Best Practices in Online Discussion Forums

I created my presentation based on professional development at Georgia Virtual School where I am employed. Here is my final product =) Enjoy!



Annotated Bibliography

Hew, K., & Cheung, W. (2008, November 1). Attracting Student Participation in Asynchronous Online Discussions: A Case Study of Peer Facilitation. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1111-1124. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ799046) Retrieved August 2, 2009, from ERIC database.

This study focused on how to encourage student participation in online discussion forums. It allowed 24 post-graduate students to take on facilitator roles and provide feedback to researchers as to what worked best to accomplish this task. The main drawback was that these students also had face-to-face classes together which means that they would be more inclined to participate in an online discussion because the students had better social relationships. Therefore in application to distance learning where no face-to-face interaction takes place, this study may show more positive results.

Mazzolini, M., & Maddison, S. (2007, September 1). When to Jump in: The Role of the Instructor in Online Discussion Forums. Computers & Education, 49(2), 193-213. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. EJ765106) Retrieved August 2, 2009, from ERIC database.

This particular study focuses on the role of the instructor in the online discussion environment. Research was collected from graduate students in Australia over an extended period of time. The main drawback of this study is the level of education student participants had. In application to secondary education, the presence of an instructor in discussion forums may be more necessary and desired by students, showing a different conclusion than Mazzolini and Maddison.
McLoughlin, D., & Mynard, J. (2009). An Analysis of Higher Order Thinking in Online Discussions. Innovations in Education & Teaching International; May 2009, Vol. 46 Issue 2, p147-160. Retrieved June 14, 2009 from Education Research Complete.

This study entailed the participation of women only which could reflect gender bias in the outcome of the study. In addition, students were attempting to attain an education above the secondary level which could presentation different applications of the study’s conclusion. Though valid points were made, participation was also part of the students grade.

Riley, N. (2006, March 1). Methods for Evaluating Critical Learning Using Online Discussion Forums. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 15(1), 63-78. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ819818) Retrieved August 2, 2009, from ERIC database.

Focused on evaluating for critical thinking skills, this particular study only highlighted results from one discussion prompt amongst 29 students. While categorizing responses into three excellent achieving levels, failure to detail the instructor’s role may invalidate results. Also, no minimum postings were to be made which did not encourage student participation.

Rovai, Alfred P. (2007) Facilitating online discussions . Internet & Higher Education, Jan2007, Vol. 10 Issue 1, p77-88, 12p; DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2006.10.001; (AN 24313219; Database: Education Research Complete) Retrieved August 9, 2009, from ERIC database.

Facilitating effective online discussions made valid points that highlighted the importance of design and participation. The study was a culmination of reviewed literature on the topic and input from the author’s own personal experiences. Therefore, though seemingly valid, the conclusion may reflect personal bias.

Zhang, T., Gao, T., Ring, G., & Zhang, W. (2007, October 1). Using Online Discussion Forums to Assist a Traditional English Class. International Journal on E-Learning, 6(4), 623-643. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ771829) Retrieved August 2, 2009, from ERIC database.
Addressing the relative impact online discussion forums can have on all types of learners, this research study focused on 54 Chinese high school students who were learning English as a second language. Conclusions were drawn from videos, interviews, and transcripts on the online discussion forums. The main drawback was forced participation in the study and the different educational expectations between Chinese and US schooling.

Mind Map: Static Versus Dynamic Technologies

As differentiated in the reading. Moller (2008) makes a clear distinction between static and dynamic technologies. To begin, static technologies are ones that I believe many educators can feel comfortable with incorporating their use in the classroom. The reason being focuses on the fact that static technologies "mimic the traditional classroom or teacher-led instruction" (Moller, 2008, p.1). As detailed in the mindmap, many of the static technologies/medias seem not to be that complicated by nature. In a way, they also allow the educator some control in how they are used to transmit knowledge. But transmitting knowledge can be done a variety of ways. On the other end, is the idea of dynamic technologies. These technologies may be more complicated but they also allow the user a degree of personal freedom over their learning experience. For example, Elluminate is a great tool for both students and teachers. While it does seem to have a static avenue to allow the teacher to communicate content information to the students, it can also be used to divide students in to break out groups and have them lead themselves in a monitored discussion. Even just surfing the Internet for resources can be considered dynamic because the learner has the capability and freedom to discover new sources of information.

Based on what I have learned in this course so far, I have many tools that enable me to move my classroom toward the dynamic end. I have learned about various new technologies that allow me to do so. But even more important, I think that this class has helped emphasize the importance of support that will allow me to do just that. For example, using Skype to communicate with classmates has given me the opportunity to build meaningful relationships with colleagues. This support system makes me comfortable in trying new dynamic technologies in the classroom because I can seek advice.

References
Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper].
Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=3476918&Survey=1&47=3679118&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Engaging Learners with New Strategies and Tools

There are various ways to engage students in content, communication, and to collaborate in the online environment. The rationale though is to use technological tools and strategies that make the process more effective.

Content: It is necessary for an instructor to provide a structured syllabus. The purpose is to clearly outline to students the expectations for the course. In addition, I always include a calendar pacing guide with my syllabus so that students understand the demands of course assignments. I think this provides students with a heads up for the course. I have found this to be valuable for kids in secondary education who are debating whether or not to enroll in online classes. Second, I think webquests and online simulations are great tools! Especially when I teach psychology, these tools provide great ways for me to illustrate to students experiments and concepts I am describing. The text I use has a great web site that provides things called psychsims and they illustrate exactly what I need the students to understand. Finally, document sharing is great! Many times, with online courses, the shell is provided by the teaching institution. This allows instructors to differentiate instruction for students and also personalize their online course(s).

Communication: I have never used Skype before this class and now I love it! I find that Skype is great not only for peer communication relating to curriculum topics, but also just for building relationships with classmates. I can be online and have a classmate just message me to tell me to have a good day. This is nice because it makes you feel comfortable interacting with people in the classroom. With GAVS we provide the kids with a tool called a pager. This pager allows students to quickly shoot each other a message. When I read through them to make sure they are appropriate and not cheating with the tool, often times they are just having conversations about their lives. It's nice to see students from various schools doing this because I see that it enhances classroom discussions. In addition this helps when I host Elluminate sessions. Elluminate software allows me to teach a class and use visual aids (powerpoints, videos, and so forth) as well as give the kids a chance to speak to one another using a microphone. I can even put them into break-out groups.

Collaboration: I have found wikis to be great for collaboration!! In my 7101 class I have a group wiki that allows us to provide feedback to one another for our projects. Even using blogs, like in this course, I receive feedback from classmates in a way that breaks away from the traditional online classroom. In addition, blogs and wikis can be made viewable to a larger audience, and receiving feedback can come from people not within the course which can be nice. I also think, just like in the traditional classroom, small group assignments are great for the online environment. I think this truly models real world expectations of working with people (i.e. from different schools, different work outlets, and so forth). Using technological tools, such as texting, blogs, and wikis, make the assignments possible to complete.

Works Cited:

Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2008). The theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Durrington, V. A., Berryhill, A., & Swafford, J. (2006). Strategies for enhancing student interactivity in an online environment. College Teaching, 54(1), 190−193. Use the Academic Search Premier database, and search using the article's Accession Number: 19754742; Retreived July 19, 2009.

Siemens, G. (2007). Curatorial Teaching (Podcast). Retrieved July 19, 2009 from http://learnonline.wordpress.com/2007/09/20/10-minute-lecture-george-siemens-curatorial-teaching/.

Assessing Collaborative Efforts

Assessing participation in a collaborative learning community can be tricky...think about applying the situation to a traditional classroom: if a student never does his homework yet aces every test, should he fail the class? The difference I guess resides with the words 'collaborative' and 'community.' These two terms indicate that learning is a team effort that must have everyone (or most everyone) participating for success. I think some tools to use for assessment include the use of rubrics (that provides standardized expectations for everyone) and a log to track access time. As an online teacher, I have the ability to see how many days my students have logged in during a week, how long they spend online in the classroom, and how long they spend in each individual unit and assignment. Obviously it is not fair to punish other members of the class if some of their peers are not following instructions. However, I do also rely on students vocalizing their concerns. I think this is important for maturity in real world scenarios. All of this aligns to what George Siemens was proposing with his ideas of "participative pedagogy." So this varies from student to student, but various participation forums, like wikis and discussion forums, should put the offer on the table.

When it comes to each student and their particular abilities, I think that "fair and equitable assessment" does depend on what each student first presents to you. When evaluating, as mentioned in the video, it is not a comparison to be made between students. The fair evaluation is seeing how that particular student has improved and demonstrated their learning. Some people are natural over-achievers so their work is always going to stand out, but you cannot grade another child lower for demonstrating their knowledge just not in the same manner. I think this also ties to what Siemens was saying about participative pedagogy when the mentality is to offer varying forms of assessments, not just standardized multiple choice exams.

If a student does not want to participate in a network or collaborative learning community for an online course the first thing that needs to be done is evaluate why the person signed up for the course in the first place. From my experience, I have students who told me that they were completely overwhelmed with the degree of personal discipline you need to have for online courses. I have also had students that were placed in online courses despite efforts from them and their parents to not take the online course. As far as members of the community, I think providing support and encouragement for that person is necessary. Push comes to shove, you have to look at for yourself, but checking up on fellow classmates is a nice thing to do. In fact, an instructor could even pair members up (like we are) to provide that support and motivation. Obviously the instructor as well needs to check with that person to make sure no personal issues are occurring to interfere with that person's performance. As far as affecting one's assessment plan, I think it varies from situation to situation, especially when their is illness or death in the family. But if it is just plain non-participation, the grade should be given according to the rubric.

One comment on a blog site for educators, TeacherLingo.com, caught my attention about the difference between cooperation and collaboration. She states: "“Cooperation is both of us sitting in a sandbox together respecting each other’s space. We are both focused on independent projects inside the same sandbox and occasionally once in a blue moon we might even share a shovel. Collaboration has us both in the same sandbox and not only are we utilizing the same space, sharing the shovel but we are actually working on the same project.” I thought this was very insightful and true about the often confused pairs.

References:

Deich, R. (January 29, 2008). Cooperation vs. Collaboration. Induction Connections: nothing beats growing your own. REtreived July 8, 2009, from http://ness-support.blogspot.com/2008/01/cooperation-vs-collaboration.html.

Siemens, G. (2009). Assessment of collaborative learning. [vodcast]. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com.

Elements of Distance Education Diffusion

As described by George Siemens in his video clip, distance education in the educational and corporate world has become more accepted. He concludes that this is due to the evolution of global diversity, communication, and collaborative interaction in both arenas. In my opinion, the element of communication has evolved the most in both areas over the past few years.

The evolution of this element has come from the increasing technology that makes it possible. Whether discussion forums, synchronous or asynchronous, or blogs (like eBlogger), people are communicating by text. Though some people do not find text an affective form of communication, I think it frees people up to discuss things that they might not feel comfortable doing in front of others. Now especially with technology like Skype, the instant messaging and video conferences that can be held put people in instant communication just like picking up a phone just for a cheaper rate. Whatever the means, communication is occurring and no one should feel lonesome in the distance world. Look at Facebook, Twitter, and other social software. I know at Georgia Virtual School we have a Twitter for students and teachers to follow. Also on Facebook you see businesses advertising in the margins. Wiki's are also ways for people to communicate. In my other graduate class, our group communicates through discussions on our Wiki.

A general blog post made by an educator on the site Distance-Educator.com caught my attention. It was posted that "very rarely people communicate purely in one or the other mode. We can say that in education, communication can vary in a continuous state between synchronous and asynchronous. They are, therefore matters of degree not absolute states" (Distance-Educator.com, 2006). I think this sums up the rationale that communication does not have to happen only in the face-to-face setting. Even in the traditional setting, communication through grades and body language can also express ideas.




General Post on On Asynchronous Learning, Posted on Dec 19 2006 iThinkMedia.com. Retrieved June 24, 2009.

Siemens, G. (2009). The Future of Distance Education. [Vodcast]. Retrieved June 24, 2009 from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=3476918&Survey=1&47=4154777&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

The Next Generation of Distance Education

Many have reservations against distance education. Being a younger educator, I had to completed many courses in college that pushed me in this direction. I have worked at a traditional school for four years, but also decided to try being an online instructor for the past two and half years. I see the benefits and drawbacks of each environment. However, I believe, with the evolution of society, distance education is the way of the future.

After reviewing the articles presented by Moller, Huett, Foshay, and Coleman (2008), in addition to the article by Simonson (2000), I agree with the statement that distance education must evolve to the next generation. When distance education was in its beginning stages, it was very primitive. As quoted from the article "Implications for Instructional Design on the Potential of the Web" (2008), it is assessed correctly that the mentality was to "sake claim before all of the good territory [was] gone; ...worry about effectively mining it later' (Moller, Foshay, Huett, p.66). It was established in many areas but the details behind its functioning correctly was not established. It is apparent from all of the articles that the concept of applying "different but equivalent" learning experiences was the main goal. Upon evaluation detailed in the article, simple learner based strategies can accomplish this goal in an effective manner. For example, the idea that Simonson (2000) presents suggesting that one "identifies learning experiences and matches them to the appropriate available technology" (p. 32) or an emphasis on training and development (Moller, Foshay, Huett, 2008, p. 70).

Bottom line, as suggested in all of the articles, this is the way of the future. As high schools and colleges/universities adapt to this new style of learning, it can not just be established and not changed to keep up with the times. This means that constant evaluation, just like in a traditional classroom, is needed. I know from experience with GAVS, this is done often. We constantly redesign courses, differentiate instruction, and locate new sources of information to provide the best learning experience possible for our students.

Simonson, M. (2000). Making decisions: The use of electronic technology in online classes. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 84, 29-34.

Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, May/June). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 1: Training and development). TechTrends, 52(3), 70-75. Use the Academic Search Premier database, and search using the article's Accession Number: 33281719.

Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, May/June). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 2: Higher education). TechTrends, 52(4), 66-70. Use the Academic Search Premier database, and search using the article's Accession Number: 33991516.

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Coleman, C. (2008, September/October). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the web (Part 3: K12). TechTrends, 52(5). 63-67.