Gilbert, Morton & Rowley discuss the findings of a qualitative study on student evaluations of and e-learning module in the article e-learning: The student experience. The article starts with a justification of the study citing the need to understand student’s experiences in e-learning since there has been such a rapid growth in this type of education and industry. A literature review discusses the multiple frameworks used in e-learning environments and their key components. Key components identified include: technology, pedagogy, organizational context, creativity, cybernetics, interaction, and evaluation. Past research has focused on online communities, e-assessment, judging text on screen, factors that influence learners’ use of online learning, e-learning dialogues, and the social dimensions of online learning. In this study, Gilbert, Morton & Rowley focus on the on students experiences since “much e-learning fails to live up to learner expectations” (p. 562).
The results of the study indicate aspects of the module that are useful (ie. practical applications, subject content, learning about methodologies, and discussion forums and support from peers) and aspects of the modules that can be improved (ie. Usability and robustness of platform, availability of papers online, currency of study materials, support for students in scheduling their work). The study found that most students followed the learning order suggested by the tutor but some liked to engage with the material in different sequences. Because students liked the mobility of printed or download objects, the e-learning environment was used more as a place to access information rather that an integrated environment. A discussion of the role of instructors revealed that students do not understand the role of tutor’s roles and many students expect more input and interaction from them. Another interesting point is that despite the fact that students like discussion forums, they are often reluctant to the first contributor.
Gilbert, Morton & Rowley recognize the need for further research including:
- How do students engage with e-learning materials and activities, and what impact do different learning strategies and tactics have on learning success?
- Are e-learning processes dependent on individual differences, as represented by learning styles and preferences, or can they be explored at a group level, with a focus on groups profession, and study discipline?
- How can students be supported in the development of their notions of their own and their tutor’s roles in e-learning environments?
- How can out understanding of learner-to-learner interaction in the learning process be enhanced in order that it can be facilitated more effectively in multichannel learning environments?
Williams, B. (2005). Formal online discussions: Reflections on process. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 1-7.
The International Forum of Educational Technology & Society (IFETS) model for moderated and formal discussions is the focus of the article Formal online discussions: Reflections on process. Five areas considered by Williams include:
- Hosting the discussion
- Maintaining archive
- preserving privacy
- providing guidelines/models for moderators, and
- providing guidelines for citing contributions
Limitations of the current IFETS approach are discussed (ie. Difficulty reading long posts, difficult to perceive context of contributions, difficult to replicate multi-participant discussions, moderators have to pull contributions together, aesthetically basic). Essential space characteristics discussed include: facilitating in-depth discussion, push communication, archiving facility, portability, no/low cost). Desirable features mentioned include: no client installation, aesthetically pleasing interface, and participant profiles. Discussion spaces can be collaborative workspaces, web-based, and/or e-mail.
William identifies essential features of archives; these include: messages stored chronologically, search facility. Desirable features include: view formal discussion contributions in context of pre-discussion document, various viewing options, and hide quoted text options.
Williams raises questions regarding preserving privacy for participants in formal and moderated discussions. It is suggested that inappropriate behaviour issues be resolved by signing a code of behaviour.
Guidelines and models for moderators is the fourth consideration offered by Williams. He discusses two common models currently used. The first model being a moderator-participant role whereby the moderator is a significant participant in the discussion (more like a traditional teacher). The second model being a participant-participant model whereby the moderator keeps a low profile (more like a facilitator).
The fifth topic that Williams addresses is providing guidelines for citing contributions. Williams identifies the need to have guidelines since users of formal and moderated discussion forums experience the need to reference these discussions. When the thoughts and opinions of others in discussion forums are being referenced in papers, what is expected? A very interesting question.
Williams concludes the article with four questions:
- What are the ideal specifications of a system for hosting and arquiving formal online discussions?
- Is there a case for moving away from the e-mail list-serve model?
- If the answer to 2 is yes, what would be the best alternative?
- Is there a need for guidelines relating to the role of moderator and to citing contributions in formal online discussions?
No comments:
Post a Comment