Group items tagged

Curtis and Lawson (2001) looked for "evidence of good quality interactions among students who are not present in the one physical site from data obtained from students' online exchanges" (p. 21). They focused on the "depth of on-task activity" (p. 21) in an asynchronous situation, which they argue is the most common form of online courses, of a small collaborative learning group. They found that "the analysis of participants' postings reveals many of the behaviors associated with collaborative learning in face-to face situations" (p. 29). However, "the students spontaneously demonstrated a need also to use synchronous communication" (p. 24). Some did this via text or email, often when they did not agree with another student and some organized synchronous chat sessions. This shows that "there is a need to incorporate among the asynchronous interactions…opportunities for real-time interactions among students" (p. 29).

This paper reports the findings of a case study in which audio feedback replaced text-based feedback in asynchronous courses. Previous research has demonstrated that participants in online courses can build effective learning communities through text based communication alone. Similarly, it has been demonstrated that instructors for online courses can adequately project immediacy behaviors using text-based communication.

This book was cited in "Strategies for Creating a Community of Inquiry through Online Asynchronous Discussions," which also included an example of a protocol from the book that sounded like a great one to use in class.

I'm sharing this slideshow from a presentation I gave last year on Facilitating Metacognition in Asynchronous Online Discussions because 1) the topic is relevant to our discussion this week, and 2) SlideShare is one of our Mashup options in Blackboard. I tested it this week and it shows up well, so wanted to demonstrate for any faculty interested. The analytics are a nice additional feature. FYI for those experimenting with social media ideas with your learners, I have also embedded SlideShare links into Tweets, and was pleasantly surprised to discover that you can view an entire slideshow in a tweet.

Graphics-based exampled of questions to answer in the syllabus. Ignoring the ugly UT brown color, this is a bulleted document that offers good points in simple fashion.

This lays a lot of information out nicely and is especially helpful in thinking about what the students need to get oriented to the class. Hideous brown, though, it's true.

I agree with all the above, including the poor color choice, however ... am I the only once feeling daunted and this point? I am beginning to wonder if it takes a certain "type" of faculty member to create an appropriate online course - someone who can think and manage in multiple platforms, constantly, both synchronously and asynchronously!! What about all the rest of our work engagements? how do they fit in?

This article addresses practical concerns about online discussions. It stresses the importance of having good discussion questions that are clearly linked to the learning objectives. There are also some good assessment tips.

I like the title, but I couldn't access it -- sign in required??

Yes, Peggy, the article comes from one of the main databases through the Emory Library.

The title does very well in explaining this resource.

This paper explores the relationship between student perceptions of various aspects of the course and their actual performance and participation

The author discusses the theory behind online discussions, as well as the potential value of - and problems associated with - online discussions. Some excerpts: "The argument I offer here is that saying an online discussion is a worse version of an IRL discussion is like saying an apple is a worse version of an orange. Disappointment with online discussions because they are not like IRL discussion is like being disappointed with an apple because it is a bad orange." ... "In an IRL discussion, students look, speak, and listen with multiple objects. In online discussion, like during a lecture, students sit and stare at a single object as well: but it is a computer rather than a person speaking. The lecturer is the computer. This lecturer is a screen with a keyboard and includes a complex series of frames within which the student types sentences in varying sequences. By this I am not only talking about video lectures which students watch, but rather more perceptually. In a lecture, the lecturer is the sole object of attention. There is only one object of attention: bracketing the complex material engaged with in the screen, it remains true that students exclusively engage with the screen when learning online. Students in online courses stare at a computer when learning online the same way they would stare at a lecturer speaking, focusing their attention on a single object. At a lecture, it's a person. Online, it's the computer."... "In any case, online discussions are still discussions. It would be a mistake to say all we do during online discussion is stare intensely at a computer. Most of the discussions in my online courses occur asynchronously on discussion boards. On these written discussion boards, for example, we read and write responsively. The whole situation of online discussion is therefore more akin, in this respect, to written correspondence."

From the conclusion: "Participating well in online discussions might be more like writing a good letter or having a good phone conversation, as opposed to a good spoken kind comment in an IRL discussion. We should not expect online discussions to be anything at all like IRL discussions. They are categorically different. In other words, being disappointed with online discussions because they are not like IRL discussions is like being disappointed with apples because they are not oranges." "In planning online courses, generating online assignments, and creating materials for online teaching, it is important to remember that online discussions require students to focus intense attention on a machine, and therefore compels them to cathect and introject that machine. Independently of the fluidity of your module and software, students transfer meanings onto their machines during the learning process rather than a person. While the introjection of machines is an interesting opportunity for further educational research, as an instructor, plan for student participation with this in mind: they are interacting with a machine and not people. An online discussion is more like a computer's lecture than an IRL discussion, no matter how interactive."