Supporting Students in Online Learning

Environments Through Group Work,

Engagement and Dialogue

Supporting Students in Online Learning

Environments Through Group Work,

Engagement and Dialogue

David McConnellCaledonian Academy, Glasgow Caledonian University

Scotland

David McConnellCaledonian Academy, Glasgow Caledonian University

Scotland

My Background

• Designer of online e-learning (distance learning) courses

• Professional development contexts

• Special interest in group work and learning communities

• Online tutor

• Educational researcher: online groups and communities

Online E-Learning: Some Problems

• HIGH DROP OUT RATES: Harvard Extension School- drop out rate on correspondence online degrees is 98.5% (Carr-Chellman, 2005, p257)

• POOR QUALITY: “ I took the online course last semester and it was easy. I took the class for all the same reasons that almost every other student takes the class - because I can finish it in six weeks and receive an A for putting forth little effort. Here is why I think the class is not good for learning and why we need to stop and think before we incorporate more of these classes into school.” (Penn State student: Carr-Chellman, 2005, p257)

• TECHNOLOGY LED: “the ways in which the Internet is used for teaching and learning is of equal importance to the tool itself” (Alexander &Golja, 2006)

The independent online e-learner- some problems

• independence in learning - the e-learner may experience negative feelings of disconnectedness

• lack of community: increased feelings of isolation leading to withdrawal from online learning courses (Carr-Chellman, 2005)

Setting the Context: the nature of learning in professional

development contexts

• problem based learning: often complex, ill-defined problems - fertile ground for production of mutual understandings

• problems have professional focus: real and contextual; examination of problem has real benefit

• require negotiation within group to understand, develop and “resolve” them

• investigation by action research approach

• journey of learning: no prescribed learning outcomes

• high degree of reflexivity in groups

Masters and Doctoral Degrees in UK

Design Features

• Global Masters in E-Learning, and Doctoral in E-Research and Technology Enhanced Learning

• Masters programme: two years part time; PhD programme: four years (part one modular, part two research)

• Completely virtual using VLE’s and Social Networking/Web 2.0

• Focus on developing a reflective research practitioner community in learning & teaching via the Internet

Design of the Sheffield Two Year Virtual Masters to supporta learning community

• Workshop One (community/AR)

– Phase One: Our collective purposes. TheCommunity. Action Research

– Phase Two: Plenary discussion andanalysis

– Phase Three: Collaborative project inlearning sets

– Phase Four: Collaborative reviews andassessments

• Workshop Two (CSCL/CMC etc)

– Phase One: Review of WS1 & Learning setformation

– Phase Two: Cooperative assignment

– Phase Three: Collaborative reviews andassessments

• Workshop Three (Internet as learningenvironment)

– Phase One: Review of WS1 & 2

– Phase Two: Collaborative project

– Phase Three: Cooperative assignment

– Phase Four: Collaborative reviews andassessments

• Workshop Four (Designing forresearch and evaluation)

– Phase One: Review of WS3 &learning set formation

– Phase Two: Personal AR mini project

– Phase Three: design of ARdissertation

– Phase Four: Collaborative Reviewsand Assessments

• Workshop Five (researchdissertation)

– Phase One: Review of Ws 4

– Phase Two: Dissertation

– Phase Three: Collab review & assess

Design of the Sheffield Two Year Virtual Masters to supporta learning community

• Workshop One (community/AR)

– Phase One: Our collective purposes. TheCommunity. Action Research

– Phase Two: Plenary discussion andanalysis

– Phase Three: Collaborative project inlearning sets

– Phase Four: Collaborative reviews andassessments

• Workshop Two (CSCL/CMC etc)

– Phase One: Review of WS1 & Learning setformation

– Phase Two: Cooperative assignment

– Phase Three: Collaborative reviews andassessments

• Workshop Three (Internet as learningenvironment)

– Phase One: Review of WS1 & 2

– Phase Two: Collaborative project

– Phase Three: Cooperative assignment

– Phase Four: Collaborative reviews andassessments

• Workshop Four (Designing forresearch and evaluation)

– Phase One: Review of WS3 &learning set formation

– Phase Two: Personal AR mini project

– Phase Three: design of ARdissertation

– Phase Four: Collaborative Reviewsand Assessments

• Workshop Five (researchdissertation)

– Phase One: Review of Ws 4

– Phase Two: Dissertation

– Phase Three: Collab review & assess

Masters and Doctoral Degrees in UK

Six Principles in Designing for Group Cooperative Learning

1. Openness in the learning process – the learning community

2. Self-determined learning (deep approaches)

3. A real purpose in the cooperative process

4. A supportive learning environment – interaction & discussion; small groups; trust; close ties

5. Cooperative assessment of learning

6. Cooperative evaluation of the ongoing learning process

1.Cooperative Learning

Cooperative Group Work: Learning to Learn from Others

• It is not enough to learn how to direct one’s own learning as an individual learner abetted by artefacts such as textbooks. Learning to learn in an expanded sense fundamentally involves learning to learn from others, learning to learn with others, learning to draw the most from cultural artefacts other than books, learning to mediate others’ learning not only for their sake but for what that will teach oneself, and learning to contribute to the learning of a collective. (Salomon & Perkins, 1998, page 21).

Cooperative Learning Theory: The Nature of Learning and

Achievement• Student learning is usually competitive and

individualistic

• But what about cooperative and collaborative group learning?

• How do these two forms of learning differ in terms of the outcomes of student learning?

• QUESTION:

• What is the impact on achievement of competitive, individualistic and cooperative learning?

What is the impact on achievement of competitive,

individualistic and cooperative learning?

(Johnson and Johnson, 1990;2003)

• In cooperative/collaborative learning:

• Mastery and retention of material: higher in cooperative learning environments

• Quality of reasoning strategies: focusing strategies used more often in coop learning; higher level reasoning greater; problems solved faster

• Process gains: production of new ideas greater

• Transference of learning: group to individual transference high

Group Performance CurveJohnson and Johnson, 1994

GROUP EFFECTIVENESSPseudo group

Traditional group

Cooperative group

High performance cooperative group

PERFORMANCELEVEL

Group Performance CurveJohnson and Johnson, 1994

GROUP EFFECTIVENESSPseudo group

Traditional group

Cooperative group

High performance cooperative group

PERFORMANCELEVEL

2.Cooperative Assessment of Learning

Making assessment a Learning Process

Innovative Forms of Learning

• we are experiencing an increasing interest in innovation in learning and teaching: “focus more on developing understanding and creativity..rather than on learning facts” (THES, June 17th 2005)

• we need assessment procedures that encourage innovation; develop transferable skills; reward collaborative group work and take account of the use if internet

• cooperative e-learning, in e-groups & e-communities

• new assessment procedures and processes to support innovations: move away from exams and tests

Research into cooperative assessment

• The case for involving students in some form of self and peer assessment in higher education is well established

• Student involvement in their own assessment is an important part of the preparation for life and work.

• Why do teachers want to use self and peer assessment processes? What benefits accrue to self-assessment processes? And why is self and peer assessment important in the context of designing online courses that are based on collaborative and cooperative learning processes?

Why use cooperative assessment methods?

• For Teachers• To enable teachers to evaluate output of their courses more accurately• They are relevant to the process of curriculum change• They are a strong, formative educational tool• To use methods that are more student centred• To reduce time spent by teacher in marking student work• To get feedback to students more quickly•  • Reduce Power Differentials• They help to remove student/teacher barriers• They give students greater ownership of the assessment process• Students become less dependent on their lecturers•  • Future Work Situations• To allow students to assess and evaluate their own work in ways that are applicable to their

future professions• To use methods appropriate to the demands of employers and society as a whole• They help students develop enterprising competencies

Why use cooperative assessment methods?

• Democracy• They are part of a wider move to more democratic approaches to teaching and learning•  • To Promote Wider Skills• They help promote interpersonal skills• They increase responsibility and autonomy• They help students develop useful problem solving and thinking skills•  • Improve the quality of learning• Students become more critical and perceptive about their own learning• They bring about changes in student’s learning processes• They help students take a more active role in their learning• They help students take more control over their learning• They help students have a greater understanding of how to improve their own performance• They promote reflective learning• To develop skill in self awareness• Their use can lead to ‘deeper’ forms of learning•  • To Sustain Student Learning• Their use can lead to greater motivation• To make students consider the whole learning process

What do Students Think About Cooperative

Assessment?

1.Appropriateness of Cooperative Assessment

• learners very positive about this form of assessment

• seen to be very fair and ‘honest’

• online medium seen to be supportive of the cooperative assessment process and supports student learning

2. Cooperative Assessment is a Learning Process

• Learners enjoy benefits of shared insights from real and motivating audience (peers and tutor)

• they like the encouragement to review and self assess

• they give perceptive feedback about affective dimensions of the experience and comment positively on community responsibility, development of skills and learning about assessment

• there is a movement away from extrinsic validation of learning to intrinsic self-validation

• most beneficial features: access to others’ work at formative stages, and insights into learning and writing this affords

3.Focus for Assessmentie what should be assessed?

• learners feel participation in online discussions and group work should contribute towards assessment ie processes should count

• acknowledged to be problematic - criteria for defining acceptable participation, evidence for participation and demonstrating sufficient participation open to question

• could lead to mechanistic approaches if not applied validly, fairly and sensitively

Self-Peer-Tutor Online Assessment Criteria

• Four components to the assessment of online cooperative learning

1. product achievement; 2. communication skill; 3. social relationships; 4. reflective skills

• each learner assesses self (330 words under each heading), and is assessed by two peer learners and tutor (200 words)

• learner, peers and tutor post their assessments in discussion forum

• discussion of each learner’s assessment then follows

1.Product Achievement

Indicators

• Project ideasResearchAnalysisProducing a report, essay or other productBuilding on comments and help receivedMeeting deadlinesStating problems or goalsTaking initiatives

2.Communication Skill

Indicators

• Initiating dialogueSeeking informationGiving informationClarifyingElaboratingSummarisingSeeking consensusDescribing ones own feelingsObserving othersBeing brief & concise

3.Social Relationships

Indicators• Being sympathetic

EncouragingShowing interestPraisingExpressing friendshipDealing with own emotionsSensing & Dealing with other’s emotionsCoping with conflict & different opinionsActing dominantBeing helpfulBeing protectiveCompeting with others

4.Reflective SkillsIndicators

• Analysing the groups’ behaviourNoting reaction to commentsSummarisingLearning about oneselfLearning about othersSharing knowledge

Writing the Reviews

CRITERIAQUESTIONS for students to consider in writing their review

PRODUCT ACHIEVEMENT

What goals and products were agreed earlier with my peers and tutor that I should achieve? Did I achieve the goals and products that were agreed earlier with my tutor and peers? (please provide details).

COMMUNICATION SKILL

Did I understand the contributions made by both peers and tutors and did they understand me? What was the quality of my contributions? Please provide evidence from the group discussionsand group work to support this.

SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS

On the whole, how do I feel I communicated in the social learning environment of my learning set?And how did I view the social relations generally in the set?

REFLECTIVE SKILL

Is the collaborative process one in which I have ‘learned’ and enjoyed and have I contributed towards other’s learning and enjoyment? Please provide evidence from the group discussions and group work to support this.

Cooperative Assessment Conclusions

• it is possible to carry out cooperative assessment online

• students experience cooperative assessment as being fair and honest

• they appreciate the opportunity to share and learn from each other

• some evidence that they learn about the nature of assessment and learn to apply intrinsic vs extrinsic criteria

• transferable skills are developed

• cooperative assessment helps motivate students and sustain e-groups and communities

• can be a challenging experience; requires trust and openness

• Online E-Learning offers new opportunities for distance/global education, and on campus education

• Online e-learning requires new and innovative course designs focusing on groups and learning communities

• Teachers producing online courses need to develop new pedagogies

• We need to research our practice (as ‘research practitioners”) and develop theory about e-learning

CONCLUSIONS (I)

• Learning theory is important when you design online e-learning

• The relationship between theory-led designs and learning experiences and outcomes is complex and requires research in order to understand it

CONCLUSIONS (II)

Bibliography

• Carr-Chellman, A. A., Ed. (2005). Global Perspectives on E-Learning: Rhetoric and Reality. Thousand Oaks, Sage.

• Alexander, S & Golja. T (2006) The consequences of e-learning in higher education: the UTS experience. Studies in Continuing Education

• Hodgson, V & Reynolds, M (2005) Consensus, difference and ‘multiple communities’ in networked learning. Studies in Higher Education, 30(1):11-24

• Johnson, D.W. & Johnson, P.J. (1990;2003) Joining together: group theory and group skills. Allyn and Bacon, Boston

• Lave, J. & Wenger E. (1991) Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

• McConnell, D (2005) Examining the dynamics of networked e-learning groups and communities. Studies in Higher Education, 30(1)25-42

• McConnell, D (2002) The experience of collaborative assessment in e-learning. Studies in Continuing Education, 24(1), 73-92

Bibliography (cont)

• McConnell, D (2002) Action research and distributed problem based learning in continuing professional development. Distance Education, 23(1):59-83

• McConnell, D. (2000) Implementing computer supported cooperative learning. London, Kogan Page

• McConnell, D. (2006) E-Learning Groups and Communities. SRHE/OU Press• Networked Learning Conference: • http://www.networkedlearningconference.org.uk Proceedings of previous

conferences available• Rheingold, H. (1993) The virtual community: homesteading on the electronic

front. New York, Addison Wesley.• Salomon, G. & Perkins, D.N. (1998) Individual and social aspects of learning.

Review of Educational Research, 23:1-24• Usher, R. (2201) Telling a story about research and research in story telling:

postmodern approaches to social research. In Paechter, R et al(eds) Knowledge, power and learning. London, Paul Chapman.

• Wenger, E. (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

This presentation is the copyright of David McConnell, 2010 and may be reproduced with due acknowledgement