There is much debate regarding the value and utility of grading discussions to ensure and assess full participation in the online classroom. Proponents of threaded discussions view it as an integral part of the learning process, where students seek knowledge and express understanding. Consequently, they deem it essential to assess participation. On the other hand, opponents of assessing or grading participation assert that an exceedingly active discussion can distract students from other equally or more important coursework, not to mention the impracticality of instructors responding to the vast number of submissions. This article examines a variety of grading rubrics used to promote critical thinking about course content and assess the quality of participation and contributions of online threaded discussions. We present the results of a study conducted at a historically Black institution that used Kneser’s Exchange Structure Analysis (ESA) to analyze dialogue in order to understand student exchanges, moves, and roles as well as the influence of gender in online discussions during 3 consecutive summer sessions.