“Would you say that to me in class?” Online Disinhibition and the Effects on Learning

What are the effects of benign, inappropriate or even toxic student-to-student or student-to-instructor exchanges in online learning communities? How do such exchanges affect learning outcomes?  It’s a topic that’s had little attention from researchers and educators, but as learning continues to scale-up with online and open communities educators need to be paying attention, examining and addressing such interactions. This post shares highlights from a recent paper, Would you ever say that to me in class?”: Exploring the Implications of Disinhibition for Relationality in Online Teaching and Learning.

images

‘Angry’ from iStock

“As Suler (2004) observes, people say and do things in cyberspace that they wouldn’t ordinarily say and do in the face-to-face world. They loosen up, feel less restrained, and express themselves more openly. So pervasive is the phenomenon that a term has surfaced for it: the online disinhibition effect.”  (Rose, 2014)

When reading the paper “Would you ever say that to me in class?”, I considered my experiences as an online student—having more than one exchange, though not toxic, that were strong enough to leave a sting—dampening my enthusiasm for engaging and participating with my classmates. I’ve since worked with students and faculty that have experienced similar exchanges. Though not all reach the toxic level, there have been instances where faculty encountered students using strong and offensive language, requiring the removal of offensive posts within discussion forums and other actions.

Lack of civility in online forums within learning communities is manageable in small, closed online learning communities where an instructor is in control of a class of up to thirty, or even forty students. However, as classes expand, with MOOCs, and other types of learning communities growing, in combination with platforms that allow anonymity (such as Coursera) it will become an issue for educators [and their institutions] involved in online learning at some time or another. Peers within my network have shared their experiences as students and instructors within MOOCs that involve politically charged or contentious subject matters where discussion forums are fraught with offensive, even toxic comments and vitriol discussion.  It is for this reason that I write this post; to provoke thought and discussion in order for educators to be proactive and develop appropriate strategies.

COI-ANIM-300x233

Community of Inquiry via coi.athabscau.ca

More so because online behavior in learning communities is complex.  On one hand, a sense of presence, or “being there” is critical to deep and meaningful learning and thus needs to be encouraged. The Community of Inquiry (CoI) is a well-researched framework (Garrison, 2007) that addresses three dimensions of presence—social, instructor and cognitive that are deemed necessary for higher education students to experience deep learning in online environments.

Yet on the other, the CoI framework, due to its two-dimensional nature, does not give us insight into the type of exchanges, the tone behind the student-to-student exchanges online and how they might affect learning. Just as tone of voice, eye contact and body language affect verbal communication—word choice, characters used, even font size and type, (e.g. CAPITAL LETTERS), in text exchanges affect meaning of a message conveyed in an online space. Yet some students will exhibit online disinhibition, emboldened by lack of personal contact, distance and in some cases anonymity. Such behavior can wreak havoc within a learning community—can discourage participants, damage student confidence, stall, or impede learning.

In open learning situations that are not controlled by any one individual due to a connectivist learning approach or student-centered focus for example, dealing with such behavior is challenging, though not impossible. Swift and deliberate action is required by one or more individuals. Even in controlled settings, on a closed platform, or within a small learning community, action is required to preserve a learning climate and community.

Highlights from the Paper:

Below are highlights from “Would you ever say that to me in class?”: Exploring the Implications of Disinhibition for Relationality in Online Teaching and Learning.”

  • The study is qualitative in nature. Analysis of data collected from two universities, from undergraduate and graduate students revealed “instructors’ and students’ experiences of connection with, or disconnection from, each other were profoundly influenced by the phenomenon of online disinhibition.
  • Students recounted stories of class peers turning “ugly” or “abusive” in online posts, making “personal attacks” against classmates, even “swearing at people, calling them idiots and stuff like that.” One student, attributed this tendency to people’s comfort with the online environment: “something that was surprising to me was that people were comfortable enough with the environment to lose a sense of decorum…like they just lost it.”
  • In most of the students’ stories, arguments and disruptive behaviour were seen as the direct result of the kinds of miscommunications that occur in online environments, where paralinguistic cues such as facial expressions and tone of voice are not available to clarify meaning.
  • Online disinhibition is also associated with positive outcomes— In some cases, the student-to-student or student-to-instructor relationship may be enriched—for example, when a student shares an experience that personalizes and thus deepens the learning for everyone, or when a shy student opens up.
  • In other cases, the relationship may be inevitably damaged, as when a student confides something she or he later regrets, or says something that other students consider inappropriate or offensive.

Conclusions
Online disinhibition is a phenomenon that affects not only learning exchanges in online communities, but social (e.g. Twitter) and gaming platforms, etc. Yet learning environments need a special layer of protection that goes beyond a ‘report abuse’ option that exists within most online platforms, e.g. Facebook and Twitter. Learning in online communities requires a level of trust, familiarity, and has associated with it an expectation of a ‘safe’ zone. How can educators create a safe learning community in a closed, online class? What about in an open learning community, in a MOOC?  Answers to questions like these depend upon the learning community, the participants, the purpose of the learning and other factors. But it is up to us as educators to look for answers; we need to have strategies and built-in mechanisms within the different types of online learning communities that will provide [albeit wide] guard rails to foster, yet protect a climate of learning and development.

I’ll be writing more about this topic, specifically anonymity in online learning communities. Stay tuned!

References:

 

How to Create a Video Strategy for MOOCs: Costs and Considerations

“Harvard has built what amounts to be an in-house production company to create massive open online courses, or MOOCs…[it] has two video studios, more than 30 employees, and many freelancers — an astonishing constellation of producers, editors, videographers, composers, animators, typographers, and even a performance coach to help professors get comfortable in front of a camera.The Boston Globe

Harvardx Studio Filming for MOOC

In the HarvardX video production studio, Harvard historian & museum curator being filmed for a MOOC.  Image credit: Katherine Taylor for The Boston Globe

I saw scores of dollar signs when I read about Harvard’s production studios created solely for the purpose of producing videos for MOOCs to put on the edX platform. The article featured in The Boston Globe about Harvard’s new studio, describes videos that share traits similar to documentaries rather than the typical lecture videos featuring a professor speaking to the camera, typical of xMOOCs. Here’s the catch though, the money spent on these production costs for MOOC videos, which is dear, may not always be worth the investment according to recent studies (Guo, Kim & Rubin, 2014), (Hollands & Tirthali, 2014).

For readers considering, or are in the process of developing a MOOC I’ve outlined guidelines that will help in the development of an instructional strategy for the delivery of the course content for xMOOCs (MOOC featured on a platform such as Coursera or Open2Study).  I’ve drawn from recent research on video production and student engagement specific to xMOOCs—one study out of MIT using data from edX, and the other a noteworthy report released this May “MOOCs: Expectations and Realities”.

Following are considerations and questions to guide the development and choice of the content delivery methods, including videos for MOOCs. Don’t be misled by the flashy [and expensive] studios that Harvard established, thinking that this is a requirement for putting on effective MOOCs. This high bar set by Harvard, may be unjustified, more so when analyzing why institutions choose to offer MOOCs, and how they fit into the vision, and long-term strategy. For the most part institutions’ reasons for offering MOOCs are vague, and few establish metrics to measure the effectiveness of MOOCs, including return on investment, as discussed in Hollands & Tirthali’s report:

“…Most institutions are not yet making any rigorous attempt to assess whether MOOCs are more or less effective than other strategies to achieve these goals.

The Numbers $$$
The two primary cost drivers of MOOC production are the hours invested by faculty members, administrators, instructional designers, technical support and the costs associated with the quality and type of delivery method for the course content. Videos, the typical mode for xMOOCs, can range between high and low production values. The estimated costs for high quality video production is $4,300 per hour of finished video (Hollands & Tirthali, p 11). High quality video production typically involves a team of at least five video experts each involved in one aspect of the process, including  filming, sound, lighting, editing and project management.

  • Development costs of MOOC vary significantly: as low as $38,980, Teacher’s College, Columbia University, to a range between $203,770 – $325,330, Large Midwestern University (Hollands & Tirthali, p 12)
  • Harvard’s costs as per the Boston article, $75,000 and $150,000, though depending upon the method for calculating, it’s difficult to compare to the study quoted above.
philip-guo-edx-first-blog-figure

Chart showing student viewing time in minutes.

Guiding Questions and Considerations for Creating a Video Strategy

  • Consider goals for each module/week within the MOOC when planning for content delivery. What delivery method will communicate content to students effectively? Is there an opportunity for student-developed or student-curated [and shared] content sources?
  • Consider a variety of content delivery methods: video, open source content (video and other), interactive online resources, etc.
  • If using video, consider between formats, tutorial-style (illustrating a procedure, step-by-step, i.e. Khan Academy-style) and lecture.  Within each format there are variations influenced by filming technique [screen cast, podcast, filming on laptop, studio, etc], media choices, etc. Research shows students engage differently with each (Guo, Kim & Rubin).
  • Consider: the average engagement time of any MOOC lecture video maxes out at 6 minutes, some as few as 4. However, students engage with tutorials quite differently, often pausing, re-watching, fast-forwarding, etc. (Guo, Kim & Rubin).
  • Are there existing open and accessible content sources on the web that can illustrate a course concept [rather than filming from scratch]?
  • Call students to action to use and apply content from video, i.e. via a  discussion forum or upcoming assignment.
  • Finally, plan the strategy upfront where: 1) each content delivery mode (video, etc) is planned by module/week (content is outlined and scripted when necessary), 2) content within delivery mode links directly to goals of given week, and 3) there is a requirement for students to apply and use the content, for example in discussion forum, assignment or quiz.

References:

Further Reading:

How and Why Institutions are Engaging with MOOCs…Answers in Report “MOOCs: Expectations and Reality”

How do institutions use MOOCs; and to what end?  •  Why do institutions pay thousands of dollars to develop and offer a MOOC on an external platform?  •  How do institutions determine the effectiveness of their MOOC efforts?  •  What are the costs associated with producing and delivering a MOOC?

All good questions; questions that policymakers, administrators and other stakeholders within higher education institutions that are considering MOOCs or already engaged with, want [or should want] answers to. The 200+ page report “MOOCs: Expectations and Reality” by Hollands and Tirthali of Columbia University attempt to answer these questions by surveying 83 faculty members, administrators, researchers and other actors within 69 education institutions. The report delivers on the promise of its title—how and why institutions engage, and provides the reader with even more insights.

The report is meaty, worthy of review for anyone with a vested interest in MOOCs of any type. In this post I provide a brief overview of the report, but focus specifically on one aspect of the ‘how‘. I highlight the resources required to develop a MOOC—how many people it requires, the job titles, the [estimated] costs associated with development. This may be useful for readers considering developing a MOOC for a platform such as Coursera or another, or for a cMOOC using a collective course design approach. This report brings into focus just how resource-hungry MOOCs are, and after reading the report, readers considering developing or contributing to the development of a MOOC might feel enlightened, encouraged, or perhaps even discouraged; at the very least, will have a better understanding of MOOCs and their place in higher education institutions.

 Overview

Who sponsored the report?  The Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education (CBCSE), a research center at the Teachers College at Columbia University. The mission of the center is “to improve the efficiency with which public and private resources are employed in education“.  Note: the report is open and available for download.

Purpose of the Study: Given the work of the CBCSE, and its pursuit of improvement of cost efficiency in education, the report is an extension of its mission. The purpose as outlined in the report, “the study serves as an exploration of  the goals of institutions creating or adopting MOOCs and how these institutions define effectiveness of  their MOOC initiatives“.

Screen Shot 2014-05-19 at 9.50.39 PM

Figure 1 ‘MOOCs: Expectations and Reality’ (p 22)

Report Snapshot:  The report sample includes 83 administrators, faculty members and researchers, all of which were interviewed, at 62 institutions. The institutions: public and private universities, community colleges, platform providers, research organizations, for-profit education companies and a selection of institutions deemed ‘other’ including one museum (p 180). Of the 62 institutions in the sample, 29 at the time of the study were offering or using MOOCs in some way; the remaining were either not participating or taking a wait-and-see position.

Why a MOOC? One of the reasons this report is instructive for the education community is the inclusion of the data about why institutions offer MOOCs. Many have asked why some institutions (several public higher education institutions) have spent thousands of dollars, invested considerable resources into this method of education delivery to the masses that has yet to be evaluated and tested for effectiveness. The chart below summarizes the six reasons identified.

Screen Shot 2014-05-20 at 8.25.43 AM

‘MOOCs: Expectations and Reality’ (Hollands & Tirthali, p 8)

The above table is merely a snapshot.  Each goal is described in further detail within the report. A case study featuring an institution accompanies each which gives a contextual example of the reasons.

A snapshot of How? MOOCs are resource intensive efforts, and the report validates this. Development of a MOOC, and the facilitation of the course once its live (accessible to students) requires significant amounts of time and energy from individuals across several departments within the institution. The faculty member (or members) acting as the subject matter expert for the MOOC requires a team, each with different areas of expertise to support him or her in bringing the content to life and creating an environment of learning for hundreds, if not thousands of course participants.

“Number of faculty members, administrators, and instructional support personnel involved MOOC production teams seldom included fewer than five professionals and, in at least one instance described to us, over 30 people were involved. Faculty members typically reported spending several hundred hours in the production and delivery of a single MOOC” (p 11)

Example of Human Resources Requirements: Case Study 11

Case study 11 provides an excellent example of the commitment of resources needed for developing a course for a MOOC platform which in this example is Coursera. The institution in the case is an unnamed MidWestern University (p 144). The school invited faculty with prior media experience to develop a five to eight week MOOC. This study is representative of the human resources required for development of a MOOC.

Human resources requirements by job title for course development of a MOOC:

2 x Faculty Members: (Subject Matter Experts)

1 x Project Manager: Leads the project, coordinates all elements of development. Liaise with departments as needed within the institution. Manages the project timetable; keeps project on time and on budget

4 x Curriculum Design Team Instructional Designer (works with faculty to present course content and create a learning environment with it on the course home page). • Instructional Technologist (works with instructional designer) • Video Production Liaison (works with faculty member in production of videos, and liaise with video production team)

5 x Video Production Team:  Production Manager •  Camera operators/equipment technicians • Audio-technician

In this case study, videos were produced at a high quality, using a full video design team. The final costs were calculated using records from the institutions, though the report authors made some estimates due to lack of detail on some aspects of human resource inputs.

Screen Shot 2014-05-20 at 8.59.34 AM

‘MOOCs: Realities and Expectations’ (p 144). One of the two data tables accompanying case study #11. Table 7 gives the range of hours spent on MOOC design (p 144)

Lecture Videos: Costs and Student Engagement
One of the primary drivers of costs in MOOC development (for platforms such as Coursera, FutureLearn, etc.) is video production. The more complex the video, for instance addition of graphics, multiple cameras used for shooting, post-filming editing, the higher the costs. Low-tech efforts,  where there might be one camera person, or even the faculty member self-recording on his or her laptop requires far fewer resources.  Some institutions seek a higher quality finished product, which in turn demands a high level of production using a team of video professionals. Accordingly, the costs vary dramatically. ‘MOOCs: Expectation and Realities’ estimates high quality video production at $4,300 per hour of finished video (p 11).

One may be tempted to think that the higher the video quality, the better the learning outcomes. However a report published recently by EDUCAUSE, What Makes an Online Instructional Video Compelling? suggests that students engagement with videos relies upon several factors, including whether or not the video links to an assignment within the course. Furthermore, the average viewing time of videos is less than five minutes (Hibbert, 2014). What this suggests is that videos presenting content must be carefully and strategically planned for during the course development phase, and tied closely to the instructional strategy. Higher production costs does not necessarily mean higher student engagement or learning outcomes.

Closing Thoughts

The report discussed here, ‘MOOCs: Expectation and Realities’ is an important contribution to the MOOC discussion in higher education. In my opinion one of the greatest benefits of the report is the spotlight it puts on the resources required for developing a MOOC, in contrast to the reasons why institutions engage with MOOCs. When one examines closely the reasons, it appears that the amount of resources invested, in some cases is extreme. I agree with the authors in the point they make in the executive summary,

” [we]…conclude that most institutions are not yet making any rigorous attempt to assess whether MOOCs are more or less effective that other strategies to achieve these goals” (p 11).

I’ll add one more point to this, and that’s the need for a complete and comprehensive approach to course design, (applicable to any course) that involves from the beginning, a thorough needs analysis that determines the goals of the organization and how the [potential] course fits into it. It’s only after this analysis that the course design process can proceed.

References:

Hibbert, M. (2014). What Makes an Online Instructional Video Compelling?. EDUCAUSE Review Online. Retrieved from: http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/what-makes-online-instructional-video-compelling

Hollands, F. M., & Tirthali, D. (2014). MOOCs: expectations and reality. Full report. Center for Benefit- Cost Studies of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University, NY.  Retrieved from: http://cbcse.org/wordpress/wp- content/uploads/2014/05/MOOCs_Expectations_and_Reality.pdf

Resources to Help Students Be Successful Online in Three Areas: Technical, Academic & Study Planning

iStock_supportsginXSmallThis post features a collection of carefully selected resources for students learning within online environments; it’s geared to leaners and educators seeking resources for just-in-time learning for technical, academic and study skills required to learn efficiently and successfully in a for-credit or open online course.

Students need a wide range of skills to learn successfully in online settings; they need to be tech savvy, know how to collaborate with peers, conduct online research, navigate proficiently within the learning management platform, manage their time effectively and engage in the learning process by interacting with content, peers and completing course work via the learning platform. Many high school and undergraduate students (perhaps even learners with an undergraduate degree or higher) have a skill gap in one area or another when beginning an online course for the first or even second time. It’s also likely a significant number of students lack the required academic skills for the online course they plan to complete. Research states that as many as 60% of entering college freshman do not have the math or writing skills required for college-level course work.  It’s no wonder that some college-level students are not successful with online studies. Several students will fail, withdraw, or may not learn as deeply as they could have due to a lack of skills in one or more areas.

Three Categories of Resources: The resources featured here address skill gaps in three areas: 1) technical, 2) academic and 3) study skills. The academic section includes resources for subject areas of writing composition, grammar and math. The technical section links to sites that provide instruction for learners in basic web skills including e-mail and file uploads, how-to navigate and search on the web, and it also features a list of resources for student support specific to learning management (LMS) platforms. The section on study skills provides a list of resources geared to learners studying online; skill development for time management, study planning and prioritizing.

How to Help Students:  I’ve compiled the following resources hoping it may help  online learners, by readers sharing ideas and strategies for learning support as discussed here. To further support students, I also recommend institutions create an orientation program for new online students that introduces students to the LMS platform, the features specific to the course site, the syllabus, as well as the resources for academic and technical support. Another idea implemented already by several institutions is a learner readiness quiz, specific to online students. Illinois Online Network has a Self-Evaluation for Potential Online Students, as does Penn State’s World Campus, with its Online Readiness Assessment. This quiz is licensed under that Creative Commons Share Alike license allowing other institutions to use it as long as certain conditions are followed.

It goes without saying, though I’ll emphasize the point anyway, that the onus lies with the student to take advantage of support and resources provided; educators and institutions do have a responsibility to support learning, but it’s the student’s responsibility to take charge and learn.

I. Resources for Technical Skills
Basic Web Skills: Students require a minimum set of skills to function within an online course that includes: how to email, browse the Internet, upload files, download needed plug-ins or software, etc. Yet some students won’t have one or more of the needed skills when beginning an online course. Below are suggested resources to fill in the skills gap.

640px-WebLiteracyMap-v1.1

Image of Mozilla Foundation’s ‘Web Literacy Map’ developed by Doug Belshaw that outlines the skills and competencies people need to read, write and participate effectively on the web. Further details see resources section.

  • Digital Learn.org: tutorials between five and seven minutes on: email basics, web search, basics of Windows or Mac operating systems, and navigating a website
  • Teach-ease (University of South Florida) how to use a web browser, and Internet basics

How to Use Google Drive (formerly Google Docs): Knowing how to share documents, collaborate within virtual teams are other skills needed for students, and not just for learning online but for working and functioning within a digital culture.

How to Bookmark Sites: Bookmarking, also known as “social bookmarking” are actions that allow students to save web sites and online documents for later reference, reading, annotating, and even sharing. There are several online bookmark platforms:

How to Navigate within the LMS Platform: Each learning management platform has its own unique features, and though many are designed to be intuitive and user-friendly, some users require instruction in the form of video clips or text documents to develop confidence and proficiency. It’s helpful for the student that just-in-time-learning is provided by way of links within the course site to instructions specific to a task—for example: how to comment within a discussion forum, or how to upload an assignment file. Several institutions have created tutorials geared to the institution’s students. One example, New Jersey Institute of Technology created tutorials on how to use features of Moodle.

I can see why some institutional educators create their own instructional videos for students, as unfortunately many help videos and text instructions offered by the LMS providers are geared to instructors, not students, per below.

  • MoodleStudent Tutorials are written for instructors, not students
  • CanvasCanvas Student Guide also appears written for instructors, note the first help topic ‘Where do I find more help for students?’
  • Desire2LearnDesire2Learn Resource Center another example of the poor support options provided for students. I found nothing on this site that provides support for students, yet numerous help documents and resources for instructors. It’s no wonder that many institutions have created student help videos—all on the same topics, for example ‘how to post to a discussion forum’ see examples from Mansfield University, Montana State, San Jose State University, Clayton State University, (the list goes on) all which provide the same instructions. This is further evidence of the barriers students face when learning online; unless their institutions provides detailed support, some students face barriers to learning due to lack of support for navigating within the learning platform.
  • Blackboard: Blackboard for Students: tutorials geared to students and instructors
  • HaikuFor Students: Using Haiku LMS: of all the platforms, this is the only one (I could find) featuring a section specific to students.

II. Resources for Academic Skills

Writing Help:

  • OWL The Purdue Writing Lab: Purdue is the mother-of-all sources for writing help of any kind—from grammar help, to developing thesis statements, to report writing, citation help and more. The site features over 200 free resources , all of which are available to anyone.
  • Guide to Grammar and Writing by Capital Community College Foundation. Very good site covering a breadth of topics to support various aspects of writing including essays, outlines and reports. Includes a section on grammar.
  • Institution resources. Many institutions offer writing help centers free of charge for students. Ideally, students studying in for-credit online classes should have access to similar support services online. If a writing center for online students is available at your institution, provide details on the course site, and/or post a note on message board with details for students.
  • e-Tutoring.org is a collaborative online tutoring program and platform for writing skills that provides one-on-one, online support to students from numerous subscribing colleges within the US. It offers two models: collaborative and single. Within the collaborative model, participating institutions share resources to provide greater coverage and quicker turn-around time. e-Tutoring monitors the quality of the tutor feedback. Within the individual model, an institution is free to use the software platform with their own tutors.” The platform appears to be a viable option for institutions with a large online student population. Click here to view the list of the participating schools.

Grammar:

Math:

  • Kahn Academy:  Khan academy is one of the most comprehensive web sites providing skill development in algebra, trig, calculus, statistics, chemistry, biology as well as subjects in history and language arts. Lessons begin at the elementary level, and continue to up to university-level topics and subjects. The site features hundreds of short videos on specific concepts within a subject that range from five to twenty minutes in length. Also offers practice exercises, and support forums.
  • Institution support. As mentioned above some institutions offer virtual support in math for online students, if this is the case, provide details on the course site, and/or post a note on message board with details for students.

III. Resources for Study Skills

  • What Makes a Successful Online Learner? by iseek education with Minnesota Department of Education and Minnesota Online High School
  • Effective Habits for Effective Study, Study Guides and Strategies Website
  • Five-Step Strategy for Student Success with Online Learning, Online Learning Insights
  • HowtoStudy.com: A clean, clutter-free site dedicated only to study skill development, and though it’s geared to college students, any student may benefit from the concise and focused information provided. The site features twelve chapters, ranging from time management, to creating a study plan, note-taking, etc.
  • My Study Life, a new [and free] app—an online student planner designed for students to plan and manage their learning time. It appears to have numerous features including tracking of due dates for assignments, schedule of classes and study times, notifications for scheduled tasks, due dates, and study times.

Closing Thoughts
There are numerous other sources on the Web students can turn to for help. The list above is but a very small representation of what’s available.  However, often time is a barrier for students needing help; searching is time-consuming which is why institutions offering online courses [ideally] need to make help available, and easy to find to support learners that are still learning how to learn. Offering just-in-time help that is focused, and specific to a deficient skill can reduce barriers to learning, and lead to meaningful and successful education experiences.

Resources/Further Reading:

MOOC ‘Jam’: Highlights from a Jam on Digital Pedagogy

This post includes takeaways from a ‘MOOC Jam’, a synchronous discussion online I participated in with a group of educators about digital pedagogy. 

MOOC_Jam_Image

‘Jam’ by John Wardell (Flickr)

“What is a Jam?  A Jam is an asynchronous, typed, online discussion designed to work around your schedule. The goal of a Jam is to gain perspective and solicit ideas that inform the community. After the Jam is over, you can read the exchange and the posted resources, which will remain available for several weeks.” MOOC Jam II, Digital Pedagogy   (The three threads of asynchronous discussions in this jam are: 1) Competencies for teaching online, 2) Developing Faculty Competencies, and 3) Learner Analytics for Faculty)

Screen Shot 2014-04-01 at 11.16.09 AM

Screen Shot of participants online during the Jam participating in the threaded discussions (only partial shot of participants)

This past Tuesday, I participated in a  MOOC Pedagogy Jam via the website Momentum, a platform created for stakeholders to discuss critical issues related to education, sponsored by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The purpose of the platform is to provide a space to host online events about topics related to online education, with the ultimate goal of the Jams ‘to gain perspective and solicit ideas that inform the community’.  I participated in the first MOOC Jam this past November. The topic, “Peer Review of a Framework for MOOCs” hosted by George Siemens, focused on the design of the MOOC Framework. Siemens, creator of the Framework, sought input from the community of participants.

The topic of this Jam, [which turned out to be more of a synchronous discussion] was digital pedagogy, divided into the three threaded discussions as mentioned above. Each discussion featured a moderator, responsible for responding to participants and furthering the discussion, and another moderator summarizing key themes of the discussion each hour. I chose to participate in ‘Competencies for teaching online: describing effective pedagogy’ given its description— “An exchange on how information is delivered to students, how they are engaged as active learners and community is built and how learning is assessed”.

Screen Shot 2014-04-03 at 3.55.00 PM

Screen shot of one the three threaded discussions of the Jam held on the Momentum platform

Digital Pedagogy: Themes and Highlights
Following are my insights from the discussion on digital pedagogy and I’ve included comments from other participants. (Jam II, Momentum, Digital Pedagogy).

The discussion was rich with ideas, insights and provided a glimpse into the issues and challenges with online instruction. Though the title of the Jam featured ‘MOOCs’, much input from contributors pertained to closed, online courses which created an interesting discussion by highlighting one of the primary challenges in online education—the application of appropriate pedagogical methods, which will vary depending upon the learners, the delivery method and goals of the course.

Themes:

1)  Part of the discussion was devoted to the contrast and challenges between learner-directed and instructor-directed learning. The fact that much discussion focused on this issue highlights one of the challenges with MOOCs; a MOOC, due to its scale and format lends itself to be learner-directed. It’s not surprising then that MOOCs attract learners that already know how to learn, are motivated and educated. Several Jam participants discussed methods to get learners involved in learning, how to encourage students to engage and participate [typically in the context of closed online classes].

“I’ve done something similar to engage students in action research with me. I was teaching Web Development and was not happy with the development framework we were using. So as a class we researched the pros and cons of various frameworks and decided as a class (with my approval) which one to use. This worked well – they had “buy in” as we used to say.  Beyond that, I set basic specifications as to what they were to include in their work product, but allowed them to choose the subject matter (content). I also had to give approval before they began coding.”

I see the above challenge highlighting two opportunities: 1) to provide support to students to learn how to be self-directed, and 2) to provide skill development for educators and course designers in how to be flexible and adapt instructional strategies by assessing learners, the learning context and creating appropriate learning experiences, implementing pedagogical methods that match the learning needs.

One Jam participant shared an initiative that his institution recently started for its students; a program designed to address much of what was discussed here.

“California State University, Monterey Bay, is creating an online training module for training in baseline skills in web technologies for collaboration and other soft skills, such as team working relationships. Selecting appropriate pedagogy again depends upon an analysis of the learners — goes back to careful and thrustful planning”

2)  Considerable discussion focused on how to get students to interact, collaborate and engage with peers in online classes, and what the instructors role is in facilitating group formation, participation and learner engagement. Though this theme is similar to the theme mentioned above, interesting thoughts on group formation and collaboration emerged—should it be encouraged, facilitated or left for students to form spontaneously? And if so, how? This relates to the motivation of the learner, which is quite different when students are in for-credit classes versus ‘free’ and open classes  [MOOCs] that are driven by interest and desire to learn—essentially self-directed.

But a key trade-off when you have non-static groups, as Michaelsen, Fink et al have looked at is that you lose the crucial accountability factor and or the time to form constructive group norms/roles etc. — this then leads to the ‘freeloaders’ issue that gives groupwork such a bad rep.  There is the challenge — in a MOOC context, can you establish stable, productive learning groups with accountability, positive norms, roles etc to really activate the engagement, peer learning and other benefits of group learning?”   

The comment above is interesting—is it really possible or desirable in a MOOC environment that the responsibility for group accountability and productivity rests with the instructor?

3)  The session wrapped up with discussion that focused on supporting learners, helping learners to learn in a MOOC format.  The question appears to be—how can this be accomplished, is it through course design, or while the course is live, accomplished via course facilitators?  Or do we need to teach students how to learn in a MOOC?

I think one of the goals for a MOOC is enabling learners to make connections, share, collaborate and learn from one another. Rather than thinking about self-directed or facilitator directed maybe we need to think about how we can create ways that encourage learners to support one another?”

I am very interested in how learners can and do support one another’s learning in MOOCs. Do you have some thoughts in mind about the answer to this question? What can we build into the design that supports and encourages peer-peer learning?”

Closing Thoughts
Discussions, similar to those within this Jam, create excellent opportunities to get the issues and challenges facing education, specifically online education, out in the open.  It also helps stakeholders identify what needs to be discussed and explored within their own institutions. There are commonalities across all institutions when it comes to online education, and ironically the very barriers affecting these issues, exist within institutions at all levels. Fortunately there is progress—many institutions are experimenting, collaborating and striving to adapt to cultural shifts, increase access, yet still provide high quality, relevant education. Are there similar discussions happening within your institution?

An Unique Approach to a xMOOC — Learner-Centric Course Design

course6671

Applied Sustainability” Fanshawe College

Not all MOOCs are created equal. I know of one, Applied Sustainability, delivered by a community college in Ontario, Canada that defies what many have come to expect from a Massive Open Online Course offered through a university-sponsored platform such as Coursera, Open2Study or edX. What makes Applied Sustainability offered by Fanshawe College unique?  It’s the learner-centric course design that makes it different, where the focus is on students and their learning. This approach contrasts with an instructor-centric design—an approach which emphasizes content delivered by faculty with a learning strategy that follows accordingly. Though both formats are applicable in given learning situations, few student-centric course designs in xMOOCs exist, which is what motivated me to share a learner-centric design example with readers. It’s a worthy endeavor for educators to explore and consider different approaches to course design for MOOCs, to improve upon what already exists, and bring xMOOCs to the next level.

How Fanshawe’s MOOC is Unique:  Fanshawe’s MOOC takes the form of an educative journey that engages students in the learning process with active, and practical learning assignments that make learning meaningful, relevant and specific to each student.

The interview approach supported the practical focus of the MOOC – as the interviewer was learning along with the student, as opposed to having an expert deliver a presentation.”  MOOCs at Fanshawe

This approach contrasts significantly with the course design model that the majority of MOOCs delivered on university platforms feature.  The pedagogical methods used in xMOOCs  are remarkably similar to the traditional classroom format—course content delivered via the subject matter expert. xMOOCs typically are associated with top-tier higher education institutions, and are led by faculty members, sometimes referred to as ‘super professors‘, or ‘talking heads’, labeled (not so kindly) by MOOC skeptics. The instructors deliver content that mirrors the classroom method quite closely, but without the accessibility and feedback capability that instructors offer. Fanshawe’s format is closer to the original version of MOOCs as its co-creators [Downes and Siemens] introduced in 2008, where the focus was on learning within a network where knowledge is co-created, not from one expert i.e. the super-professor, but from many sources including the learners within the course.

Screen Shot 2014-03-26 at 7.25.07 AM

Image from Presentation Slide featuring student project, posted during Webinar with Contact North, with Wendy Wilson describing the MOOC’s development strategy

“For the students, the most significant benefits they reported on the first offering of this MOOC were the changes they made in their thinking, behaviour, and habits concerning sustainability – for some it was truly life changing.The wide range of students from around the world appreciated the truly applied nature of the course.”

Course Description: Applied Sustainability: The course is designed to emphasize the practical and the personal elements of sustainability, with each of the six modules featuring on-site video interviews in locations and with experts involved with different aspects of sustainability. The themes of the modules focus on: water, waste and wastefulness; homes; streets and neighbourhoods; cities and regions; policies and certifications; and a final section on our community, your community. Applied Sustainability, Desire2Learn

Below is a brief outline the characteristics of Fanshawe’s MOOC that make it unique. For readers interested in learning more, the Pockets of Innovation series on Contact North’s website provides further background and description—Designing and Offering a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) at Fanshawe College.

Characteristics of the Learner-Centric Design

1) Diffusion of subject matter expertise: Rather than one subject-matter expert leading the course, there is an interviewer who travels to visit numerous subject matter experts in the field. The interviewer acts as the ‘host’ of the course, going on exploratory journey along with the students to learn about applied sustainability by conducting interviews with experts in the field.

“Three short videos (8 to 10 minutes) highlight three specific themes through visits to facilities directly related to waste and water such as the Greenway Wastewater Plant and the Upper Thames River Conservation Authority (pictured below). Staff interviews, facilities tours, and demonstrations of their ongoing work are presented.  The interview approach supported the practical focus of the MOOC – as the interviewer was learning along with the student, as opposed to having an expert deliver a presentation.  Topic-related links are provided to articles, report summaries, videos, TED talks, and other resources.”

Screen Shot 2014-03-26 at 7.22.07 AM

Presentation Slide posted during Webinar with Contact North, featuring Wendy Wilson describing the MOOC’s development strategy

2) Reliance on open resources, with a collection of curated resources. Students accessed content on the course topic (sustainability) primarily from the experts in the field, on the field trips with interviewer, and by exploring list of curated resources provided on the course site. The resources are from a variety of sources, with very few coming from scholarly or peer-reviewed sources.

3) Customization of learning experience. The Fanshawe MOOC provided options for students to customize their learning by offering four options for course participation. The four levels of achievement—Green, Silver, Gold and Platinum.

“… At the Silver level, students take part in weekly discussion on such topics as the use of rain barrels and antibiotics in agriculture.  The Gold level involves completion of a weekly task, such as undertaking a three-day waste audit at home, posting a photo of the accumulated waste, and reflecting on personal consumption and disposal habits. The Platinum level of achievement requires the completion of one project over the length of the course, assisted by a project manager from Fanshawe. The project-options include creating a Green Gaming Journal by using a blog, Tumblr, YouTube, or a podcast to comment on the green elements of a video game with ecological themes, such as SimCity. Another choice involves using QGIS, an open source geographic mapping system, to map a neighbourhood and analyze issues such as park vs residential space usage.”

Conclusion
We can credit MOOCs for generating discussions among educators and stakeholders about technological advancements and education, specifically how technology can be used to improve access, quality and cost. Yet we need to move discussions about online education forward, and one dimension which needs attention is how to create learning experiences for students that are relevant and meaningful. The current format of most xMOOCs are not much different from the traditional instructor-focused model, yet student-centered course design is a viable option very worthy of our time and energy.

Update: After this post went live, two other institutions reached out to share MOOC, learner-center models.  Open2Study, customizes courses for the MOOC format; you can read more from the comment posted. Another, Penn State’s Center for Online Innovation in Learning is developing a ‘flex-MOOC’ framework, which appears to have much potential.

Further Reading:

Why Google’s ‘Helpouts’ Concept is a Brilliant Idea for Online Education

Help wanted Sign

Students seek real-time help and support as demonstrated by community use of Google Helpouts

I wrote about synchronous learning in a recent post where I suggested that technological applications have advanced to a point where real-time exchanges between students and instructor, students and students can be facilitated seamlessly, leading to improved quality and better outcomes in online learning. Real time interactions can fill the void frequently mentioned by students and educators—the absence of a personal connection, the human touch in online learning environments. My position is that synchronous, real-time exchanges will bring what we now call ‘distance learning’, or ‘online learning’ to a new level, where distance is no longer a barrier, and online learning becomes ‘learning’. Distance and the barriers associated with it will disappear.

In this post I review the Google Helpouts platform, launched by Google in late 2013 that provides a method for face-to-face learning via a video call, and is one that institutions and online providers could model. Such a platform can bring significant benefits to students and their respective institutions. Benefits that include increased student performance, higher levels of student engagement, and reduced attrition. There is also potential for value-added services that include life skills development, career advice, networking skills, and coaching for students transitioning from school to the work world. Before getting to my proposal for institutions that models the idea of Google Helpouts—first a brief overview of the platform.

Google Helpouts Overview
Google has a long history of launching new tools and platforms, many of which don’t catch on, fade into obscurity, essentially fail, but whether Google Helpouts becomes a success is not the point of the this post, it’s the concept that has great potential for online learning, specifically for institutions and providers of online education that serve high school or undergraduate students. It’s the concept that is worth examining—how can the idea of real-time student interaction help institutions improve learning outcomes.

Screen Shot 2014-03-17 at 10.19.22 AM

Three ‘Helpouts’ listed within the Education & Careers category on Google Helpouts

What’s a Google Helpout?
‘Real help from real people in real time’ is Helpouts tag line. It’s essentially an online service where one can find an expert in a given field, and pay by the minute to receive realtime help and guidance from the expert using a web cam.  I see it as an extension of YouTube, but you get to interact with the expert, get feedback and ask questions.

“Live interactive video. Helpouts are conducted through live video calls with the provider. During the session, you can point your camera to show what you need help with, or take a photo, or even allow the provider to remotely access your computer to fix a problem. For example, you can point your camera at a broken appliance. If you don’t want the provider to see you, you can always turn off your camera. If both you and the provider agree ahead of time, you also can record the Helpout, and it’ll automatically be saved in your Google Drive” Introduction to Helpouts by Google

Google Helpouts features eight categories that include Art & Music, Computers & Electronics, Education & Careers, and more.  Not surprisingly, there are several Helpout options within the Education & Careers category, many related to math, writing  and SAT prep support. But here is where it gets interesting, there are also Helpouts featuring support in Test-Taking Strategies, Giving a Speech: Coaching support for students, Finding a job using Social Media, and Learn more Effectively by Taking Better Notes!.  This last Helpout appears to be one of the most sought-after, with over 45 reviews by users giving five stars (out of five). In fact after reviewing several categories, it appears the Education category has the most reviews by users, which may be an indication it’s generating the most interest. It appears there is a great demand for not only subject specific support, but study skills, communication and job searching skills.

How Does Apply the ‘Real Time Helpout’ Concept to Education?
Given the apparent demand for personalized support related to education, it’s worth examining in light of the problems and opportunities that exist within online education—could there be a fit? I believe so. Let’s look at some of the biggest barriers to online learning cited by students (Muilenburg & Berge, 2005).

  1. Lack of social interaction
  2. Administrative / Instructor issues
  3. Time and support for Studies
  4. Learner motivation

Institutions also face challenges of poor student performance and low completion rates for-credit courses for students enrolled in the online or blended courses. A recent example is the San Jose pilot project with Udacity, where three courses were offered online for students, including a remedial math course. Results were poor, with the pass rate far lower than in the face-to-face class. Student motivation, time and lack of academic skills were factors influencing the poor results.

Low completion rates, another challenge—yet when looking at successful programs we find that one-on-one coaching and mentoring is key component to success. This is a method Western Governors University has relied upon since its inception. And the City University of New York (CUNY), gives us an example of a public institution addressing problems of low graduation rates and low performance with its Accelerated Study in Associate Program (ASAP) that increased graduation rates significantly from 23% to an incredible 56%. Though financial support was part of the program, another was the academic advising and support  “[the] ASAP website  [provided] the personal touch — biweekly seminars and one-on-one advising.(Kirp, 2014).

Screen Shot 2014-03-17 at 3.03.56 PM

Scheduling tool associated with each expert’s service, Google Helpouts

Proposal for ‘Student Helpouts’
I suggest institutions seeking to increase the quality of online programs and success of their students, adopt a platform that closely follows the Google Helpouts format. A platform that features a similar interface (how the platform looks and its ease of use) and infrastructure (how it works) that upon implementation supports seamless communication including online scheduling, ability for students to provide feedback, and a selection of services and educators to choose from for support. The platform would be a landing-place for students that require:

  • Academic advising, what courses to take, drop, and planning for graduation
  • Help with course work that is subject specific
  • Support with the writing of academic papers, essays, etc.
  • Life Skills coaching: time management, stress management
  • Career Building Skills: Resume advice, how to interview, how to look for a job, using social media

How it Might Work
Of course, the question is how would it work, for instance who would be providing the services?  I suggest a combination of students and employees of the institution as the tutors, mentors and advisors. Senior students could be hired to provide tutoring support, even mentoring support for new or struggling students.  Employees working in the institutions academic advising, career services, student aid departments would provide support specific to their department’s services.

Another question, how would transactions be funded? Students could be assigned a certain number credits each semester that they can use towards the Student Helpout platform, which is included in students’ tuition.  Once the credits run out, students can buy additional credits, or apply for ‘free’ credits depending on certain criteria. At-risk students, or those identified as requiring remedial support, may be awarded an additional block of credits.

Conclusion
I see great potential with a platform such as Student Helpouts. It’s a platform that could address the barriers students associate with online learning—the lack of social connection and personalized interaction, poor motivation, and absence of needed academic skills for college level work. I acknowledge that this vision is simplistic, lacks depth, as it is only an idea where the details have not been fleshed out.  Yet my goal here is to provide ideas and perspectives for institutions and educators about technology and its role as a tool for providing personalized support and guidance of high school and undergraduate students. And to meet the challenges of online learning, while at the same time helping educators and institutions remain relevant, effective and prepare students for thinking, living and learning in 2015 and beyond. Now that would be brilliant.

References:

Image credit: ‘Help Out Sign’ by brizzle, born & bred, Flickr

The Next-Big-Thing in Online Education…Learning in Real Time

This article examines the potential of synchronous communication in online education by analyzing the newest tools and platforms that facilitate real-time group communication, and the pedagogy associated with implementing synchronous communication tools into asynchronous learning environments.

synchronous communication in online courses

synchronous communication

Communicating in real-time from a distance has never been easier. There are numerous new platforms and applications (apps) available free-of-charge that are easy-to-use and facilitate seamless communication between geographically distant people with access to a smart phone or laptop. After reading a WSJ article reviewing several smart phone apps that facilitate real-time communication among small groups seamlessly, I realize that the time is coming where synchronous tools will bring online education to the next level. Over the last two years there’s been a flood of free apps and platforms on the market that break down distance barriers and allow people to communicate from their handheld mobile device, tablet or laptop. One example is group video conferencing. There are now several free web-conferencing tools for groups that also feature document and screen sharing, including Google Hangouts, newly launched appear.in (video conversations for up to 8 people), and meetings.io (also free). These platforms knock down the once insurmountable barriers for video conferencing use in education—barriers of student access, and technology that was cumbersome and expensive.

A key aspect of this is the consideration of approaches to capitalizing on the capacity of video communications to reduce isolation and increase personalization of learning experiences for distance students. Indeed there is now scope for the empowerment of distance learners and an opportunity to offer a much wider choice of strategies intended to enhance and support learning (Smyth & Zanetic, 2007). Indications from the research literature are exciting.(Andrews, Tynan, Smyth &  Vale, 2010)

However, one significant barrier still exists when considering synchronous tools for education settings, and that is pedagogy.  From the same paper as the above paragraph, is this statement that describes the barrier crisply, “from a practitioners point-of-view, the challenge will come from the need to be flexible, adaptive and innovative. In other words, the need is to rapidly develop new understandings of pedagogies to best utilize the person-to-person interactivity of emerging technologies” (Andrews et al, 2010).

hangouts

A group of students in an online hangout using the platform meetings.io

The Great Potential: Synchronous Tools for Online Education
These apps and platforms hold great potential for online education—seamless real-time chats, video discussions that can facilitate peer-to-peer, and educator-to-student(s) exchanges that foster social connections, learning support, feedback or create a space for discussion of concepts and ideas in a way the asynchronous communication cannot. The new technology brings with it numerous possibilities. But though the potential is great, so are the challenges associated with implementation. As with any educational technology tool, the purpose for using the tool has to make sense, has to fit in with the curriculum in a pedagogically sound way that supports learning and achievement of the course objectives.

Although video conferencing has been around for some years, in many cases the use has not been informed by rigorous research leading to sound pedagogical practices. videoconferencing has frequently copied typical lecture style format of didactic lecture style delivery rather than exploring approaches….” (Andrews & Klease, 2002)

How-to Implement Educational Technology, i.e. Synchronous Tools
Before getting to highlights of the research addressing synchronous tools in online education, I’ll emphasize what needs to happen prior to implementing educational technology into a learning environment, which essentially is a needs analysis. The first step is asking questions—questions such as, “what educational problem are we trying to solve? what method can we apply that supports the problem? what tool will best work for the application that works within the learning context?“.

To be more specific with regards to implementation of synchronous tools as discussed here, the question might be, “How can a synchronous tool be used to improve the learning outcomes, or solve a learning problem that is not being met within asynchronous online classes?

It’s the answers to these questions that guide the learning design process. The next steps are when the real work of course design begins, developing the learning strategy to meet learning objectives ideally by following a model of learning or instructional design [I write extensively about instructional design. A good post for readers interested in learning more about instructional design is "Start Here": Instructional Design Models for Online Courses].

Learning Challenges Synchronous Tools Can Solve
Synchronous tools are not a given for each online course, it will depend upon a number of factors as determined during the course design process. Though to give readers an idea of the types of situations where synchronous tools may be used, I’ve included excerpts from Kansas State University’s webpage ‘synchronous course delivery‘ from its e-learning faculty modules site.  Note, that it’s not always the instructor that will use synchronous tools, but learning counselors, tutors, small groups of students and others.

“Online real-time may be used for a number of learning purposes. There may be a small window of time when an online class may access a digital lab; a simulation; …an interactive streamed event.

….to introduce learners starting a cohort-based program. … there may be icebreakers to help people connect online….

…for academic and professional advising and counseling. It may be used for group or expert critiques of student designs and e-portfolios.

….for student group work, collaborations, and study sessions. Learners may interact with each other for problem-solving, planning, co-design, or strategy sessions.

If there is not a need for synchronous learning, then it may well be better left alone.e-learning faculty modules, 2012

No Talking Heads
One of the papers I review here from the International Journal of Education Technology, provides sound advice based upon the research, and one worthy of highlighting is that synchronous tools should not be used as a one-way medium, a format where the instructor can deliver information in real-time, but instead be viewed as a vehicle that allows for the exchange of information, for accommodating three or four-way [or more] conversations that build learning, ideas and learners’ motivation. The synchronous communication medium should be reserved only for exchanges that support a course objective or other learning-related function that can’t be accomplished through asynchronous methods.

“In other words students find the talking head presentation to be undesirable. This finding is not a new one (Commeaux, 1995; Schiller & Mitchell, 1993)…” (Andrews & Klease, 2002)

Research Highlights
Below are a selection of highlights from the papers referenced in this post that outline the impact of, and considerations for synchronous methods used in online education.

1) Building Social and Teacher Presence: More than one study suggests that synchronous communication activities support the social needs of online students not typically met in the asynchronous format, “Social support is desirable as a way to foster knowledge work and collaborative learning; it provides an environment where communication is encouraged; e.g., anecdotes and personal experiences encourage trust, which foster receptive and creative learning environment” (Hranstinski, 2008).

Synchronous activities contribute to building of social presence, one of the three dimensions of the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework, a  frequently referenced model that describes the conditions for optimal online learning experience (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000). When the three dimensions are present, teacher presence, social presence and cognitive presence, the student can experience deep and meaningful learning. Purposefully developed synchronous [and asynchronous] activities can contribute to building social and teaching presence as supported by the research cited here.

2) Group Size: The purpose of a group activity as determined by the course design process, will determine the appropriate group size as well as the best tool or platform to support it.

It is worth noting here that multi-point videoconferencing is most effective with small groups of students (20 to 25 across 3 or 4 sites) as stated by Mason, (1994) cited in Burke, London and Daunt (1997)…” (Andrews & Klease, 2002)

Video and hangout platforms each have a limit to the number of individuals participating at once, as do chat platforms, which again reinforces why the instructional strategy created in the course design process is critical. The meetings.io platform for instance allows up to five people per hangout, ideal for a small group discussion, while Google Hangout accommodates up to ten, which may be applicable for a meet-and-greet type session held at the beginning of a course.

Chat platforms, for example whatsapp, might be used effectively for group discussions, i.e. one question related to a course topic, where students contribute initial thoughts and exchange ideas, followed by an asynchronous forum discussion continuing the conversation.

3) Differences in Time Zones: One of the drawbacks of synchronous tools often cited is students living in different time zones, however in closed online courses for credit, this is not as much of an issue as massive courses that cater to a world-wide audience (though even in these instances, there are ways to accommodate learners in different time zones). In my personal experience with synchronous activities in closed, online classes, most students are willing to adjust their schedule to participate in synchronous activities, more so when activities have a clear purpose and appear worthy of students time.

“Students were willing to deal with the problems of time difference in order to take advantage of this opportunity, which, on this occasion, resulted in very early classes. Additionally, they liked the experience of interacting with a wider peer group and of learning from each other’s different knowledge-base and backgrounds.” (Andrews & Klease, 2002)

4 ) Instructor and Student Familiarity with Tool: As with any technology used in online education, familiarity with the technology is essential to establish the foundation for a successful learning outcome. The institution is responsible for providing professional development for faculty and instructors, and working with course designers/instructors to build-in course time for student practice with the tool, and make available resources that support students (and faculty) with the technological issues.

Resources:

References