Going the distance – what students

say about effective learning online

COIL Conference 2014

Uwe Matthias Richter

Dr Phil Long

Research Aims

Evaluate factors that determine online

engagement and non-engagement

• Learning community design

• Learning activity design

• Leaning environment usability

• Online learner persona?

Improve learner experience on PGCert:

• Increase engagement

• Improve community

• Improve technology usability

Background

Postgraduate Certificate (PGCert) in

Learning and Teaching in Higher Education

• Two 30 credit modules (Semester 1: Enhancing

Learning & Teaching Through Reflective Practice

(ELTTRP), Semester 2: Developing Assessment for

Learning (DA4L))

• Compulsory staff development for new

academic staff

• Moved fully online in 2011-12

• 2012-13 evaluation

A Deficit as Starting Point PGCert completely online and

compulsory for all new academic staff

“Frustrating at times .. distance learning is not my

preferred means of learning.”

often on top of high workload, and

“Time constraints due to work commitments” (DA4L)

unfamiliar online learning environment

“The module content is enjoyable and rewarding

however navigating through that content is difficult,

frustrating and ultimately reduces my capacity to

connect with the material” (ELTTRP participant)

Improvements (Semester 1 to 2)

Models of Online Learning

Situated Learning (Lave and Wenger)

Community of Practice (Wenger)

Conversational Framework (Laurillard)

Social Constructivist Learning (using

Salmon’s 5 Stage Model and e-tivity

design)

occasional

transactional

peripheral

active

coordinator

core group

lurkers

leaders

sponsors

experts

beginners

support

outsiders

Levels of participation

clients

(Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner, 2011)

Observer

Master

Expert

Apprentice

Salmon’s Five Stage Model

Source: Gilly Salmon http://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-

model.htm (creative commons)

Conversational Framework (Laurillard)

Teacher

Concept

Learner

Practice

Teacher

Practice

Thoughts

Action plans

Guidance

Others’

Concepts

Others’

Practice

Articulating ideas

Others’ ideas

Preparing Outputs

Others’ Outputs Acting

Listening/ Reading

Reflection

Producing

Revising

Information

Learner

Concept

Learner

Practice

Adaptation Reflection Adaptation

Adapted from Laurillard, 2009, Creative Commons

Asking Questions

Learner

Concept

Working to a goal

Internal Learner

Cycle

Adaptation Reflection

Research Design

Survey (after each module)

6 Interviews (Semester 2: DA4L)

Other sources:

• (Standard) Module Evaluation Questionnaire

• Adhoc feedback (e.g. Ask the Tutor Forum)

• Reflections in assignments

What Students said .. Impressions (DA4L)

What Students said .. Online engagement

• “Time constraints due to work

commitments”

• “I was not able to do the tasks

each week and therefore it

happened always with a huge

delay.”

• “Other students were not

participating in online discussions

[..] therefore, it was difficult to

engage in online discussions”

• “The design of the module felt

complicated in comparison to

previous module delivery, which

had very clear alignment to

learning outcomes and patchwork

[assessment].”

• “The learning activities were

carefully thought out so that each

week built upon the last.”

• “Deep learning was made

possible due to the availability of

rich learning resources”

• “Familiarity with the structure

and format, .. using a wiki etc..

leading to being more securely

engaged.”

What Students said .. Engaging

To what extend did your online engagement with other

participants engage you?

“My online engagement went down as the course progressed as

fewer and fewer people engaged” (ELTTRP)

“However, once we were divided into small groups this was not a

good experience. I had no feedback from fellow students and limited

feedback from tutor which was often too late.” (ELTTRP)

What Students said .. Socially engaging

To what extend did your online engagement with other

participants engage you socially?

“The face to face [Induction] sessions were the only opportunity

to socialise”.

Different learning preferences: visual versus read / write

Active engaging (online activities) versus passive engagement

(content)

Setting up activity • illustrative title

The „Spark“:

„A small piece of information,

stimulus or challenge”

(max. 1 page)

• Invitation to participate

Activities: Elapsed time:

E-moderator

Particpant:

E-moderator

& Participant

1. Reading, exploring, thinking …

2. Posting contribution Response to spark & invitation

3. Interaction & Participation

Summary, feedback or critique

from e-moderator

Online Activities

offline/online

offline

online

online

offline/online

Lead by:

Asynchronous E-tivities (G. Salmon)

Summary

In the distance learning modules improvements

were achieved by:

• Reducing the number of learning activities

• Distributing between content and peer engagement

• Requiring less engagement towards the end

• Increase the mix of media

• Improve navigation in VLE (less is more)

• Future developments:

• More immediacy through synchronous sessions (webinars)

and personalisation through social networks (e.g. Facebook

group)

• Design activities which encourage engagement with work-

based community / work colleagues

Discussion 1. How do you engage participants online when

they don’t have time?

2. How can you develop a virtual learning

community / community of practice for those

who learn from engaging with others?

3. How can you encourage and promote

engagement of participants in their work-based

community?

4. How can you make the online environment a

more “social” place?

References Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Laurillard, D. (2008). Digital technologies and their role in achieving our ambitions for education.

Professorial lecture. Institute of Education, University of London: IoE Publications. Available at:

http://eprints.ioe.ac.uk/628/1/Laurillard2008Digital_technologies.pdf. [Last accessed 15/03//2014].

Laurillard, D. (2009). Evaluating learning designs through the formal representation of learning

patterns. PowerPoint presentation. In: ALT-C 2009 "In dreams begins responsibility" - choice,

evidence and change, 8 - 10 September 2009, Manchester. Available at:

http://repository.alt.ac.uk/id/eprint/654. [Last accessed 15/03//2014].

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a Design Science. Building Pedagogical Pattern for Learning and

Technology. New York and London: Routledge.

Salmon, G. (n.d.) The 5 Stage Model. Available at: http://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html.

[Last accessed 15/03//2014].

Salmon, G. (2011). E-Moderating: The Key to Online Teaching and Learning. 3rd edition. London:

RoutledgeFalmer.

Salmon, G. (2013). E-tivities: The Key to Active Online. 2nd edition. New York, Abington: Routledge.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of Practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Wenger, E., McDermott, R. and Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating Communities of Practice. Boston:

Harvard Business School Press.

Wenger, E. and Trayner, B. (2011). Levels of Participation. (Slide). wenger-trayner.com. Available at:

http://wenger-trayner.com/resources/slide-forms-of-participation/. [Last accessed 15/03//2014].