I am not sure I even know the trick to encouraging responses to one another.  :-(

Good question, from my experience in this area there are several discussion prompts that can be used. For example, you could pick up from the last thread and start by ..has anyone explored/read had the opportunity to figure out ??? from the last discussion. Referring to a reading that was set as a task may be another discussion prompt. A news paper article, news item that relates directly to the topic or area of study might be yet another way to prompt discussion. Setting a question in the previous session for follow up can also provide a trigger. Bringing together the gist of the discussion as you see it might also encourage another viewpoint or further discussion. If students are clear about the ground rules for participation, there may be more likely to take up the challenge to share their ideas, thoughts, views, knowledge etc. Making sure that all the participants have access to the ground rules which may be discussed else where such as course manuals, etc. can also clear the way for participation.   Hope this is helpful...

Encouraged involvement, seek contribution, are available face to face, web enabled an online reducing barriers of distance.

http://www.isls.org/cscl2015/papers/MC-0192-FullPaper-Yang.pdf

Dear Barbara,

I don't have experiences with designing discussion prompts, but I can tell you what to my view worked very well within a course I participated in.

You might set the "discussion writing" as a real assignment for the students to be completed by a certain deadline and triggered by an engaging activity that would naturally inspire the discussion.

I am sure you already got to know about gamification in learning. An assignment of this course was framed as follows: we as students were asked to play a game connected to the topic of study and to share what we learnt from it in an online collaboration platform by a certain deadline.  

Of course gamification is not necessary, as the point is to get the students naturally prone to discuss as they dealt with an activity, whichever it may be, that they deem engaging. 

Also, catching up the written discussions within a following lecture and continue the discussion orally with the lecturer can boost participation.

Hope this may help you out.

Best regards

Ilaria

In my own research and that of others published in the literature, the crafting of Guided Response parameters has been demonstrated to encourage the type of engagement you are describing.

Would like to suggest the following:

1) Identify the objective of the asynchronous discussion e.g. to solicit factual supporting facts / evidence about a topic / question, invite various opinions on a particular open ended topic / question, tracking the progress of certain deliverables from different parties etc.

2) Pen down the asynchronous discussion requirements, what to expect from respondents / participants, response formats, ground rules to follow, communication protocol, latest when to come back, other logistics etc.

3) Monitor the discussion threads from time to time.  If the discussion being side tracked, you might want to remind respondents / participants to bring them back to the right discussion path.  If the discussions threads seem slow or not excited / uninterested, you might want to send reminders to response.  You might need to do some personal coaching / 1-to-1 counseling when some respondents are facing some difficulties in participating in the asynchronous discussion.

4) When the deadline & adequate deliverables received, you might want to thank the respondents / participants and summarize the discussion status / conclusion & what is the next step (if any).

I design sessions with questions rather than content.

I use a blend of humour and provocation - say something outrageous, make people laugh and then find the serious element! 

Barbara, I'm not sure whether you are doing a class or just trying to create an online community.  I've done the latter, and it seems to me that there is a point of critical mass that differs for each group, depending on how many active contributors you are lucky enough to get.  Before that happens, it IS necessary to drive discussion by doing much as Vasintha said--asking questions (the more provocative the better), posing interesting hypotheticals, and finding relevant articles or even photos.  Once a group does hit critical mass (our Home Dialysis Central Facebook group is nearing 2,000 members, and reached critical mass at, perhaps 500?), discussions will start and continue with NO outside input from you.  I love coming back to the group and finding new threads that I had nothing to do with.  But, I still end up putting in probably an hour a day, nearly EVERY day, to moderate the group and maintain an appropriate tone (no bullying, no spam...), respond to threads with questions or support to keep them going or see if we can use the content to develop articles to help others, and to decide which prospective members to allow in (no obvious spammers, for example).  We have five moderators now, because one person can't be there 24/7.  

Barbara;

What works for me is to design the discussion as a debate:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274720155_Debating_A_Dynamic_Teaching_Strategy_for_Motivating_Students_and_Teachers

Conference Paper Debating: A Dynamic Teaching Strategy for Motivating Student...

If I understand your question correct, you are looking for scripting online discussions via prompts? In the context of learning there are plenty of articles from Mandl, Weinberger, Stegmann, deWever, Fischer and more. Maybe you could refer to "scripting online discussions" and "self regulating"?

maybe you will find some information within these articles?

Fischer, F., Weinberger, A., & Stegmann, K. (2005). Learning in online discussions Scripting collaborative processes to facilitate individual knowledge acquisition. Invited Talk at the workshop „Talk and Dialog. A festschrift for Lauren Resnick“, Learning Research and Development Center (LRDC), University of Pittsburgh, USA.

Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2005). Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning in Higher Education: Scripts for Argumentative Knowledge Construction in Distributed Groups. In Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005: The Next 10 Years! Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning 2005 (S. 717–726). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2006). Scripting Online Discussions: Effects on Argumentative Discourse, Cognitive Processes, and Knowledge Acquisition. In International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Bloomington, IN, USA.

De Wever, B., Keer, H. V., Schellens, T., & Valcke, M. (2010). Roles as a structuring tool in online discussion groups: The differential impact of different roles on social knowledge construction. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 516–523.

Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2011). From guided to self-regulated performance of domain-general skills: The role of peer monitoring during the fading of instructional scripts. Learning and Instruction, 21(6), 746–756. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.05.001

O’Donnell, A. N., & Dansereau, D. F. (1992). Scripted cooperation in student dyads: A method for analyzing and enhancing academic learning and performance. In Interactions in cooperative groups. The theoretical anatomy of group learning (S. 120–141). Cambridge, MA: University Press.

Please drop me a line if this was helpful and I understood you rquestion correct.

Best

Christopher

We spend considerable time in our masters program helping students craft questions. When I do an online discussion, I ask the students to do the readings and put 2 or 3 of their own questions on line--the questions are supposed to stimulate discussion like tying readings together, tying with other courses, tying readings to real world experiences, not have a correct answer, etc. Once everyone has put their own questions on, the students are then asked to look at all the questions and select (again 2 or 3) and begin to answer--again using real world experiences, readings, other coursework, etc to back up what they are saying and their arguments. Some questions stimulate debate and quite a few answers. Others not so much--depending on student interests. This is assignment is generally required and considered part of their participation grade. I like what Han Ping Fung wrote above--the students generally understand what is expected but these suggestions will further clarify.

Hi Barbara,

As is the case with any communication, the important first step is to establish a positive sharing environment. In a discussion with a colleague today on this matter, a few suggestions are appropriate. You could establish "buddies" within the discussion group whereby you can reply to any other post but must reply to posts from your buddy. Alternatively, as the lecturer you could be very active in the discussion group initially (either as lecturer or pseudonym - pretend student) encouraging and supporting the initial posts to establish a positive environment. Hope this helps. Kevin. 

I do not know if this would help, but my favourite is to ask more inputs - Something like I agree, but I need more inputs, or I do not agree, but I need more inputs. This technique helps me to get more inputs from those who read, but seldom react.

Right from the start, it is important to make it clear to students that they'll be expected to contribute in discussion whether online or in the class. It is also important to explain that they stand to benefit a lot when they share ideas with others. Sharing ideas give them the opportunity to assist others to learn from them and they also learn through the feedback that could be given to them. Further, moderating the discussion in a more proactive way by the facilitator/instructor would be highly crucial. In a study I was involved in recently, we found that students prefer instructors to promptly respond to questions or coordinate their discussion by calling their attention to what they may consider to strengthen their arguments. It is also important to thank those who have contributed while those who have not should be encourage to participate because what is not seen as good ideas to them may be useful to others. Constructive feed back should also be given with respect and courtesy. Doing that would stimulate them to contribute in the future. Lastly, it might be necessary to give students some points/marks for their contributions in discussion either online or in the class.

As noted already it is essential that students are encouraged to participate and contribute constructively and feel supported in doing so.  It is the same atmosphere you would want to create in a tutorial room face to face.

Always good at the start to ask something about their background and motivation for studying in this area, as a way of getting to understand them and spark conversations between them as well.  Depending on the topic it can be a way of sharing their individual experiences.  For example, a study group on museums can be asked what encounters with museum objects have remained with them for a long time.

Encourage every one to participate in the discussion by first informing them that in the group no one knows everything and there is no best answer than the other.  Every answer leads to something. 

Barbara

I have two techniques that I often use mainly for thinking out of the box or problem solving discussions

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this discussion. While I was asking specifically about the design of discussion prompts versus the facilitation of discussions, I have enjoyed hearing these perspectives, too.

I have a follow-up question: In what ways, if at all, do you think how we design a discussion question affects the peer-to-peer interaction, not just a student's initial response? In other words, are there ways to design discussion prompts that increase the quantity and/or quality of peer-to-peer interaction beyond a student's initial response?

Thanks again for sharing your thoughts!

Students can learn science ideas from a well-designed online asynchronous discussion alone. In this research, discussion succeeded in helping students learn more often when comments introduced in the discussion enact a historical debate, rather than when they follow a narrative text format. The historical debate format appears to help students learn science by making alternative views of the science topic memorable and by modelling the process of distinguishing among ideas

http://www.tophe.net/papers/Hoadley-Linn-2000.pdf

I specifically state how many responses are expected.  I say that because of the nature of the online environment - responding to a peer requires the inclusion of a reflective process followed by the activity of processing and writing the response.  Its not as immediate as having a face to face conversation, even though it simulates one. 

I can say though that if cohorts are continuously expected to respond to such design  prompts, they become used to responding in that manner and then automatically perform or complete the work required.  Sometimes you may even get more than the required posts. 

You should know that receiving more posts than required can hinder the expected exchange if and only if the original question does not incorporate an authentic activity.  Questions that incorporate authentic questions then produce meaningful discussions that can go on and on for the entire course.

I formulate and write threads in RG because in my country there are no LMS systems in universities, Prof. Barbara Miller Hall.

I write tips about complicated solid-state physics questions, some people (including students) come around and acknowledge the posts. Not many though.