The linked paper is authored by members of the Florida State University Instructional Systems Program and published in Educational Technology & Society. It is an excellent evaluation of the effectiveness of computers in an online learning environment to "function as cognitive tools . . . that extend student's capacity to learn and create knowledge." Their observation is that current course management systems largely fall short of this goal. They propose improved design to address (1) social structure (shared context) and (2) collaboration (knowledge construction) in an online learning environment.
Design support to create a shared social context: The authors propose that a shared social context is needed for "online learners to socialize, learn and create knowledge." They note that it can be established by providing:
- Virtual environments to foster social relationships: They point to research indicating "design of the virtual environment has to have the impact of being real and concrete" to produce a feeling of "place" with the goal of increased and sustained user involvement in the online activities. Suggestions include student lounges, space for personal information, virtual office hours, lecture halls and enhanced discussion forums.
- Informational support: This includes support for navigation and use within the learning environment itself (for example, providing assistance in selecting "features of interest").
- Multiple information channels and tools to support collaboration: Learners need to be "aware" in order to act and react. Awareness includes: social awareness (who is involved?), action awareness (what is happening?) and activity awareness (how is it going?). The authors note that support for social and action awareness is often present, but activity awareness is rarely adequately addressed. Yet, they propose that activity awareness (involving goals, plans, resources, understanding of others' actions, assessment of status) "is necessary for the successful implementation of complex and long-term tasks". They suggest improved "joint workspace", enhanced notification systems and other tools to address gaps in awareness.
Design support that facilitates online communication: A distinction is made between systems that "allow" collaboration and systems that "support" collaboration. It is a fine distinction, but an important one as the ultimate goal of collaboration should be "knowledge construction". The results of studies on knowledge construction in collaborative learning environments indicate that "the students' ability to conduct effective interactions with others was limited." It was found that the focus was primarily on "observational or procedural matters" versus "knowledge construction where each member of the team contributed" to a consensus solution. The authors propose both design intervention (for example, "communication scaffolds", "embedded communication tools", Gantt charts to display project status), but also intervention by online facilitators to support both communication, as well as to facilitate knowledge construction.
Hi Jennifer,
I agree with the need for "support for navigation and use within the learning environment itself;" when one is dealing with multiple interfaces, it can sometimes be confusing where you should go.
Reflecting on our own courses, I wish there were a little more standardization in the course interface design. I'm taking three Oncourse classes this term. Two classes are on the new Oncourse, one is on the old course, and the navigation of each one is completely different. Even with the two classes that use the new interface there are significant differences; for example, discussion in one class takes place in the "Discussion" tab, while discussion in the othe takes place in the "Message Center." Likewise, one class makes use of the "Calendar" function while the other does not.
I'm juggling three classes, working full-time, and moonlighting, so I've got a lot on my plate. It's easy for me to forget the due dates of assignments, and the multiple interfaces make it difficult for me to keep my schedule straight. I think instructors should have flexibility, but I think that a standard approach in certain areas (e.g. syllabus, discussion, calendar, etc.) would be helpful.
Ken