Currently reading Yang et al. (2026) on “Applying a Think-Pair-Share (TPS) Structure to Asynchronous Online Discussions (AODs): A Mixed Methods Study”
I am still deep in my asynchronous online learning phase, and the paper by 2026), “Applying a Think-Pair-Share (TPS) Structure to Asynchronous Online Discussions (AODs): A Mixed Methods Study”, looked super interesting!
They investigate whether using a think-pair-share structure in discussions can help participants learn better by providing them with more interaction, and how they experience working in that structure. They find that in terms of interaction frequency, informational length, and social presence, both cohorts are similar. However, the cohort using the think-pair-share structure learns more than the control one who does not.
My immediate question, reading about the online asynchronous think-pair-share, is how that got facilitated to make it work. Turns out that in the 13 week course, usually there are unstructured whole-group discussions on two prompts every week, and students have to write one post themselves and respond to at least one post by someone else. In the intervention design, each week was broken into “think” (Monday and Tuesday, about the same prompts as in the other cohort), “pair” (Monday to Wednesday, here participants discussed the prompts in closed threads in groups of two to four participants), and “share” (Wednesday to Friday, discussion in a thread with the whole class, where a representative of the small group summarized their discussion in the thread, and everybody is encouraged to comment on each others’ posts, so the total post requirements are the same as for the other group).
Participants seem to recognize the typical benefits of think-pair-share structures (e.g. gaining confidence in small groups before engaging in a larger group), and typical things like freeriders and difficulties communicating disagreement came up, as well as redundency of some responses that were repeated over and over again. However, especially interesting in this online asynchronous case: some participants complained about the “clumsiness” of the structure, since it requires revisiting the course repeatedly throughout the course of the week, when the preference would be to get done with that week’s work in one go and not wait for other people to reply (especially if the others might be procrastinating).
And it is this last problem that I find most interesting. In our MOOC there will be cohorts, but content won’t be dripped, so it is not realistic to think that participants will be progressing through the MOOC in parallel so that this would work. In other courses I am teaching, however, this structure opens up new possibilities for facilitating engagement with a topic in parallel to in-person components. Definitely worth a try!
, , and . 2026. “ Applying a Think-Pair-Share (TPS) Structure to Asynchronous Online Discussions (AODs): A Mixed Methods Study.” Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 42, no. 2: e70194. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcal.70194.
Pictures all taken today. What a beautiful day with the ice!
