ELDT lunchtime webinar series Making collaborative online activities work Dr Richard Walker E-Learning Development Team, University of York Wednesday 11th January 2017

Session Outline 1. Drivers for collaboration online - Use cases highlighting approaches & tools 2. Common challenges in engaging learners - Discussion of barriers to participation 3. Designing in student engagement - Activity design tips 4. Facilitating collaborative learning - Instructional responsibilities for delivery of collaborative tasks

To begin with – some questions to ponder   Why do you want your students to engage in collaborative online activities? What learning outcomes are you targeting? How will the performance of the online activities contribute to students’ overall learning for your course? (e.g. for blended modules, how will the online activities complement class-based learning?)

Defining collaborative learning Focusing on situations ‘in which 2 or more subjects build synchronously and interactively a joint solution to some problem’ (Dillenbourg & Schneider, 1995) emphasis on extent and quality of exchanges during task engagement shared approach to tasks and student interdependence positive social interdependence: - giving & receiving help / feedback, - exchanging information & resources; - challenging others’ contributions - jointly reflecting on progress and process (Johnson & Johnson, 1996)

Modes of collaborative engagement supported through the use of technology Enhancing learning: articulation of learning; reflection on key concepts Peer-based learning Reciprocal teaching discussion forums / role play; presentations Enhancing learning: structured interaction Group research and report writing tasks wiki /blog spaces online peer, assessment and review Transforming learning: student-led teaching and discovery Student-led content creation Problem-based learning online resource hub wiki / blog problem solving space The slide presents a selection of the modes of collaborative engagement that may be supported through the use of technology. These modes vary in terms of the levels of responsibility and task ownership that are required of the student to engage with the proposed online activities – but reflect different components of active learning which we may wish to see included in programme design. – i.e. from application/transfer of learned material to new contexts, through to activities which encourage students to author and develop their own learning and teaching resources. Structured interaction could be based around a collaborative research and writing task, with groups assigned wiki and blog tools to help present their findings. Learning technologies can also support student-led teaching and content creation tasks – as well as guided / unguided problem solving tasks through the use of a prescribed set of resources.

Collaboration use cases at York Activity mode Targeted learning Case example Collaborative editing of course resources (Enhancing learning) Critical reflection on course resources: commenting & feedback Biomolecular Archaeology (Archaeology) Workshop presentations & discussion (Enhancing learning) Group-led presentations & peer review of research findings New Media & Society (Sociology) Academic writing and peer review Peer review of individual opinion pieces on target literature History & Theory of Criticism (English) Student-led teaching and discovery (Transforming learning) Group summaries of research literature: online textbook Evolutionary Ecology (Biology) Problem-based learning (Transforming learning) Unguided group research & drafting of case solution LLM International Corporate & Commercial Law (York Law School)

Evolutionary Ecology

Output and work patterns : Evolutionary Ecology Module Output & participation Comments Evolutionary Ecology 8 x 8 reports > 50% of modifications by 1 student in 3 groups Allocation of report writing to individuals Collaborative research Mix of communication methods (Facebook/f2f/blog)

Categories of cognitive skills and examples from the LLM blogs Characteristic of cognitive skill Example from blog posts Offering resources This case relates to cases of master and servant, these principles apply equally to directors serving the company under express or implied contracts of service, and who are therefore also employees (Dranez Anstalt v. Zamir Hayek,) Making declarative statements I cannot understand the reason, you mentioned, that the UCTA may not apply to this case. LC is not of course a consumer, but M is a relevant consumer. Supporting positions on issues Once Ackerman heard from the inside information from his father in law, he would be as insider under s. 118B (e) of FSMA because he has information “which he has obtained by other means which he could be reasonable expected to know is inside information”. Therefore his action to sell his share of SAH would be dealt with as insider dealing. Adding examples The offence of insider dealing can be committed in 3 ways. If an insider: deals in price-affected securities, when in possession of inside information, s.52(1) CJA 1993 encourages another to deal in price-affected securities, when in possession of inside information, s.52(2)(a) CJA 1993, or discloses inside information other than in the proper performance of his employment or profession, s.52(2)(b) CJA 1993. Framework based on Fox and MacKeogh’s 16 categories of cognitive thinking: Fox, S. and MacKeogh, K. (2003) 'Can eLearning Promote Higher-order Learning Without Tutor Overload?', Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 18: 2, 121 — 134 and examples from the weekly blogs Framework based on Fox and MacKeogh’s 16 categories of cognitive thinking: Fox, S. and MacKeogh, K. (2003) 'Can eLearning Promote Higher-order Learning Without Tutor Overload?', Open Learning: The Journal of Open and Distance Learning, 18: 2, 121 — 134

Challenges to student engagement online   Why do you think students don’t always participate effectively in collaborative tasks? What are the key barriers to student engagement in online collaborative activities?

Some reasons why students don’t participate online They are not motivated They can’t access the discussion They are shy or do not want to share their views They do not know what to do They do not know why they should They prefer to lurk They are too busy It is not assessed Highton, M. (2009) Encouraging participation in online groups. https://elearningyork.wordpress.com/2013/04/25/using-technology-in-planning-small-group-teaching-sessions/

Observations on student engagement Set-up of collaborative tasks does not automatically lead to engagement Cultural challenges in adoption of collaborative online tools for formal learning Students as “beneficiaries of teaching” rather than “participants in learning” Online environments can be viewed as spaces for presentation of work – not drafting & negotiation Text negotiation “uncomfortable” in public domain Technical skills can be underestimated e.g. wiki page design & structure; embedding of images Learning competencies often overlooked Skills to synthesise & condense, rather than add information Ownership of contributions & willingness to edit the work of others Peer review & feedback: critiquing & reflection (Britcliffe & Walker, 2007) Set-up does not equal engagement Knowing precisely how the tool works and deploying it is not enough; just as providing a discussion board is not enough to generate a “community”. The module leader must be comfortable and clear on how to use the tool If the person leading the course is not comfortable using the tools then this may have a knock-on effect for students in terms of their willingness to adopt the new learning methods The relationship between the purpose of the collaborative tool (e.g. wiki), the overall purpose of the module and the incentive to contribute needs to be clearly communicated to the students Lack of communication as to the simple “Why” is a killer. If the students don’t understand what they are learning by engaging (at all levels) then you will struggle to engage them. Collaborative activities often run into problems when tools are introduced to complement and support class-based discussion and seminar sessions, without a clear rationale in place – or clear expectations on how students should engage and for what purpose. This has provoked comments in the end of module feedback on the use of collaborative tools as: “Forced into the learning experience” / “in the way of the work”. Wiki usage most effective, (as reflected by student participation levels and output of work), in contexts where group work contributed directly to development of shared knowledge base. Students engaged in group task – difficult to opt out – accountability and shared benefits to all. The relationship between the purpose of a wiki, the overall purpose of the module and the incentive to contribute needs to be clearly communicated to the students Be aware that the student perception of the VLE is that it is formal and not for draft quality work This has come out repeatedly in focus groups and feedback; because a wiki is transparent to everyone the general feeling is that any material put up for general consumption is near to completion.

Designing in student engagement: activity design tips Clear objectives and link to class-based learning – not ‘bolted on’ activity Alignment between learning objectives, task design and tool selection Consider profile of cohort: technical & learning competencies; accessibility issues; parallel course activities / competing workload Articulate rationale for online activity and participation drivers (e.g. assessment & accountability) Establish expectations on participation – individual & group roles (initiator, summariser, chair); targeted learning behaviour - how tool will be used Instructional guidance: rules of engagement (‘netiquette’): how to contribute / frequency of contributions / group roles / self-regulation & ownership issues.

Facilitating collaborative learning http://bit Facilitating collaborative learning http://bit.ly/ytelhb-4-2 (Walker & Baets, 2008) Phase 1: Preparation (design phase) Phase 3: Supporting student participation online (early stages) Phase 5: Summing up the learning outcomes for the module (end of module) Phase 2: Socialising learners (start of the module) Phase 4: Sustaining student participation online (later stages)

Instructional responsibilities: delivery tips Socialising: induction – modelling of course tasks and targeted learning behaviour; building confidence & addressing technical and learning competencies Supporting: just in time instructions; model learning; provide feedback / technical support (tips) Sustaining: monitoring of work; on-going evaluation & accountability – ‘little and often’ Interlinking and Summing Up: acknowledge and summarise on-line contributions in class; invite class presentations on collaborative work (peer accountability); make explicit learning outcomes from class-based and online activities

Want to know more? Please refer to sections 4 and 5 of the York TEL Handbook: http://bit.ly/ytel-hb Addressing: design of online activities and their relationship to learning objectives; instructional guidance and support to students during the performance of online activities

References and recommended reading Britcliffe, W. & Walker, R. (2007). Making wikis work: How do we create the conditions for effective collaborative learning? ALT-C 2007. http://tinyurl.com/making-wikis-work Dillenbourg, P. & Schneider, D. (1995). Collaborative learning and the internet. http://tecfa.unige.ch/tecfa/research/CMC/colla/iccai95_1.html Highton, M. (2009). Encouraging participation in online groups. Oxford University. Johnson, D. & Johnson, R. (1996). Cooperation and the use of technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1017-1044). New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan. Walker, R. & Baets, W. (2008). Instructional design for class-based and computer-mediated learning: Creating the right blend for student-centred learning. In R. Donnelly & F. McSweeney (Eds.), Applied E-Learning and E-Teaching in Higher Education (pp. 241-261). New York: Information Science Reference.

Discussion & Questions