Online courses are different than face-to-face courses at many aspects. As we can see in this image, in the face to face class, the learner is present and the instructor can read the body language, make eye contact, identify students’ expressions– read the visual cues. the instructor can recognize when learners are bored, lost focus.
This is not so easy to do online. Students in online classes work at computers miles apart at varying times of the day, resulting in a feeling of isolation.
Community building is widely
accepted as a sense rather than a tangible entity (Wiesenfeld, 1996). Sense of
community has been defined as “a sense that members have a belonging, members matter
to one another and to the group and a shared faith that member's needs will be
met through their commitment to be together” (McMillan & Chavis, 1986, p.
9). The literature highlights many strategies and processes to help online
students build a sense of community. The following section reviews the
literature that puts the foundation for the processes I use in my online course
to build a sense of community among students.
In order to help
students to develop a sense of community, we educators need to develop
authentic and effective ways to assist them to connect with peers and to build
relationships from the beginning of the online course. It has been argued
(Dixon, Crooks & Henry, 2006; Palloff & Pratt, 2005; Conrad &
Donaldson, 2004) that instructors must develop ways to create a community of
learners early on in online environments. Additionally, Palloff and Pratt
(2007) assert the necessity of establishing “human-to-human contact before the
interaction involved with the course content begins, a means by which presence
can be established (p. 12). To establish human contact between students before their
participation in the course content, the use of an introductory activity is
recommended. According to Ebersole (2003), creating discussion areas for
students to use for initial introductions is one of community building
activities that help reduce the feeling of isolation and increase social
presence from the beginning of the online course. Introductory postings provide
opportunities for students to present themselves to their classmates and begin
the interaction with one another in a nonthreatening manner (Conrad &
Donaldson, 2004).
Much of
the writing on the community-based approach to online learning—that are related
to developing and sustaining it—describes the use of asynchronous threaded
discussions in response to instructor discussion questions as the main means by
which this community is developed (Cazden, 1988; Buckingham,
2003; Palloff & Pratt, 2007; Clark & Kinne, 2012). In online learning,
these discussions have become a common feature for structuring learning
experiences through personalizing and humanizing the course (Palloff &
Pratt, 2007). Many researchers who work in online environments agree that asynchronous
discussions are places where students learn from each other (Carr-Chellman
& Duchastell, 2000), provide accessibility to each other’s thinking (Peterson
& Slotta, 2009), and enable students to participate even more than in live
classroom discussions (Hirumi & Bermudez, 1996; Paloff & Pratt, 1999;
2007). Additionally, Ebersole (2003) recommends
creating spaces for student-to-student interaction where students can engage
with each other outside of the regular or required discussion assignments.
These spaces, as Ebersole explains, contribute to an online learner’s sense of
connectedness with other students and contribute to overall level of
satisfaction with the course.
Collaborative
activity is also critical to help develop that sense of community, thus
enabling the creation of an environment in which further collaborative work can
happen (Palloff & Pratt, 2005; 2007). For helping students to work
effectively in activities that involve online collaboration and reduce
resistance to the activity, Palloff and Pratt (2005) suggest providing students
with an explanation of the importance of and reasons for including collaborative
activity in an online course. Dell (2004) also stresses the importance of
giving clear instructions and guidelines regarding not only the assignments,
but also the method and tools of communication that will be used. Dell also
suggests designing evaluation criteria to include peer evaluation. He argues
that this peer evaluation rewards extraordinary team members while at the same
time appropriately evaluates non-contributing members. Additionally, the use of
an agreement or contact among group members has been noted to be of significant
importance in promoting learner satisfaction with collaborative learning
experiences online (Murphy, Mahoney & Harvell, 2000; Doran, 2001). The contact
outlines how the group members will interact together, determines the roles
each member will play in the collaborative activity, and creates benchmarks and
deadlines for the completion and submission of collaborative work (Palloff &
Pratt, 2005). Furthermore, it is advised to pair learners for an activity as a
way to build a bridge to collaborative group work later in the course and help
learners to develop an appreciation of collaboration (Conrad
& Donaldson, 2004; Palloff & Pratt, 2005).
Web 2.0 technologies
can play an important role in the development of a learning community among
students in online courses (Kearns &Frey, 2010; Palloff & Pratt, 2009; Gunawardena
et al., 2009). Web 2.0 is the term used to describe a variety of web sites and
applications that allow anyone to create and share online information or
material they have created. A key element of the technology is that it allows people
to create, share, collaborate, and communicate. There is a number of different
types of Web 2.0 applications including wikis, blogs, and social networking. According
to Palloff and Pratt (2009), Web 2.0 technologies do have the ability to
enhance the development of community online and reduce the isolation and
distance felt by students in online courses. Palloff and Pratt argue, relying
on any tool of Web 2.0 technologies to accomplish that task is a bit
shortsighted. However, the inclusion of a variety of means by which community
is developed in an online course can only serve to facilitate this task by
increasing the means and amount of communication possible between students as
well as between students and the instructor (Palloff & Pratt).
Reference
Buckingham, S. (2003). Perspectives on the
experience of the learning community through online discussion. Journal of Distance Education, 18(2),
74-91.
Carr-Chellman, A., & Duchastel, P. (2000). The ideal online course.
British Journal of Educational
Technology, 31(3), 229–241.
Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom
discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Clarke, L., & Kinne, L. (2012). More than words: Investigating
the format of asynchronous discussions as threaded discussions or blogs. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher
Education, 29(1), 4-13.
Conrad, R., & Donaldson, A. (2004). Engaging the online learners: Activities and resources for creative
instruction. USA: Jossey-Bass.
Dell, D. (2004). Philosophy
of online teaching. Capella University.
Dixon, J., Crooks, H., & Henry, K. (2006). Breaking the ice:
Supporting collaboration and the development of community online. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology,
32(2), 1-14.
Doran, C. (2001). The effective use of learning groups in online
education. New Horizons in Adult
Education, 15(2). Retrieved May 6, 2004, from http://www.nova.edu/~aed/horizons/volume15n2.html.
Ebersole, S. (2003). Online
learning communities: Connecting with success. Retrieved September 20, 2012,
from http://bcis.pacificu.edu/journal/2003/09/ebersole.php
Hiltz, S.R. (1998). Collaborative learning in asynchronous
learning networks: Building learning communities. Orlando, Florida.
Hirumi, A., & Bermudez,
A.B. (1996). Interactivity, distance education, and instructional systems design
converge on the information superhighway. Journal
of Research on Computing in Education, 29(1), 1–16.
Kearns, L., & Frey, B.
(2010, July/August). Web 2.0 technologies and back channel communication in an
online learning community. TechTrends, 54(4),
41-51.
LaPadula, M. (2003). A
comprehensive look at online student support services for distance learners. The American Journal of Distance Education, 17(2),
119–128.
McMillan, D. W., & Chavis,
D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6 – 23.
Murphy, K., Mahoney, S.,
& Harvell, T. (2000). Role of contracts in enhancing community building in
Web courses. Educational Technology &
Society, 3(3), 409-421.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K.
(1999). Building learning communities in
cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K.
(2005). Collaborating online: Learning
together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Palloff, R., & Pratt, K.
(2007). Building online learning
communities: Effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Peterson, S. S., & Slotta,
J. (2009). Saying yes to online learning: A first-time experience teaching an
online graduate course in literacy education. Literacy Research and Instruction, 48, 120–136.
Rovai, A. P., Wighting, M.
J., & Lucking, R. (2004). The classroom and school community inventory:
Development, refinement, and validation of a self-report measure for educational
research. Internet and Higher Education,
7, 263–280.
Sadera, W., Robertson, J.,
Song, L., & Midon, M. N. (2009). The role of community in online learning
success. Journal of Online Learning and
Teaching, 5(2), 277–284.
Walker, J., Wasserman, S., &
Wellman, B. (1994). Statistical models for social support networks. In S.
Wasserman and J. Galaskiewicz (Eds.) Advances
in Social Network Analysis. (p. 53-78) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Wellman, B., & Gulia, M.
(1999). The network basis of social support: A network is more than the sum of
its ties. In B. Wellman (Ed.). Networks
in the Global Village. (p. 83-118) Boulder, CO.: Westview Press.
No comments:
Post a Comment