Chih-Hsiung Tu Michael Corry
Building Active Online Interaction via a Collaborative Learning Community SUMMARY. Online interaction creates a desirable learning situation. Transferring traditional instruction to an online environment usually does not generate effective interaction for learning. This paper discusses theories and practices for an interactive collaborative learning community in an online environment. Three theoretical constructs–interactivity, social context, and technologies–are discussed to provide a theoretical foundation. Effective online interactive strategies and activities, communications, online discussions, technology selections, peer evaluations, team moderations, team projects/presentations, and online learning specialists are recommended to maximize online learning interaction. [Article copies available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800HAWORTH. E-mail address: Website: © 2003 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved.]
KEYWORDS. Learning community, online collaboration, interaction, computer-mediated communication, active learning, distance education, e-learning, online moderation, teamwork, small group instructional design CHIH-HSIUNG TU is Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Leadership, Educational Technology Leadership Program, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052 (E-mail:
[email protected]). MICHAEL CORRY is Assistant Professor, Department of Educational Leadership, Educational Technology Leadership Program, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052 (E-mail:
[email protected]). [Haworth co-indexing entry note]: “Building Active Online Interaction via a Collaborative Learning Community.” Tu, Chih-Hsiung, and Michael Corry. Co-published simultaneously in Computers in the Schools (The Haworth Press, Inc.) Vol. 20, No. 3, 2003, pp. 51-59; and: Distance Education: What Works Well (ed: Michael Corry, and Chih-Hsiung Tu) The Haworth Press, Inc., 2003, pp. 51-59. Single or multiple copies of this article are available for a fee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service [1-800HAWORTH, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail address:
[email protected]].
http://www.haworthpress.com/store/product.asp?sku=J025 2003 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 10.1300/J025v20n03_07
51
52
DISTANCE EDUCATION: WHAT WORKS WELL
Active online interaction remains a desirable learning situation. It has been said that “no interaction” equals “no learning” (Gunawardena, 1995). Online communication and interaction differ from traditional encounters because they are text-based and lack social context cues. Therefore, computer-mediated communication (CMC) requires different communication styles. Social context, online technology, and interactivity (Tu & Corry, 2002) are critical elements of online instruction. The purpose of this paper is to provide strategies to enhance online interaction via an active collaborative learning community design. These strategies and suggestions may be applied to increase the level of online interaction and, thereby, learning.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND The theoretical foundation for building a sustainable interactive collaborative online learning community via various technologies relies on three major constructs: interactivity, social context, and technologies (Tu & Corry, 2002). Interactivity incorporates concepts and designs that engage learners in active collaboration activities. Social context refers to the concepts of a learner-centered learning community. The third construct, technologies, supports and enhances knowledge development and knowledge management. These three constructs blend and overlap to the extent that one cannot implement one construct without including the other two. A key concept, a sense of “community,” is also necessary to implementing online collaborative learning.
Interactivity In collaborative learning small groups of students are encouraged to work together to maximize their own learning and the learning of each group member. Collaborative learning engages students in knowledge sharing, inspiring one another, depending upon one another, and applying active social interaction. Therefore, collaborative learning is an artistic rather than a mechanical process: “Collaborative learning (CL) is a personal philosophy, not just a classroom technique. In all situations where people come together in groups, it suggests a way of dealing with people, which respects and highlights individual group members’ abilities and contributions. There is a sharing of authority and acceptance of responsibility among group members for the group’s actions” (Panitz, 1996). Under the auspices of ideal collaborative learning, instructors shift their authority to the learners. Instructors also provide the foundation and learning structures to guide learners through various learning experiences involving active social interaction by applying modern technology. Gerdy (1998) states that “Good learning, like good work, is collaborative and social, not competitive and isolated; sharing one’s ideas and responding to others’ (ideas) improves thinking and deepens understanding.”
Chih-Hsiung Tu and Michael Corry
53
Studies have shown that small-group instruction positively impacts student achievement, persistence, attitude, modeling, cognitive disequilibrium, cognitive development, self-esteem, social skills and the work of women and minorities (Johnson, Johnson & Holubec, 1990; Ocker & Yaverbaum, 1999; Slavin, 1991; Springer, Stanne & Donovan, 1997; Stahl & VanSickle, 1992; Stahl, 1994). However, when CMC is compared to face-to-face communication, no significant differences have been demonstrated in learning quality (Scifres, Gundersen & Behara, 1998) or on final exam grades (Benbunan-Fich & Hiltz, 1999).
Social Context Social context emphasizes the characteristics of learners and the social learning environment (learning community). Collaboration is inherently social (Golub, 1988; Ocker & Yaverbaum, 1999). A social group values the members’ obligations to one another. Team members support one another and their group because they feel it is the morally appropriate action (Jarvenpaa, Knoll, & Leidner, 1998). This sense of obligation to and support for one another are characteristic of online learners. Latham and Lock (1991) found that a group member skilled in self-management, goal setting, self-monitoring, and self-assessment is critical to the successful performance of the group. It also has been observed that successful groups are committed to the mission of the group, can be counted upon to perform their respective tasks, and enjoy working in a group (Snow, Snell & Davison, 1996). A successful online collaborative learning community is an organization where community members engage intellectually, mentally, socioculturally, and interactively in various structured and unstructured activities to achieve their common learning goals via electronic communication technologies.
Technologies Technologies are important tools in human learning. Technology delivers content (information) and possesses the capability to stimulate opportunities for knowledge development. Many people prefer computer technology communication tools, like CMC, to face-to-face communication. Technologies such as e-mail, bulletin board, listserv, and real-time discussion are powerful tools for human communication. This is true in education communication; in fact, contents, bits, learning, and cognitive science are converging into “knowledge media” (Eisenstadt, 1995). Cooper (1998) identified technology as the most important issue in small-group learning and argued that technology-based instruction would have the most profound impact on student outcomes. Technologies that foster learner engagement with content, including techniques that encourage greater learner-learner and learner-teacher interaction, will comprise the classrooms of the future. Simply making technologies
54
DISTANCE EDUCATION: WHAT WORKS WELL
available for learners is not enough for nontraditional learners in the online collaborative learning process and the appropriate technical design of computing technologies is critical (Ocker & Yaverbaum, 1999).
PLAN, ORGANIZE, AND MANAGE Developing an ideal online learning environment requires planning, organizing, and managing skills. To insure a good learning experience, an ideal interactive online learning environment requires a fully integrated design rather than a sparse collection of unrelated, disconnected, and fragmented learning activities scattered throughout the course. The importance of an online learning “community” is emphasized because it is the key to online collaborative learning. Fostering and building a community requires commitment, time, and long-term planning. Simply copying the strategies outlined here will not result in an ideal learning experience; any successful online program must be fully integrated. Readers may adopt the entire group of activities discussed in this paper or they may select useful examples to incorporate into their own instructional design.
Communications The foundation of an effective interactive online collaborative learning community is communication. Instructors should initiate the course with a definition of an online collaborative learning community and explain its purposes and expectations to motivate learners to sustain online learning collaboration throughout the course. The instructor must communicate regularly, via e-mail or other computermediated communication forms, with every team and each individual throughout the course to provide support and to monitor progress. A mid-semester team report can be integrated to supply information that may be missed by simple observation. Instructors must attend discussions and team communications to provide psychological and substantive support. This process provides the instructor with information about the progress of the teams and permits early corrective intervention. Active participation may not be necessary; a simple demonstration of social presence by the instructor may be adequate.
Online Discussions Synchronous and/or asynchronous online discussions are the core component in the online learning environment. Learners are required to participate as individuals in course discussions rather than as team members. A large class generates a large volume of messages that require reading and responses. This
Chih-Hsiung Tu and Michael Corry
55
burden may be overwhelming to the students and provoke them to skip messages or withdraw from discussions. Much less difficulty is encountered if large groups are subdivided into smaller groups/teams for online discussions.
Selection of Technologies It is more effective to make all of the multiple communication technologies available to online learners. Learners exhibit different communication styles in different places, at different times, and in different situations, making it advisable to permit them to select the communication technology with which they are most comfortable. Instructors should permit learners some laterality in determining what communication forms are used for class activities and team activities. The most frequently used technologies are bulletin board, real time chat, and e-mail. However, other technologies are also available, such as listserv, listserv digest, video-conferencing, and audio-conferencing.
Assignments Online instruction engages learners in different assignment activities to assess if they are attaining the learning objectives. Very often, assignments are designed as individual activities that require learners to work alone with limited support from classmates. However, when students are allowed and encouraged to obtain support from peers, assignments become social exercises while maintaining the original objectives. This may enhance assignment performance and will permit the addition of peer evaluation activities. Learners produce two drafts of an assignment in this design, first draft and final draft. The first draft is distributed to teammates, who review the assignment draft and return it with constructive comments. Peer feedback is also utilized in the preparation of the final draft, which is submitted for assessment. This collaboration involves students in three rich learning processes: preparing a first draft, providing constructive feedback, and preparing a final revision, utilizing the comments of peers.
Team Moderators Engaging teams in moderating online discussions enriches learning responsibilities. Each team is responsible for online discussions of at least one lesson, which it selects. The team prepares discussion questions based on required readings, or assignments by the instructor, and moderates the discussion according to guidelines provided by the instructor. The discussion questions must be posted before the lesson begins, and the team initiates discussions that encourage classmates to participate, challenge the thinking of fellow learners, exchange information, and stimulate critical thinking. The team posts a summary of the discussion when the moderation responsibilities have been completed.
56
DISTANCE EDUCATION: WHAT WORKS WELL
Team Projects Assigning team projects is a common design in collaborative learning. Teams are required to post/upload their final products online for other teams to review. When the team project is completed, it is presented to the class using Microsoft PowerPoint or other authoring applications, and defended online, using bulletin board discussion or real-time chat.
Final Projects Final projects can be designed like regular assignments; learners engage in draft preparation, peer review, feedback, and final draft preparation. The integration of an online presentation format into an individual final project requires learners to post/upload their final projects, to present them, and to defend them to their peers. Team project presentation and individual final project presentation can be done either asynchronously or synchronously, depending upon the learning objectives, subjects, teaching styles, student learning styles, various learning situations, availability of various communication technologies, and time.
Online Learning Specialists Instructors invite the participation of local, national, or international specialists in fields that are appropriate to the course content and learning objectives. These online learning specialists engage teams of learners as rich learning resources via e-mail or other communication technologies. These specialists are contacted by teams, as opposed to individuals, to prevent them from becoming overwhelmed by volumes of online messages. The instructor must provide etiquette guidelines in communicating with these specialists. After a team receives a response from a specialist they are required to share the information with the entire class. This involvement permits learners to stretch their learning boundaries and enrich their learning experiences. This process is conducted throughout the entire course since exchanges by e-mail normally require more time than direct contact.
POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS Nothing in this world is perfect. There are limitations on this design as with most things in life. Because of this, it is necessary to understand not only the strengths but also the weaknesses of the interactive online collaborative learning community design. Some of the potential negative impacts or weaknesses are discussed in the following sections.
Chih-Hsiung Tu and Michael Corry
57
Are Learners Ready? Collaborative learning may not be new to most learners; however, their experiences and reactions vary widely. The main purpose of collaborative learning is to enrich learners’ critical thinking, information exchange, and knowledgegenerating processes and to attain rich interactive learning experiences. If learners do not see the value of collaborative learning, they will focus only on achievement and will not engage effectively in collaborative activities. The perception acquired by learners involved in collaborative learning is very critical and success depends upon a clear understanding of its purposes and values. The instructor must assist students in developing this positive perception before any collaborative learning activities can occur.
Time Intensive Online collaborative learning is not as efficient as traditional face-to-face collaborative learning. Team communication by computer-mediated communication requires more time to achieve a consensus. There is the risk that a team may not be able to achieve some tasks if appropriate support is missing or too little time is allotted.
Intensive Monitoring Instructors must monitor collaborative activities closely because online collaborative learning is a slow process. It demands more time and effort from instructors to ensure that all teams are making progress throughout the entire course. Again, good planning, organizing, and managing are critical.
Failure With the absence of visual communication (facial expressions, body language, speaking tone), online collaborative learning may be more prone toward failure. Therefore, it is vital that any difficulties within teams are reported to the instructor early on so that teams do not become frustrated and fail to complete assignments.
CONCLUSIONS Organization, management, and planning are required to engage students in interactive online learning through the integration of the online collaborative learning community design. Traditional face-to-face instruction does not adapt to the online learning environment. Online instructors and instructional
58
DISTANCE EDUCATION: WHAT WORKS WELL
designers should provide interactive learning conditions to maximize learning. Instructors should transfer the accountability for learning to learners and provide them with opportunities to negotiate when, where, how, and what they learn by applying computer technologies.
REFERENCES Benbunan-Fich , R., & Hiltz, S. R. (1999). Educational applications of CMCS: Solving case studies through asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(3). Retrieved January 15, 2002, from http://www.ascusc. org/jcmc/vol4/issue3/benbunan-fich.html Cooper, J., & Robinson, P. (1998). Small-group instruction in science, mathematics, engineering and technology (SMET) disciplines: A status report and an agenda for the future. Journal of College Science Teaching, 27(6), 383-388. Retrieved March 3, 2002, from http://www.csudh.edu/soe/cl_network/RTinCL.html Eisenstadt, M. (1995). The knowledge media generation. Retrieved September 25, 2002, from http://kmi.open.ac.uk/kmi-misc/kmi-feature.html Gerdy, K. B. (1998). If Socrates only knew: Expanding law class discourse. Paper presented at the annual conference for Law School Computing Online Conference. Retrieved March 6, 2002, from http://www.cali.org/conference/1998/postconf/thursday/ 25c4a/ Golub, J. (1988). Focus on collaborative learning. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English. Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Interaction–Affirmative (Opening Statement). ICDE95: Debate on Interaction. Retrieved July 21, 1998, from http://www.ualberta.ca/ ~tanderso/icde95/interaction_www/0009.html Jarvenpaa, S. L., Knoll, K., & Leidner, D. E. (1998). Is anybody out there? Antecedents of trust in global virtual teams. Journal of Management Information Systems, 14(4), 29-64. Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1990). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom. Edina, MN: Interaction Book Co. Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (1991). Self-regulation through goal setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 212-247. Ocker, R. J., & Yaverbaum, G. (1999). Asynchronous computer-mediated communication versus face-to-face collaboration: Results on student learning, quality and satisfaction. Group Decision and Negotiation, 8, 427-440. Panitz, T. (1996). A definition of collaborative vs cooperative learning. Retrieved March 18, 2002, from http://www.lgu.ac.uk/deliberations/collab.learning/panitz2. html Scifres, E. L., Gundersen, D. E., & Behara, R. S. (1998). An empirical investigation of electronic groups in the classroom. Journal of Education for Business, 73(4), 247-250. Slavin, R. E. (1991). Synthesis of research of cooperative learning. Educational Leadership, 48(5), 71-82.
Chih-Hsiung Tu and Michael Corry
59
Snow, C. C., Snell, S. A., & Davison, S. C. (1996). Use transnational teams to globalize your company. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 50-67. Springer, L., Stanne, M. E., & Donovan, S. (1997). Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology: A metaanalysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED415814) Stahl, R. J. (1994). The essential elements of cooperative learning in the classroom. ERIC Digest. Retrieved March 12, 2002, from http://www.ed.gov/databases/ERIC_Digests/ ed370881.html (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED370881) Stahl, R. J., & VanSickle, R. L. (1992). Cooperative learning in the social studies classroom: An introduction to social study (Bulletin No. 87). Washington, DC: National Council for the Social Studies. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED361243) Tu, C. H., & Corry, M. (2002). eLearning community. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2), 207-218.
