour privately.	Non-participation or aggressive or potentially disruptive behaviour can disrupt students' learning and assessment and unfairly disadvantage others in the discussion. At the outset, provide clear information about what behaviour is unacceptable, and how it will affect assessment. Deal with unacceptable behaviour quickly and by private email.

 

Suitable assessment tasks

Reflect on discussion

Ask students to reflect on how a discussion is evolving or has evolved. The discussion can be their own or a sample discussion thread (if using a sample, make sure the sample participants have been made anonymous). This reflective exercise is useful in encouraging students to identify what makes discussions effective, and to think about the relationship of discussions to the assessment criteria for individual contributions.

Students can move from this reflective activity to self- and peer assessment, either for formative feedback or to contribute towards the summative grade. Students can develop their own reflective responses, and relate this to the assessment criteria.

Sample reflective responses may include:

• explain how posts are related to the previous thread of the discussion
• comment on or express an opinion on a topic
• provide a reason or rationale for the post
• provide substantiating evidence (including the source) for assertions made in a post
• contribute an example that illustrates a point in the discussion based on reading or personal experience
• contribute a link to related reading or other material
• ask for clarification of a post by someone else, or comment on their post
• provide a summary of the discussion thread so far
• analyse the main perspectives being presented by different participants
• pose a new but related question that will take the discussion deeper.

Small group reports to the whole class

Sub-groups discuss particular topic areas, then prepare a summary of their group discussion as a contribution to the whole class discussion. Many variations are possible;; for example, sub-group members can visit other discussions to share outcomes, or individual contributions or jointly constructed syntheses can be the subject of assessment.

Role-play discussion

Students adopt particular roles, which they first research and then represent in the discussion. For example, they might present the perspectives of diverse stakeholders seeking funding to advance a community initiative.

Lead or moderate a discussion

Students facilitate or e-moderate, leading a discussion on a particular topic. For example, you could require a student to provide a brief summary of a particular reading, pose some critical questions, monitor the ensuing contributions and  synthesise the key points that emerge. The assessment criteria should reflect the leadership and management aspects of the role. 

Case studies and scenarios

Students engage in discussion analysing a given case study or scenario. Sub-groups pursue particular aspects of the case or scenario, collaboratively prepare summary posts and report their findings.

Retrospective commentary on learning

Ask students to retrieve all their discussion-board posts for the course and prepare a reflective account, commenting on:

• how their understanding of concepts and skills has developed
• how they have contributed to the learning community of their class.

This can be used to substantiate their self-assessment of their learning performance.

Ensure fairness

Assessment using discussion boards is intrinsically fairer for many students, particularly shy students or students in remote locations. But it can disadvantage others; for example, students with a visual impairment or dyslexia. Ensure that you set up discussion conditions so that all students have an equal chance of success. For example:

• Advise students of any flexibility that is available in the assessment plan to accommodate special needs.
• Ensure that students have access to the discussion board, and that they understand how to use its features to engage actively in the discussion. Give them practice in a low-stakes activity before you require them to participate in a high-stakes summative assessment discussion.
• Appropriately limit the proportion of the mark that derives from discussion-board contributions, in accordance with its role in the assessment design.
• Monitor discussion-board activities to ensure that students are appropriately inclusive in their discussions.

Table 2: Rubric for assessing the content of discussion-board contributions (Nandi, Chang & Balbo, 2009)

CRITERION	POOR	SATISFACTORY	GOOD	EXCELLENT
Clarification	Regurgitation of information	A clear explanation of available information	Explaining available information using relevant examples	Articulating available information to expand on ideas presented, including the use of examples
Justification	No justification of points	Justification based on personal opinion	Justification using existing cases, concepts or theories	Justification using existing cases, concepts or theories and providing clear discussion of implications
Interpretation	Misrepresentation of information	Basic paraphrasing of available information	Clear interpretation of available information	Critical discussion of available information
Application of knowledge (relevance)	No application or discussion of relevance to questions asked	Application of knowledge to questions asked	Application of knowledge including discussion using relevant examples	Knowledge is critically applied and may include discussion of limitations
Prioritisation	No prioritisation of information or knowledge	Some basic comparison of information	Ability to prioritise information and knowledge	Ability to prioritise information and knowledge based on criteria that the learner has established
Breadth of knowledge	Narrow and limited knowledge	Some indication of a wider view of the topics discussed	Presenting a wider view of the topics discussed by showing a good breadth of knowledge	Ability to point out other perspectives, including drawing from other fields of study

Table 3: Rubric for assessing the interaction quality of discussion board contributions (Nandi, Chang & Balbo, 2009)

CRITERION	POOR	SATISFACTORY	GOOD	EXCELLENT
Critical discussion of contributions	No engagement with other learners' contributions	Some basic discussion about other learners' contributions	Consistent engagement with other learners' contributions and acknowledgement of other learners' comments on own contributions	Contributing to a community of learners, with consistent engagement and advancement of each other's ideas
New ideas from interactions	No evidence of new ideas or thoughts from interaction	Some new ideas developed as a result of interaction	Some solutions and new ideas as a result of interaction	Collaborative approach to solution-seeking and new ideas developed
Sharing outside knowledge	No sharing of outside knowledge	Sharing generic information that is easily available from outside sources	Sharing real-world examples that may not be immediately obvious to other learners	Sharing real-life knowledge, personal experience and examples of similar problems and solutions
Using social cues to engage other participants	No engagement with others in the discussion forum	Answering some basic question posed by facilitator or other learners	Engaging with the work and discussion of other learners	Engaging in and encouraging participation with fellow participants in the forum

Table 4: Rubric for assessing objective measures of discussion-board contributions (Nandi, Chang & Balbo, 2009)

CRITERIA	POOR	SATISFACTORY	GOOD	EXCELLENT
Participation rates	No posts or fewer than two posts per week	Between two and five posts per week	Between five and 10 substantive posts per week	More than 10 substantive posts per week
Consistency of participation	Rare posts with occasional activity	Occasional activity	Consistent activity	Consistent and productive activity