John's emal and my response
Hi John
Thanks for the helpful thoughts. Especially after a very frutiful my time with Dan Ball (who just graduated from our program and who explored the idea of online community and online social interdependence with three groups), your encouragements have given me some hope.
I don't feel I am out of the woods yet. I don't think Dan reflected the difficulties of transcript analysis in his dissertation. In a sense it is like doing a study of the biblical text where meaning is situated in the development of the text. Any suggestions for how best to analyze the text for cognitive presence, social presence and teaching presence? One could do the analysis in a "systematic theology" way (which is less contextual) or a "biblical theology" way which I think makes more sense but is more difficult to do if there are many posts which don't interact. The transcripts I have from last year's class don't show a high degree of interaction - put it this way, there were good responses to 10 questions posted by the instructor, but less replies to posts.
One other question John: When I asked the question about where in the online experience the best learning takes place, the person I spoke to at Moody replied: "Offline" - almost suggesting that the discussion board had potential for good learning, but the real learning is from reading the course material (like reading an online lecture which students print and read). It seems therefore that individualism still prevails.
In the light of your encouragement that asynch interactions which bear only 15-20% of the grade are still worth studying, how do you think I can best
i) present the reality (ie this is a blended course, they meet regularly on Thursday evenings for the f2f time, they interact with the online, interactive study guide, they have discussions which are only required to post 5x for the 15 questions for the entire semester)
...while at the same time, being able to
ii) make a persuasive case for studying this small segment of the total learniing experience?
I know that research is about narrowing down and finding a focus, but how does one make a strong case for my research? Present literature which suggest the asynch text-based interactions promote higher order thinking? What if some student's say they hated the discussion board because they didn't have the skills or the language for it or that they don't like discussion as a learning mode?
I want to make a strong case but am being intentionally negative and critical to cover my bases.
Calvin
> Calvin,
>
> What a bummer about the research. Research does often go this route and I
> guess
> that this is one of the reasons why good research can be so difficult.
>
> Here are a few references that might spur on some thought. I think that
> there
> is still a lot of research to be done on the impact of asynch
> communication in
> DE. Canada has led the way in this research. Even is an asynch
> communication
> is only 15 or 20% of a grade it is still worthy of research. The research
> being
> done so far focuses on analyzing the nature of communication in asynch
> conferencences. This type of research is being pursued through text
> anaylsis,
> which is a difficult and involved process. I have not seen any good
> research
> that attempts to link asynch communication in a DE course to the
> effectiveness
> of the learning experience. I think one of the reasons why this type of
> research is not being done is because of the difficulty of proving
> validity
> between asynch conferencing and learning outcomes. It can be done, but it
> will
> be difficult.
>
> One area that from my experience is critical to good DE is that of teacher
> presence. Not much research has been done in this area. I've included
> one
> article on this subject.
>
> "Methodological Issues in Analysis of Asynchronous, Text-based Computer
> Conferencing Transcripts"
> http://communitiesofinquiry.com/documents/MethPaperFinal.pdf
>
>
> France Henri. (1992). "Computer Conferencing and Content Analysis" In A.
> Kaye
> (Ed.) Collaborative learning through computer conferencing. The Najaden
> paper
> (pp. 117-136. This is old, but it lays out the challenges and a good
> framework
> for text analysis.
>
> Zhu, Erping. "Meaning Negotiation, Knowledge Construction, and Mentoring
> in a
> Distance Learning Course." Paper presented at the Proceedings of Selected
> Research and Development Presentations at the 1996 National Convention of
> the
> Association for Educational Communication and Technology. Indianapolis, IN
>
> Anderson, T., Rourke, L. Garrison, D.R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing
> teaching presence in a computer conferencing context.
> http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/jaln-vol5issue2v2.htm
>
> Fahy, P.J. (2001) "Addressing some common problems in transcript
> analysis."
> http://www.irrodl.org/content/v1.2/research.html
>
> Fahy, P.J., Crawford, G & Ally, M. (2001). "Patterns of interaction in a
> computer conference transcript.
> http://www.irrodl.org/content/v2.1/fahy.html
>
> Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2001). "Critical Thinking,
> Cognitive
> Presence, and Computer Conferencing in Distance Education." In American
> Journal
> of Distance Education, 15(1), 7-23.
>
> Fahy, P. J. (2002). Use of Linguistic Qualifiers and Intensifiers in a
> Computer
> Conference. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(1), pp. 5 -
> 22.
> http://cde.athabascau.ca/showcase/ajde.doc
>
> Fulford, C.P. & Zang, S. (1993). "Perception of interaction: The critical
> predictor in distance education." In American Journal of Distance
> Education,
> 7(3), 8-21. (This is a really interesting article that basically notes
> that the
> student's perception of interaction in a DE course is a key indicator of
> student
> satisfaction with the DE course. There is still a lot of research
> remaining to
> be done in this area and the research model does not have to be
> complicated.)
>
> This will give you some stuff of go through and hopefully trigger some of
> your
> great thoughts!
>
> Let me know how it goes.
>
> By the way, yes, I did receive your previous email and I did respond to
> it.
> I'll send it to you again.
>
> John
>
> John M. Palka
> Concordia Seminary - EIIT
> Instructional Systems Designer
> Project Manager
> 314-505-7774
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Calvin Chong [mailto:calchong@sbc.edu.sg]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2004 9:22 AM
> To: Palka, John
> Subject: Re: FW: Special Online Event,Keynote Address-NELA Partner,
> December
> 8th.
>
> John
>
> Thanks for sending me this information. Did you get a recent email I sent
> you?
> I don't seem to have your email, only the old prodigy.net one which I
> think is
> now defunct right?
>
> Anyways, I wonder if you can help me with a major problem I have hit doing
> my
> dissertation. I was home for two months to collect data for my project
> and came
> back with a "failed project" - scope too large, people I was trying to
> interview
> were just not the right sort of people. I think it was a case of being
> away for
> too long and trying to do too much with my project which meant that it
> didn't
> have enough focus. I was trying to explore the impact of the internet on
> Christian leadership in Singapore, to explore the types of leadership
> qualities
> which have arisen and implications for seminaries.
>
> I came back to retool my study. before returning, I was chatting with a
> colleague who is teaching an online NT survey class using what has been
> offered
> by Moody Bible Institute. What is interesting is that Singapore is really
> into
> distance and blended learning, but this represents the very first steps
> for
> seminaries and I want to do a case study and explore issues there. It
> will be
> taught both f2f and online. Moody has set their class up using
> Blackboard, but
> the content (which is quite interactive) is mainly on their own server to
> allow
> for migration from LMS to LMS (they are exploring the SAKAI project).
> Discussions are linked to lessons.
> Many of our students will be novices to the online experience and the
> instructor
> is a relative novice too with one previous class under his belt (Jan-May
> 2004,
> same NT Survey Class)
>
> I was actually exploring Garrison, Anderson and Walter's community of
> inquiry
> model which gives attention to cognitive presence, social presence,
> teaching
> presence in asynchronous text based learning environment as my framework,
> but
> the cues I have got from my time with the Moody folk as well as the
> instructor
> in Singapore indicate that it may not be too suitable. Why? The
> conference
> discussion (which is really what Community of Inquiry focuses on) is only
> assigned 20% of the grade. I think my colleague is going to reduce that
> to 15%
> and only mandate 5 posts over the entire semester per person. That will
> probably limit the discussion interactions for this class and it will not
> totally account for the total learning experience.
>
> Time is not on my side since the class will begin in Jan 5th and I need to
> get
> my research framework in place. Help!!! My hunch now is to explore
> interactivity and how that contributes toward some sort of learning
> outcome, but
> I am not familiar enough with literature. I do have some articles listed
> below,
> some of which I have read, others which I have either acquired or will do
> so.
>
> Need a solid framework which can translate into a research focus. Any
> leads?
>
> Chou, Chien. 2003. Interactivity and interactive functions in web-based
> learning
> systems: A technical framework for designers. British Journal of
> Educational
> Technology 34 (3):265-79.
>
> Chung, SeJin, Charles Severance, and Moon-Jung Chung. 2003. Design of
> suport
> tools for knowledge building in a virtual university course.
> Interactive Learning Environments 11 (1):41-57.
>
> Collins, Mauri, and Zane Berge. 1996. Facilitating Interaction in Computer
> Mediated Online Courses.
>
> Geer, Ruth. 2000. Social interdependence in collaborative interactivity
> in an
> Internet based learning environment. Paper read at Distance
> education: An open question?, at University of South Australia,.
>
> Hillman, Daniel C., Deborah J. Willis, and Charlotte N. Gunawardena. 1994.
> Learner-interface interaction in distance education: An extension of
> contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. The American Journal
> of
> Distance Education 8 (2):30-42.
>
> Jung, Insung, Seonghee Choi, Cheolil Lim, and Junghoon Leem. 2002. Effects
> of
> different types of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction and
> participation in web-based instruction. Innovations in Education &
> Teaching
> International 39 (2):153-163.
>
> Karaliotas, Yannis. Interactivity in the learning environment [Internet]
> 1998 [cited. Available from http://users.otenet.gr/~kar1125/iaction.htm.
>
> Leeder, Dawn. From Linear Lecture To Interactive Multimedia Module: A
> Developer's Perspective.
>
> Lohr, L. L. 2000. Designing the instructional interface. Computers in
> Human
> Behavior 16 (2):161-182.
>
> Maor, Dorit. 2003. The teacher's role in developing interaction and
> reflection
> in an online learning community. Education Media International 40
> (1/2):127-137.
>
> Moore, M. 1989. Three types of interaction. The American Journal of
> Distance
> Education 3 (2):1-6.
>
> Muirhead, Brent. 2004. Encouraging interaction in online classes.
> International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning 1
> (6).
>
> Roblyer, M. D., and W. R. Wiencke. 2003. Design and use of a rubric to
> assess
> and encourage interactive qualities in distance courses. The American
> Journal of
> Distance Education 17 (2):77-98.
>
> Roggenkamp, Daniel. Learner-interface interaction in distance learning
> [cited.
> Available from http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Admin/TOC/index.htm.
>
> Takimoto-Makarczyk, Keiko. Online Interaction [cited. Available from
> http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Admin/TOC/index.htm.
>
> Vrasidas, Charalambos, and Marina Stock McIsaac. 1999. Factors influencing
> interaction in an online course. The American Journal of Distance
> Education 13
> (3):22-36.
>
>> Calvin,
>>
>> I know that you've read Mark Prensky's book and so I thought that you
>> might be interested in this web event. I believe that it is free.
>> Unfortunately, I won't be able to attend it, but I believe that in the
>> past they've archived their presentations and made them available on
>> the web.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> John M. Palka
>>
>> Concordia Seminary - EIIT
>>
>> Instructional Systems Designer
>>
>> Project Manager
>>
>> 314-505-7774
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>>
>> From: Allan Cole [mailto:info@nelearning.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 1:32 PM
>> To: Palka, John
>> Subject: Special Online Event,Keynote Address-NELA Partner,December
>> 8th.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> New England Learning
>> Association
>>
>>
>>
>> Designing Learning Digital Natives Will Love
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> a
>> Special Keynote Address right from your desk.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Practices Study-Multiple Industries Covered
>> ________________________________
>>
>> Partner Event-New England ASAP Chapter-Holiday Reunion After Hours
>> Party Vantage Partners conducted a ground-breaking study on alliance
>> relationship management. They are now in the process of completing the
>> second phase of this study, and it will be published in a couple of
>> months. The speaker will share highlights from the current study
>> Pre-register Now.
>>
>> http%3A%2F
>> %2Fwww.strategic-alliances.org%2Fchapters%2FBoston%2FDEC04.htm>
>> .
>>
>>
>> Dear John,
>>
>> Special Partner Event. NELA is excited to partner with the Canadian
>> ASTD,New Brunswick Chapter and LearnNB to offer special online access
>> to a terrific keynote speaker that will be at the their fall event at
>> noon on December 8th.
>> Join author, visionary, and writer Mark Prensky as he discussess, "
>> How do we go about redesigning our learning for Digital Natives?" As
>> learners become more and more immersed in their digital technology -
>> carrying around their communications, computing and entertainment
>> devices in their pockets - the gap is widening between the skills they
>> have, the languages they speak (e.g.
>> game,
>> blog, IM), and what instructors and trainers expect. Mark will explore
>> the important implications of this gap, and suggest ways organizations
>> and instructors can help close it, via gaming and other alternatives.
>>
>> Event Details:
>>
>> 2Fwww.nelearning.org>
>>
>>
>> Wenesday Lunchtime
>> December 8,2004
>> 12:00 PM - 1:00 PM
>> Right from your Desktop
>>
>>
>> New Corporate Sponsor:Innovatia
>>
>>
>> Delivered By Elluminate
>>
>>
>> Register Today!!!
>>
>> 2Fwww.nelearning.org>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Perfect
>> opportunity to hear a great keynote address without leaving your office.
>>
>> Watch for more event details at www.nelearning.org.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Allan Cole
>> New England Learning Association
>> ________________________________
>>
>> email: info@nelearning.org
>> voice: 617-558-5566
>> web: http://www.nelearning.org
>>
>> 2Fwww.nelearning.org>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> New England Learning Association * P.O. Box 760872 * Melrose * MA *
>> 02176
>>
>>
>> Forward email
>>
>
>>
>> SafeUnsubscribe(TM)
>>
>> &ea=palkaj%40csl.edu>
>> This email was sent to palkaj@csl.edu, by New England Learning
>> Association
>>
>> 2Fwww.nelearning.org> .
>> Update your profile
>>
>> SafeUnsubscribe
>>
>>
>> by Constant Contact
>>
>>
>>
>
posted by Cross My Path @ 9:19 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home