Chapter1 E-Learning: Promise and Pitfalls

Chapter 11 Learning Together on the Web

 What is collaborative learning?

 We define collaboration as a structured exchange between two or more participants designed to enhance achievement of the learning objectives.

 See Table 11.1

 Collaborative learning versus knowledge management

 In addition to supporting learning of course content, collaborative tools can also serve a knowledge management function by encouraging learners to exchange their own experiences related to the course topic.

 Learning through knowledge exchange is a valuable feature of online learning.

 Options for collaboration in internet e-learning

 Synchronous tools: chat rooms, online conference…

 Asynchronous tools: message boards, email…

 Guidelines for use of collaboration tools in e-learning.

Assign projects to e-learning groups using proven collaborative methodologies such as jigsaw and structured controversy.
Assign structured discussions to e-learning groups using proven collaborative methodologies such as problem-based learning and peer tutoring.

 Which collaborative tools to use?

 Two major factors are the degree of learner concurrency and the learning goal.

 What is concurrency?

 Concurrency refers to the number of learners active in an e-course in the same time period.

 Highly concurrent environments have set start and end dates.

Assignments are completed independently but in a coordinated time frame.
It is thus feasible to make group assignments and plan synchronous and asynchronous exchanges using a range of tools including chats, conferences, e-mail, and message boards.

 Moderate concurrency means that learners are likely to engage in the same training at roughly the same time.

Tools such as discussion boards, chats, and e-mails or a scheduled expert presentation via conferencing are practical.

 Low concurrent learning environments are characterized by individuals who may start and finish training at any time.

Everyone enjoys a unique schedule, and the number of learners who are simultaneously engaged in a given instructional unit is unpredictable.
Synchronous events like chats or conferences linked to the instruction are less practical, while message boards and instructor e-mail can play a greater role.

 The degree of learner concurrency in your training environment is a major pragmatic factor that dictates which collaborative techniques and tools you can use to achieve your learning goals.

 See figure 11.5.

 What are your anticipated learning goals?

 Procedural courses benefit from different types of collaborative interactions more than conceptual courses focusing on far transfer skills.

 Procedural courses

provide instructor e-mail for resolving difficulties
message boards can offer opportunities for participants to share experiences of a new procedure.

 Conceptual courses

lend themselves more effectively to collaborative team projects.

 What we know about collaboration during learning

 Adapt the findings from classroom collaboration to online environments.

 Learning together can be better than learning alone

 Most studies reported a positive learning effect when students studied together and were given a group reward based on the individual progress of all learners in the group.

 The following guidelines summarize the best practice for implementation of collaborative learning in classroom environments that are likely to apply to e-learning collaboration well.

Guideline 1: make assignments that require collaboration among learners
The lesson must make structured assignments of sufficient scope and complexity that can not be achieved by a single participant working alone.
Guideline 2: assign learners to groups in ways that optimize interaction.
Collaborative learning assignments yield best outcomes for learners working in pairs or in small groups (<=6).
Heterogeneous groups get better learning outcomes than homogeneous groups.
Guideline 3: structural group assignments around products or processes.
Product-oriented collaboration

 A tangible output such as a report or design is a vehicle for stimulating group collaboration with subsequent learning.

 The lesson must provide sufficient guidance and resources to ensure productive collaboration but have enough openness and ambiguity to stimulate creativity and challenge.

 For conceptual learning that involves product design or problem-solving and no one correct solution, assign collaborative projects to foster maximum interaction, mutual exchange, and in depth discussions.

 When working on these types of projects, the amount of interaction in the group is predictive of learning.

Process-oriented collaboration

 does not involve production of a tangible product, but rather focuses on the learning that can be gained from structured group exchange.

 Problem-based learning (PBL): follow a structured process to discuss the problem, define learning issues, conduct independent study, and reconvene to discuss problem solutions.

 Peer tutoring: pairs work together following study guidelines to prepare for course tests such as the mutual question-asking technique.

 Effective structuring of the collaborative assignment to maximize interaction is a critical factor for success. In addition, the degree of concurrency in your learning environment and the types of collaborative facilities your technology support will shape the collaborative learning assignments that you can implement.

 Models for productive group collaborations

 See Table 11.3.

 Jigsaw

 The jigsaw method uses two team structures-home teams and specialty sub-teams.

 Several home teams made up of five to seven members work independently on an assignment such as to design a product, to prepare a report, or to complete some project related to the instructional goal.

 After an initial period of work, home teams divide and meet with members from different home teams to form sub-teams, which focus on a specific aspect related to the core assignment.

 Each home team member participates in a separate sub-team. Sub-teams work together to master their topic and then the members return to their home team.

 Each member then teaches a piece of the conceptual puzzle to fellow home team members and applies that piece to the final product.

 Adopting Jigsaw to e-learning

 In high or moderate concurrency, learners will form home teams similar to standard classroom procedures.

A project is assigned in the e-course.
Learners with other online participants to begin the home team assignment.
After working on an initial project, each home team number is then assigned to a sub-team.
Members of each sub-team can go to a message board with an assignment linked to one of the sub-topics.
They can work with others active on that sub-topic to review previous discussions and, after researching available resources, make their own additions and synthesis of the discussion to take back to the home team.
The home team uses e-mail, chat, or conference session to integrate the findings of each member into a final project.

 Environments with low learner concurrency can use a form of jigsaw in which an individual learner contributes to an ongoing project.

After reviewing the status of the project to date on a project Web page, the learner selects a topic to research from specified subtopics and can use both sub-topic message boards and individual research to build expertise on his or her chosen topic.
The individual learner then makes a change or contribution to the ongoing learning project based on his or her specialty topic.

 Structured controversy

 In the classroom, learners are assigned to heterogeneous teams of four. The teams are presented with an issue or problem that lends itself to a pro and con position.

 The teams divide into pairs, each of which takes one side and researches it, developing a strong position for their perspective.

 After a period of time, the team of four reconvenes and one pair presents their argument to the other.

 After the presentation, the receiving pair must state back the argument adequately to the presentation pair to demonstrate their understanding of the presentation’s argument.

 Then the pairs reverse roles. All team members develop an understanding of both perspectives.

 After the argumentation stage, the full team moves into a synthesis stage where the opposing perspectives are merged into a reasoned position that culminates in a group report or presentation.

 Factors for successful constructive controversy:

Ensure a cooperative context where the goal is first understanding the opposing views, followed by a synthesis of perspectives.
Structure groups to include learners of mixed background knowledge and ability.
Provide access to rich and relevant information about the issues.
Ensure adequate social skills to manage conflict.
Focus group interactions on rational arguments.

 Adapting structured controversy to e-learning

 It could be adapted to e-learning environments of high- or medium-learner concurrency.

At an appropriate Web site, design an application problem or case that lends itself to two or more alternative perspectives.
Provide links to relevant resources.
Instruct participants to take one of the positions and find an online classmate interested in that same position.
The pair will then work through e-mail or chat to research their position and develop their case.
Next they post their argument to the message board, and either together or individually review opposing arguments. They can post their summary of those arguments to verify understanding.
To complete the exercise, either the pair or an individual can produce and post a final product to an online gallery that represents a synthesis of all perspectives.

 Seven-jump method

 Problem-based learning with a structured group process. After reading the problem, the group process follows this sequence:

Clarify unknown terms and concepts.
Define the problem in the case.
Analyze the problem by brainstorming different plausible explanations.
Critique the different explanations produced and try to draft a coherent description of the process.
Define the learning issues.
Engage in self-directed study to fill the gaps specified by the learning issues.
Meet with the group, share learnings, and develop a final description of the process.

 Adapting seven-jump to e-learning

 Step 3 is best facilitated through some type of synchronous interaction such as chat or conference.

 Step 1, 2, 4, 5, and 7 could be handled asynchronously via e-mail and /or postings to a group discussion board.

 Scripted cooperation

 Scripted cooperation requires pairs of learners to follow a structured assignment as they study together.

Each member of the pair reads the same text assignment.
One member then summarizes the key points to the listener.
The listener points out any inaccuracies or omissions by the summarizer.
They both work to find effective study strategies for the material, such as forming analogies, creating images, and so on.
After completing the study strategies, they read a second selection of text, reversing roles on summarization and critique.

 The guidelines for scripted cooperation:

Use pairs, since interaction is maximized between two individuals.
Provide pairs with specific interactive process guidelines (scripts) rather than allowing participants to develop their process.
Assign heterogeneous pairs with respect to ability or cognitive style.
Adapt the interactive script to the characteristics and task-relevant skills of participants.

 Adapting scripted cooperation to e-learning

 The use of synchronous exchanges via chats or conferences would provide an online communication environment closet to the face-to-face experience of the classroom scripted-cooperation method.

 Psychological reasons for collaborative assignments

 The need for learners to attend to important information in the lesson and to integrate new knowledge with existing knowledge in long-term memory.

 Well-structured collaborative assignments that maximize interactions among all participants support both of these processes.

 Activate prior knowledge in learners.

 Confronting a problem and discussing the problem in a small group have independent positive effects on prior knowledge and subsequent learning.

 The evidence for online collaborative learning

 Patterns of deeper communication in the online discussion, possibly due to greater accountability, visibility, and opportunities for reflection afforded by the written asynchronous on line discussions.

 Online collaborations that were supported by guiding statements resulted in deeper communications and better learning outcomes than collaborations that had no supporting questions or has specific content-oriented questions.

 What to look for in e-learning

 Structured group assignments requiring project outcomes that are based on well-designed cases, along with resources to work those cases.

 Assignments that use e-mail, chat, conferencing, and message boards appropriate to the degree of concurrency in the learning environment.

 Structured group discussions on well-designed case problems that make use of chats or conferencing, accompanied by resources to research follow-up issues.

 Structured study assignments for pairs of learners that make use of e-mail or chats.

 Knowledge management facilities to extend learning through discussion boards.

 Student-instructor e-mail used for questions and for evaluating projects.