This presentation was given in Dallas, TX in April 2014 at the Sloan C Emerging Technology Conference

1. Developing Collaboration
in Online Courses:
A Comparison of Structured Group Assignments
in Synchronous and Asynchronous Courses
Nori Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed.
Jessica Decker, Ed.D.
University of La Verne
La Verne, CA

2. Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

3. Session Outcomes
•Participants will identify
the elements of structured
group assignments in
online courses that lead to
collaboration
•Participants will compare
techniques for creating
and organizing effective
group assignments in
online classes

4. Agenda
• Context
• Role of Social Presence
• Elements of Structured Group
Activities
• Student Perception Data
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

6. Context
• Small Liberal Arts University with
a reputation for small class size
and strong student-instructor
relationships
• Focus on social presence and
building relationships
Challenge: build online courses
that replicate what happens in
our f2f courses
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

7. Conditions
Learning Technology for Educators
delivered online
• Undergraduate education
majors
• General education credential
candidates
• Education specialist credential
candidates
Challenge: consistent learning
outcomes, evolving tools,
varied student population
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

8. Course Iterations 2009-2014
Progression of Creating and Organizing Effective Group Assignments
On-demand videos and assignments
Began including webcam in all on demand
Increased complexity of group work
Increased intentionality in group assignments
Move toward synchronous sessions

9. Asynchronous Session Structure
Population
Duration
Session
f2f
Regional campuses
Term schedule (10 weeks)
2 synchronous sessions (2 hrs)
None

10. Synchronous Session Structure
Population
Duration
Session
f2f
Main campus
Semester schedule (16 weeks)
Weekly video conf (2-hr mtg)
Two f2f sessions

12. Building Social
Presence
•“the ability of learners to project
themselves socially and affectively into a
community of inquiry” (Rourke,
Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 2001, p.
1)
•“relationship between social presence
and perceived learning and student
satisfaction in online courses”
(Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997;
Richardson & Swan, 2003; Swan & Shih,
2005)
•“Shared group identity should be
established early on; groups in online
settings benefit from the ability to
manage their interactions themselves,
thereby further developing the group’s
shared identity and increasing the
participants’ sense of ownership in group
activities” (Rogers & Lea, 2005)

13. Course Phases
Beginning
Early Middle
Late Middle
Closing
Getting to know you
Structured group
assignments
Student driven group
assignments
Course outcome
reflection
Boettcher & Conrad, 2010
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

14. Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

15. Beginning Phase
First Session: synchronous
Content:
1. Introductions;
2. Course Orientation
Assignments:
1. WP Blog Bio (follow all
classmates’ blogs);
2. Picasa web album (shared with
group)
First Session: asynchronous (!)
Assignments:
1. Orientation videos
2. WP Blog Bio/Gravatar page
3. Add avatar image to LMS
4. Google+/Picasa web album
5. Introduction discussion forum
Asynchronous Class Synchronous Class

16. Middle Phases
Early Middle
World is Flat Wiki
Journalistic Article
Cell Phone Fairytale
Late Middle
Cool Tool Duel
Book Club
Synchronous & Asynchronous Class

17. Closing Phase
Course Outcome Reflection
Final blog post prompt:
Wow, I Think I Made It Post
Revisit the purpose & learning outcomes for this course in
the course syllabus. Address your progress towards
those outcomes giving any examples of your experience
Synchronous & Asynchronous Class

19. Elements of Structured
Activities
1. Establish social presence
prior to assignment
2. Establish clear roles or
process for collaboration
within team activity
3. Select tools that allow
collaboration
4. Monitor participation
5. Rubrics with specific
expectations
6. Individual grading
accountability
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

20. Roles and Processes
Instructor-selected groups
Student-selected groups
Groups identify meeting process
Host/leaders identified by instructor
Reporters identified by instructor
Identified reporting process for group activity

21. Tools for Collaboration
Dependant upon assignment:
LMS for simple, reportable collaboration
(Discussion forum)
Cloud based for interaction, revision history,
greater variance in outcome (YouTube,
blogging, Google docs)

22. Monitoring Participation
Instructor access to revision history or
participation log
Early warning system from Grades (Early
middle and Late middle increasing frequency)
Instructor comments at assignment
checkpoints
Recognize and reinforce students or teams
meeting/exceeding expectations (Especially
in Beginning and Early Middle)

23. Rubrics and Accountability
Quantify expectations (comments, word
count, revision cycles)
Qualify expectations (content, depth)
Group and individual grade override
Rubrics include quantitative and qualitative
measures
Peer evaluations

24. EarlyMiddle Assignment
Roles/Collaborati
on
Tool
Feedback/Monitor
ing participation
Grading Rubric
World is
Flat
Summary
Single page wiki;
3 specific
contribution
deadlines
LMS wiki
(group page
collaboration)
Comments on
each due date;
Version history
Individual:
Conceptual
understanding;
formatting and
organization;
Group: participation
Journalistic
Article
Shared folder;
team
edits/commentin
g
Google Doc;
shared folder
Google revision
history
Individual: article
interest, voice,
length,
Group: comments,
sharing
Cell Phone
Fairy Tale
Leader
creates/shares
single
presentation
Leader creates
YouTube playlist;
adds/orders
video sequence
Google
Presentation
SnagIt
screencast
YouTube
playlist
Google revision
history; individual
screencasts as
part of complete
playlist
Individual: Images,
narration,
presentation tool
Group: cohesion,
playlist
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

25. LateMiddle-CoolToolDuel
Phase Assignment
Roles/Collaborat
ion
Tool
Feedback/
Monitoring
participation
Grading Rubric
S
Cool Tool
Duel
Diigo shared
bookmarking to
find educational
tools; individual
research &
presentation
Screencast/
Form
Polling for
“Coolest”
Diigo annotated
bookmarks;
shared group
bookmarks
Final submission
Individual/
partner
presentation
A
Cool Tool
Duel
Student
selected
groupings;
collaborative
research &
presentation
Screencast;
Google Form
Final submission
Individual/partn
er presentation
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

26. LateMiddle-BookClub
Phase Assignment
Roles/Collabor
ation
Tool
Feedback/Moni
toring
participation
Grading Rubric
S Book Club
Assigned
within
synchronous
session
LMS wiki
(individual
page/group
wiki)
Individual
page updates;
observation
of meetings
w/ feedback
Per student
A Book Club
Regular
meetings at
the discretion
of the group
LMS wiki
(individual
page/ group
wiki)
Individual
page updates
Per student
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

28. Data Collection
Survey of course participants in both types
of sessions
Likert-scale questions about social presence
and group assignments
Open-ended questions about general course
and assignment structure

29. EarlyMiddle Assignment
Roles/Collaborati
on
Tool
Feedback/Monitor
ing participation
Grading Rubric
World is
Flat
Summary
Single page wiki;
3 specific
contribution
deadlines
LMS wiki
(group page
collaboration)
Comments on
each due date;
Version history
Individual:
Conceptual
understanding;
formatting and
organization;
Group: participation
Journalistic
Article
Shared folder;
team
edits/commentin
g
Google Doc;
shared folder
Google revision
history
Individual: article
interest, voice,
length,
Group: comments,
sharing
Cell Phone
Fairy Tale
Leader
creates/shares
single
presentation
Leader creates
YouTube playlist;
adds/orders
video sequence
Google
Presentation
SnagIt
screencast
YouTube
playlist
Google revision
history; individual
screencasts as
part of complete
playlist
Individual: Images,
narration,
presentation tool
Group: cohesion,
playlist
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

30. 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
I was comfortable interacting with others in my group.
It was difficult to receive feedback from others in my group.
I was able to be expressive in interactions with my group.
The tool used for the assignment matched the purpose of the
assignment.
The tool selected for the assignment was difficult to use.
The tool provided a platform that promoted group interaction.
Roles were organized to promote collaboration within the
group.
I understood my role within the group for this assignment.
I understood the roles of other group members for this
assignment.
The assignment structure helped my group be successful.
The quality of my work was strengthened by working in a
group.
The quality of my work could have been improved by working
individually instead of in a group.
The directions for the assignment were clear and easy to follow.
I understood all components of the assignment.
I understood the method of grading my performance on the
assignment.
GroupArticle
Summary
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

31. Article–Peer
Feedback
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
I was comfortable interacting with others in my group.
It was difficult to receive feedback from others in my group.
I was able to be expressive in interactions with my group.
The tool used for the assignment matched the purpose of the
assignment.
The tool selected for the assignment was difficult to use.
The tool provided a platform that promoted group interaction.
Roles were organized to promote collaboration within the
group.
I understood my role within the group for this assignment.
I understood the roles of other group members for this
assignment.
The assignment structure helped my group be successful.
The quality of my work was strengthened by working in a
group.
The quality of my work could have been improved by working
individually instead of in a group.
The directions for the assignment were clear and easy to follow.
I understood all components of the assignment.
I understood the method of grading my performance on the
assignment.
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

32. Collaborative
Presentation
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 5.00
I was comfortable interacting with others in my group.
It was difficult to receive feedback from others in my group.
I was able to be expressive in interactions with my group.
[Google Presentation - Cell Phone Fairy Tale]
The tool selected for the assignment was difficult to use.
The tool provided a platform that promoted group interaction.
Roles were organized to promote collaboration within the
group.
I understood my role within the group for this assignment.
I understood the roles of other group members for this
assignment.
The assignment structure helped my group be successful.
The quality of my work was strengthened by working in a
group.
The quality of my work could have been improved by working
individually instead of in a group.
The directions for the assignment were clear and easy to follow.
I understood all components of the assignment.
I understood the method of grading my performance on the
assignment.
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

33. LateMiddle-CoolToolDuel
Phase Assignment
Roles/Collabora
tion
Tool
Feedback/
Monitoring
participation
Grading Rubric
S
Cool Tool
Duel
Diigo shared
bookmarking to
find educational
tools; individual
research &
presentation
Screencast/
Form
Polling for
“Coolest”
Diigo annotated
bookmarks;
shared group
bookmarks
Final submission
Individual/
partner
presentation
A
Cool Tool
Duel
Student
selected
groupings;
collaborative
research &
presentation
Screencast;
Google Form
Final submission
Individual/partn
er presentation
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

34. CoolToolDuel
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
I was comfortable interacting with others in my group.
It was difficult to receive feedback from others in my group.
I was able to be expressive in interactions with my group.
The tool used for the assignment matched the purpose of the
assignment.
The tool selected for the assignment was difficult to use.
The tool provided a platform that promoted group interaction.
Roles were organized to promote collaboration within the group.
I understood my role within the group for this assignment.
I understood the roles of other group members for this assignment.
The assignment structure helped my group be successful.
The quality of my work was strengthened by working in a group.
The quality of my work could have been improved by working
individually instead of in a group.
The directions for the assignment were clear and easy to follow.
I understood all components of the assignment.
I understood the method of grading my performance on the
assignment.
AsyncronousSynchronous
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

35. LateMiddle-BookClub
Phase Assignment
Roles/Collabor
ation
Tool
Feedback/Moni
toring
participation
Grading Rubric
S Book Club
Assigned
within
synchronous
session
LMS wiki
(individual
page/group
wiki)
Individual
page updates;
observation
of meetings
w/ feedback
Per student
A Book Club
Regular
meetings at
the discretion
of the group
LMS wiki
(individual
page/ group
wiki)
Individual
page updates
Per student
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

36. BookClub
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00
I was comfortable interacting with others in my group.
It was difficult to receive feedback from others in my group.
I was able to be expressive in interactions with my group.
The tool used for the assignment matched the purpose of the
assignment.
The tool selected for the assignment was difficult to use.
The tool provided a platform that promoted group interaction.
Roles were organized to promote collaboration within the
group.
I understood my role within the group for this assignment.
I understood the roles of other group members for this
assignment.
The assignment structure helped my group be successful.
The quality of my work was strengthened by working in a group.
The quality of my work could have been improved by working
individually instead of in a group.
The directions for the assignment were clear and easy to follow.
I understood all components of the assignment.
I understood the method of grading my performance on the
assignment.
AsynchronousSynchronous
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.

37. Initial Results/Themes
Students value the team and relationships
they build
“[The instructor] did provide us with a team which we
definitely utilized…”
“Got to know my peers more here than in any class setting
so far!”
“[The instructor] did a great job of making us a class even
though we were in different locations.”

38. Initial Results/Themes
Students value timely and specific feedback
from instructors
“[The instructor] gave positive and specific feedback that
helped us to improve upon our long term assignments
while still ensuring that we would learn on our own and
do the legwork ourselves.”
“Her feedback was extremely timely and helpful, and you
could tell she truly wanted students to be successful.”

39. Initial Results/Themes
Students appreciate the synchronous format
of the class
“I enjoyed the weekly online meetings/environment; it felt
as if I was still in a class rather than doing everything by
myself. I think format is really helpful for students who
want to have the online class experience, but also need
some sense of structure/accountability.”
“I loved the experience of having a virtual classroom. It
was a different experience that I think was really good for
me to have!”

40. Next Steps
Continue data collection
and analysis
Incorporate peer review
in assignment rubrics
Further develop
instructor monitoring
of student
participation
CC image by Ruthanne Reid

41. Agenda
• Context
• Role of Social Presence
• Elements of Structured Group
Activities
• Student Perception Data
Noreen Barajas-Murphy, M.Ed., Jessica Decker, Ed.D.