Author: Tiina Rinne (page 1 of 1)

1. Make your session AUTHENTIC – connect it the contents of real-world situations/problems. Organizing students into break–out rooms to address a relevant, engaging, real-world problem can stimulate thought, focus and cognitive engagement (Kay 2022). Students could be encouraged to discuss about a case study, design a learning tool, evaluate some program, compare two approaches or contrasting opinions, debating messy social issues, or creating a web page (Kay 2022).
   
2. Use BREAKOUT ROOMS to create smaller groups (ideally 4 persons) for discussions. Large groups do not work that well in online contexts: participants tend to turn off their cameras and are reluctant to participate in discussions more often than not.
3. Use COLLABORATION as a learning strategy, it works surprising well in online synchronous environments.
4. To maximize the benefits of working in small-groups, make sure your small-groups are PRODUCTIVE. Smaller groups should be asked to produce an artifact; mindmap, mural board or a one slide presentation. Have a clear goal, otherwise discussions tend to deteriorate to off-topic conversations.
5. TIMING is a a very critical part of a succesful online course. Plan small breaks every 10 min; present information, shift audiences attention by asking them a chat question, presenting a poll, or testing their knowledge.
6. CLARITY is extra important. One needs to be super clear in providing instructions for breakout activity. It is challenging to go over confusion when students have shifted into groups.
7. Offer CHOICES for students as much as possible in terms of completing tasks, presentation modes, etc. This works best with open-ened and “messy” tasks.
8. CREATIVITY leads to great results. It seems that activities requiring exploration and creativity lead to the most impressive and engaging results: Challenge student’s to brainstorm.
9. Be INTERACTIVE. Passive presentation of information is not an effective strategy to promote learning: apply interaction between instructor and learners as student’s need to engage with concepts and procedures and construct meaning to truly understand and learn.
10. POLL about the topics and concepts you discuss. Surveying student opinion or understanding of concepts. Two-step-polling is a particularly effective activity.

Finally, according to Kay (2022) the most successful online classes use a variety of the above presented activities, including short presentations, polls, chat discussion, breakout discussions, and large group discussions.

Reflecting on these, I feel like I’ve done so many mistakes in my previous online teaching. It feels like I have tried to fit a square shaped block to a rounded whole by brining face-to-face teaching practices to an online environment. To give some creadit to myself, I did not have an easy task transforming a fully face-to-face course into a fully online course in 2020 after Covid19 restrictions made it impossible to arrange a face-to-face teaching. I had zero experience about online teaching and pedagogics. Taking these facts into account, I would say I did not do soooo bad, but I neither did very well. It is easy to laugh afterwards, but I remember back then I was terrified. From the 10 guiding principles by Kay (2020) introduced here, I might have used one and that is the authenticity, which was an initial part of the course already when it was arranged as a face-to-face format. But well, know I know better and I think with all that I have learned from ONL231 course I could actually plan one heck of a good online GIS course, but that remains to be seen.

REFERENCES

Fullan & Longworthy 2013: https://michaelfullan.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/New-Pedagogies-for-Deep-Learning-An-Invitation-to-Partner-2013-6-201.pdf

Kay, R. 2022. Creating Engaging Online Synchronous Activities in Kay, R., H. & Hunter, W. J. (Eds.). (2022). Thriving online: A guide for busy educators. Ontario TechUniversity

Photo credit to Chris Montgomery, Unsplash

In topic three we dived into the different perspectives of the power of collaboration. This weeks topic was very interesting to me as I have been facing a lot of resitance from students towards collaborative work. I have been mainly teaching bachelor level students and most critisism I have faced during many years of teaching relates to having group work tasks in my courses. My previous experiences led me to investigate students resistance related to collaborative work and how one could overcome these challenges.

My investigations took me to Tolman and Kreming’s (2017) integrated model of student resistance (IMSR) which provides a systematic model outlining reasons for student resistance to collaborative learning (CL). It includes four elements that are highly interdependent. I will now introduce these elements and reflect my personal teaching experiences related to these.

#1 COGNITION: Student cognition refers to the beliefs students hold about how knowledge is acquired (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982). Many students’ have simplistic views of knowledge formation where they feel that the source of knowledge needs to be transferred from an authority (instructor) along with the information needed to pass courses/exams (Kloss 1994, Perry 1970). Students with these kinds of views typically have very strong resistance towards CL, because they tend to see peer learning as a waste of time.

• I have a feeling that these beliefs sit very deep in bachelor level students (who I mainly teach), which most likely is because of the way they are used to bein taught in school. Many bachelor students in my Univerisity’s program come directly from the high school to the University and they expect that the teaching follows exactly same procedures as in elementary, upper elementary and high school. I have realized that in order to engage the students for collaborative learning I need to help them to change their beliefs about how knowledge is acquired:
  publicly defining learning as a jointly constructed endeavor between students and the instructor; validating students as having an essential voice in the learning process; situating learning to allow students to construct their own knowledge as per the suggestions by Baxter & Magolda, 1992

#2 METACOGNITION: Metacognition refers to students’ self-awareness of their own cognition and their ability to regulate their cognitive processes (Vrugt & Oort, 2008). Dweck (2000) maintains that most students either view their intelligence as static (fixed mindset) or as changeable (growthmindset).

• According to Fuchs & Fluegge, 2014 I would need to help my students to develop a growth mindset in order to go over the metacognitive challenges that keep up the resistance. I would clearly need to tell my students about the the benefits of collaborative learning to allow students to adopt more of a growth mindset in an effort to embrace the change.

#3 EXTERNAL FORCES – Negative Classroom Experiences: External forces include students’ negative classroom experiences. While collaaborative learning has many documented benefits, many students’ have had some negative experiences from it which leads to resistance.

• There are several suggestions how to create positive and productive collaborative learning classroom experiences suggested by Stover and Holland (2018):
  • Communicate to students the clear intentions, assign intentional groups, develop protocols and structures for group work, and hold individuals accountable for their own work.
  • Encourage students to be active participants in the learning process by valuing them as they engage in group work (Cole 2007).
  • Prep students with the skills necessary to become an effective member of the community of learning by carefully observing student interactions
  • Demonstrating and modeling collaboration skills
  • Giving students feedback in class
  • Asking students to write short reflections resulting in self-realizations and growth (Bosworth, 1994).
  • Include actions that hold students accountable for their own knowledge with activities such as opening-class quizzes to ensure students have completed required readings so they have the knowledge background to be effective contributors to their Community of Inquiry.

#4 EXTERNAL FORCES – Environmental Forces: These may include work, family, culture/racism and disabilities. Studies have found it can be challenging for minority students to participate in collaborative learning due to their lack of confidence (Roksa et al, 2017; White & Lowenthal, 2010). Widnall (1988) conducted studies that found that women may feel their contributions are devalued or discounted in collaborative learning environments and are also uncomfortable with the argumentative format adopted by some of the men in their group.

• From my experiences with the bachelor students, I think that the learning and teaching culture in basic education is an external environmental force that makes up the resistance. To overcome the culture of learning they have been used to I could pay more attention to assign the students to have different roles in the group, e.g. different tasks and responsibility, so that creating good group dynamics do not only fall on their shoulders. Besides this, I may emphasize that collaborative learning brings students together to support one another’s learning while promoting creativity and critical thinking while at the same time higlighting also the importance and benefits of group social acceptance to divergent views.

Currently, the course I have been teaching where I have faced quite some student resistance towards collaborative working culture is not runnig in my University. But once I am back on teaching duties, I will for sure put all these lessons learned into action and see what it brings along.

REFERENCES

Baxter Magolda, M. (1992). Knowing and Reasoning in College: Gen-der-related Patterns in Student Development. San Francisco,CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bosworth, K. (1994). Developing collaborative skills in college students. Collaborative learning: underlying processes and effective techniques. New Directions for Teaching and Learning,59, 25-31.

Cacioppo, J.T., & Perry, R. E. (1982).The need for cognition. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology, 42(1), 116-131.

Cole, D. (2007). Do interracial interactions matter? An examination of student-faculty contact and intellectual self-concept.Journal of Higher Education, 78(3), 249-281.

Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. NY:Ballantine Books

Fuchs, E., & Fluegge, G. (2014). Adult neuroplasticity: more than40 years of research. Neural Plasticity, 2014, 1-10. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/541870S

Kloss, R. J. (1994) A nudge is best. College Teaching, 42(4), 151-159. doi: 10.1080/87567555/1994/9926847

Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A Scheme. NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston

Stover, S., & Holland, C. (2018). Student resistance to collaborative learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 12(2), 8.

Tolman, A. O. & Kremling, J. (2017). Why Students Resist Learning: A Practical Model for Understanding and Helping Students. Sterling,VA: Stylus Publishing

Vrugt, A., & Oort, F. J. (2008). Metacognition, achievement goals,study strategies and academic achievement: pathways toachievement. Metacognition and Learning, 3(2), 123-146.

In topic two we dove into thinking about the benefits and challenges of openness in education and learning. Our group focused on multiple questions related to open learning: What are the advantages and disadvantages of AI integration in learning and is co-existing with AI possible for Educators or Subject Matter Experts, what are different support structures needed for Open Learning (such as technical support, peer/educator support, student support, institutional support), how does one keep their competitive advantage if everything is going to be available via open learning and how to get students to share their work with other learners. In this post I will reflect on moslty on the advantages and disadvantages of AI integration in learning and teaching which I find very interesting topic.

One of the latest hot topics of AI and learning & teaching is of course the infamous ChatGPT. The extraordinary abilities of ChatGPT to perform complex tasks within the field of education has caused mixed feelings among educators as this advancement in AI seems to revolutionize existing educational praxis (Baidoo-Anu & Owusu, 2023). Tools like ChatGPT poses both challenges and opportunities for teaching and learning. These tools can promote the personalized and interactive learning and formative assessment practices. It can also function as a study companion for students, which in my opinion should not been seen only as a negative element. According to Kasneci and colleagues (2023) ChatGPT may help students to develop research skills as it can provide them with information and resources on a particular topic, suggesting undiscovered aspects, and introducing them to new research topics, enabling them to gain a better
understanding and evaluation of the topic. Furhtermore, AI tools, such as ChatGPT, may also help teachers in some tasks – for example, in creating syllabus for a particular course, with thematic sub-sections and even assignments. Yet, there are multiple relevant concerns related to the use of AI in education such as plagiation, wrong information generated, unsufficient learning, biases in data training just to mention a few.

I feel that ChatGPT and other generative AI have come to stay and will continue revolutionizing the current educational system. It is high time we began to accept the rapidly changing landscape in educational practices and incorporate these changes in our current educational praxis. David White mentioned in his online webinar during our topic 1, that many famous UK learning institutions have banned ChatGPT, whereas other have welcomed it as part of their education system (see more e.g. https://inews.co.uk/news/oxford-cambridge-ban-chatgpt-plagiarism-universities-2178391).According to Halaweh (2023) AI will pose students to demonstrate more critical thinking in their evaluation of information, as well as in developing and presenting new ideas. The area that has garnered more attention and become topical is students assessment. It is too soon to conclude but very soon educators may need to rethink how students are assessed (Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. 2023). Presentation and defending one’s work will become standard assessments in the educational environment, in order to verify the learning specially when assessment are done in collaboration with ChatGPT (Halaweh 2023).

Open learning defined as “encompassing resources, tools and practices that employ a framework of open sharing to improve educational access and effectiveness worldwide…  open allows not just access, but the ability to modify and use materials, information and networks so education can be personalized to individual users or woven together in new ways for large and diverse audiences” (Open Education Consortium), goes well hand in hand with open AI tools developed lately. These tools do indeed allow access but also ability to modify and use materials, information and networks so education can be personalized to individual users or woven together in new ways for large and diverse audiences. Thus, I would conclude that despite the concerns related to e.g., to generative AI like ChatGPT, the tool could be concluded indeed to support the oppeness of learning. It remains to be seen how we further apply these tools in different learning and teaching settings.

REFERENCES

Baidoo-Anu, D., & Owusu Ansah, L. (2023). Education in the Era of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI): Understanding the Potential Benefits of ChatGPT in Promoting Teaching and Learning. Available at SSRN 4337484.

Halaweh, M. (2023). ChatGPT in education: Strategies for responsible implementation. Contemporary Educational Technology, 15(2).

Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., … & Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274.

It’s been few weeks since ONL 231 started. Already, I feel like I’ve learned more than I ever imagined. I have come to like problem based learning a lot and even online collaborative learning. What has happened? In this post I first reflect shortly about my personal and professional digital literacy and ways I use digital tools in personal and professional life. After this, I will reflect on my learning journey so far, after diving straight into the deep end with online learning and teaching.

I see myself as a quite literate dweller in the current digital world. I use multiple digital platforms, resources and apps both in personal and professional life, but these are very separate from each other. As White and Le Cornu (2011) puts it, I seem to be more of a resident than a visitor in most of online platforms I use. In my personal life the digital platforms I use are mostly related to socializing and keeping connected with family and friends. In my professional life, the digital platforms and tools I use relate directly to my work; I use multiple digital tools for doing research, communicating my research but also for keeping in touch with colleagues. Yet, socializing with colleagues rarely takes place in the same social media platforms than in my personal life. I find this separation quite important for me, especially from the recovering perspective. Being a reserachers means I have academic freedom in terms of how, when and where I work, but this freedom comes with a price. It means I work a lot when there is a lot to do, meaning that I might work 7 days a week, in the evenings and while my kid is taking a nap. Sometimes this feels like I am working 24/7. Because of this, I feel like I need a very distinct separation between the social paltforms I use for personal communication and professional communication. Thusfar, this has worked well and I can quite nicely keep professional digital communication channels separate from my personal ones. However, I feel like I and all peers workin in higher education should crefully consider if and when technology-use related stress (technostress) becomes a reality and then take a needed pause (Halupa & Bolliger 2020).

I can honestly say that my experience from online teaching prior to this course has been quite far from positive. I was pushed into online teaching right at the beginning of Covid19. I had no previous experience from online teaching and I had no outside help to transform a very practice oriented, hands-on computer assisted tool teaching to an online environment. Somehow I managed to do that, but I guess I did not do it too well. It all just felt too much. After this experience, this course I had been teaching for some years was merged with another course and I was able let go of my teaching responsibilities for a while. This means that my last full-on teaching experience is from panic-mode from Covid19-times when everything just suddenly had to move to online platforms.

I guess my decision to participate in ONL 231 was partly explained by a need for self-healing. I wanted to learn how on earth can one build up a learning environment online, that is actually functional and supports the learning and teaching needs of all participants. I am more than happy I am on board in this course. The topic 1 “Online Participation and Digital Literacies” has given me a great crash-course into online participation and the world of digital literacies, but what has bee especially fruitful has been the discussions we have had in our PBL group 1. I feel like I’ve been blessed with such a great group of enthusiastic and professional peers who all have such interesting viewpoints to online learning and teaching. At times I feel like the one hour session is not enough to let the creative discussion to flow, but I know we all are limited with our time. The first topic took me to read more about the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework and the concepts of cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presences. In the further discussions in the group I learned how CoI framwork is linked to Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL). I feel like the topic 1 has not necessarily provided me that much tools for creating functional online courses, but I have come to realize that the basis for a functional online learning spaces is built upon good a spirit of community, safe and relaxed space. One of the topics that was brought up in our group discussions was the role of humour in online environments and how it can be used in online classroom contexts. I find this so simple but ah so brilliant. Using humor to create safe spaces for online learning and boosting the spirit of comunity will for sure be put into my teacher tooldbox. I will for sure follow up on the other findings or our topic 1 when I again need to do teaching online.

I find myself being inspired and wanting to learn more about online learning and teaching. I guess this course is working its magic on me 🙂

REFERENCES:

Halupa, C., & Bolliger, D. U. (2020). Technology fatigue of faculty in higher education. Technology, 11(18), 16-26.

White, D. S., & Le Cornu, A. (2011). Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First monday.

Photo credit: John Schnobrich on Unsplash