flexible approaches to using technology for online interaction
DESCRIPTION
Flexible approaches to using technology for online interaction. University of Aberdeen Teaching and Learning Symposium January 11 2012 Sarah Cornelius and Yvonne Bain School of Education. Yvonne. Sarah. You. The Plan. A few words on flexibility and interaction - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Flexible approaches to using technology for online interaction
University of AberdeenTeaching and Learning Symposium
January 11 2012
Sarah Cornelius and Yvonne BainSchool of Education
The Plan
• A few words on flexibility and interaction• Your experiences and challenges• Our examples:
1. Towards a flexible model for interactive course delivery - the TQFE
2. Asynchronous interaction using discussion forums3. Synchronous interaction with web conferencing
• Your examples: – Issues and first thoughts on solutions– Where next?
5 dimensions (Collis and Moonen, 2001)1. Time2. Content3. Entry Requirements4. Instructional approach and resources5. Course delivery and logistics
Giving learners choices about what to study
Meeting diverse student needs andstyles
Learner-centred notteacher-centred
Developing independent Lifelong learners
Teacher as facilitator
Interaction is one of the most important components of any learning experience
(Vrasidas and McIsaac, 1999)
‘the interaction level in a synchronous class is a significant factor
in the effectiveness of the class’ (Skylar, 2009, p. 71).
students’ satisfaction with their learning environment
is affected by levels of interaction (Stephens and Mottet, 2008)
Transactional distance (Moore)Conversational Framework (Laurillard)
Purposeful, encouraged and managed
INTERACTION
Learner-teacher
Mediated by technology
Adapted from Terry Anderson (2003) www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230
Your examples
How do you, or would you like to, encourage flexibility and interaction for your learners?
• Something you are proud of?• A scenario you would like to improve?• An approach you would like to develop?• An aspiration?
Adapted from Terry Anderson (2003) www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230
Example 1flexible content
Example 2 effective discussion
Example 3 real-time interaction
Why do we need flexibility?
• Diversity of learners• College demands and practice• Flexibility of study modes • Flexible access for tutors• Ease of updating and reuse
Online Activities for individual or
collaborative study and/or workshops
Working Together On-campus
Working Together On-line
Guiding principlesReflective practice
Collaborative inquiryAuthentic problems
Individual learning journey
Professional standards for lecturers in FE
What have we learned?
• No ‘typical’ response to flexibility - although mostly positive
• Diversity of learners’ strategies– Universalists, butterflies and changelings
• IT skills and technology issues impact experience • Importance of induction and setting expectations• Role of support and collaboration
Example 2: Flexible asynchronous interaction
Towards a framework for learning through online discussion
Why?"CMC has the potential to provide a means for the weaving together of ideas and information from many people's minds, regardless of when and from where they contribute." Kaye (1989: 3)
•Is the potential realised?
Thread 3: Social Viewpoint
Thread 4: Burial at Ornans
14th November
15th November
16th November
17th November
18th November
19th November
20th November
21st November
491 RosePosts question
14/11 17:47
493 CamilleReplies
152 words15/11 10:21
494 Tutor Posts further
question16/11 12:24
496 CamilleResponds166 words16/11 22:10
497 LillaAsks question17/11/08 12:04
498 CamilleResponds243 words17/11 14:54
499 RoseAsks further question
17/11 15:45
503 CamilleResponds174 words17/11 18:00
508 RosalbaAsks question on different aspect
20/11 23:05
506 RosalbaAsks question20/11 22:33
509 CamilleResponds114 words21/11 12:13
Valued Art Form thread initiated by
Camille
Corot and classicism thread initiated by Rose
13th November
14th November
20th November
21st November
455 CamilleAsks question13/11 13:49
456 Rosalbareplies
674 words21/11 10:46
457 Roseasks question14/11 14:48
458 Rosalbareplies
251 words20/11 20:30
•Is the potential realised? Not always!
What have we learned?
Reflecting on the thinking of others
Reflecting on own perspective
unconnectedpost
connectedpost
Composing
Reflecting
(1) COVERT INDIVIDUAL THINKING
Individual learner responds to some stimulus.
(2) COVERT COLLECTIVE INFORMED
THINKINGIndividual reads others'
messages.
(3) ARTICULATIONof own thoughts
OI(4) OVERT INDIVIDUAL
THINKINGIndividual posts an unconnected
message.
OC (4) OVERT COLLECTIVE THINKING
Individual posts a connected, threaded message.
A framework for learning through online discussion – useful to support students’ learning?
Why?• To meet college and individual needs• To reduce staff release/travel time
requirements• To integrate learners from distributed
locations• To replicate face to face workshop experience• To enhance technology skills
What have we learned?
• Learners’ perspective– Convenient, flexible approach– Easy to learn– Facilitates interaction and collaboration
• Teachers’ perspective– Facilitation is demanding– Encouraging interaction in absence of visual clues– Duality of experience– Importance of team approach
Group Activity
In small groups• Share your ideas for improving flexibility and/or
interaction using technology • Choose one ‘idea’ to discuss further
– On flipchart paper1. Outline the idea briefly2. Raise any issues that need to be considered3. Outline possible solutions or add comments4. Revisit your idea
Keep in mind flexibility and interaction
Further informationOur research• Bain, Y (2011) Learning through online discussion: a framework evidenced in learners’ interactions. ALT-C 2011
Thriving in a colder and more challenging climate, conference proceedings, Leeds. Access http://repository.alt.ac.uk/2172/
• Cornelius S, Gordon C and Ackland A (2011) Towards flexible learning for adult learners in professional contexts: an activity-focused course design. Interactive Learning Environments 19(4) 381-394
• Cornelius S. (2011) Convenience and Community? An exploratory investigation into learners' experiences of web conferencing. In T. Bastiaens & M. Ebner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2011 (pp. 2696-2704). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.
References and other sources of information• Anderson T. (2003) Getting the mix right: an updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. International Review of
Research in Open and Distance Learning. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230• Collis B. and Moonen J. (2001) Flexible learning in a digital world: experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page• Kaye, A (1989) Computer-mediated Communication and Distance Learning. In R. Mason and A. Kaye (eds)
Mindweave: Computers, Communication and Distance Education. Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp 1 - 21• Laurillard D. (2002) Rethinking university practice: a conversational framework for the effective use of learning
technologies. London: RoutledgeFalmer. • Moore M. G. (1997) Theory of transactional distance. In: Keegan, D. (ed.). Theoretical principles of distance
education. London and New York: Routledge. pp. 22-38.• Skylar A. A. (2009) A comparison of asynchronous online text-based lectures and synchronous interactive web
conferencing lectures. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 69-84.• Stephens K. K. and Mottet T. P. (2008) Interactivity in a web conference training context: effects on trainers and
trainees. Communication Education, 57(1), 88-104.• Vrasidas C., and McIsaac S. M. (1999) Factors influencing interaction in an online course. American Journal of
Distance Education, 13(3), 22-36.