Adventures in MET Land

ETEC 565: E-portfolio Assignment #3: Communication Tools.

Dale Addis

June 21, 2009

ETEC 565A B.

(Reflection about assignment is located after the references)

Introduction

Teachers using Learning Management Systems (LMS) to deliver e-learning or blended e-learning courses rely on communication tools to create communities of practice too encourage discourse among students. E-learning environment students participate solely through their computers whereas blended e-learning environment of students participate in both e-learning and a face-to-face (f2f or in-class) learning.

Communication tools are being selected for a blended British Columbia curriculum Chemistry 11 course. Seventy-five percent of the course time will be e-learning while the remainder will be laboratory work and test writing performed at school. Course theory will be delivered to and practiced by the students predominantly through the Moodle LMS platform.

Discussion

Students learn more successfully in situations that encourage interactivity (Bates & Poole, 2003). Communities of practice encourage interactivity and help increase students critical thinking skills (Burges, 2009). Anderson (2008) identified that discourse amongst students creates these communities where students can uncover misconceptions, obtain better understanding through reflection, and develop critical thinking skills. Participants in learning communities, either novice or expert within the content area, engage in discussions. Experts provide novices with information, while novices identify inadequacies within explanations (Scaramalia & Bereiter, 1994). Scardamalia and Bereiter (1994) determined that students in this communal learning develop a better understanding of course material than those students that are not.

Communities of practice between student-student, student-teacher, and student-content can be developed with synchronous and asynchronous computer supported communication tools (Burges, 2009; Anderson, 2008). Paulus (2009) identified the need for multiple communication methods to increase student grounding of the course material. For instance, asynchronous communication discussion forums work well to help students understand conceptual issues, but are unsuccessful in supporting student construction of knowledge when dealing with mathematical problems (Andresen, 2009). Herein, a synchronous communication tool is required to be selected for math rich e-learning/blended learning environments.

Appropriate communication tools are important for student comprehension of course material (Paulus, 2009). Chemistry 11 is a problem-rich course. For this purpose, the two main forms of student-student, student-teacher, and student-content interaction will be through (asynchronous) discussion forums, and (synchronous) Wimba. Wiki’s and weblogs will be used as secondary forms of communication for group work (Wiki) and as a platform to host laboratory write ups (weblogs). Further discussion on the selection of discussion forums and Wimba will occur.

Discussion Forums

Discussion forums was selected to be used within this Moodle based Chemistry 11 course because of their educational significance in creating discourse within communities of learners, flexibility, ease of use, and ability to rank students posts for assessment purposes. Forums are the primary method of communication in many e-learning environments (Hew & Cheung, 2008). When scaffolded and used appropriately, they support exchanges of ideas, enhance student comprehension of course material, support reflective writing, and support critical thinking (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994). These forums are flexible in that they allow students to use and communicate with them on their own time (Anderson, 2008), allowing them ample opportunity to create reflected written responses (Andresen, 2009).

Bates and Poole (2003) indicate that any instruction medium should be easy for students to use. They should be able to operate the technology within twenty minutes. Discussion forum responses can be done in word processing and pasted into the discussion post. Students can even write directly within the discussion forums since they are easy to use and their affordances are similar to word processing software (Wang & Woo, 2008).

Students tend to become bored with this means of discourse; thus, incentives must be employed for continued communication (Anderson, 2008). Participation marks for interaction is a powerful incentive (Andresen, 2009). Moodle provides multiple methods of assessing student posts (Moodle: Forum Module). The easiest method is to assign a ranking for each post and have the average of the rankings be used as a student’s participation mark at the end of the course.

Discussion forums within the blended Chemistry 11 Moodle course will be used to stimulate student discourse about theoretical chemistry concepts. Students having difficulties understanding concepts will benefit from communal learning as they discuss various theoretical issues. To enhance student success, the instructor will relay their enthusiasm about the subject within the posted discussion forum questions/instructions. Questions/instructions will be designed to encourage meaningful reflective responses. Rather than asking them what they thought about the topic, questions/instructions will ask them what they would do (Andersen, 2009). For example, when students are studying about periodic table trends, one of the forums will have students discuss how atomic radius and valence electron arrangement can be used to predict periodic trends in electron affinity, ionization energies, reactivity, and metallic character.

Discussion forums have several identified disadvantages. They do not allow students to interact with the use of verbal and body language cues. These cues help students understand material in greater detail (Andresen, 2009). Also, volume of information within these forums may be seen as too much, or not enough. Too much could make students feel overloaded while not enough might make them feel discourse did not occur. Anderson (2008) noted that asynchronous communication may eventually cause participants to feel out of sync with the learning community because there is no direct contact with the instructor, or peers. To combat this feeling and to foster student discourse over mathematical problems, the synchronous communication tool Wimba was selected for the Chemistry 11 blended course.

Wimba

Wimba virtual classroom was selected as a method of communication because it affords synchronous communication, audio/video communication, and virtual whiteboards/desktop sharing. Anderson (2003) suggests that synchronous communication tools allow communities of learning to be formed because of student-student, student-teacher, and student-content interactions. Synchronous interactions amongst peers and instructors facilitates a deeper learning as students are constantly evaluating their own, and others’, perceptions (Chen, Ko, Kinshuk, and Lin, 2005).

Chen, et al. (2005) noted that audio/video interactions gave students immediate feedback and increased the level of motivation to be present/participate. It also allowed students to quickly correct themselves or strengthen what they had learned. Yamada’s (2009) study on English as a second language (ESL) learners found that audio/video communication enabled students to hear and see each other, allowing natural social communication cues that helped solve ESL-based issues. Social presence of others promoted the distance learning process and enhanced student’s perception of their own experience (Yamada, 2009).

Virtual whiteboards and sharing of instructors’ desk-tops allow problems-solving as if the students where in a face-to-face situation (Wang and Chen, 2009; Chen, et al., 2005). During these sessions, students and teachers collaborate by simultaneously drawing and editing the whiteboard (Wang & Chen, 2009). Students may ask questions during synchronous student-teacher interactions, further enhancing their understanding of course content.

Wimba will be use in the blended Chemistry 11 Moodle course predominantly for student-teacher, student-student, and student-content interactions involving solving of math-based problems. Andresen (2009) indicated that asynchronous communication, via discussion forums, was not the best environment for students to solve these types of problems as they typically allow a single response to occur, effectively, inhibiting any further student discourse.

Students will be able to use the application for collaborative work and the instructor will hold weekly virtual office hour sessions. Virtual office hour sessions will be recorded for future viewing by students who could or could not attend. Students seeking help will be required to ask the student community prior to asking the teacher. Those who cannot find help from the community will email the instructor their question the day before sessions. Instructor will use Wimba’s virtual whiteboard/desktop sharing to give audio/video explanations to these questions. Students will be encouraged to use Wimba’s chat room features to submit problem specific questions during instructor explanations. Upon completing prescribed questions solutions, new questions will be entertained from the student community. Chen, et al. (2005) found that students participating in virtual office hour sessions with audio/verbal capabilities performed better than students who did not have this medium of communication during distance learning experiences.

There are identified disadvantages of synchronous communication. Anderson (2008) indicates that it does not allow for flexibility among students. Although virtual sessions are recordable and can be posted within the Moodle platform, students who cannot attend the actual sessions may feel disconnected from the learning community because of a lack of interaction with their peers. Synchronous communication does not necessarily allow students enough time to derive the information and provide meaningful responses (Yamada, 2009). Anderson (2003) suggests that the affordances of student’ computers (such as web-surfing and checking email) may inhibit student-student and student-teacher interaction during synchronous communication sessions.

Audio/video specific disadvantages include computer/internet requirements to run audio/video applications. Chen, et al. (2005) identified that technological limitations of students computers and narrow band-with hindered students from interacting synchronously during virtual office hour sessions.

The Wimba virtual classroom tool was instructor tested (it is not hosted within the ETEC 565 Moodle LMS platform, but is linked). It was easy to learn and manipulate. Within 20 minutes of first use as an administrator, it was possible to enable/disable student audio/video, share the instructor desktop, use the virtual whiteboard, and upload documents. Wimba was also tested at the student level during a synchronous WebCT/Vista information session held within ETEC 565. Students were able to use the system within minutes of introduction. As earlier mentioned, twenty-minutes-to-use is one of the criteria Bates and Poole (2003) suggests should be considered when selecting educational technology.

Conclusion

Multiple types of communication tools are required to satisfy students’ learning abilities (Anderson, 2003). The blended Chemistry 11 Moodle course’s two main forms of communication will be through the asynchronous medium of discussion forums, and the synchronous medium of Wimba. Both forms support the creation of communities of learners. Combination of the tools allows for contact between students and staff, develop cooperation amongst students, encourages active learning, provides prompt feedback, and allows for different learning styles (in accordance to Chickering and Gamson (1987) principals for good practice within a learning environment). Discussion forums and Wimba will help teachers inspire learning in the student community, a requirement held by the International Society for Technology in Education’s (ISTE’s) educational technology standards for teachers (NETS, 2008). Students engaging in student-student, student-teacher, and student-content interactions will be given the tools and abilities to be successful within the Moodle supported blended Chemistry 11 course.

References:

Andresen, M. (2009, January 1). Asynchronous discussion forums: Success factors, outcomes, assessments, and limitations. Educational Technology & Society, 12(1), 249-257. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ833430) Retrieved June 16, 2009, from ERIC database.

Anderson. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. The International Review of REsearch in Open and Distance Learning. Retrieved June 16, 2009, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/viewArticle/149/230.

Anderson, T. (2008). Teaching in an online learning context.  In: Anderson, T. & Elloumi, F. Theory and Practice of Online Learning. Athabasca University. Accessed online 16 June 2009 http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/14_Anderson_2008_Anderson-DeliveryQualitySupport.pdf

Bates and Poole. (2003) A framework for selecting and using technology. In Effective Teaching with Technology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pages 75 – 105.

Burgess, M. (2009, March 1). Using WebCT as a supplemental tool to enhance critical thinking and engagement among developmental reading students. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 39(2), 9-33. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ831256) Retrieved June 17, 2009, from ERIC database.

Chen, N., Ko, H., Kinshuk, K., & Lin, T. (2005, May 1). A Model for Synchronous Learning Using the Internet. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 42(2), 181-194. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ724749) Retrieved June 20, 2009, from ERIC database.

Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven principals for good practice in undergraduate

educztion. American Association for Higher Education Bulletin. , 39 (7), 3 – 7.

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 June 16, 2009, from ERIC database.

Moodle.org: Forum Module. (n.d.). Retrieved June 6, 2009, from http://docs.moodle.org/en/Forum_module

National Educational Technology Standards for Teachers (Nets). (2008). Retrieved May 4, 2009, from
http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_for_Teachers_2008.htm

Paulus, T. (2009, May 1). Online but off-topic: Negotiating common ground in small learning groups. Instructional Science: An International Journal of the Learning Sciences, 37(3), 227-245. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ836160) Retrieved June 16, 2009, from ERIC database.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge – building communities.  The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265-283

Wang, Y., & Chen, N. (2009, February 1). Criteria for evaluating synchronous learning management systems: Arguments from the distance language classroom. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 22(1), 1-18. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ824746) Retrieved June 17, 2009, from ERIC database.

Wang, Q., & Woo, H. (2008, September 1). The affordances of weblogs and discussion forums for learning: A comparative analysis. Educational Technology Magazine: The Magazine for Managers of Change in Education, 48(5), 34-38. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ807450) Retrieved June 16, 2009, from ERIC database.

Yamada, M. (2009, May 1). The role of social presence in learner-centered communicative language learning using synchronous computer-mediated communication: Experimental study. Computers & Education, 52(4), 820-833. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. EJ829783) Retrieved June 17, 2009, from ERIC database.

Reflection on Selecting communication tools.

Selecting communications tools for the problem rich Chemistry 11 course was an interesting process. The more I interact with MET course content, the more I learn about myself. I am truly scientific by nature. I did not decide which communication tools I was going to use based on literature, but decide based on my experiences within the MET program. I hypothesized that an asynchronous and a synchronous communication tool would support my Moodle based course. Asynchronous communication tools have allowed me flexibility and the ability to think critically about topics during the writing process, where as an audio synchronous communication tool has given me the sense of community. From my past MET experience I decided to use the asynchronous communication tool discussion forums and the synchronous communication tool Wimba.

The process of completing this assignment afforded me the experience of being able to academically test my theory. Reading journal articles about asynchronous and synchronous communication acted as my scientific experiment. Research supported the use of a mixture of these two forms of communication. If literature did not support my hypothesis, I would have created a new hypothesis and started the research process all over. The true experiment as to if these were the appropriate tools to choose would come from having students run through the Moodle based course.

Implementation of these tools was not labour intensive. I have not created the discussion forum as described within my paper, but I have created a discussion forum on a different topic. Creation and setting up grading of the forum was not difficult. Twenty minutes were required to alter a face-to-face assignment to afford students the ability to answer questions within a discussion forum format. I do not foresee creation of future discussion forums to be too labour intensive.

I have not created an assignment for students to use Wimba; however, I have decided to use Wimba as a virtual office hour space. I have created a syllabus and a webpage outlining when these session would occur (both contained within Moodle platform). Moreover, links to Wimba virtual classroom and instructions on logging into and using Wimba has been placed within the webpage. Creation of course syllabus and webpage were not too labour intensive. However, actually using Wimba for a virtual office hour session has not occurred; thus, I do not know how labour intensive it will be to use.

Overall I found this activity to be an excellent opportunity to learn more about communication tools within online learning environments.