Online Classroom, October 2005 Issue

O..N LI NE
IDEAS
OCTOBER
FOR
EFFECTIVE
ONLINE
INSTRUCTION
2005
TIPS
·
·
courses
without
sacrificing
quality.
Time management
should begin
with course design. Providing clear
instructions and easy navigation
will reduce the amount of time
spent answering the students'
questions about course logistics,
says Mary Ellen Bornak, instructional designer at Bucks County
Community College in
Pennsylvania.
Bornak also says that the course
objectives, content, and assessment
need to be aligned. "In other words,
what you are testing them on and
what they are demonstrating
to you
is what they learned. The action
and interaction in the course is all
about the same information."
To further improve clarity,
Bornak recommends
explaining to
students
··
·
·
how
how
how
each
the course will proceed
learning is going to occur
they will exchange ideas with
other
how they will demonstrate
W
::J
rn
rn
UI
J:
...
Z
they understand
the material
how they will demonstrate
how
they're going to use this new
knowledge
where to get help.
One aspect of providing clear
instructions
is minimizing the
amount of text that students have
Course design
to scroll through. This means that
whenever possible put instructions
in bulleted-list form rather than
long paragraphs because people
read things on the Web differently
than they do in print.
"On every level. things need to be
clear to the student, from the
overall learning plan to specific
assignment instructions.
The
clearer you can make them up
front, the better off you're going to
be," says Georglyn Davidson,
director of online learning at BCCC.
Establish
parameters
Online learners
often have unre-
alistic expectations of instructor
availability and response time.
Setting realistic parameters that
state specifically when you are
available for office hours, how often
you will check e-mail, when you will
post to the discussion board, and
when students can expect graded
that
THE
PRDS
Facilitate Student
Collaboration
Time Management
for Online Instructors
ry"'he time demands of teaching
.1 online can be overwhelming, but
there are techniques
that can
greatly reduce the amount of time
you need to spend in your online
FRDM
CONTINUED
·
·
·
Use peer reviews, chats,
bulletin boards, discussion
forums, group projects, and
study groups.
Encourage connections
between students by having
them interview and
introduce each other.
Have students complete a
personality questionnaire
to
help form compatible and
effective groups.
Adapted from "Principles of
Best Practice in the Design and
Delivery of Online Education at
Howard Community College."
Retrieved Sept. 20, 2005 from
www.howardcc.edu/distance/
jacultYJesources
/ besCpractice
s / Advisory_Group_BesCPractic
es_Guide_--Jj.naLhtm.
~
ON PAGE 2 > >
3
Choosing Appropriate Online
Learning Tools
4
Common Fears about Teaching
Online
7
Course Profile: Secondary Teaching
Methods
8
Study: Q:hangingVirtual Team
Mernbership Improves
Participation
--
Interaction among students
can be one of the most
important sources of learning
in an online course. However, if
you do not provide ample
opportunities to encourage collaboration, many students
likely will remain individual
learners and will not take
advantage of their peers'
knowledge and guidance.
Here are some suggestions
for getting students to work
together:
6
Ongoing Student Evaluation
Essential to Course Improvement
President: William Haight
([email protected])
Publisher:
David Burns
([email protected])
< <
Editorial Content Director: Bob Bogda
([email protected]
Managing Editor: Rob Kelly
([email protected])
Creative Services Director: Debra Lovelien
Customer Service Manager: Mark Beyer
ADVISORY BOARD
Randy Accetta, Ph.D., Eller College of
Management,
The University of Arizona,
a c cett [email protected];Thomas
D. Bacig Ph.D., Morse Alumni Distinguished
Teaching Professor of Humanities, Department
of Sociologyl Anthropology,
University of
Minnesota-Duluth,
[email protected];
Toni
Bellon, Ed.D, School of Education, North Georgia
College and State University, Dahlonega, GA
[email protected]; Sherry McConnell, DVM,
Depart-ment of Anatomy and Neurobiology,
Colorado State University-Fort Collins, CO,
Sh erry. McCon ne II @Co 10State.
EDU;
Frank Moretti, Ph.D., Executive Director
Columbia Center for New Media Teaching and
Learning, Columbia University, New York, NY,
[email protected]; Dennis O'Neil, Ph.D.,
Professor of Anthropology, Palomar College, San
Marcos, CA, [email protected]; Lawrence C.
Ragan, Ph.D., Director-Instructional Design and
Development, Penn State's World Campus,
[email protected]; Henry R. van Zyl, Ph.D., Director of
Distance Learning Programs, Thomas Edison
State College, Trenton, NJ [email protected];
John Wager, Ph.D., professor of philosophy,
Triton Community College, River Grove, III.
J wag e r@tr i ton. cc . i I . us; S h i r ley
Waterhouse,
Ed.D., Director of Education
Technology,
Embry-Riddle
Aeronautical
University, shirley@db. erau.edu
Online Classroom (lSSN 1546-2625) is published
monthly by Magna Publications Inc., 2718 Dryden
Drive, Madison, WI 53704. Phone BOO-433-0499.
Copyright @ 2005. One-year (12 issues) subscription: $167. 5end change of address to: Online
Classroom, 271B Dryden Drive, Madison, WI
53704.
E-mail:
[email protected];
Website: www maonapubs com
To order back issues, call Customer Service at
800-433-0499. Back issues cost $20 each plus
shipping and handling in the U.S. You can pay
with MasterCard, VISA, Discover, or American
Express.
This publication is designed to provide accurate
and authoritative information in regard to the
subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in
rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent
professional should be sought. Authorization to
photocopy for internal or personal use, or the
intj!rnal or personal use of specific clients, is
granted by Online Classroom for users registered
with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC)
Transactional Reporting Service, provided that 50
cents per page is paid directly to CCC, 222
Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923; Phone:
978-750-8400, wwwcoovright com. For those
organizations
that have been granted
a
photocopy license by CCC,a separate system of
payment has been arranged.
FROM
PAGE
1
assignments
returned will greatly
reduce the number of e-mail
messages you get from students
requesting something from you.
It's also important to stick to the
parameters. There can be a strong
temptation to increase your participation in a threaded discussion
when that discussion is particularly
interesting. Although this can
improve the discussion, Davidson
warns not to give in to the temptation to post more frequently
because students will then expect
you to post more frequently in subsequent discussions.
Anticipate
students'
questions
As you teach a course each
semester, compile a list of answers
to commonly asked questions in a
Word document from which you can
copy and paste. This saves the time
of having to retype information you
know you will reuse. Putting the
information in Word enables you to
copy and paste It into whatever
communication
tool you happen to
be using-chat,
e-mail, or threaded
discussion, Davidson says.
Manage e-mail
Bornak
and Davidson
recommend using an e-mail
account that is dedicated to a single
course; however, if you don't, make
sure that students include a designated course title in the subject line
of each e-mail message related to
the course and then filter It to one
folder.
board, and if students go off on a
tangent, create a new folder to
address that topic while maintaining the original thread.
Use more efficient grading techniques
Davidson
AutoCorrect
recommends using
tools in Word to
provide feedback on written assignments. These allow you to create
standard comments that can be
inserted into an assignment, saving
the time It takes to retype them in
each instance.
Although this type of standardized feedback can save time,
students should also receive specific
feedback. One way to do this is by
inserting audio comments into Word
documents. These audio comments
can provide explanations
that would
be more time consuming if typed.
"[Audio comments] also are a very
effective way to provide teacher
presence in online courses. Hearing
a voice is another pathway to the
brain. A student may understand
a
comment better by hearing it rather
than reading it," Bornak says.
I
Contact Georglyn Davidson at
[email protected] and Mary Ellen
Manage threaded discussions
The instructor does not necessarily need to be the one to facilitate
threaded discussions.
By taking a
step back and letting students facilItate discussion~, you can empower
students to takl control of their
1/"- - _.-
own learning while reducing the
amount of time you spend in
threaded discussions. This does not
mean that you should let students
take full control, but instead of
having to respond to everything in
the discussion, try monitoring,
guiding, and making sure students
are on track, Davidson says.
Bornak recommends creating
discussion topic folders so threaded
discussions are not all over the
Hornak at bornakm@bu£ks.edu.
rgj
I
i
i
I
i
-
I
I
(.J 1'.' 1..1H E
C L(U)E~ S, f~ U (] M
I[
DESIGN
CCURSE
Choosing Appropriate
Online Learning Tools
"[j'\-'1culty need to consider
access to the course by logging in
to Blackboard, which is the
course management
system we
use," HilIslock says.
Provide students with clearly
stated minimum technology
requirements.
Sludenls need to
know up front the lechnologies
they will need to access the
course. This lets studenls know
learning
1. 1 objectives, learning styles,
accessibilily, cost, and available
lechnical support when designing
distance learning courses, says
Laurie HilIstock, manager of
distance learning al Clemson
University.
Hillslock works with faculty to
develop satellite, CD-ROM, and
Web-based courses using a design
model lhat Is roughly 80 percent
asynchronous
and 20 synchronous.
Within this model, instructors can
choose a variety of technologies that
the university's office of educational
technology services (ETS) supports.
The decision to use a given technology needs to be based on a
needs assessment
of the course, the
technology's compatibility with the
institution's
course management
system, and the level of technology
students have access to.
For example, suppose an instructor decides that his or her students
would benefit from vlew-on-demand
·
ahead of lime whal arrangements
they will need to make, whether
it's upgrading their technology or
making plans to use a computer
at a local libraI}' or friend's
"If you're using things
like video or on-demand
presentations,
the
course management
system should be the
container for all of that.
house. Hillstock recommends
presentations.
There are many
products that can do this, but nol
all will work as well across different
platforms and within a course managemenl system, Also, differenl
products have different end-user
technology requirements.
The technologies you use and
how you incorporate lhem Inlo your
course can have a major effect on
sludenl support issues. Hillstock
recommends
the following strategies
to reduce student support issues:
·
Put things in one place. "If
you're using things like video or
on-demand presentations,
the
course management
system
should be the container for all of
that. Even though you know that
you're using six different technologies in your course, the
students don't care. All they need
to know is that they have full
u
ONLINE
..
doing a test run several days
before using synchronous
tools in
a course. The five minutes it
takes for students to connect and
·
verifY that they can see and hear
and navigate through the system
will greatly reduce the need for
support staff help during the
actual synchronous
session.
Hide functions that are not
used. Course management
systems and other online learning
tools have many functions that
are not always used in a course.
Once you determine which tools
you will be using in your course,
hide all the other functions. This
will make the course easier for
nologies does not mean thai they
all should he used in your
('ourse.
Deeiding which tools to use
should be based on the specific
needs of your course. And there is
such a thing as using too much
technology. How much is too much'?
"If I look at a course that lIses
videoconfcrencing,
audio conferencing, satelllle, video streaming, and
BIackhoard, I stop and say. 'Whoa.'
I stop and ask, 'Why do you think
this is a good idea'?' They may have
good reasons, but a lot of times
when I listen to them, it's more like,
'I just thought that since you guys
support all these things, I should
tI}' to use them all.' There is
nothing wrong with them trying to
use videoconferencing,
audio confereneing, or even streaming video, but
many times those faculty who
attempt to use five or six different
technologies do it because they
don't have a thorough underslanding of the advantages and disadvantages ofeach of those tools,"
Hillstock says.
Rather than tI}'ing to include
eveI}' technology that might be
appropriate for a course, I-lilIstock
recommends
that instructors begin
by using the course management
system and one additional tool. This
reduces the amount time it takes to
create the course, and instructors
often find that this less technologyintensive design works well.
"The majority of faculty members
basically want to use things like
discussion boards and chat, and to
be able to make their course
documents available to their
students,"
Hillstock
says. mD
students to navigate and will
reduce the need for support staff
help, Hillstock says.
· Avoid using too much technology. Just pecause your institution
supports' a wide range of tech-
_~
CL@SSROOM
3
GUEST
CCLUMN
5 Common Fears about Teaching Online-Fact
By Patti Shank,
PhD, CPT'
O
ne thing new online instructors
often have in common, whether
they feel pressured to teach online
or are more enthusiastic,
is a great
deal of anxiety. Teaching online
involves a set of new technical.
administrative,
and instructional
skills. Many are not thrilled about
teaching online unless they feel
confident that they can do a good
job. And they often have fears that
make them feel that doing a good
job is going to be difficult. or worse.
I often hear these five common fears
and misconceptions
ii'om new
online instructors,
and other
instructional
designers who work
with faculty tell me they hear much
the same.
I. Online courses aren't as good as
face-to-face courses.
2. My course can't be taught online.
3. I won't be able to connect with
my students.
4. The software and systems are too
hard to learn.
5. Teaching online will take more
time and effort.
Like most fears and misconceptions, there's a small grain of truth
in each. But being able to discern
fact from fiction in each of these is
a good first step toward feeling more
confident that learning these new
skills is not so difficult.
Online courses aren't as good
as face-to-face courses
to-face courses to be the gold
standard. but we've all experienced
enough dreadful face-to-face
courses (Econ 405! Ugh!) to dispel
this notion.
Both online and face-to-face
instruction have unique advantages
and challenges. For example. it is
often easier, because of time considerations, for everyone to contribute
in an online class. But it is easier 10
get immediate help in a f~1Ce-to-lace
class. One of the primary considerations, then, when teaching online, is
how to use the advantages and
manage the challenges. Some faceto-face courses utilize online components in order to take advantage
of their benefits. Online courses
sometimes utilize some synchronous (same-time) components in
order to improve motivation and
allow students to get immediate
help. These days, good instructors
use the tools that best help
students learn, and that often
means combining online and faceto-face elements.
My course can't be taught
It is harder
online
to teach courses
that
involve in-person performances
or
require immediate feedback online,
but there are well-established
ways
to get around many of the difficulties. Some instructors use a hybrid
(online + face-to-face) format for
these kinds of courses so that much
of the course is online, but certain
performances or feedback sessions
are in person.
Performance and feedback
vs. Fiction
students' performance be monitored
by outside proctors. Some instructors use Web conferencing systems
such as WebX or Elluminate and
desktop sharing systems such as
Microsoft NetMeeting to hold online
synchronous
meetings where
students and instructors
can share
inlormation,
help.
ask questions,
and get
I won't be able to connect
with my students
Instructors fear that not being in
the same room with students will
inherently result in a lack of connection. In fact, it is relatively
common for students to feel disconnected with instructors
in face-toface courses. That shouldn't be Ule
case in either environment.
When
teaching online, there are some
well-established
methods for connecting, getting and giving
feedback, and managing students
so that the connection, while
different, can be as good or even
better.
Because an online course tends
to be ongoing (not event based,
such as Wednesday from 4 to 8
p.m.), there's a potential for more
connections, feedback, and help
than are possible in most face-toface courses. Students can communicate with each other and provide
help; documents and projects can
be peer reviewed; and the instnlctor
can facilitate in-depth discussions.
A discussion without a time limit
that it is primarily course design
and teaching quality that make
instruction good or less good, not
the medium used for teaching and
learning (see the No Significant
Difference reference at the end of
sessions do not need to happen in a
central face-to-face classroom,
though. I taught an online presentations skills course that required
students to perform for an inperson audience and to submit documentation and evaluations after
provides more possibilities for shyer
or more analytical students to participate, and research shows that
this often happens.
Online instructors can integrate
feedback into online course activities to gauge student motivation,
understanding,
and satisfaction.
This can include self-assessment
this article if you need some convincing). Many people consider face-
the performanc9s.
Many online
nursing instructors require that
quizzes and reflection questions.
They can examine student partici-
Research
4
shows over and over
ONLINE
CL@SSROOM
pation (or lack of it) to determine
who needs hclp and can reach oul
personally to those who are not participating. Many online instructors
design their courses with more
frequent deliverables than in a
similar face-la-face course so that
students are able to more easily
slay engaged and on task.
The software and systems are too
hard to learn
It's true that teaching online
requires the use of systems and
technologies thaI take some effort 10
learn. Most instilutions
have
classes for new instructors
so that
they can become profieient. and
new online learning instruclors
should avail themselves of these
opportunities
to learn. In addition,
many institutions
provide help so
that new online instruclol's can
convert their face-to-face courses to
an online liJnnaL Still, it can be a
daunting task.
My Subaru mechanic tells me
that keeping up-to-date on cars
requires constant learning and
unlearning these days. lIe had to
learn how to use an online system
that helps him keep up, and this
system is constantly being
improved. My accountant
says that
tax law changes each year require
gobs of time and effort to keep up
with. My point? Many folks are
dealing with a continual need for
reskilling, so our profession doesn't
have a monopoly on needing to
learn new things. And since we're
(hopefully) teaching the next generation of people who will need to he
constantly learning, we cerlainly
ought to walk the talk.
Teaching online
time and effort
will take
more
Some instructors have put a lot
of efJart into building lecture notes
and slides and worry that these
ONLINE
CL@SSRDDM
won't translate well to the online
environment. That's tnle. Online
courses often work besl when they
are more project- and activitybased, and a fair amount of
redesign may be needed. This
certainly can be lime-consuming.
Whal new online instructors often
tell me, however, after we have
finished redesigning their courses in
a more project- or activity-based
Jarmat, is that these project-or
aclivily-based courses are better for
students and more fun to teach.
Many take all the lessons learned in
redesigning for online back to the
classroom. Students in these
I'edesigned courses often
recommend these courses over the
dull lecture-with-slides-type
face-toface courses and give instructors
higher evaluations, so there's a definitely a payoff for all involved.
There are some aspects of
teaching online that actually take
less time and effort. You can
and new skills, so having us walk
the talk is good. The first step to
getting over the typical fears
described here is seeing how many
of them aren't exactly true, and it
helps 10 see the positive nip side of
each fear. Don't get me wrong, I
don't think it's easy; I just think it's
worth it.
To Learn More:
Anderson, T., & Elloumi, Fathi.
(2004). Thear!) and prac/ice C!.fonline
learning. Athabasca Universily.
Hetrieved Sept. 23, 2005 from
http://cde.athabascau.ca/
online_book/ pdfjTPOkbook.
pdf.
1(0, S., & Rossen, S. (2001).
Teaching online: A practical guide.
Boston: Houghton Mimin Company,
Russell, 1'. L. (1999). Tlte no significant dillerence pllenomenon.
Western Cooperative for Educational
Telecommunications.
Retrieved
literally teach in your pajamas. One
of the greatest parts of teaching
online is how the administrative
Sept. 23, 2005 from www.nosignil1cantdilTerence.org.
features of many course management systems allow you to track,
grade, and provide feedback in ways
that are far easier. Students can't
pull out the "I-Iost-my-syllabus"
excuse because all materials are
available online or use the "1handed -it -in-bu t-you -must-havelost-it" defense because the system
logs in the lime and date for
homework submissions. This allows
me to be more of a teacher and less
of a babysitter.
Anxiety provoking as the skills
new online instructors need to learn
are, they often make us betler
instructors. They make us reconsider how we (and others) learn, and
our courses are often better as a
result.
Shank, P. (2004). Making sense
oJ online learning. San Francisco:
Pfeiffer/John Wiley & Sons.
Patti Shank, PhD, CPT. is a widely
recognized instnlCtional designer,
technologist, and author, who
teaches and helps others teach
online. She can be reached through
her website,
www.learningpeaks.com.mg
Many of 1.}simplore our students
to be open t6 new ways of thinking
5
EVALUATI
C N
Ongoing Student Evaluation Essential
to Course Improvement
S
tudenl evalnations are an
essential source of inl<wmation
on how well an online course is
finished the course.
Level four looks at the results
the course in terms of increased
meeting jjs objectives and can point
to ways to improve course design
and delivery. To be useful. evaluations should address each of
Kirkpatrick's four levels of evaluation: reactions, learning, transfer,
and results, say Doris Owens,
assistant director of distance
education at Midwestern State
Universlly In Texas, and Cheryl
Williams, training and education
coordinator at Elk Valley Rancheria,
a Native American casino in
California.
At the reactions level. evaluation
measures how learners react to a
course, asking questions like the
following:
productivity, Improved quality,
decreased costs, and ret urn on
investment.
··
·
·
Did you like the course?
Was it relevant to your job?
Do you feel you've learned from
the course?
If you feel you didn't feel learn
anything from the course, was it
because of the delivery method,
content. or method of communication?
The second level-Iearninglooks at whether the students
learned from the course. This can
be accomplished
through formal or
informal testing; through team
assessment
and self-assessment:
or
by comparing results of pretests
and posttests.
Level three looks at whether or
not students are able to apply what
they've learned to the work environment. This level is harder to achieve
than the first two levels because
students may not immediately apply
what they've learned, and It may
require an extra effort to follow up
with students after they have
6
trainers
of
Owens says, "You rarely get to
level three or four, but nowadays a
lot of organizations,
especially universities, are trying to get 10 the
results level because resulls are
being tied to tenure. Universities
are looking at student retention and
whether or not students are able to
apply Ihe information they're
learning. So if this was a prerequisite course, can students apply that
knowledge to the next level?"
As online students at the
University of Phoenix, Owens and
Williams came to appreciate the
evaluations they were asked to
complete. In addition to providing "a
chance to moan and groan," evaluations, especially among adult
learners, indicate that the instructor respects and values the opinions
of his or her students, Owens says.
Getting students to complete
evaluations can be dilTicult, and
Owens and Williams warn against
giving too much weight to one or
two evaluations. For example,
Owens did a qualilative and quantitative study of her institution's
nursing program over a three-year
period. She interviewed recent
graduates to find oul the areas that
were weakest in the program,
looking for paUerns rather than the
opinions of one or two students. "It
can't be just a one-time evaluation.
It's got to be a longitudinal study,
and once you identify those
patterns, you can begin making
changes," Owens says.
ImplementIng changes can take a
while based on ,this approach. This
is one area in which corporate
have an easier time. "If
you're giving an instructional
coul'se to employees, Ihe resulls are
almost immediately apparent. If
you've got 200 employees, you're
prohably not giving thai course to
all 200 at the same time. By the
time the lasl session comes around,
you are able 10 implement any
changes that are necessary. It's a
tremendous advantage. At the same
time, it's a tremendous scramble to
get that information to back, to
correlate all the evaluations, to
identify the areas that need
changes, and to make the changes,"
Williams says.
This is not to say that course
evaluation and changes based on
those evaluations should come only
at the end of the course. It is also
important to evaluate at the
beginning of a course to get a feel
for your students' learning styles
and throughout the course to
consider changes that can be made
to the course thai could help the
current studenls.
"Do an assessmenl
at Ihe
beginning. Find out whal the
knowledge level of your students is.
Tknow you can't do Ihis with all the
courses you teach, because some
are strictly knowledge based, but
when it's an application-type
course, you can assess the
beginning knowledge students have
about the subject maUer. Then
midway through, ask. 'Are we on
target? Are we meeting your needs?
Are you grasping the material? Is
the course what YOll thought II
would be?' And at the end, ask
again," Owens says.
Con/act Do/is Owens at
[email protected] and Cheryl
Williams at cwilliams@elkvalley. com mI
CCURSE
PRCF"ILE
Secondary Teaching Methods Online...Times 3!
By Patrick DllrDW, PlrD
I
teach general and special.in the
secondary teacher educal.1on
program al Creighton UniversHy in
Omaha, Nebraska. As the program
typically enrolls 30 to 40 undergraduate and graduale sludents,
the special methods courses li)r
studenls nearing their student
teaching in each content area (e.g.,
science, Spanish, histOlY) are
subjecl to very small enrollments at
times. The Education Department
also offers a graduate teacher
education/service
option that may
enroll students at remole locations.
Combining the dean's charge to the
Education Department to staff the
small enrollment courses more economically, to meet the distance
learning needs of some of our
students, and to continue to provide
a quality course experience for all
students, the department
has
chosen the online course offering
option.
Allhough I formerly taught the
secondary English special methods
course, I now teach Special
Methods for Teaching the
Humanities in the Secondary
School. which combines the disciplines of English/language
arls/journalism,
world languages,
and history/social
sludies. The
course is delivered via Blackboard.
Each sl udent is assigned a
textbook that describes teaching
methods in her or his academic discipline. In addition to tradH ional
assignments
such as papers,
projects, and materials compilation/evaluation
activities, students
'respond (via discussion board in
Blackboard) to thematic questions
such as "How do the best teachers
in your academic area motivate
students?" and "What does effective
1,',liH
student
assessment
look like in
your field?" each week, citing information from their texis and from
the teacher observation/
aiding that
they are required to complete concurrent wilh the course. Following
the weekly deadline li)r the original
posting, I direel students to read all
original posts and reply to at least
two other students by a second
weekly deadline.
Each week at a predetermined
time, students and the instmctor
also participate in a required hour-
Online discussions
allow
students to hear the perspectives of preservice
teachers in their own
disciplines
and others.
long online chat session.
Participation in the chat session is
treated the same as course attendance and participation
in a faceto-face class meeting. The chat
session features additional discussion, organized debates, and presentation of project work.
Besides the obvious advantage of
access for those at a distance, the
online discussion formats in this
course allow students to hear the
perspectives of preservice teachers
in their own disciplines and in
olhers, as well as those of experienced teachers in other disciplines
wit h whom class members are
observing. Students also benefit
from time Oexibility and the opportunity to think and respond in
depth.
A significant challenge continues
to be that the online course experience is new.~ for most of our
students.
l'll"",hHUOi1
---
They miss the cama-
raderie of the traditionall~l('e-toface course and perceive the course
as rathcr sterile. To help estahliHh a
bit of classroom community, I
scheduled the first chat sf'ssion as
a face-to-hlce meeting. If possihle.
there will be 01her such meetiugs.
Some students struggle to manage
the strict timelines of the post/reply
schedule. I help that sit uation by
sending e-mail reminders and
feedback on discussion posls al
two-week intervals. Students who
struggle willi writing need encouragement with construction
of Iheir
online posts. I recognize the
challenge of energizing the course
assignments
beyond text reading.
assignments.
and paper expectations, and I hope to include audio
and video of students' actual
teaching segments.
Several sllceesses have been
noted in the second year of the
online offering structure. We are
more economical: one instruclor is
teaching 10 to 12 students inslead
of three handling the same number.
Despite the newness of the experience, students are willing to
embrace the technology and lormat.
We all recognize that technology will
sometimes deal us a dose of the
unexpected. Although I am not a
techno-geek, I have expanded my
teaching strategies. Finally, the
online "Times 3" structure provides
everyone the opportunity to mm'e
broadly inlegrate academic work
with on-sile classroom observation.
Patrick Durow is at! assistant
pn?/essor ill the Department oj
Education at Creighton Universily.
Contact him at
williamdl [email protected]
CCLLABDRATICN
Study: Changing Virtual Team Membership Improves
Participation
A
re you having trouble getting
Yirtual team members to con-
tribute equally to team projects? If
so, perhaps you should try varying
the membership of these teams
because, according to a study by
Brian Dineen (see reference below).
doing so can reduce the issue of
social loafing, where team members
rely on other group members to do
the work for them.
Dineen formed groups in a large,
upper-division
organizational
behavior class and gave members
the option of working face to face, by
telephone, or online. He opted for
this model because he fell it closely
replicated conditions now common
in professional contexts. Employees
work with others in a virtual environment, and frequently, as tasks
evolve, membership in working
groups changes.
In the article referenced below,
Dineen provides complete logistical
details for the assignment,
including
the following important elements
that were used: groups were made
up of three to five members; for each
of eight weeks they analyzed short
cases relevant to course material
and answered two questions related
to the case; and group work, which
counted for one-fourth of their
grade, included a peer evaluation
component. Even though students
had the option of meeting face-toface or by phone, 70 percent
reported that they completed the
entire exercise without ever meeting
face-to-face. Instead, they used
private bulletin boards that the
instructor set up for them within
WebCT.
For comparative purposes, Dineen
kept membership in half of the 26
groups stable. Those students
worked together from start to finish
on the project. In the other groups,
Dineen changed group membership
weekly; in the second week, groups
gained and lost one member, and in
the third and fourth weeks they
gained and lost two members.
Students did not know how long
they would be in the group. They
simply received an e-mail announcing that they had been reassigned to
another group. They could no longer
access their previous group's
bulletin board and were given access
to a new one.
Dineen looked at the impact of
this group work design across a
number of different variables. He
collected data from students before
the experience, on weekly surveys
and on the anonymous end-ofcourse evaluation. From the data
gathered, Dineen discovered that
most of those who responded to the
surveys did not have previous group
experience in a virtual environment.
The inexperienced group reported
signifkantly higher degrees of
learning outcomes and confidence
than those who had worked in
virtual groups before.
Dineen explains the reduction of
socialloallng
by citing other
research documenting
that when
groups contain strangers, team
members tend to be on their best
behavior because they are somewhat
inhibited by people they don't know.
Quantitative data indicated that
social loafing was isolated to less
than 5 percent of possible cases.
However, levels of cohesion reported
by group members were higher in
those groups with stable membership. Interestingly, students in
groups with fluid membership did
not report lower levels of internal
communication
or decreases in their
perceived abilities to Influence group
decision making.
Also of note were some findings
related to extraverted and introverted team memb~s. Results "show
that introverts actually felt more
influence than extraverts during this
exercise and perceived a greater
cohesiveness and beller internal
communieation."
This finding held
true regardless of whether group
membership was stable or fluid. (p.
613) Dineen suspects that the
virtual environment somehow "levels
the playing field," making it easier
lor introverts to contribute during
group interactions.
~rhis is
important because it suggests that
conducting online team exercises
might bring more equivalent contributions from all team members." (p.
613)
This article is exemplary not only
for the creative design of the group
work, but also for the comp,"ehensive
way in which the impact of the
approach was analyzed and
assessed. This is an imp,"essive piece
of practil ioner pedagogical scholarship.
Reference: Dineen, B. R. (2005).
TeamXchange: A team project experience involving virtual teams and
fluid team membership. Journal oj"
Management Education, 29(4).
593-616. rm1
Share
Your
Ideas
If you have developed an
Innovative online course or have
some online teaching tips you
would like to share with the
readers of Online Classroom,
contact Rob Kelly at
<[email protected]>,
-
III
B
[) NLlhlE
CUiVSSROOM