multicultural_education

I asked all 55 people in the online community to
send me an autobiography about their experiences related to equity and diversity

Since then the cultural consultants
and I ensure that every student has supportive responses posted to all
assignments. At times, we even gently advise people on strategies for
building relationships online, because interpersonal skills and social presence are
just as important in an online environment as they are face to face

How does technology make a critical
difference? First, in a face-to-face environment people in the course could read or hand out their bios, but
there would never be sufficient time for them to interact over the bios in the
way they can online. Second, the teachers I work with consistently say that
they would not share such sensitive information if they "had to look at people
and
<!-- Generation of PM publication page 10 -->


read it," and they would not ask the same kinds of questions if they
were discussing the bios in a face-to-face classroom (Merryfield, 2000a). As
the title of this article suggests, the online discussion acts as a veil to
protect people as they reveal, question, and take risks. Third, when people
have only text to respond to, they are attracted to people and respond to
them based on what they have written, and that is a profound difference from
an oral discussion in a classroom (Sunal & Christensen, 2002). The
writing process is also important, as it appears that the teachers think more
deeply about the content of the course when they write instead of talk about it
(Rose & McClafferty, 2001; Warschauer, 1996; Whittle et al, 2000; Yates,
1996).

When I want everyone to think deeply and synthesize ideas,
threaded discussions are best. Over the last 5 years I have seen more
complex thinking about course content in threaded discussions than I believe is
ever possible in an oral whole class discussion in a conventional classroom.
In some ways threaded discussion combines the best of classroom
interaction — the person-to-person interaction, the public view and sharing — with
the best of writing assignments - incorporation of academic content,
references, and time to reflect and organize ideas. When people have the time to refer
to references, compose and edit their ideas, and then interact with others
over several days on their work, some amazing learning takes place (Flynn
& Klein, 2001; Lapadat, 2002).

Third, in online discussions I set a minimum and maximum number
of messages each person posts. After they reach their maximum, they can
use the private email in WebCt to continue a conversation. There is no
possibility of a few people monopolizing a threaded discussion; nor is anyone
left out. Everyone participates equally. And when everyone in a
culturally diverse class participates equally in course discussions, the course
is qualitatively different from one in which some people participate a
great deal and others very little (Merryfield, 2000a).

In these courses I ask teachers to apply what they are learning to their
own teaching. Some develop lessons or unit plans. Others organize
resources for whole courses to infuse multiple perspectives and primary sources
into instruction and assessments. I find that teachers are better able to use
ideas and resources from my courses in their own classrooms if they can work
on their plans within a supportive and caring learning
community.

have experimented with student presentation pages for this assignment
but I find threaded discussion offers some important advantages, as it
allows interactivity over several weeks. And I love the way we can watch
projects grow and change as the author receives feedback and suggestions,
engages in new resources, and fleshes out ideas. Within threaded
discussions cultural consultants can interact as projects develop. The
"conversations" between teachers and cultural consultants over their plans demonstrate
how online communication and cross-cultural learning complement each other.

The asynchronous nature of most online pedagogy also effects
student learning across cultures. First, there is substantially more time to
think deeply and react purposefully. Discussions take place over several days
so that people have time to look up references, share resources, or add URLs
as they discuss a reading or work on a project. They take time to
think,
<!-- Generation of PM publication page 18 -->


analyze, and synthesize ideas and, undoubtedly, are affected by the
online interaction with others. In comparing the same discussion held in a
classroom and online I have been amazed at how asynchronous
discussions increase both depth of content and equity in participation.

Online technologies support student-centered learning.
It is easy to have a student-directed discussion online. I find that teachers take off and run
with a discussion in ways they never do in a campus classroom. Online
courses can de-center a class, moving authority and control from the instructor to
the students (Damarin, 1998; Harasim, Hiltz, Teles, & Turoff, 1995).
Some teachers feel frustrated with this loss of control (Larson & Keiper, 2002).
The familiar instructor-student-instructor-student rhythm in a
classroom discussion totally disappears in chats, threaded discussions, and
listserv discussions.

Post-positivists reject the idea that any individual can see the world
perfectly as it really is. We are all biased and all of our observations are affected
(theory-laden). Our best hope for achieving objectivity is to triangulate across multiple
fallible perspectives! Thus, objectivity is not the characteristic of an individual, it is
inherently a social phenomenon.