Interpretations

As we will see, interpretations were quite divergent: they did not convey shared understandings, or even coordinated actions. Since, as we will show, the nature of communication was so precarious, the division of the discussion in episodes was a difficult enterprise: somemoments could represent boundaries for some discussants, while they could be apprehended as in the middle of a move by others. Our approach was to propose a division into episodes according to clear changes in patterns of interaction. The discussion includes 49 contributions. The first episode — Turns 2–20 is characterized by the non-intervention of the moderator, and the quite equal participation of the three discussants. The second episode— Turns 21–37, is characterized by the participation of all discussants, including the moderator, who sends messages to all discussants. The pattern of interaction is quite centralized. In the third episode— Turns 38–49, the moderator continues to sendmessages to all discussants but only one discussant is responsive. We begin our analysis by a first episode in which the moderator does not intervene.

1st episode: starting the discussion without moderator — accumulating similar contributions

Fig. 2 shows the beginning of the discussion (Fig. 1 shows it in its entirety). It is characterized by short contributions in which no challenge is raised. Rather, the map seems to grow with contributions that express the same point: at Turns 8 and 13, Fatima writes In my opinion research should refer to the position of the teacher, no one can overlook him! and I agree with you (what is written in the e-discussion is in underlined italics to differentiate it from what is said in the interview); at Turn 11, Rim writes In my opinion, any research on learning and instruction should refer to all the directions, students, teachers, parents, school. Judith writes at Turn 12 We all agree. Is it possible? and ostensibly links this recognition of agreement to all previous interventions with arrows of support. Ahmad did not make any contribution in the first episode because he faced technical problems. However, as he later reported, he watched the map, and thought how to act in this situation.

We will see that all participants interpreted this situation differently and that their interpretations relied on their beliefs regarding the role of discussions in learning, and the role of the moderator and of the discussants in e-discussions. Let us begin with how Ahmad interpreted this discussion in the auto confrontation.