CALICO 2008 San Francisco

CALICO 2008San Francisco

Fostering Cohesion and Community in Asynchronous Online Courses

Dorothy Chun, David Hiple, Stephen Tschudi

Fostering cohesion and community

Community and cohesion

Chinese 332: the study

Results – lessons learned

Communities: social contexts for learning

Individuals (re)construct identity through community experiences

Experiences accumulated by participation in social contexts

Social participation as learning processWenger 1998

Communities of practice

A group of individuals participating in a communal activityWenger

Social learning groups that form when people have a common interest and collaborate over time…

Lave and Wenger 1991

In CoPs co-constructed knowledge – larger than individual knowledge – is developed through discussion and collaborationJohnson 2001

Sociocultural theory

Human activities take place in cultural contexts mediated by language and other symbol systems

Emphasizes interdependence of social and individual processes in the

“co-construction of knowledge”

Vygotsky

Constructionism

Learning happens especially well when people are engaged in constructing a product such as a machine, a computer program or a book…

Papert

Constructivism (Piaget)

Learners with different skills/backgrounds collaborate to arrive at shared understanding

Duffy and Jonassen 1992

Learners arrive at own version of the “truth” based on background, culture, world view

Gredler 1997

Students produce and analyze their own dataFurstenberg 2001

Inquiry based-learning

A student-centered, active learning approach focusing on questioning, critical thinking, and problem-solving.

Associated with the idea "involve me and I will understand." Bass

Using technology in teaching and learning

Slow down the learning experience Make thinking visible Create a culture and context of reflective

practice Virtual communities of practice

Bass

Viability of online communities of practice

Access (++)

Asynchronous (+)

Archived (+)

Nonthreatening (+)

Disconnected (-) lack of community

Nurturing CoPs online

Share opinions and feelings

Group knowledge developed

Cohesion - Wenger reference to other postings low redundancy

Online pedagogy

Task: relevant/personally important

Task: clearly defined with clear outcome

Teacher: prime the pump

Teacher: share responsibility/management

BRIX course management system

WHAT Dynamic Web pages: Cold Fusion processes code,

reads and updates database, outputs HTML SQLServer database stores, modifies, retrieves

user input from learning community

WHY Commercial courseware does not support

Pedagogical priorities Needed charsets Voice postings

BRIX courseware tools

Chinese 332: the course

•16 weeks; 8 instructional units

•Curriculum built around CD-ROM

•Lessons: authentic Chinese texts (Int-High / Adv)

•CD-ROM published as independent CALL tool

•Course designed as “community of users” of CD-ROM

•Flow of activities

preparatory activities together

independent use of CD-ROM

text-based communicative group activities related to CD-ROM content



Small Group Forum•first activity after return from

individual CD-ROM use

•tasks blend intermediate-level and advanced-level functions

•builds towards an endpoint essay in current unit

•Small groups of 5 or 6 interact in task; can only post in own group but can read all


Objective: identify behaviors and strategies that foster or hinder cohesion and community in online forums in courses

1. Threads with high and low indicators of cohesion and community identified using quantitative methodology

2. Interesting exemplars of both kinds of threads “thickly described” and compared using qualitative methodology

3. Three distinct patterns discerned in threads of interest, used as sources for identifying behaviors and strategies


Cohesion & Community: Quantitative Indices

Cohesion

•postings per participant, MLU

•references to content of other postings

Community

•direct address; references to other participants


Quantitative Methodology•Structured query language (SQL) used to

extract data from course database

•Data passed through scripts to obtain reliable word and utterance counts

•Nonlinguistic operating definitions used for “word” and “utterance” for purposes of the study

•Forums closely read and scored for references to other people and to other postings in the forum


Qualitative Methodology•Overall pattern of interaction described:

“broken,” or whole? Rich, or impoverished? Drive toward consensus or (at least) clarification?

•Roles of participants described: proactive, or reactive? Involved, or distant?

•Interactions in forum described as a series of turns or communicative “events” with consequences


Focus of Analysis

2 Small Group Forum discussions from Spring 2003 semester

•Unit 2 (weeks 3 and 4), early in the course

6 small groups – negotiation task

•Unit 6 (weeks 11 and 12), late in the course

4 small groups – narration task


Unit 2: quantitative analysisSmall Group # 1 2 3 4 5 6

Number of postings 12 7 7 17 11 6

Mean postings per active participant (teacher postings not counted)

2.40 1.75 1.75 4.00 3.33 2.50

Total word count(excluding teacher postings)

550 (550) 331 (331) 238 (238) 800 (730) 735 (682) 221 (197)

Mean length of utterance 11.22 10.68 10.82 10.13 10.07 12.28

Rate of ref to other participants/number of postings

.17 .43 .14 1.12 1.45 .67

Rate of ref to other postings/number of postings

.75 .57 .86 1.06 .91 .67


Unit 2: qualitative analysisPattern 1

•Higher participation in Group 4 connected with higher

personal interest in topic

•Higher interest associated with “topic drift” towards actual favorite restaurants in

Honolulu

•Teacher strategy: “go with the flow” and exploit increased interest

Unit 2: Group 4 transcriptHannah Let’s have Taiwan cuisine today! I have never had authentic Taiwanese cuisine before. I’ve heard

that Taiwan cuisine is very distinctive. What do you all think?

Wendy Okay! (rep) What restaurant do you want to go to? I have also never eaten authentic Taiwanese cuisine. Do you know what dishes from Taiwan are good?

Flora I have also never eaten Taiwanese cuisine. I’ve heard their snacks are very good. I have only ever had Cantonese cuisine. I would also like to try Sichuan cuisine because I like spicy food. But it doesn’t really matter. I can eat anything, whatever you like.

Robert I think Taiwan cuisine is delicious. Their beef noodles are the best. And their snacks are very popular too. So let’s have Taiwan cuisine, OK?

Wendy I know that many people are of the opinion that Taiwan’s snacks are delicious. So I would like to eat with you guys. Doesn’t the "Hometown Diner" specialize in Taiwan cuisine? We could go there to eat. How about it?

Qin_laoshi Wendy, where is the "Hometown Diner"? Have you have noticed that during the last lesson Tsu-hou said that the restaurant his parents run, the K.C. Kitchen, is a Taiwan-style diner and their food is delicious! Besides these two, what other places are there?

Flora I am not quite sure where there might be a Taiwan restaurant, because I have never eaten Taiwan cuisine. So wherever you all decide to go, I will go with you.

Hannah O.K., so we’ll go have Taiwan cuisine. I think K.C.'s beef noodles are good. I heard that there was another Taiwan-style diner in the Cultural Plaza called "Elegant Orchid" that also serves Taiwan snacks. Have you all ever been there? …



•Student leader consistently made conversational moves to “shepherd” other students in the group towards task closure

•Communication style fits “active participation paradigm” of persuasive communication (Burgoon & Miller, 1985)

•Active participation by one such student may mean the difference between success and failure for a group

•Such students not categorically the best performers; other students may even contribute more, but these leaders focus and energize the discussion in a distinct way

Unit 2: Group 4 transcriptHannah Let’s have Taiwan cuisine today! I have never had authentic Taiwanese cuisine before. I’ve heard

that Taiwan cuisine is very distinctive. What do you all think?

Wendy Okay! (rep) What restaurant do you want to go to? I have also never eaten authentic Taiwanese cuisine. Do you know what dishes from Taiwan are good?

Flora I have also never eaten Taiwanese cuisine. I’ve heard their snacks are very good. I have only ever had Cantonese cuisine. I would also like to try Sichuan cuisine because I like spicy food. But it doesn’t really matter. I can eat anything, whatever you like.

Robert I think Taiwan cuisine is delicious. Their beef noodles are the best. And their snacks are very popular too. So let’s have Taiwan cuisine, OK?

Wendy I know that many people are of the opinion that Taiwan’s snacks are delicious. So I would like to eat with you guys. Doesn’t the "Hometown Diner" specialize in Taiwan cuisine? We could go there to eat. How about it?

Qin_laoshi Wendy, where is the "Hometown Diner"? Have you have noticed that during the last lesson Tsu-hou said that the restaurant his parents run, the K.C. Kitchen, is a Taiwan-style diner and their food is delicious! Besides these two, what other places are there?

Flora I am not quite sure where there might be a Taiwan restaurant, because I have never eaten Taiwan cuisine. So wherever you all decide to go, I will go with you.

Hannah O.K., so we’ll go have Taiwan cuisine. I think K.C.'s beef noodles are good. I heard that there was another Taiwan-style diner in the Cultural Plaza called "Elegant Orchid" that also serves Taiwan snacks. Have you all ever been there? …

Unit 2: Group 4 transcript

Wendy The "Hometown Diner" is in Chinatown. I have not been to the K.C. Kitchen, but if you all want to go, then I will go with you. When do you all want to go?

Robert Which of the three -- the "Hometown Diner", the "Elegant Orchid", and K.C. Kitchen – have you all been to? Which one has the best beef noodles? I can go anytime.

Flora I have also heard that the Taiwanese restaurant inside the Cultural Plaza is very good. When you all decide, just tell me what time to go.

Hannah I think K.C. Kitchen and the "Elegant Orchid" both have good beef noodles. So it does not really matter which one we go to. Which one do you all want to eat at? You decide.

Flora It doesn’t really matter to me either; I can go to whichever. So if you say that you have been to both restaurants, then we’ll go to whichever one that you think is best, OK?

Hannah Since Robert said he likes to eat beef noodles, let’s go to K.C. Kitchen to try their Taiwan snacks. How about it, you all?

Flora Good! I have no problem with that! I have been wanting to try Taiwan cuisine for a long time now! So when are we going?

Robert Where is the K.C. Kitchen? Can anyone go with me?

Hannah K.C. Kitchen is in the Cultural Plaza in Chinatown. Do you know where that is?


Unit 6: quantitative analysis

Small Group # 1 2 3 4

Number of postings 7 10 9 9

Mean postings per active participant (teacher postings not counted)

1.50 2.00 1.60 1.80

Total word count 910 538 465 535

Mean length of utterance 19.78 13.79 10.29 14.86


Unit 6 Group 3 thread list



•Poor cohesion when students failed to participate in a single thread

•Highly redundant content of postings showed students not paying attention to others’ postings low group cohesion

•Students had to intuit division of labor from model postings labeled “background,” “description,” and “narration”



•Teacher expectations regarding division of labor in the group not met; instructions did not make individual requirements clear enough

•Teacher “rescue” strategy: create new thread with subject line only (no content):

“Students, please make your postings together in one thread!”

Analysis and Discussion

Teaching implications of the 3 striking patterns in the data:

(1) Increase of participation, direct interaction, and personal involvement when the topic closely related to students’ daily lives points to two important principles

(a) instructor flexibility

(b) fostering of connections to students’ lives and interests


(2) The second pattern, the emergence of a student leader suggests that instructors should:

(a) promote leadership in the group

(b) provide guidelines for interaction among students


(3) The third pattern, the decrease in interaction and cohesion points to:

(a) importance of clear instructions

(b) sustained leadership from the instructor

(c) clear definitions of task completion


To conclude, we return to the principles of online pedagogy mentioned at the beginning (which are also important in traditional/F2F language teaching):

Two principles deal with tasks:

(1) Tasks must be clearly defined and include an identifiable outcome or conclusion

(2) When possible, tasks should ideally be relevant to the students’ lives and important to them personally


Two principles deal with teachers:

(1) A key role for instructors is that they “prime the pump” in the initial stages but also be flexible and adaptive to students’ input

(2) Instructors should share the responsibility of discourse management whenever possible, i.e., they should designate student leaders to help keep their classmates on task (Poole, 2000)

Conclusion

The four principles are in line with those presented in the Community of Practice framework for fostering coherence in virtual learning communities (Wenger), whose goal is to create “learning communities in which students are willing, even enthusiastic, to share the responsibility of learning.”

Bass, R. (2000). Hyperactivity and underconstruction: Learning culture in a wired world. http://www9.georgetown.edu/faculty/bassr/hauc3-00_files/v3_document.htm

Burgoon, M & Miller, G. R. (1985). An expectancy interpretation of language and persuasion. In Recent Advances in Language, Communication, and Social Psychology. Ed. Howard Giles and Robert N. St. Clair. NJ: Erlbaum. 199-229.

Duffy, D & Jonassen, D.H. (1992). Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. NJ: Erlbaum.

Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., English, K., & Maillet, K. (2001). Giving a voice to the silent language of culture: The Cultura Project. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 55-102. http://llt.msu.edu/vol5num1/furstenburg/default.html

Gredler, M. E. (1997). Learning and Instruction: Theory and Practice (3rd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Johnson, C. (2000). A survey of current research on online communities of practice. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6W4X-44BMD1R-4&_user=996227&_rdoc=1&_fmt=&_orig=search&_sort=d&view=c&_acct=C000059603&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=996227&md5=66be95a2289db4d50707fb4a6d43703c

Lave, J & Wenger E (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.

Piaget, Jean. (1950). The Psychology of Intelligence. New York. Routledge.

Poole, D. M. (2000). Student participation in a discussion-oriented online case: A case study. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33, 167-177.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bibliography

Aloha!

nflrc.hawaii.edu/CALICO/2008.ppt/

to see this presentation…

CALICO 2008 San Francisco

Documents

Transcript of CALICO 2008 San Francisco