The Death of Discussion Boards in DE

Over a semester, yes and more!

 

Hope you are getting compensated properly.

 

I love to teach, so I teach. But I am very well compensated.

 

Unfortunately, those of us, both instructors and students, who have zero control over discussion board questions are likely reading a lot of content from Bing AI which now provides cites. https://www.bing.com/chat

 

I understand you don't like it! Fine, there is technology now to monitor AI use. I'll be continuing. I wish you well in whatever direction. We just don't agree here.

 

You trust TII? Going to expend your time putting in uncompensated plagiarism reports. I doubt it.

 

No insinuation here, my point is the Discussion Board is compromised as an online teaching tool at this point in time until something other than TII is deployed against AI written posts. I have taught exclusively online for 17 years, suddenly my General Education students are writing at Post Grad level. As an adjunct no way I am going to conduct dozens of uncompensated plagiarism investigations of AI generated nonsense. I would also argue that unless the student admits to using AI, TII is inconclusive since AI generates different versions of a question and is not static. A raw TII score with nothing but some funky algorithm backing it up does not seem like credible proof.

 

Musk's new search engine Perplexity.ai not only provides answers but cites, I rest my case.

 

It's called discussion! Just like in traditional classes. I could care less if it cites, it the interaction that counts. All in how you design the work!

 

Not sure I follow the logic. The courses I instruct have preloaded questions, this is fairly standard for online schools and has been the case at the six I have taught at. The students are taking the questions and dropping them into AI machine which generates differing versions of the same elegantly written and cited machine output. I know they are doing this at every level because just in the past year, students who grudgingly could only produce a few sentence in Gen Ed coursres are producing flawless 3 pargraph mini essays. You can't nail them because these AI machines produce endlessly different versions of the same answers. Is the "meat" instructor supposed to read the machine product and comment?

 

Oh, so you nail them! That's the answer. You don't instruct anything; you facilitate cookie cutter courses for some private for profit! I discuss with students the topic at hand. I assess the learning through various other means.
As to the "meat" instructor, there is now several software types to evaluate AI characteristics in discussion. If you ask questions in the right way, not necessarily seeking to catch student cheating, transfer of appropriate learning takes place. I've done it always, and when all I do is lead cookie cutter courses, I'm done. Have you done live lecture? We discuss topics. I don't care where they get their answers, they have to find them, and through the vetting of those topics they understand better the material. I sometimes use objective multiple-choice quizzes, but most often I use papers of various sizes, and open-ended questions that require them to write and explain a concept. But you probably don't agree with that either, it's no cookie cutter and done for you! Look enough of this! You do your way, I'll do mine. I wish you success.

 

I am not arguing with you at all; I am simply discussing an important subject - Discussion Board dependent LMS' that are used by online schools which despite being for profit or non profit are regionally accredited. Since there is no active learning besides the discussion board on the LMS, the instructor (almost always an adjunct) who is tasked with monitoring, faciliating, grading and student retention duties cannot devote hours to try to "catch" students using AI, especially if there are 20-40 students in the class and one or two weekly discussion questions. Their already meager compensation would be subminimum wage since integrity cases are time consuming. That is why I say the DB is dead in its current form in the LMS. The schools by the way are well aware of AI and essentially ignore it because machine tools like TII cannot really "prove" a student is using AI, the student can just deny it, it is not as if you can produce the plagiarized sources. No one however is learning anything here except "valuable" skills in machine aided deception, use of AI tools, and copying and pasting.

 

I always found discussion boards to be easy grades. I wanted to post first and then I knew it was done with. Speaking of LMS's I miss Moodle, other softwares I've used have their quirks and annoyances.

 

For what it's worth, I learned as much from the discussion boards as I did from the course content itself, maybe more. That said, my grad program was a cohort where all of us went through the same courses together. Many of the bulletin board post were pretty bad as you'd expect, but many of the discussions were thoughtful and thought provoking. So many of us were able to apply the course content directly to things in our own respective fields. Just seeing the perspectives of others was a great learning experience, even if I didn't agree with them. I remember many of the discussions going off topic to related issues, not unlike our threads here on Degreeinfo. I found that to very interesting and valuable as well. Any time you get a group of people to actually engage it's worth it, no matter the outcome.

 

Discussions are designed to take the place of in class discussions. In this case, however, you can measure the level of activity. Any good online Professor knows to ask specific questions to assure a thorough vetting of the material. As to Moodle, it is an open- source software, and very basic. It is the foundation for what is now the largest LMS, Canvas.

 

Designed correctly, and with an active Professor, Discussion are outstanding.

 

Mr. President, LMS design can be an issue, if there are tech glitches, etc. What I refer to is more the design of the questions/comments on Discussion. An example, in a current Health Administration class I'm doing, we are investigating Population health, and value=based reimbursement. I post information about a specific issue, and students go to their home Community Health Needs Assessment, now mandated by the PPACA. They have to complete an intervention/Program Plan to help make a positive impact on that issue! Active learning.

A second topic for this particular class is the use of Mid-level providers (PAs and Nurse Practitioners). I ask the question, should they be allowed more independence from Physician supervision. Yes or no, and why. Students have to make an initial response, and comment on at least 2 peers. I respond to each comment. As you are aware, if you are supporting one side or the other on a given topic, I will assume a completely oppositive position (whether or not that is my personal position or not). In a recent class I had one Physician, who felt MD meant magnificent deity, take a strong stance against PA and NP advanced practice initiatives. The two PAs took a completely opposite side. It led to a lively discussion. My role was to stimulate, and in this case control and focus the work.

As we wrap up the week, I summarize the discussion to the class. The point is to attempt to find consensus, and a minimum thoroughly vet the material.

Long ago, a movie came out (And the Band Played On) that described the discovery of AIDS, and how we went about caring for that group of people who contracted the disease. Many may remember providers of all types refused to treat them because they feared contracting this deadly disease! They watched the film, and we discussed it. During one class meeting a former student worked at the CDC and I was able to arrange for one of the primary characters in the film to do an early video for the class. Now, it was not like today, this was only a VHS, but he did a 30-minute presentation.

I'll end this diatribe by simply saying each and every Professor on this planet has a personality! I've been approached by several larger for-profits to teach for them. Each course is designed the same, and in some cases have nice videos and other cookie cutter methods, but it's just not my thing. I like interaction with students! I use Discussions and find them beneficial. Now one may ask, how do you grade that? I use a rubric and review the depth of the responses. Gee that's subjective! Nope, my rubric tells what the expectation is, and they do it or not! In the end, I look for participation. Consider an in-class lecture and discussion. You may think you know how Johnny or Suzy participated, but do you really? In this online Discussion, I can measure and evaluate!

Everyone will conduct class their way. I believe in these conversations online, and they work for me. If you don't, then I completely understand. But I'll be damned if I'll put up some reading and videos, and have a shot multiple choice test, and call that teaching. Does it take time to grade papers, and do these discussions? Absolutely. If you don't have time, don't do it! Me, I thrive off of the interaction with students!

 

At all five schools I instruct at - the discussion board questions are preprogrammed. The students load it into AI or Chegg or whatever. What comes out is OK content. I then am required to do a 20% response. The students rarely reply to me. This is garbage in, garbage out aided and abetted by regional accreditors.