Post on 21-May-2015
description
transcript
Fostering collaboration, ownership, and professional networks—in online and distance
environments
Eileen A. O’Connor, Ph.D. Eileen.oconnor@esc.edu
Empire State College
What will follow:
• Possible outcomes & design considerations • Examples from my work– IRB procured; a study was conducted– The work has been submitted for possible
publication • General considerations
Higher level work
Products & relationships
that last beyond the
course
Increased pride &
ownership
Improved work:
Higher level work
Products & relationships
that last beyond the
course
Increased pride &
ownership
Use web & wiki
products:
Higher level work
Products & relationships
that last beyond the
course
Increased pride &
ownership
Social professional
networks can result too
Higher level work
Products & relationships
that last beyond the
course
Increased pride &
ownership
But how do you do this
in online courses?
Through careful planning, design, and integrate the course elements:
• Make the collaboration process itself explicit• Develop or assign teams; require brainstorming• Model the type of complex outcomes desired;
be clear about expectations and assessment• Scaffold and pace the project development
process: set a time line / require reports • Provide a forum for displaying work• Invite / require peer review
The course that will be illustrated
• A graduate course in the Master of Arts in Teaching program – Content Course: Science – Extending the students expertise in science
through a science exploration – Creating a project that K12 students could join • In a collaborative efforts
Course elements & their analysis: the evidence; presented in the research
In determining what elements of design, interactions, expectations, virtual building, and virtual presenting were effective in supporting collaboration on the inquiry-based science-project development, this author/instructor gathered evidence from processes and products within the course, including:
• project delineation, considering the course elements of structure, expectations, and evaluation required for the brainstorming, project submission, peer voting, project-selection and team-assignment process;
• peer interactions, surveying the weekly project-and-topic meetings that were conducted by teams within Second Life and reported to the class in a discussion board and the weekly individually-submitted task lists;
• final products and presentations, observing, videotaping (within the virtual space), analyzing, and grading the presentations and projects within the Second Life pod and within the required project wiki/website, using the assigned criteria and the grading rubric;
• student debriefings, reviewing their comments on their own work, on the work of colleagues, and on ways to improve the course in the future
Overall results / 17 studentTopic & # of students Bio. (3) Biodiv. (2) Bio2 (2) Rain (3) Physics
(3)Ocean
(2)River
(2)
Prior work w/ instructor 2 2 0 1 1 0 1
Student centered project Partial Yes Yes Yes Partial Yes Yes
Collabor. effectiveness Good Good Poor Good Poor Good good
Student satisfaction Good Good Varied Good Varied Good Good
Instructor satisfaction OK Good OK Good Not OK Good Good
Exceeded expectations Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes
Final report quality Good Good OK Good Not OK Good Good
Topic & # of students Bio. (3) Biodiv. (2) Bio2 (2) Rain (3) Physics (3)
Ocean (2)
River (2)
Prior work w/ instructor 2 2 0 1 1 0 1
Student centered project Partial Yes Yes Yes Partial Yes Yes
Collabor. effectiveness Good Good Poor Good Poor Good good
Student satisfaction Good Good Varied Good Varied Good Good
Instructor satisfaction OK Good OK Good Not OK Good Good
Exceeded expectations Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes
Final report quality Good Good OK Good Not OK Good Good
Overall results / 17 student
Topic & # of students Bio (3) Biodiv. (2) Bio 2 (2) Rain (3) Physics(3) Ocean (2)
River (2)
Prior work w/ instructor 2 2 0 1 1 0 1
Student centered project Partial Yes Yes Yes Partial Yes Yes
Collabor. effectiveness Good Good Poor Good Poor Good good
Student satisfaction Good Good Varied Good Varied Good Good
Instructor satisfaction OK Good OK Good Not OK Good Good
Exceeded expectations Yes Yes No Yes No Yes Yes
Final report quality Good Good OK Good Not OK Good Good
Only 1 was below the standard
Overall results / 17 student
Within the course: generating the project
General brainstorming to . . .
focusing ideas & creating teams . . .
the actual project planning
Explaining the logistics & the collaborative process• Reports weekly
meetings via PPTSecond Life meetings
• Documents weekly individual progress Task / time
report
Defining the project – required components
And, providing a rich schematic (and verbiage) of areas to consider:
Logistics & the collaborative project development process
• Reports weekly meetings via PPTSecond Life
meetings
• Documents weekly individual progress Task / time
report
Clarifying the final evaluation:
75% individual & 25% cohesive, attractive project
What I saw: the students took pride
in their “pod” development work
Pods where decorated by students
Added: plants
Second Life pod expectations were minimal, but students added more than required – from individual exploration & sharing with peers
Added: rotating spheres Added: circulating
fish
Pride in ownership / Extended learning
And, in the projects that they eventually presented within the pods
Genuine sharing, community & caring was evident; students asked relevant questions & added extending ideas – all at a distance
A pod about oceanography
Observed
• Rich projects – better than previous courses (students comments show pride & valuing)
• Genuine valuing and application of 21st century technologies to the future K12 students; an expanded understanding of literacy
• Peer teaching/learning – more skills evident then “taught” or even required
• Responsibility and professionalism in the presentations – proud to share their findings
NOT ONLY WITHIN VIRTUAL
ENVIRONMENTS
The following slides show peer developed websites, an easy
alternative or adjunct to using virtual shared work
Project websites welcomed K12 students and teachers
Some students even featured their own avatars
Some projects included other schools
Projects helped other teachers understand how to integrate their ideas
Some projects had direct public service aspects
Projects with scientific materials
Useful teacher guidelines
Info and links to 21st century tools
Some projects included relevant YouTubes & resources
Other student projects created their own YouTubes
Some projects included work that the students had actually conducted
And, showed data could be collected & used in the project (quantitative science literacy)
Some required science literacy journals
Teacher resources were included in all
Conclusions• Course themes and approaches that appeared to
influence the effectiveness of the results– Sequencing & scaffolding – built understanding of
requirements and staged – Brainstorming and modeling – provided a rich example– Pacing, weekly reporting, and task lists -- kept all
teams on task and accountable – Requiring a project wiki/website, a science pod in
Second Life, & presentations within the pod – developed pride and ownership
Contingency plans
• Place collaboration as a course objective and requirement – Not all will like the process– Develop a grading approach that will ensure
fairness – participation can be monitored in wikis• Have backup plans – Alternative assignments if needed
Higher level work
Products & relationships
that last beyond the
course
Increased pride &
ownership
There are multiple ways to work to the best
in online environments