cathy snelling and sophie karanicolas 2008

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Why Wikis WorkAssessing Group Work in an Online

Environment

Cathy Snelling and Sophie KaranicolasSchool of Dentistry

Faculty of Health Sciences


Dental School Learning and Teaching Philosophy - group work/collaborative and scholarly learning in a contextual framework

Human Biology in Bachelor of Oral Health - traditional group assignment followed by PowerPoint presentation of findings

Difficulty in assessing quality of group work processes Disparities in quantity and quality

of individual input hard to monitor Effectiveness of group roles and

processes largely based on anecdotal evidence.

Background

Bachelor of Oral Health : Why Wikis Work


Engage students in the process of learning, rather than promote an outcome-focussed activity

Utilise contemporary social technologies to foster learning communities

Introduce collaborative research methods in the early years of an undergraduate program

Motivate students to actively and equitably participate in a group based assessment activity.

Rationale for change




Key Issues

Research has commonly identified the following key issues to consider when engaging students in an online learning environment

Teacher expertise Student readiness Changing role of the

‘teacher’(Fahraeus et al 1999, Felder 1995, Oliver 2001)

Determining explicit levels of performance by which the groups would be assessed.

Bachelor of Oral Health: Why Wikis Work


Practice run – “ A wiki on how to make a wiki”

Use of discussion boards and blogs for collaborative research

Developing teacher readiness



Developing student readiness

O Week

Setting up a Community of Practice where students explore and develop their:

preferred approaches to learning

expectations

group norms and learning culture

Entry survey: Research Skills

Learning support further reinforced - General Studies Stream



Week 1

Orientation Session- Using Wikis and and Blogs in education

Setting up of class blog as a social learning forum.

Developing student readiness



Our Blog @ http://bohonecommunity.blogspot.com

http://bohonecommunity.blogspot.com/




Step 1: Make a wiki on a wiki – developed in wikispaces.com

Step 2: Allocate groups to topics

Step 3: Allocate e-facilitator to each wiki group

Step 4: Wiki orientation session – hyperlinks on homepage to sites that support learning – eg., examples of other wikis

Setting up and developing the Wiki



Step 5: Students invited to begin collaborative wiki work on group pages

Step 6: Students select a focus area of research to develop a poster for presentation in a

simulated academic forum

Step 7: E-facilitators log in at least once weekly to support group progress

Step 8: Provide assessment rubric for wiki and poster work based on Research Skills

Development Framework (RSDF)

www.adelaide.edu.au/clpd/rsd

Setting up and developing the Wiki

http://www.adelaide.edu.au/clpd/rsd



Facet of Inquiry RSD Level 1 RSD Level 2 RSD Level 3

A. Students embark on inquiry and so determine a need for knowledge/ understanding

Identifies peripheral/duplicated core components of topicMinimal articulation of core components to oral health practice.

Identifies core components of topic.Clear articulation of core components to oral health practice.

Identification includes and goes beyond core components of topic.Comprehensive articulation of core components to oral health practice.

B. Students find/generate needed information/data using appropriate methodology

Search strategy is limited to a single source (eg internet only) for finding information.Content generated is partially relevant to the topic and/or primarily drawn from one or two sources.Allocation of group roles to manage workflow is minimally identified on the wiki page. Inequitable distribution of group work contribution with minimal evidence of shared leadership roles.

Search strategy uses several different sources (eg catalogues and databases) for finding information.Content generated is relevant to the topic, and primarily based on several sources. Allocation of group roles to manage workflow is identified on the wiki page.Equitable distribution of group work contribution with evidence of shared leadership roles.

Search strategy includes multiple source types for finding quality information (eg scientific catalogues, library databases, search engines)Content generated is relevant and draws on a wide range of sources.Allocation of group roles to manage workflow is clearly detailed and identified on the wiki page. Equitable distribution of high degree group work contribution and strong evidence of shared leadership roles.

C. Students critically evaluate information/data and the process to find/generate this information/data

Identifies indicators of sources credibility and reliability but does not fully apply them in evaluating data or process Supporting evidence in search strategy only partially supplied and/or inappropriateMissing:

Minimal evidence of a team approach to reviewing, revising and editing group content contributions.

Identifies several relevant indicators of source credibility and reliability and provides appropriate rationale for use/inclusion of information.Supporting evidence in search strategy supplied but some details inaccurate.Problems with

Evidence of a team approach to reviewing, revising and editing group content contributions.

Identifies a wide range of indicators of source credibility and reliability and fully applies these in selection of data for inclusion.Supporting evidence in search strategy is extensive and appropriate.Strong evidence of a team approach to reviewing, evaluating, revising and editing group content contributions.

Human Biology I OH Rubric for Wiki and Poster Project



D. Students organise information collected/ generated

The group use basic strategies to organise the wiki (eg headings, dot points etc.) but with little flow or connection. Problems with:_________________________________________The group use basic strategies to organise the poster (eg layout, sections, choice of visuals etc.) with some explanations and basic conclusions. Problems with: _______________

The group use several sound strategies to organise the wiki, with linkage between and within most sections. Problems with

The group use several sound strategies to organise the poster with accurate explanations and sound conclusions.Problems with _____________________________________________________

The group use a wide variety of strategies to organise the Wiki with coherent linkage between and within all sectionsThe group use a wide variety of strategies to organise the poster with accurate and complete explanations and draw distinct conclusions.

E. Students synthesise and analyse and apply new knowledge

Content largely restates information from original sources used, with minimal integration.Poster has a broadly based and superficial coverage, which does not specifically address the chosen learning outcomes

Information from original sources is integrated data but overall theme closely resembles that of the original sourcesPoster has broadly based coverage, with detailed information provided for at least one of the chosen learning outcomes.

Content incorporates paraphrasing of information and presents ‘new’ interpretations/context from that of original sources.Poster has a focussed and in-depth coverage of all chosen learning outcomes.

F. Students communicate knowledge and the process used to generate it, with an awareness of ethical, social and cultural issues

Minimal coverage of poster appearance criteria.Partially conforms to spelling, grammar conventions except for:

Partial/incomplete referencingMissing:

Moderate coverage of poster appearance criteria.Generally conforms to spelling, grammar conventions; minor errors with:

Generally well referenced;Problems with

Complete and total coverage of poster appearance criteria.Accurately conforms to spelling/grammar conventions.Full and correct acknowledgement of all sources used in poster.

http://boh08.wikispaces.com/



The Changing role of the Teacherand

How the Wikis Worked :


/




Bachelor of Oral Health: How Wikis Work


Accountable Group Work through the history tab – facilitator can track quality of group contribution through edits

Monitoring and notification facility- all posts and discussions can be monitored as they evolve

Provides immediate peer and facilitator feedback

Contribution to group work at a time that suits the learner

Emphasis on the learning process rather than outcome-focussed

Empowers students to make sense of their learning through active engagement

Why we think Wikis work



Frequent contact - online and face to face fosters a learning community

Utilise a variety of learning styles - the more timid or shy students can flourish in a non-threatening environment

Fosters creativity and diversity

Promotes reflection of written work, critical assessment and peer review

Builds a shared knowledge repository

Appeals to the tech savvy Gen Y students – familiarity with on-line social technologies

Why we think Wikis work



Why students think Wikis work

Wikis accessible off campus and “on demand” Facilitator can check progress and provide ongoing guidance – “they were really accessible” Great to see the wiki grow Peer appraisal Peer encouragement provided enthusiasm to learn Strive to do your best not to let the group down “Fun” “Freedom” “Able to motivate each other”



Why students think Wikis work

Wikis have a legitimate role to play in learning

Pre-course: 57% agreement Post-course: 91% agreement

I am uncertain about my role in using a wiki as a group learning tool


I am confident in my ability to use a wiki as a learning tool




What Students didn’t like about Wikis

Formatting limitations

Can’t save changes at the same time Need a more ‘snazzy’ looking wiki Platform was not always ‘user friendly’ Limited tools and functions- limits creativity “Communication could be misinterpreted”



Guiding Principle Chickering & Ehrmann (1996) Application in Wiki Project

Encourage increased communication between faculty and student

Initially in Blog; consolidated and developed via discussion board on each Wiki site

Develop reciprocity and co-operation between students

Collaborative group research, Wiki and poster development

Use of active learning technologies

Social technologies promoted student on-line engagement

Provide prompt feedback On-line facilitation which created a tangible social and cognitive teaching presence

Make effective use of time ‘On demand’ on/off campus

Respect diverse talents and approaches to learning

Learning tasks allocated according to individual talents; constructivist approach

Communicate high expectations Explicit levels demonstrated in assessment rubrics; formative peer and facilitator feedback



On-line technologies such as Wikis are becoming part of mainstream teaching and learning

3 Wiki-based group work projects in undergraduate Oral Health programs have consistently generated positive student feedback in both a qualitative and quantative context.

The assessment rubric, based on the Willison and O’Reagan RSD Framework, has provided explicit levels of performance in the groups’ learning process and summative product.

This assessment strategy has the potential, and indeed is being utilised, in other disciplines, to provide a transparent and equitable process of assessing the effectiveness of group-based learning.

In Summary

We wish to acknowledge the support, guidance and encouragement of

Dr John Willison Project Leader

Research Skills Development Framework CLPD, The University of Adelaide and

and Associate Professor Tracey Winning,Associate Dean Learning & Teaching

School of Dentistry.





References

Chickering A and Ehrmann SC (1996) Implementing the Seven Principles: Technology as a Lever. American Association for Higher Education (AAHE) Bulletin, October, 9 3-6.

Fahraeus E, Chamberlain, B, Bridgman N, Rugeli J and Fuller U (1999). Teaching with Electronic Collaborative Learning Groups: Report of the ITiCSE’99 working Group of Electronic Collaborative Groups. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin. 31(4), 121-128.

Felder RT (2005) We never said it would be easy. Chemical Engineering Education, 29 (1), 32-33.

Oliver R (2001) Assuring the Quality of Online Learning in Australian Higher Education. In Wallace M, Ellis A and Newton D (eds) Proceedings of Moving Online II Conference (9 21) Lismore: Southern Cross University.


http://bohonecommunity.blogspot.com


