O n f e r e n c e

Short paper 
Background and Review of Current Research 
From the late 70s and early 80s critical thinking gained noticeable prominence in higher 
education (Moore, 2011). In higher education, knowled
ge construction is viewed “as both 
process and product of argumentation and informal scientific reasoning” (Derry, 
Seymour, Steinkuehler, Lee, & Siegel, 2004). In recent years, in many Western 
countries including Britain and Australia, critical thinking has become a major graduate 
attribute in higher education (Moore, 2011). 

---

-149- 
2014 CALL Conference 
LINGUAPOLIS
www.antwerpcall.be 
With higher education increasingly delivered in blended learning modes that are both 
offline and online (Amhag & Jakobsson, 2009; Lee, 2009), it is necessary to investigate 
whether critical thinking is present in online learning contexts. This is called a search for 
“transversal relationships” (Kern, 2006, p. 202), which is an investigation of the 
transferability of a learning skill from one communicative modality and context to 
another.
Email, asynchronous discussion forums, blogs, and wikis are among the online tools used 
to complement face-to-face classrooms. Asynchronous discussion forums (ADFs), in 
particular, are used frequently (Amhag & Jakobsson, 2009; Dringus & Ellis, 2010) 
because they are text-based and deemed suitable for serious academic discussion 
(Motteram, 2001). Learners’ engagement in asynchronous online discussions is a form of 
computer-supported group-mediated collaborative activity in which an electronic medium 
is used (Deloach & Greenlaw, 2005). ADFs are proposed to have the potential to take 
discussions to a more critical stage. This is because, through online discussions, students 
can create a discourse community where they negotiate with one another in an extended 
period of time. Such negotiations can lead to cognitive conflict, which in turn, can trigger 
exploratory talk (Song, 2008). Moreover, ADFs provide a platform for expressing multiple 
perspectives, negotiating meaning, understanding knowledge gaps and resolving issues 
(Haavind, 2006; Land, Choi, & Ge, 2007). Therefore, due to the specific features of ADFs, 
it is proposed that students can benefit from extended learner-learner interactions in 
ways not feasible in face-to-face classrooms (Ling, 2007). 
There is a vast body of research on the potential of ADFs for fostering tertiary level 
students’ critical thinking (e.g. Lee, 2009; McLoughlin & Mynard, 2009; Richardson & Ice, 
2010). However, there are three key gaps in the literature that should be addressed. 
Firstly, previous research has mainly focused on individual critical thinking; the 
investigation of critical thinking when a group works together has been generally 
overlooked. Secondly, few studies have investigated critical thinking processes of the 
individual and of the group in a single study, to present a comprehensive picture of 
collaborative critical thinking. Finally, in previous studies of critical thinking on ADFs, ESL 
students have been generally overlooked despite the fact that the increase in the number 
of international students for whom English is a second/foreign language has made 
classrooms increasingly multicultural.
To address these gaps, I examined the demonstration of collaborative critical thinking 
(CCT) on ADFs in a multicultural higher education learning context. The scope of this 
research was limited to a graduate blended subject over two 12-week periods at an 
Australian research university. I investigated the demonstration of CCT as students 
discussed topics on 10 weekly ADFs over the course of the semester. The three proposed 
research questions were: 

Is there evidence of CCT on ADFs in a graduate level subject? 

Do NS students and ESL students differ in their demonstration of CCT on ADFs in a 
graduate level subject? If so, How? 

What factors affect the demonstration of CCT on ADFs in a graduate level subject? 
In this paper, I discuss the 
ontological
and 
methodological
challenges encountered in 
conducting the above research.