Group work Ethics and Online Group Work

Learning Goals: Identify and understand the ethical issues regarding group work in online

environments. (Emtinan)  Implement online tools to support equitable group work in an online environment.  Identify 3 design/set up techniques that encourage equitable and interactive online

group work. (Marcia)   Identify 3 grading techniques that support and encourage fruitful group participation

by all group members.  Select and use an effective way for group members to assess their efforts and their

group members' efforts after a collaborative experience.  Compare and contrast online group assignments to traditional face-to face

experiences. 

Learning goal # 1-Identify and understand the ethical issues regarding group work in online environments. (Emtinan)Roberts & McInnerney (2007, p. 257) identifies seven problems associated with online group learning:

"Student antipathy towards group work"  "The selection of the groups"  "A lack of essential group-work skills"  "The free-rider"  "Possible inequalities of student abilities"  "The withdrawal of group members"  "The assessment of individuals within the groups" 

Figueira & Leal (2013, p.112) found that the most common issues with group work are:

"A largely unequal contribution of the group participants" � "An inability of the students to manage the different ideas and opinions while

progressing" � "A decentralization of the objective of the work due to the requirement for increased

autonomy and control over the choice of information and its processing" "An individual assessment of each group participant"

References:

Figueira, A., & Leal, H. (2013). An online tool to manage and assess collaborative group work. Paper presented at the 112-XIII. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1467835970?accountid=10610Roberts, T. S., & McInnerney, J. M. (2007). Seven Problems of Online Group Learning (and Their Solutions).   Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 257-268. To summarize:

- Students don’t know how to work together in a group.

- Students don’t have the understanding of how to construct knowledge together.

- Grading and assessing individuals' contribution in a group work/project.

Learning Goal # 2-Implement online tools to support equitable group work in an online environment-(Becky)General information from reseach involving group work

and online collaboration: "Students’ involvement in learning activities via collaborative tools improves their

final course grades (Ravid, Kalman, & Rafaeli, 2008). Better outcomes were obtained with Wiki collaborative technology as opposed to asynchronous forums (Levin-Peled & Kali, 2008)" (Blau & Caspi, 2009 p.48).

"When requested to collaborate by using Wikis, learners tend to avoid changing other students’ written products (Dalke, Cassidy, Grobstein, & Blank, 2007). They often feel that it is inappropriate to edit others' work (Coyle, 2007), and many are reluctant to interfere with “somebody else’s material” (Konja & Ben-Zvi, 2008). When they do, it was more on a language level than on a content level (Lund & Smørdal, 2006), by adding more than by deleting sentences (Berger, Gorsky & Meishar-Tal, 2008)" (Blau & Caspi, 2009 p. 48-49).

"Participants in all groups believed that collaboration improves the document quality. However, evaluation of the contribution of collaboration was asymmetrical - students felt that while they did not exacerbate the document they read or edited, others worsen their document when reading, suggesting or editing it. We therefore suggest that collaborative learning may be improved by encouraging collaboration mainly through suggesting and receiving improvements and less by editing each others' writing" (Blau & Caspi, 2009 p. 53).

"The challenges increase exponentially when collaborative group work is added to the mix. Without context and support, online groups can experience unbalanced participation, a lack of progress and direction, mistrust, misunderstandings, and conflicts" (West & West, 2008 p.21).

"Quantitative results revealed no significant difference on student success between CL and Traditional formats. The qualitative data revealed that students in the cooperative learning groups found more learning benefits than the Traditional group. The study will benefit instructors and students in distance learning to improve teaching and learning practices in a virtual classroom" (Kupczynski et al, 2012 p. 81).

"In recent years, distance learning has made possible several innovative means to include CL in virtual pedagogical settings. Researchers have reported that group work through computer-mediated collaboration resulted in improved performance, interaction, and critical thinking (Bliss and Lawrence, 2009)" (Kupczynski et al, 2012 p. 82). 

References:Blau, I., & Caspi, A. (2009). What type of collaboration helps? Psychological ownership, perceived learning and outcome quality of collaboration using Google

Docs. In Proceedings of the Chais conference on instructional technologies research (pp. 48-55).Kupczynski, L., Mundy, M. A., Goswami, J., & Meling, V. (2014). Cooperative learning in distance learning: a mixed methods study.West, J. A., & West, M. L. (2008). Using wikis for online collaboration: The power of the read-write web (Vol. 15). John Wiley & Sons.

Collaborative Tools:Google Docs-

"Google Docs is “a free, web-based word processor, spreadsheet, presentation, form, and data storage service offered by Google” (Wikipedia, 2010a). It allows users to create, edit and store their documents online (Thompson, 2008). Google Docs includes four major options: Google Documents, Google Spreadsheets, Google Presentations, and Google Drawing, which all share similar functions. This review focuses on Google Documents and how this application can facilitate students’ collaborative writing in the English language classroom" (Wikipedia (2010).

Sharp (2009) writes that collaborative editing tools allow a group of individuals to edit a document simultaneously while they can view the changes made by others in real time. It is the collaborative editing tool that makes Google Docs a powerful program that can facilitate collaborative writing in the language classroom.

"...Google Docs as it allowed collaborative writing and was freely available. We soon learned, however, that it was not embeddable, meaning students could not access a given Google Doc from within the course website and would need to link to a different web- site to complete their assignments" (Roseth et al, 2013 p.57).

Watch VideoUsing Google Docs for Collaborative Work

User: MSU LearnDAT - Added: 1/21/13References:Google Docs. Retrieved November 4, 2010, from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Docs.Sharp, V. (2009). Computer education for teachers: Integrating technology into classroom teaching (6th ed). Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley.Thompson, J. (2008). Don’t be afraid to explore Web 2.0. Education Digest, 74(4), 19-22Yang, C. (2010). Using Google Docs to Facilitate Collaborative Writing in an English Language Classroom Practice. Retrieved September 23, 2015, from http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume14/ej55/ej55m1/Roseth, C., Akcaoglu, M., & Zellner, A. (2013). Blending synchronous face-to-face and computer-supported cooperative learning in a hybrid doctoral seminar. TechTrends, 57(3), 54-59.Wikis-

"Wikis are best suited for collaborative activities, especially those that are dynamic and nonlinear in construction and will result in a shared product or outcome" (West & West, 2008 p.6).

"Educators must know how to frame wiki activities such that they lead to meaningful learning. During the process of collaboration, edu- cators must learn to take facilitative roles, in which they prepare students for wiki collaboration, facilitate group progress, and manage conflicts and distractions" (West & West, 2008 p. 21).Resources:West, J. A., & West, M. L. (2008). Using wikis for online collaboration: The power of the read-write web (Vol. 15). John Wiley & Sons.Google Hangouts/Collaborate Classroom-

Watch VideoGoogle+: HangoutsUser: Google - Added: 9/20/11

"expanding access to computer-mediated communication technologies now make new models possible, including dis- tance learners synchronous online attendance of face-to-face courses. Going beyond traditional uses of videoconferencing (e.g., real-time remote viewing with limited student interaction), this article describes the use of freely available technologies to support synchronous coopera- tive learning activities involving both face-to- face and hybrid doctoral students" (Roseth et al, 2013 p.54).

"Recent efforts to use computer (e.g., online) technology to support cooperative learning respond to a call from the literature (e.g., Abrami, Bernard, Bures, Borokhovski, & Tamim, 2011; Resta & Laferriere, 2007) and are guided by theory and research highlighting the importance of making students feel a sense of belonging (Bau- meister & Leary, 1995), meeting their needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000), and maintaining mastery rather than performance goals (e.g., Ames & Ames, 1984)" (Roseth et al, 2013 p.56).

"Google Hangouts are part of the Google suite of applications that support multi-party video chat as well as other Google applications includ- ing Sketch-Up, Docs, Spreadsheets, Presentations, and screen sharing. In short, Google Hangouts provided a synchronous, video, audio and text-rich communication platform that simultaneously connected our students to the wider affordances of the internet (Teras & Teras, 2012). With Google Hangouts, one can freely host videoconferences involving up to ten people and, if needed, also record the conference, store it to YouTube and provide a link for later viewing" (Roseth et al, 2013 p.56).Resources: Roseth, C., Akcaoglu, M., & Zellner, A. (2013). Blending synchronous face-to-face and computer-supported cooperative learning in a hybrid doctoral seminar. TechTrends, 57(3), 54-59.Discussion Boards-

"The discussion board, an asynchronous communication tool, is conducive for social interaction where knowledge and understanding are discussed, thus providing an effective collaborative learning platform (Bliss and Lawrence, 2009)" (Kupczynski, 2012 p.83).

"A benefit of discussion boards is the valuable learning accomplished in an asynchronous environment. Collaboration in an asynchronous environment offers flexibility, where synchronous communities are dependent on each other (Paulsen, 2008)" (Kupczynski, 2012 p.83).

"Asynchronous formats in online learning promote reflective discussion responses (Prestera and Moller, 2001)" (Kupczynski, 2012 p.83).

"In evaluating online collaboration tools, Havard et al., (2008) discovered how students find the discussion board to be “flexible, convenient, and efficient” due to its asynchronous format (p. 44)" (Kupczynski, 2012 p.83).

"Further, threaded discussions in the discussion board encourage student interactions and collaboration (Prestera and Moller, 2001)" (Kupczynski, 2012 p.83).Resources:Kupczynski, L., Mundy, M. A., Goswami, J., & Meling, V. (2014). Cooperative learning in distance learning: a mixed methods study.

Learning Goal # 3-I dentify 3 design/set up techniques that encourage equitable and interactive online group work-(Marcia) 

According to Scherling (2011), instructors can: 2. set up effective online group work by beginning group work early so

that the members have enough time to work together 3. having the group members set up guidelines for their activity and

participation 4. create authentic problems for the group to address 5. set up some method for the instructor to monitor group progress. 

 According to Roberts, & McInnerney (2007), set up / design methods that can improve group work are: 

7. Explaining the multiple gains and advantages of group work (to counter antipathy) 

8. Have a clear and explicit method of assessment (to counter antipathy) 9. Select either random or hereogenous group members 10. Provide courses that cover effective group work methods or provide

instruction at the beginning of a course on effective group work 11. Identify and contact possible "free-rider" students before group work has

even begun 12. Create subgroups where appropriate  

According to Kali, Levin-Peled, and Dori (2009), design principles can effectively improve group work. They focus mostly on: 

1. Creating group work where students instruct each other 2. Use student work as a course text  

They researchers tried a jigsaw activity using these principles, but found they had to provide much more structure to the activity in a second iteraction to achieve higher levels of thinking.  

Another design method that can allow for more effective and ethical group work are collaboration scripts. Macro scripts organize resources, steps of the process, and learners. Micro scripts provide learners with clear ideas about roles and next steps in the process. They can provde a literal script that tells users how to respond or ask questions (Weinberger, 2011). Used in CSCL, these have been shown to improve indiividual learning, as well as the effectiveness of the group, though not in all cases (Weinberger, 2011). Scripts can, according to Weinberger (2011).

1. Increase self-regulation by providing steps for the regulation of learning 2. Provide a method to share knowledge across team members 3. Provide specific prompts for steps to take in the process 4. Automate how group members should coordinate (rather than placing those demands on the

learners themselves)5. Increase student awareness of the knowledge and abilites of their group members, and how they

work togetherReferences Kali, Y., Levin-Peled, R., & Dori, Y. J. (2009). The role of design-principles in designing courses that promote collaborative learning in higher-education. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(5), 1067-1078. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2009.01.006Roberts, T. S., & McInnerney, J. M. (2007). Seven Problems of Online Group Learning (and Their Solutions).   Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 257-268. Scherling, S. E. (2011). Designing and Fostering Effective Online Group Projects. Adult Learning, 22(2), 13-18. Retrieved from http://authenticate.library.duq.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ926217&site=ehost-liveWeinberger, A., (2011). Principles of Transactive Computer-Supported Collaboration Scripts. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy, 6(3): 189. Retrieved from https://www.idunn.no/dk/2011/03/art06

Learning Goal # 4- Identify 3 grading techniques that support and encourage fruitful group participation by all group members. -JessicaRoberts and Mclnnerney (2007) state, " Assigning group grades without attempting to distinguish between individual members of the group is both unfair and deleterious to the learning process, for many reasons which should be apparent from earlier discussion, and may in some circumstances even be illegal" (p.264).Robert and Mclnnerney also offer several solutions for appropriate grading for the purpose of measuring group productivty:Solution 1: use individual assessment. For example, while skills may be built up by a series of group projects throughout the semester, the assessment of the student learning process may take place through individual tests or assignments placed throughout the semester, or via an end-of- semester examination, or via a combination of these.Solution 2: assess individual contributions. Instructors may in addition require students to record their own contributions and reflect upon them, in the form of a diary or journal, or perhaps in the form of a more structured portfolio, to be submitted to the instructor at the end of the course.Solution 3: use self, peer, and group assessment techniques.One technique is to have students within each group anonymously rate their fellow group members.An alternative scheme uses a pie chart. Students are advised to divide up the pie according to their relative contributions to the group. Since this is done by all students anonymously and online, there is little fear of repercussions from aggrieved students.The link to the video below discusses the most effective assessemnts in an online environment:

Assessments in Online Environments References:

Roberts, T. S., & McInnerney, J. M. (2007). Seven Problems of Online Group Learning (and Their Solutions).   Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 257-268.   ** Great article Marica!

YouTube: "Assessment and Evaluation in Online Courses". DrChristopherDavis's Channnel. Uploaded November 21, 2011(This section added by Marcia - hope that's ok, Jessica! Feel free to use it in your final project section): Collaborative tools also allow instructors to grade individual contributions from the group. The video below shows how to grade:Grading a Wiki in Blackboard 

Learning Goal # 5-Select and use an effective way for group members to assess their efforts and their group members' efforts after a collaborative experience. (Jordan)Lawrie, G. A., Gahan, L. R., Matthews, K. E., Weaver, G. C., Bailey, C., Adams, P., ... & Taylor, M. (2014). Technology supported facilitation and assessment of small group collaborative inquiry learning in large first-year classes. Journal of Learning Design, 7(2), 120-135. 

Little evidence has focused on measuring student outcomes from group processes  Assessment usually relies on peer-assessment which is prone to influence of the

social functions of the group rather than the learning experiences that took place  Assessment done through technology has shown to support the engagement of

students in a group setting and creates an opportunity for the instructor to facilitate group formation and management of collaborative learning tasks 5 Key Elements of Constructive Cooperative and Collaborative Learning Environments:1) Positive Interdependence - students value and perceive all individual contributions are essential

2) Individual Accountability - students perceive a requirement to contribute

3) Social Interaction - Establish group relationships (respectful in nature)

4) Group Processing - Collective understanding how group communication and contributions will happen

5) Communication - Establishes effective communication processesBlackburn, M., Warwick, S., & Booth, L. (2014). Effective use and assessment of web-based collaborative learning. Problems with assessing group work:

unfair that grade is dependent on other students' input  everyone gets same grade "flat-assessment"  not approriately rewarded for efforts  non-contributing students benefit 

Design feature - everyone is responsible for their own task and how it is integrated into the product/outcome

Kear, K., Donelan, H., & Williams, J. (2014). Using wikis for online group projects: Student and tutor perspectives. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15(4).Research has found that students are reluctant to edit each other's work which in turn impacts the effectiveness of collaborative authoringThomas, E., Rosewell, J., Kear, K., & Donelan, H. (2014). Learning and peer feedback in shared online spaces.

Peer feedback is a valued form of learning activity - students engage with assessment criteria and reflect on their own workPossibility could be to use a Wiki to give evaluative peer comments

What is our goal? 1) engaging students 2) promoting student learning or 3) formally assess contributions

Is it fair to give student assessment? Is this just for learning process or is there a grade attached to the peer feedback/evaluations?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Parker and Goldrick-Jones state that collaborative writing alone provides no guarantee of student engagement in online or traditional classes. A technique an instructor could use is a team writing assignment in which students write down group ethics. It allows to engage students in the dynamics and challenges of teamwork and invites critical reflection about the role of writing in the formation of proessional communities. Writing collaborative writing must engage students and promote responsibility and accountability.

Well-designed collaborative assignments play a key role in preparing students for future membership in professional communities.

Cooperative-learning strategies can strongly influence student engagement. It allows students to feel as if they have a stake in the community.Collaborative writing takes place in online environments where face to face intereactions may not be possible. Participating in a community cannot be taken for granted in an online environment.

A written code of ethics assignment provides assessing team effectiveness and collaboration as a whole will depend on how effectively teams are able to interact in both face to face and online.

The online group that wrote out their ethics guide for professionalism were at times too lofty of goals. It was written by one member instead of the team. Meanwhile the face to face group took a much longer

approach. Collaborative ethic writing allows for team's evolution and monitor progress.  Some students were disengaged and the group progressed very, very slowly.

In their group ethics, team members had to notify the entire team by email if unable to attend a scheduled meeting. Other examples included consequences should a team member fail to do something and committed to full participation allowed for importance of their community and commitment flourish.

Group work should include the following:

A forum for expressing, discussing and consolidating common interests

Definitions and examples of accountability

Sufficient scaffolding before, during and after the code of ethics assignment

Monitoring of team effectiveness

Regular but not heavy-handed monitoring of discussions within forums

Paker, A. & Goldrick-Jones, A. A code of ethics as a collaborative learning tool: Comparing a face to face engineering team and multidsciplinary online teams. Retrieved from http://wac.colostate.edu/books/winks/chapter15.pdf

Learning Goal # 6-Compare and contrast online group assignments to traditional face-to face experiences. (Started by Becky-Group please add no one addressed this goal)

"A benefit of discussion boards is the valuable learning accomplished in an asynchronous environment. Collaboration in an asynchronous environment offers flexibility, where synchronous communities are dependent on each other (Paulsen, 2008)" (Kupczynski, 2012 p.83).

"Asynchronous formats in online learning promote reflective discussion responses (Prestera and Moller, 2001)" (Kupczynski, 2012 p.83).

"In evaluating online collaboration tools, Havard et al., (2008) discovered how students find the discussion board to be “flexible, convenient, and efficient” due to its asynchronous format (p. 44)" (Kupczynski, 2012 p.83).

o "Quantitative results revealed no significant difference on student success between CL and

Traditional formats. The qualitative data revealed that students in the cooperative learning groups found more learning benefits than the Traditional group. The study will benefit instructors and students in distance learning to improve teaching and learning practices in a virtual classroom" (Kupczynski et al, 2012 p. 81).

o "In recent years, distance learning has made possible several innovative means to include CL in virtual pedagogical settings. Researchers have reported that group work through computer-mediated collaboration resulted in improved performance, interaction, and critical thinking (Bliss and Lawrence, 2009)" (Kupczynski et al, 2012 p. 82).Resources:Kupczynski, L., Mundy, M. A., Goswami, J., & Meling, V. (2014). Cooperative learning in distance learning: a mixed methods study.