The "Provoker" Strikes Back: Fostering Student Community and Engagement through the "Provoker" Thread

 1. Introduction

[1] One of the first, and perhaps biggest, hurdles that First-Year Composition instructors often face is student disengagement with the writing process. This disengagement seems to be especially present for courses centered on argumentative writing, for students seem to misinterpret the argumentative process as stifling, alienating, or even hostile. For example, when I ask my students their views on argumentation through an anonymous survey each semester, many claim that they are not comfortable with this skill. In the Fall of 2022, one student elaborated on this point: “Honestly, I do not consider debating topics in any situation worth my time because, when debating, the whole situation can heat up very quickly between friends, family, or teachers…it’s not worth fighting.”  It is important to note that this student included “teachers” within their explanation, showing that even within an academic setting, where lively discourse is highlighted as a means of growth, some students feel it is better to simply go through the motions rather than risk confrontation.

[2] Furthermore, these concerns can be amplified within an online setting where engagement may be further encumbered by the lack of weekly face-to-face interaction. Students may in turn feel like “islands” behind a screen who view one another as disembodied names rather than a collaborative classroom community. This can become detrimental to their growth as writers but can be especially problematic within argumentative writing since it is at its core an act of communal discourse. However, we as instructors can break this cycle. This can be done by employing the “OLI Principle and Tenets“ (OLI Principles Committee, 2019), and through the discovery and utilization of innovative OWC pedagogical practices.

The "Provoker" Discussion Board Threads

[3] In the Fall of 2022, I was given the opportunity to investigate some of these methods as a GSOLE Research Fellow. For this project, I was asked to implement teaching practices from an OLOR Effective Practice article of my choice. Although there were many thought-provoking pieces, the one that I kept coming back to was “‘The Provoker’ Discussion Board Threads” by Scott Warnock with Lisa Schepis-Myers (2020). In this article, the authors explain a unique strategy for fostering online engagement while also enabling academic discourse by asking students to respond, analyze, and evaluate provoking argumentative positions. This is done using “Provoker Threads.” 

[4] The “Provoker Threads” are discussion board assignments, but with a twist. Instead of the common read-and-respond strategy, “Provoker Threads” allow instructors to create a contradictory persona that “challenges students with hyperbolic and oftentimes outrageous positions…” (Warnock & Schepis-Myers, 2020, par. 2). This activity not only enables students to practice important rhetorical skills such as evidence-based reasoning, but also “help[s] create community among students, who often work together to debate the Provoker” (par. 3). Students are encouraged to comment upon and/or add on to one another’s claims, uniting together as allies against the “Provoker Persona.”

[5] I was both fascinated and intrigued with this activity. It seemed like it could be an entertaining project for both the instructor and students, and I liked how these discussion threads seemed to juxtapose playfulness with academic discourse. However, I was also a bit hesitant, especially when it came to my ability to develop a persona and create arguments that students could unite against. Yet, despite my concerns, I decided to give this practice a try.

2. Methods

[6] I incorporated “The Provoker Threads” into my Fall 2022 ENGLI-1102 (Composition II) course. To better understand how students felt about the concepts of online community and argumentation, I once again began the semester with an anonymous survey. I asked students if they had ever taken an online course before, and if so, whether or not they felt connected to their peers within the course. The answers were somewhat varied, but one constant point was that the majority of students mentioned that a sense of community within an OWC is possible, but difficult and would take work. For example, responses like this were common: “I believe that since it is online it is difficult to have a sense of community, but I think that when people are going out of their way to support one another and reaching out to each other for help is when it feels more like a community with my peers.”

[7] I also asked students their thoughts on argumentation and debating. As I mentioned within the introduction, most students communicated feeling uneasy about argumentation. However, there was a common caveat. The majority of students explained that they may actually enjoy arguing as long as they were comfortable with both the person they were arguing against and the environment that the debate was taking place within. As one student explains, “It depends. [M]ost of the time on social media, I find it pointless because the other side doesn't really care. But I think it's healthy to debate on topics with people you are close with.” This point highlights how important it is for OWC instructors to facilitate multiple opportunities for class connection so that students feel both comfortable and safe when presenting, investigating, and responding to arguments.

[8] After I had a sense of how my students felt about argumentation within an OWC, I then began to consider how I could adapt the “Provoker Threads,” and one issue that came to the forefront was that my OWC was only eight weeks long. This added extra pressure. Not only did students have much less time to build a community, but I was also concerned about overwhelming them with work. To address this, I decided to make most of the discussion boards for that term “Provoker Threads,” centering them around the readings assigned for that week. I also tried to choose topics that connected to students’ lives but were not too personal.This included topics such as the value of nontraditional academic approaches, debates over the cost of higher education, and whether or not internet access should be defined as a  human right.

[9] Once I knew the topics, it was time to develop my own “Provoker Persona.” I wanted this persona to be outrageous. Yet, I also wanted to challenge students by emulating the questionable techniques that they may face on a day to day basis, but within a comfortable and safe environment.  Therefore, I decided to slightly shift from Warnock and Schepis-Myers' (2020) approach by letting the students in on the ruse. Ms. P. became my “Provoker Persona,” and students knew that she was my alternate voice. However, I also let students know that Ms. P would be presenting faulty arguments. Thus, they knew from the beginning that they should be wary of Ms. P’s claim, and confident when they noticed holes and inconsistencies.

[10] The structure of these activities was as follows: First, the Provoker would make a post, utilizing a somewhat theatrical tone. This was key because it set the tone for the overall class. Figure 1 provides an example of my first post as Ms. P.

[12] Once the initial post and responses were completed, the Provoker would write a rebuttal that added to the previous argument. Students would then post a final response, and the Provoker would admit defeat (see Figure 3).

3. Results

[14] Implementing  “Provoker Threads” into my class led to some very intriguing results. For instance, in the second Provoker thread, Ms. P claimed that college should not have to lower costs and loans should not be forgiven because college is in fact a choice (see Figure 4).

[15] Because this was the second “Provoker Thread,” I wanted to make it a bit more challenging by utilizing less outrageous language (although I tried to keep Ms. P’s initial sass), and using more questionable evidence and overgeneralizations. However, I may have been spending too much time as Ms. P because I soon fell into some common argumentative traps. I made the incorrect assumption that students would automatically agree that student loans should be forgiven. Yet, that was not the case. In fact, many students were more on the fence about forgiving student loans. I found these results illuminating, for it reminded me that any of us can, even accidentally, prioritize our own biases and assume that everyone will or should agree with our points of view. In this moment, I learned from the students because, despite not fully disagreeing with Ms. P, they still demonstrated nuance by highlighting some issues within her overall claim. This can be seen in Figure 5 below where the student respectfully, but directly, underscored the flaws in Ms. P’s reasoning by emphasizing how the concept of “choice” is not so easily defined.

[16] This type of response became the norm for the “Provoker Threads.” Students interacted with the material by taking in the content of Ms. P’s points, addressing holes in her reasoning, and defending their own claims by unpacking supporting evidence. They even added to the conversation by utilizing their own outside research. The tone and intricacy of these posts also proved that students were engaged with the material and felt comfortable entering these conversations while sharing their own informed perspectives.

[17] By the end of the term, it seemed that my use of the “Provoker Threads” was an overall success. This can be shown in a few ways. First, as I noted above, the responses within these threads were thoughtful, utilized evidence-based reasoning, and showed an understanding of the nuances within argumentative discourse. I also want to highlight that the completion rate for these threads was 90%. This is outstanding and much higher than my previous discussion board assignments. Finally, the students spoke very highly of the “Provoker Threads.” For example, I asked students to complete another anonymous survey at the end of the semester. Some of the questions I asked were whether or not students felt more comfortable with argumentation and for their overall thoughts on the “Provoker Threads.” The responses were overwhelmingly positive. One student shared how the threads directly helped their own argumentative skills, claiming that “It was fun to try to find the small holes in Ms. P's arguments. I believe they were helpful towards our debate skills, particularly as the rebuttals came out and we had to rework our arguments.” Another student highlighted their enjoyment of the threads: “ I thought they were fun…it was an interesting take reminiscent of some random argumentative 62 year old woman on a political Facebook thread.” Students also claimed that these threads helped them feel more engaged and part of a community: “This was by far the most fun part of class. Honestly, I was at work when I got the notification about this assignment, and I was super excited to go home and start working on it. I think this is what made the whole class come together.”

4. Conclusion

[18] Utilizing the “Provoker Thread” activity proved to be an enlightening experience that I believe has helped me grow as both an online and in-person instructor. Students felt connected to both the content of the course and to one another, and I found myself more connected as well. This activity also pushed me to rethink and revise my approach to OWCs. I have always found it a bit difficult to display the energy I evoke within my in-person classes into an OWC. However, the “Provoker Threads” encouraged me to step outside my comfort zone by not only trying something new, but by also becoming someone new, experimenting and learning from this new persona along with my students. As noted above, both my students and I loved it.

[19] In fact, this activity was so successful that I am now considering how it can be implemented within an in-person class as well. Students today have had to deal with unprecedented challenges, and it is understandable why they may come into a classroom, whether in-person or online, with reluctance. Yet, activities like the “Provoker Thread” remind us that learning can be both challenging and fun, and it ultimately leads to individual growth through discovery. The “Provoker Threads” underscore an interesting opportunity here. As online instructors, we are  constantly striving to create and share approaches that best benefit our students within a digital environment, an environment that is constantly changing and evolving. We have created effective practices such as the OLI Principles and Tenets (OLI Principles Committee, 2019) to help continue this work. Yet, the digital world is not the only one that continues to evolve, and as we continue to explore the relationship between online and in-person pedagogy, perhaps we may consider how best “online” practices could become, more simply, best practices.