1. Anna Ólafsdóttir Project Manager Distance Education University of Akureyri Ásrún Matthíasdóttir Assistant Professor Reykjavik University Online Communication in University Education in Iceland

2. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir2 Overview  Focus will be on ICT and online communication  Research from 2002 Teachers and students Results  Discussion

3. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir3 Research  The research which is described here is a part of a 3-year project which started in the autumn 2002 The title of the project is LearnICT – using ICT in learning and teaching Partly funded by the Icelandic Centre for Research (RANNIS) The main goal of the LearnICT project is to examine the influence of ICT on teaching and learning at all levels of the school system  We will be focusing on higher education

4. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir4 Research  In the autumn 2002 in 3 universties  Student main results Students responce rate was 46% -Females 75%, males 25% -In the higher education system the propostion is females 71%, males 29% Students

5. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir5 Student use of online communication Students

6. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir6 Student use of online communication Students

7. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir7 Students Student attitudes

8. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir8 Attitudes to online communication Students

9. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir9 Teacher main results Teachers responce rate was 59% -Females 49%, males 51% -For the higher education system the percentage is females 46%, males 54% Teachers

10. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir10 Use of e-mail for preparing teaching Teachers

11. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir11 Teachers E-mail communication with the students

12. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir12 Attitudes to online communication (agree and totally agree) Teachers

13. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir13 Communication with the help of technology  Can give the students a new feeling of freedom They can communicate and answer questions wherever They are and whenever they want  Can also distract from the discussion Attendance can be poor or late Spontanity in answering and brainstorming may be lost  The student can make use of the personal anonymity the web offers but the quality of the communication depends on the organization and the tools used as well as the role of the students and the teachers

14. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir14 Illustrative explanation

15. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir15 Online quiz

16. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir16 Quiz from WebCT

17. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir17 Online discussion

18. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir18 Information on the Internet

19. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir19 Information and exercises

20. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir20 Online database

21. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir21 MSN

22. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir22 Online- Communication...What for?  Can serve as an effective tool to increase student activity in courses  Strengthens collaborative work amongst the students and encourages critical reflection through various forms of interaction amongst teachers, learners and content  Online communication as an assessment tool offers many opportunities for peer-evaluation

23. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir23 Online Discussion – cont.  Effective way to promote deep-learning (Entwistle, 2001) Main strengths or advantages: -More time for reflective thinking than in real-time discussions -The fact that students have to put their thoughts into written words often broadens and deepens the discussions -Some students are less shy when expressing their thoughts and opinions in web-discussion than in classroom discussion -Powerful tool for evaluation work, especially to involve students in the assessment

24. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir24 Online- discussion – cont.  Can be of various forms: Formal, topic centered, graded Informal – voluntary, open one-to-one discussions Whatever form is used it is necessary to integrate online- discussion into the learning experience if it is to become a useful tool in the study (Wallace, 2001)

25. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir25 Online Chat  Most VLE platforms have inbuilt chat-facilities  A lot of free chat-facilities on the Internet (e.g. MSN ) Can be used for teacher-student meetings, one on one or for meetings with student-groups e.g. in project-work Can also be used in student-groups for the same purpose without the teacher being involved Teacher can be online for students on MSN during office hours

26. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir26 Online chat – cont.  Advantages Useful tool in building up a class-culture within the student group, especially important when it comes to distance education students reduces the risk of distance-education students feeling alone and isolated in their study  Disadvantages Students sometimes tend to use online-chat meeting with the teacher as a kind of FAQ – hour, can turn into a rather chaotic, frustrating event when many students attend the meeting ( Gunn and Barnett, 2001)

27. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir27 Conclusion  For the generation now knocking on the door of the university online communication is just a part of everyday life  Challenging task for policy makers having totally different technological background to understand their needs  The Internet-generation: -Has been living with computers and the Internet all their lives -Technology has played a vital role in their study, communication and hobbies -Expect to see the possibilities technology offers being used in the utmost sense (Nasseh, 2000)  Is the university fully prepared to meet the demands of this generation?

28. Anna Ólafsdóttir and Ásrún Matthíasdóttir28 References Entwistle, Noel, 2001. Promoting Deep Learning Through Teaching and Assessment. In Linda Suskie (Editor), Assessment to Promote Deep Learning (p. 9-20). Washington DC: American Association for Higher Education. Gunn, Cathy and Barnett, John (2001). Online learning: a quality experience. In Peter Roberts og Mark Chambers (Editors), Digital Developments in Higher Education - Theory and Practice (p. 139-160). Cambridge: Taylor Graham Publishing. Nasseh, Bizhan (2000). Forces of Change: The Emergence of a Knowledge Society and New Generations of Learners. In Lisa Ann Petrides (Editor), Case Studies on Information Technology in Higher Education: Implications for Policy and Practice (p. 217-227). London: Idea Group Publishing. Wallace, Lori (2001). Do Students really want to Interact? In David Murphy, Rob Walker og Graham Webb (Editors), Online Learning and Teaching with Technology: Case Studies, Experience and Practice (p. 21-27). London: Kogan Page Limited.