1. Flexible approaches to using technology for online interaction University of Aberdeen Teaching and Learning Symposium January 11 2012 Sarah Cornelius and Yvonne Bain School of Education

2. Sarah Yvonne You

3. The Plan A few words on flexibility and interaction Your experiences and challenges Our examples: 1.Towards a flexible model for interactive course delivery - the TQFE 2.Asynchronous interaction using discussion forums 3.Synchronous interaction with web conferencing Your examples: – Issues and first thoughts on solutions – Where next?

4. 5 dimensions (Collis and Moonen, 2001) 1.Time 2.Content 3.Entry Requirements 4.Instructional approach and resources 5.Course delivery and logistics Giving learners choices about what to study Meeting diverse student needs and styles Learner-centred not teacher-centred Developing independent Lifelong learners Teacher as facilitator

5. Interaction is one of the most important components of any learning experience (Vrasidas and McIsaac, 1999) ‘the interaction level in a synchronous class is a significant factor in the effectiveness of the class’ (Skylar, 2009, p. 71). students’ satisfaction with their learning environment is affected by levels of interaction (Stephens and Mottet, 2008) Transactional distance (Moore) Conversational Framework (Laurillard) Purposeful, encouraged and managed INTERACTION

6. Learner-teacher Mediated by technology Adapted from Terry Anderson (2003) www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230

7. Your examples How do you, or would you like to, encourage flexibility and interaction for your learners? Something you are proud of? A scenario you would like to improve? An approach you would like to develop? An aspiration?

8. Adapted from Terry Anderson (2003) www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230 Example 1 flexible content Example 1 flexible content Example 2 effective discussion Example 2 effective discussion Example 3 real-time interaction Example 3 real-time interaction

9. Example 1: Flexible learner- content interaction Teaching Qualification for Further Education

10. Why do we need flexibility? Diversity of learners College demands and practice Flexibility of study modes Flexible access for tutors Ease of updating and reuse

11. Online Activities for individual or collaborative study and/or workshops Working Together On-campus Working Together On-line Guiding principles Reflective practice Collaborative inquiry Authentic problems Individual learning journey Guiding principles Reflective practice Collaborative inquiry Authentic problems Individual learning journey Professional standards for lecturers in FE

14. What have we learned? No ‘typical’ response to flexibility - although mostly positive Diversity of learners’ strategies – Universalists, butterflies and changelings IT skills and technology issues impact experience Importance of induction and setting expectations Role of support and collaboration

15. Example 2: Flexible asynchronous interaction Towards a framework for learning through online discussion

16. Why? "CMC has the potential to provide a means for the weaving together of ideas and information from many people's minds, regardless of when and from where they contribute." Kaye (1989: 3) Is the potential realised?

18. Is the potential realised? Not always!

19. What have we learned? A framework for learning through online discussion – useful to support students’ learning?

20. Example 3: Flexible synchronous interaction Synchronous online workshops for the TQFE

21. Why? To meet college and individual needs To reduce staff release/travel time requirements To integrate learners from distributed locations To replicate face to face workshop experience To enhance technology skills

24. What have we learned? Learners’ perspective – Convenient, flexible approach – Easy to learn – Facilitates interaction and collaboration Teachers’ perspective – Facilitation is demanding – Encouraging interaction in absence of visual clues – Duality of experience – Importance of team approach

25. Group Activity In small groups Share your ideas for improving flexibility and/or interaction using technology Choose one ‘idea’ to discuss further – On flipchart paper 1.Outline the idea briefly 2.Raise any issues that need to be considered 3.Outline possible solutions or add comments 4.Revisit your idea Keep in mind flexibility and interaction

26. Discussion Issues raised by case studies Planning for action – what will you do next?

27. Further information Our research Bain, Y (2011) Learning through online discussion: a framework evidenced in learners’ interactions. ALT-C 2011 Thriving in a colder and more challenging climate, conference proceedings, Leeds. Access http://repository.alt.ac.uk/2172/ http://repository.alt.ac.uk/2172/ Cornelius S, Gordon C and Ackland A (2011) Towards flexible learning for adult learners in professional contexts: an activity-focused course design. Interactive Learning Environments 19(4) 381-394 Cornelius S. (2011) Convenience and Community? An exploratory investigation into learners' experiences of web conferencing. In T. Bastiaens & M. Ebner (Eds.), Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2011 (pp. 2696-2704). Chesapeake, VA: AACE. References and other sources of information Anderson T. (2003) Getting the mix right: an updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230 Collis B. and Moonen J. (2001) Flexible learning in a digital world: experiences and expectations. London: Kogan Page Kaye, A (1989) Computer-mediated Communication and Distance Learning. In R. Mason and A. Kaye (eds) Mindweave: Computers, Communication and Distance Education. Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp 1 - 21 Laurillard D. (2002) Rethinking university practice: a conversational framework for the effective use of learning technologies. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Moore M. G. (1997) Theory of transactional distance. In: Keegan, D. (ed.). Theoretical principles of distance education. London and New York: Routledge. pp. 22-38. Skylar A. A. (2009) A comparison of asynchronous online text-based lectures and synchronous interactive web conferencing lectures. Issues in Teacher Education, 18(2), 69-84. Stephens K. K. and Mottet T. P. (2008) Interactivity in a web conference training context: effects on trainers and trainees. Communication Education, 57(1), 88-104. Vrasidas C., and McIsaac S. M. (1999) Factors influencing interaction in an online course. American Journal of Distance Education, 13(3), 22-36.