• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Cranfield small groups_online2010_v2
 

Cranfield small groups_online2010_v2

on

  • 619 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
619
Views on SlideShare
619
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

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

    Cranfield small groups_online2010_v2 Cranfield small groups_online2010_v2 Presentation Transcript

    • Distributed collaboration: Supporting Small Groups Online George Roberts July 2010 Directorate of Human Resources
    • Before we begin
      • When you return from the break, please organise yourselves into 3 small groups of about 4 people that as nearly as possible align with your department/School/discipline
      • Each group should have a sheet or two of flip-chart paper and a pen
    • Identify groups
      • Notice what happened
      • Who spoke?
      • How were they chosen?
      • How might similar emergence occur in distributed groups?
      • Choose a recorder
    • Design for Learning Background reading Individual task Group task Plenary Follow through
    •  
    • Activity
      • Form groups
      • In groups
        • Identify topic
        • Write objective(s)
        • Plan session
      • Plenary
        • Present
        • Debrief
      Plan Brief overall Brief A1 Group work Objectives
      • Identify topic
      • Determine approach
      • Inductive
      • Deductive
      • Kolb position
      Present Debrief
    • Task
      • In your groups develop a short online group activity and prepare a presentation of this activity using the flip chart paper.
    • Objectives
      • At the end of this session you should be able to
      • Describe some similarities and differences between small group working online and in face-to-face situations
      • Recognise and describe your context in which online groupwork will be used in terms of pedagogical approach, and sequence
      • Apply the maxims of stance to setting up group work
      • Identify roles that can be taken in group work and recognise issues that might arise for a moderator
      • Produce an outline of an online small group activity that is relevant to your current practice
    • Feedback groups
      • Channel?
      • Relationship?
      • Roles?
      • Topic?
      • Outcome?
      • Task?
      • Assessment?
    • Rules: Sequence & Stance
      • Sequence
        • Where are you in the course? Is it the first week or the 8th week?
        • Have groups been used in other settings?
        • Do people know one another yet?
      • What is the interactional function of groupwork (as opposed to the instrumental or regulatory or hueristic functions?)
      • Maxims of stance (Scollon 1998)
        • Channel
        • Relationship
        • Topic
      e-Tivity Sequence (Salmon)
    • Division of labour: Roles
      • Such as:
        • Initiator
        • Researcher
        • Recorder
        • Summariser
        • Reporter
      • How are role assumed?
        • Assigned
        • Emergent
        • Hybrid
      • Responsibility?
      • Moderation: issues for consideration
    • Tools
      • Shared documents (Word; Google docs)
      • e-Mail
      • Discussion forums (in VLE; PHP bb)
      • Instant messaging (MSM, Jabber, Skype)
      • Virtual Learning Environments (VLE: e.g. Blackboard)
      • Learning object repositories (Harvest Road HIVE, Merlot, Intralibrary)
      • Audiographic systems (LiveClassroom, Elluminate, Instant Presenter)
      • Blogs (Blogger, TypePad, WordPress)
      • Wikis (MediaWiki, Confluence)
      • e-Portfolios (PebblePad, OSP)
      • Social networking (Elgg, mySpace, FaceBook)
      • Knowledge management systems (Hyperwave)
    • Open Course Tools
      • VLE e.g. Blackboard, Moodle
        • Strengths: administration, privacy, institutional security, suite of tools, consistent interface
        • Weakness: difficult to admit guests, rarely best-of-breed, little student/peer initiated interaction (all teacher-led)
      • Wiki e.g. Confluence , MediaWiki , GoogleSites
        • Strengths: peer collaboration, easier to open to guests
        • Weakness: interfaces and mark-up, can lead to messy sites, hard to navigate
      • ePortfolio system e.g. PebblePad
        • Strengths: learner controlled, dialogic, walled gardens
        • Weakness: idiosyncratic interfaces, needs learners to be motivated
      • Blogs e.g. WordPress , Blogger , TypePad
        • Strengths: learner controlled, dialogic, open environments
        • Weaknesses: needs confidence & digital literacy/awareness
      • Knowledge sharing e.g. Diigo , delicious, Twine, Zotero
        • Strengths: quick & easy, links of links, personal, transportable
        • Weakness: content focussed, yet another interface, online
      • Content sharing: e.g. Flickr, YouTube, SlideShare, Blip TV, Scribd
    •  
    • Blogs http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/ http://del.icio.us http://www.downes.ca
    • Blogs 2 http://www.brookes.ac.uk/schools/education/arts/diaries/home.html ! http://blogs.warwick.ac.uk/groups/en-all
    • e-portfolios http://elgg.net/
    • Virtual teamwork
      • 200+ 1 st year Business students
      • Formed randomly into virtual teams of 6 members each
      • Students collaborate online for 4 weeks to create a PowerPoint presentation on a specific teamwork theme (e.g. ‘motivation’ theory)
      • Issues:
        • Practicality, logistics
        • Learning
        • Engagement
        • Assessment
    • Online tutoring (podcasts)
      • Online CPD short course
      • Weekly podcasts allow tutors to introduce and explain key ideas and comment on previous week’s learning points
      • Easy and quick to produce
      • Wiki is perfect for collaborative writing
    • Online tutoring (Wiki 1)
      • Groups produce a collaborative presentation whose content is first discussed/debated/organised using WebCT Discussions
    • Online tutoring (Wiki 2)
      • The full history of page revisions is preserved in a Wiki
    • Partnerships in Practice
    • Contributory model of blended learning
      • Collis & Moonen (2005) suggest that blended e-learning represents a shift from
      acquisitive model of learning contributory model of learning I know I know what the group knows I increase what the group knows “ In blended learning activities are king” (Betty Collis, University of Leicester, Oct 2006)
    • Techniques for contributing Collis & Moonen 2005
    • Contributory model of blended learning
    • Task
      • In your groups develop a short online group activity and prepare a presentation of this activity using the flip chart paper.
    • Delivery and support
      • Wider aims: good practice
      • encourage student-tutor contact
      • encourage student-student co-operation
      • encourage active learning
      • give prompt feedback
      • emphasise time on task
      • have and communicate high expectations
      • respect diverse talents and ways of learning
      • (Chickering & Gamson, 1987)
      • independent of the mode of engagement
    • Rules
      • Disaggregate
        • Time factors
        • Content factors
        • Delivery factors
      • Sequence
        • At least 3 navigations
          • Table of contents
          • Index
          • Marginalia
          • Hypertext
      • Activity
        • Self-assessed exercises (SAEs)
        • Group activities
        • Tutor-marked assignments (TMAs)
          • N.b. all activity must be assessed
    • Rules
      • Objectives
        • Interactional, instrumental, regulatory, heuristic, imaginative, representational, personal
        • Task/outputs/product
      • Netiquette
      • Response time
      • Equal treatment
    • Participants’ experiences 1
      • Vicki:
      • “ At the beginning of the task I typed something in, and then lost it, and couldn’t find where it had gone. And that was frustrating because I spent all that time typing it in and then just couldn’t find it ”
      • Nick
      • “ for people from other campuses or other universities, because they have firewall, network problems and security problems as well. That’s the only pitfall .”
    • Participants’ experiences 2
      • Vicki :
      • “ I think you’re probably more careful about what you say. And also the fact that it’s printed, it’s there, you’re not going to say something that’s totally off the wall. Because it will be there and everybody else will know that you’ve said it, it was a daft idea. You’re not going to expose yourself in that way. ”
      • Cathy:
      • “ Well the fact that it is a permanent record reminds people sometimes that they have to think quite long and hard about what they put in there. So, whereas if you’re sitting in a group and you say something which is profoundly embarrassing you can laugh it off and say ‘Oh God!’ you know. Whereas if you’ve posted something on the WebCT site and everybody can read it you’re less likely to perhaps open up. ”