• Like
  • Save
Making discussion forums work
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Making discussion forums work

on

  • 421 views

These are the slides accompanying my presentation "Making discussions forums work" at the University of Manchester on 2nd November 2012. ...

These are the slides accompanying my presentation "Making discussions forums work" at the University of Manchester on 2nd November 2012.

They might be of interest to language and translation teachers looking for ideas to get their discussion forums off the ground.

Please check the provisional proposed model and add your comments at: http://bit.ly/QYIozR

Statistics

Views

Total Views
421
Views on SlideShare
421
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Making discussion forums work Making discussion forums work Presentation Transcript

    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012Making discussion forums work Benoît Guilbaud benoit.guilbaud@manchester.ac.uk @benguilbaud
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 This work is licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0). To view a copy of this license, visit:http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/deed.en_US. Benoît Guilbaud, 2012
    • “More group work” “I don’t know thepeople on my course” “I feel isolated when I work” Picture by pennstatelive via flickr.com
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Social DistanceFace-to-face Peer-feedback OpennessSharing Error correction Transparency Open learning
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Context English ⇢ French 25 final year September 2011 -translation (L1 ⇢ L2) undergraduates (C1) March 2012 1 hour / week 18 texts Weekly contributions contact time 18 weeks to discussion forums
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Weekly task Sharing part of the Commenting on onehomework on the forums another’s contributions
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 The studyCollect student feedback on use of OADs for peer-feedbackMeasure student engagement with OADsGauge if interactions lead to collaborative learning
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Methodology Using$social$media$in$an$undergraduate$translation$class$–$a$case$study Preliminary$questionnaire$X$Benoît$Guilbaud$X$2011Section(2(–(Social(networking(sites(7(for!all!purposes!other!than!translation 3 feedback questionnaires assessing2a.$Are$you$a$member$of$one$or$more$social$networking$sites$(Facebook,$Twitter,$Google+,$etc.)?$Which$one(s)?____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________2b.$If$you$answered$‘yes’$in$2a,$please$place$one$tick$per$line$in$the$following$table: When using social networking sites (not for translation purposes) Never Rarely Sometimes Often Very often Always Not applicable / don’t know expectations & satisfaction I log in to my existing member account. I read other members’ contributions and pre / mid / post-study existing discussions. I post contributions in response to other members’ activity. I engage in longer discussions (more than 2 posts) with other members. quantitative + open questions When another member has a question, I try and answer it. Page 4 of 5
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012Methodology Collection and analysis of contributions to OADs using Murphy’s collaboration model (2004)
    • FindingsBenoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • FeedbackBenoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • March 2012: “The platform was useful”92% Feedback Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Feedback“I think it works really well and is easy to access.” “Working really well - maybe we could have a similar thing on other modules.”“It would be useful to have it for other courses.” “Very useful.”
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Feedback “Not enough students use it for it to be wholly effective. I think most students just rely on the contributions of others.”“It is just down to ourselves to make more ofan effort this term, which I will attempt to do.” “Very useful. No improvements needed.”
    • EngagementBenoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • Number of contributions to forums 0 13 25 38 50 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Week number 11 12 13 14 Contributions per week 15 16 17 Ideal 18 Actual Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • Analysis of contributionsBenoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • Murphy’s collaboration model(2004)
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Murphy’s collaboration model (2004) A Producing shared artefacts B Building shared goals and purposesCollaboration C Co-constructing shared perspectives and meanings P Accommodating or reflecting the perspectives of others I Articulating individual perspectives S Social presence
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Distribution of contributions per category (% of total) A Producing shared artefacts B Building shared goals and purposesCollaboration C Co-constructing shared perspectives and meanings P Accommodating or reflecting the perspectives of others I Articulating individual perspectives S Social presence
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Distribution of contributions per category (% of total) A Producing shared artefacts 0% B Building shared goals and purposes 0%Collaboration C Co-constructing shared perspectives and meanings 33% P Accommodating or reflecting the perspectives of others 2% I Articulating individual perspectives 23% S Social presence 41%
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Articulating individual perspectives (I)A Summarising or reporting on content without reference toB 5% the perspectives of others (S)CP Statement of personal opinion or beliefs making no referenceI 18% to perspectives of others (O)S
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012Accommodating or reflecting the perspectives of others (P)A Coordinating perspectives (C) 1%B Introducing new perspectives (N) 0%CP Indirectly disagreeing with challenging statements made by 1% another participant (I)I Directly disagreeing with challenging statements made by 1%S another participant (D)
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Co-constructing shared perspectives and meanings (C)A Sharing advice (S) 0%B Responding to questions (R) 11%C Provoking thought and discussion (P) 0%P Soliciting feedback (F) 9% Posing rhetorical questions (Q) 0%I Asking for clarification/ elaboration (A) 10%S Sharing information and resources (I) 4%
    • Identified issues Picture by HckySo via flickr.com
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012Identified issues Lack of a common goal Little reference to perspectives of others Near-absence of disagreements 50% of questions left unanswered Near-absence of source referencing & sharing
    • Other issuesBenoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • InterfaceBenoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • Impact of (non)assessmentBenoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Impact of assessment on number of contributions Guilbaud, 2012 McNeilly & Zhok, 2012 Level: BA Level: MA Blended learning Distance learning Not assessed Assessed (10% of unit)Feedback mostly positive (92%) Feedback “overwhelmingly positive” Average no. of contributions Average no. of contributionsper student per week = 0,27 per student per week ≃1
    • Suggested model !Work in progress Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012
    • © Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Suggested criteria for online collaboration !Work in progress
    • © Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012 Suggested criteria for online collaboration Little reference to perspectives of others Near-absence of disagreements ! Lack of a common goalWork in progress 50% of questions left unanswered Near-absence of source referencing & sharing
    • © Benoît Guilbaud, The University of Manchester (UK), 2012Add your comments and suggestions at: http://bit.ly/QYIozR! I think this could be improved by...
    • ReferencesCouros, A., 2011. Why networked learning matters. Education in a Changing Environment (ECE) 6th InternationalConference, Creativity and Engagement in Higher Education, 6-8 July 2011, University of Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.McNeilly, E. & Zhok, A., 2012. The Online Discussion Board for Translation - An Undergraduate MFL Perspective for theStudy of Italian and Russian. In: LLAS: 7th e-learning symposium. University of Southampton, 26-27 January 2012.Murphy, E., 2004. Recognising and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion. In: British Journal ofEducational Technology, 35(4) pp.421–431.Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P. and Wheeler, D., 2008. The Good, the Bad and the Wiki: Evaluating Student Generated Content asa Collaborative Learning Tool. In: British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), pp.987-995.Wheeler, S., 2012. Digital Pedagogy: Content is a Tyrant, Context is King. In: NAACE 2012 Annual Conference, 9 March2012, Leicester, United Kingdom.