Skip to main content

Abstract

While race and gender academic disparities have often been categorized via differences in final grade performance, the day-to-day experiences of minoritized student populations may not be accounted for when only concentrating on final grade outcomes. However, more fine-grained information on student behavior analyzed using AI and machine learning techniques may help to highlight the differences in day-to-day experiences. This study explores how linguistic features related to exclusion and social dynamics vary across discussion forum structures and how the variation depends on race and gender. We applied linear mixed-effect analysis to discussion posts across six semesters to investigate the effect of discussion forum structure, race, and gender on linguistic features. These results can be used to suggest design changes to instructors’ online discussion forums that will support students in feeling included.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

  1. Ahuja, R., et al.: Machine learning and student performance in teams. In: Bittencourt, I.I., Cukurova, M., Muldner, K., Luckin, R., Millán, E. (eds.) AIED 2020. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12164, pp. 301–305. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52240-7_55

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Atkinson, E., DePalma, R.: Dangerous spaces: constructing and contesting sexual identities in an online discussion forum. Gend. Educ. 20(2), 183–194 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250701797192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Baker, R.S., Martin, T., Rossi, L.M.: Educational data mining and learning analytics. In: Rupp, A.A., Leighton, J.P. (eds.) The Handbook of Cognition and Assessment, pp. 379–396. John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken, NJ, USA (Nov 2016). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118956588.ch16

  4. Dowell, N.M., Cade, W.L., Tausczik, Y., Pennebaker, J., Graesser, A.C.: What works: creating adaptive and intelligent systems for collaborative learning support. In: Trausan-Matu, S., Boyer, K.E., Crosby, M., Panourgia, K. (eds.) ITS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8474, pp. 124–133. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07221-0_15

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Dowell, N.Met al.: modeling learners’ social centrality and performance through language and discourse. In: International Educational Data Mining Society (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Fehrman, S., Watson, S.L.: A systematic review of asynchronous online discussions in online higher education. Am. J. Distance Educ. 35(3), 200–213 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/08923647.2020.1858705

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hurtado, S., Alvarez, C.L., Guillermo-Wann, C., Cuellar, M., Arellano, L.: A Model for Diverse Learning Environments: The Scholarship on Creating and Assessing Conditions for Student Success. In: Smart, J.C., Paulsen, M.B. (eds.) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, vol. 27, pp. 41–122. Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2950-6_2, higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research

  8. Klauke, F., Kauffeld, S.: Does it matter what i say? using language to examine reactions to ostracism as it occurs. Front. Psychol. 11, 558069 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.558069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kovanović, Vet al.: Towards automated content analysis of discussion transcripts: a cognitive presence case. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge - LAK 2016, pp. 15–24. ACM Press, Edinburgh, United Kingdom (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883950

  10. Lin, Y., Yu, R., Dowell, N.: LIWCs the same, not the same: gendered linguistic signals of performance and experience in online STEM courses. In: Bittencourt, I.I., Cukurova, M., Muldner, K., Luckin, R., Millán, E. (eds.) AIED 2020. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12163, pp. 333–345. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_27

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Macgilchrist, F.: Cruel optimism in edtech: when the digital data practices of educational technology providers inadvertently hinder educational equity. Learn. Media Technol. 44(1), 77–86 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1556217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. McKee, H.: “Your views showed true ignorance!!!’’: (Mis)Communication in an online interracial discussion forum. Comput. Compos. 19(4), 411–434 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S8755-4615(02)00143-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Milner, H.R.: Rethinking achievement gap talk in urban education. Urban Educ. 48(1), 3–8 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085912470417

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Nur, N., et al.: Student network analysis: a novel way to predict delayed graduation in higher education. In: Isotani, S., Millán, E., Ogan, A., Hastings, P., McLaren, B., Luckin, R. (eds.) AIED 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11625, pp. 370–382. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23204-7_31

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. O’Riordan, T., Millard, D.E., Schulz, J.: Is critical thinking happening? Testing content analysis schemes applied to MOOC discussion forums. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 29(4), 690–709 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Pennebaker, J.W., Chung, C.K., Frazee, J., Lavergne, G.M., Beaver, D.I.: When small words foretell academic success: the case of college admissions essays. PLoS ONE 9(12) (2014). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115844

  17. Raudenbush, S.W.: A crossed random effects model for unbalanced data with applications in cross-sectional and longitudinal research. J. Educ. Stat. 18(4), 321–349 (1993). https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986018004321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tausczik, Y.R., Pennebaker, J.W.: The psychological meaning of words: LIWC and computerized text analysis methods. J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 29(1), 24–54 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zimmermann, J., Wolf, M., Bock, A., Peham, D., Benecke, C.: The way we refer to ourselves reflects how we relate to others: Associations between first-person pronoun use and interpersonal problems. J. Res. Pers. 47(3), 218–225 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2013.01.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kimberly Williamson .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Williamson, K., Kizilcec, R.F. (2023). Structures in Online Discussion Forums: Promoting Inclusion or Exclusion?. In: Wang, N., Rebolledo-Mendez, G., Dimitrova, V., Matsuda, N., Santos, O.C. (eds) Artificial Intelligence in Education. Posters and Late Breaking Results, Workshops and Tutorials, Industry and Innovation Tracks, Practitioners, Doctoral Consortium and Blue Sky. AIED 2023. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1831. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36336-8_18

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36336-8_18

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-36335-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-36336-8

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics