Addicted

In my quest for a free whiteboarding tool, I came upon this excellent tool from GE. I needed the tool for an online physics course -- so students can work on drawings and equations together. This tool is perfect for that activity. I plan on sharing it with my students this fall. But, for the moment, I am just addicted to playing with it, and making friends draw with me.

Lots of eLearning tools!

Check out Jane Hart's blog. Every day she shares a new eLearning tool. I am impressed with the variety of tools shared, and with her ability to post something new every day...I'm lucky if I post something once a week. Anyway, Jane's blog is a great way to keep up with tools and a one-stop-shop for researching possible tools that you can use with students.

Making me think

Related to my last post, I find this to be a thought-provoking slideshow as well...

Clearly...the need for technology integration

Well, if this doesn't illustrate the need to integrate technology into what we do with students at every grade level, I don't know what will...

Please see this thought-provoking slideshow from the Durango School District's IT Director, Howie DiBlasi.

Structures for asynchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 2)

I have been using discussion protocols in my on-campus and online courses (see Protocols Part 1 posting for protocols for on-campus use). I like discussion protocols because they provide a structure for engaging students in critical thinking about topics and issues. These protocols also help me encourage balanced voices in which all students share their perspective. I originally learned about discussion protocols from two very useful books:

McDonald, J., Mohr, N., Dichter, A., & McDonald, E. (2003). The power of protocols: An educator's guide to better practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Brookfield, S. D., & Preskill, S. (1999). Discussion as a way of teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

What I share below are descriptions of my modifications of various protocols for use in facilitating asynchronous online discussions (synchronous discussions addressed in a subsequent post in this series -- Protocols Part 3). If you (and your students) are tired of conventional Q&A sessions, debates, or conversational role-playing (such as devil's advocate), these structures may be helpful.

Structures for Asynchronous Discussions
These protocols help students interpret and reflect on readings, but you can also use them to focus students’ discussion of case studies or a current event in the news. For these protocols, it is best to have students work in discussion groups of 4 to 5, with each group provided access to their own threaded discussion forum.

The Final Post
(Modified from McDonald et al.’s The Final Word protocol)

Steps:

1. Each student identifies one of the most significant ideas from the reading, illustrated by a quote. (Ask each student to prepare a back-up quote in case another student in the small group has already posted their first choice.)


2. Each student starts a new thread by posting a quote from the text that particularly struck her or him. The student points out where the quote is in the text. In less than 100 words, the student describes why that quote struck her or him.


3. Each student responds to that quote and what the original student said, using no more than 50 words. The purpose of the response is to expand on the original student's thinking about the issues, to provide a different look at the issue, to clarify thinking about the issues, and to question the original student's assumptions about the issues.


4. After each student in the group has responded to the original post, the first student has the “final word.” Using no more than 50 words, the original student then responds to what has been posted, sharing what she or he is now thinking about the issue, and her or his reaction to what the other students have posted.


5. This process continues until everyone has had the opportunity to have the “final word.” This means that 4-5 discussions are happening simultaneously within a particular timeframe (say, 3 days to 1 week), or that they are happening one at a time (each discussion over 1-2 days).

The Last Post
(Modified from McDonald et al.’s The Last Word protocol)

Steps:

1. Each student identifies one of the most significant ideas from the reading, illustrated by a quote. (Ask each student to prepare a back-up quote in case another student in the small group has already posted her or his first choice.)


2. Each student starts a new thread by posting a quote from the text that particularly struck her or him. The student points out where the quote is in the text, but does not explain why that quote struck her or him.


3. The rest of the group discusses the quote, why it is significant, what it means, and so on. Specify an amount of time for this discussion, such as 2 days.


4. After each student in the group has participated in a discussion about the quote, the first student has the "last word.” In no more than 100 words the original student shares why she or he thought it was significant, and sharing what she or he is now thinking about the issue, and her or his reaction to what the other students have posted.


5. This process continues until everyone has had the opportunity to have the "last word.” This means that 4-5 discussions (depending on number of students in a group) are happening simultaneously within a particular timeframe (say, 3 days to 1 week), or that they are happening one at a time (each discussion over 1-2 days).

Posting the Crux of the Matter
(Modified from McDonald et al.’s Crux of the Matter protocol)

Steps:

1. Set up four new threads: Sentences, Phrases, Words, and Insights. Designate a time frame for the discussion, such as 2-3 days.


2. First round: Each student posts a sentence from the reading that she or he feels is particularly significant in the Sentences thread. Each new post must be unique; in other words, if another student has already posted a particular sentence, other students should not post it again.


3. Second round: Each student shares a phrase that she or he feels is particularly significant in the Phrases thread. Each new post must be unique; in other words, if another student has already posted a particular phrase, other students should not post it again.


4. Third round: Each student posts the word that she or he feels in particularly significant in the Words thread. Each new post must be unique; in other words, if another student has already posted a particular word, other students should not post it again.


5. In the Insights thread, the small group discusses what they understand about the reading based on what everyone has posted, and any new insights about the reading.

Note: When using a protocol, it is also very helpful to debrief the activity with the whole group. This can help reinforce what students have gained and learned from the discussion, and explore any remaining questions.


Designated Readers
(Modified from Brookfield & Preskill’s Designated Listeners protocol)

1. At some point in the course, each student takes on the role of the designated reader.


2. During an online discussion, the designated reader does not contribute (except to ask for clarification of someone else’s posting).


3. At the end of the discussion, the designated reader is responsible for summarizing the online discussion. (Note: You can require a specific word count for summaries, such as 250 words, to help designated readers write concisely.)

This protocol promotes active “listening” during online discussions because it requires the designated readers to read all postings, look for themes and differing perspectives, ask clarifying questions, and summarize what has occurred during the discussion in a way that values everyone’s contributions. Especially when written concisely, these summaries also serve to help the group feel a sense of closure, making it easier to move on to the next discussion.

Related posts in this blog:
Discussion ground rules
Don’t jump into discussions
Engaging quieter online students
Small groups reporting out to the large group?
Karma (or inspiration) points for discussion assessment
Beyond debates and conversational roles (Protocols Part 1)
Structures for synchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 3)
Structures for small groups reporting out to whole group (Protocols Part 4)

Engaging quieter online students

A few times a year I am lucky to work with a new group of online instructors. I primarily share with them my thoughts on engaging students in online discussions, and facilitating groupwork activities. A question that comes up has to do with involving students who are a bit on the quiet side, regardless of the reason (e.g., learning preference, procrastination, lack of interest, overwhelming number of posts in the discussion, not clear about value, not clear on directions, and so on). Here are just a few of the strategies I use to address this issue in my online courses.

• Use strategies such as karma points (see May 25, 2007, post on "Karma points for discussion assessment") to encourage students to get involved. Incentives, such as assessments that lead to points towards final grade, do make a difference to many students.

• Besides making sure that the activities are relevant (and that students know they are relevant...you can't assume it is obvious), create a structure in which students need to post by a certain time, and then respond to others by a certain time. For example, if the class week starts on Monday, I have students post their initial views on an issue, reading, case study, and so on by Thursday, and then engage in the discussion further between Thursday and Sunday.

• Organize students into groups to make it more likely that everyone will have a chance to participate – smaller discussion groups of between 5 and 10 learners can make room for everyone to contribute.

• Assign people specific roles in the discussion: facilitator, questioner, summarizer, devil's advocate, and so on. Then, provide clear directions about what you do specifically when you are assigned that role.

• Put a limit on the number of posts (and length) that any one individual is allowed to contribute. How does this help? It will be less likely that students will enter a discussion and feel overwhelmed by the number of posts (especially if you have students in discussion groups of 5-10 students), and it will keep students from feeling like someone has already addressed the issue thoroughly with his or her 3,000 word post!

• Assign students a response order/sequence and require each subsequent responder to post something that extends the previous posts.

• Use online discussion protocols. Interested? Watch for posts throughout July and August 2007 (Protocols Parts 2-4) for more on online discussion protocols.

Related posts in this blog:
Discussion ground rules
Don’t jump into discussions
Small groups reporting out to the large group?
Karma (or inspiration) points for discussion assessment
Beyond debates and conversational roles (Protocols Part 1)
Structures for asynchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 2)
Structures for synchronous online discussions (Protocols Part 3)
Structures for small groups reporting out to whole group (Protocols Part 4)