Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Supporting Online Learning with Distributed Teaching Presence indicators

3,023 views

Published on

Bustos, A., Coll, C., & Engel A. (2011). Supporting Online Learning with Distributed Teaching Presence Indicators. Paper presented at the Symposium Informing CSCL participants about their collaboration to promote collective and individual learning: Awareness tools to support collaboration, 14th EARLI Biennial Conference, Exeter, UK, August 29-September 3rd.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Supporting Online Learning with Distributed Teaching Presence indicators

  1. 1. Symposium: Informing CSCL participants about their collaboration to promote collective and individual learning: Awareness tools to support collaboration  <br />Supporting Online Learning with Distributed Teaching Presence indicators<br />Bustos, A., Coll, C., & Engel, A. <br /> Group for Research on Interaction and Educational Influence <br />Department of Development and Educational Psychology <br />
  2. 2. Distributed Teaching Presence<br />Individual and collective learning, takeplace thanks to the educational influence of others<br />the set of supports provided by the participants –the teacher and the students— throughout the course of the joint activity to promote the cognitive and social processes for realizing meaningful learning.<br />
  3. 3. Distributed Teaching Presence<br />To help and guide the rest of the participants effectively, as well as to make use of the help that they might receive from others, participants must meet certain participation requirements:<br /><ul><li>the access to digital environment (with some frequency)
  4. 4. the reading on others’ contributions
  5. 5. the writing of own contributions (with some frequency and continuity)
  6. 6. the bidirectional interactions (connectivity) with the other participants</li></ul>Therefore, we think it's important to inform participants about how the group and the individual participants meet this criteria.<br />
  7. 7. Distributed Teaching Presence Indicators<br />
  8. 8. Objective<br />Analyse whether the delivery of information related to these DTP indicators to the participants has an impact on level of participation in subsequent forums.<br />
  9. 9. Methodology<br /><ul><li> Data collected: logfiles
  10. 10. Access
  11. 11. Reading
  12. 12. Writing / Contributions
  13. 13. Information about participation: network density and reciprocal dyads
  14. 14. Data processing:</li></ul>Group indices: data of performance in previous forums used to calculate group indices, organized to informed to the whole group at the beginning of the next forum<br />Individual indices: data of performance in previous forums used to calculate individual indices, organized to informed to each participant at the beginning of the next forum<br />
  15. 15. Design<br /><ul><li> One semester’s mandatory (current approaches in Educational Psychology Postgraduate program at University of Barcelona)
  16. 16. Participants: 42 students
  17. 17. Groups randomly created for the delivery of individual profile information :</li></ul> group 1: 20 students (2 man & 18 women)<br /> group 2: 22 students (1 man & 21 women)<br /><ul><li>Moodle + GISMO (Graphical Interactive Student Monitoring System for Moodle)</li></ul>Forum 1<br />Forum 7<br />Forum 5<br />Forum 3<br />Forum 4<br />Forum 2<br />Forum 6<br />Individual access to data by group ( G1 / G2)<br />Oral presentation for the group and data added at the platform.<br />Performance in previous forum <br />
  18. 18. Presented at thewholegroup<br />Design (Data organization presented to participants)<br />
  19. 19. Presented at thewholegroup<br />Design (Data organization presented to participants)<br />
  20. 20. Presented at thewholegroup<br />Design (Data organization presented to participants)<br />
  21. 21. Presented at the whole group<br />Design (Data organization presented to participants)<br />
  22. 22. Presented at thewholegroup<br />Design (Data organization presented to participants)<br />
  23. 23. Presented at thewholegroup<br />Design (Data organization presented to participants)<br />
  24. 24. Each participant has access to their own data<br />Design (Data organization presented to participants)<br />
  25. 25. Presented at the whole group<br />Each participant has access to their own data<br />Design (Data organization presented to participants)<br />group 1<br />group 2<br />
  26. 26. Results: delivery of group information<br />
  27. 27. Results: delivery of group information<br />Participants DTP profiles after group indices information<br /> 5 indices<br /> 4 indices<br /> 3 indices<br /> 2 indices<br />1-0 indices<br />
  28. 28. Results: delivery of group information<br /> 5 indices<br /> 4 indices<br /> 3 indices<br /> 2 indices<br /> 1 - 0 indices<br />
  29. 29. Results: delivery of individual information<br />
  30. 30. Results: delivery of individual information (Group 1. Only indexes results)<br />Stable Low<br />Seems to Improve<br />Seems to Improve<br />Seems to Improve<br />Seems to Improve<br />Seems to Improve<br />Stable High<br /> 5 indices<br /> 4 indices<br /> 3 indices<br /> 2 indices<br /> 1 - 0 indices<br />
  31. 31. Results: delivery of individual information (Group 2. Indexes results + profile + reached and unreached issues )<br />Seems to Improve<br />Stable Low<br />Seems to Improve<br />Stable High<br />Seems to Improve<br />Seems to Improve<br />Stable High<br /> 5 indices<br /> 4 indices<br /> 3 indices<br /> 2 indices<br /> 1 - 0 indices<br />
  32. 32. Conclusions<br />We aimed to explore the possible impact of the knowledge of participation indices on students’ participation in the next forum:<br />1) group indices results delivered to the group<br />2) individual indices results delivered to students<br />Individual indices results (group 1)<br />Individual Indices results + profile + reached and unreached issues delivered to some students (group 2). <br />Firstly, the findings of our work suggested that providing group information about DTP's indices has a limited impact on students futures performance specifically in writing, reading and participation in reciprocal dyads. Although, we were able to identify some relevant profiles and their evolution throughout time. <br />
  33. 33. Conclusions<br />Secondly, Individual results show that <br />progressively more participants met the criteria of the ideal profile of presence (between 5 and 4 indices). <br />The Individual profiles evolution show that some participants in groups 1 and 2 clearly improved their performance after receiving DTP indexes information (S5, S8, S9, S20, S21 and S35 & S38). Some participants seem to improve their performance (S7, S10, S12, S13, S16, S25 & S26). Finally, some other participants are able to maintain its high performances continuously (S14, S34 & S39). Although others participants maintain a low profile.<br />
  34. 34. Prospective<br />More experimental evidence is needed to a better analysis of group information delivery.<br />We need to apply more powerful analysis in order to identify significant differences between individual information delivery in both conditions.<br />We need to explore the students’ perception about group information (public) and individual information (private) and consider the socio-emotional implications of a very exhaustive activity report. Some unexpected results suggest that participants interpreted the information as an evaluation or even control / sanction. <br />
  35. 35. Prospective<br />We need to explore many other variables as visualizations possibilities for delivering information, cognitive load, the level of use or access to the indexes report and usability, etc.<br />Finally, in our design we didn't consider the importance to discuss with participants, at the beginning of the activity, about the meaning of information related to individual and group participation.<br />
  36. 36. Symposium: Informing CSCL participants about their collaboration to promote collective and individual learning: Awareness tools to support collaboration  <br />Supporting Online Learning with Distributed Teaching Presence indicators<br />Bustos, A., Coll, C., & Engel, A. <br /> Group for Research on Interaction and Educational Influence <br />Department of Development and Educational Psychology <br />

×