Strategies for Enhancing Student Interactivity in an Online Environment by Vance A. Durrington, Amy Berryhill, and Jeanne Swafford. (2006)
This was an interesting article because there were many topics presented in class that touched on interactivity. Just by the title the reader is able to assume that interactivity is something they would want to promote in an online environment and that the article will supply the reader with some strategies for developing an interactive online environment.
The authors provide supporting evidence for how online learning can be as effective as traditional classroom instruction under the following criteria:
- Technology is appropriate for the tasks
- Instructors provide timely feedback to students
- Levels of student interactivity are high
- Student demonstrate more positive attitudes and higher levels of performance in online classes when they experience high levels of interaction.
- Interactivity can bridge the physical and psychological gap that occurs in online courses
- Interactivity in both contexts (online vs onsite) lead to positive learning experiences and are key to effective instruction
The strategies suggested are very repetitive in the literature, but still informative. I didn’t see any new ideas presented in this article that I haven’t read elsewhere.
The main ways the authors sought to engage students was through various strategies to use a technology, the discussion forum.
• FAQ
• Instruction mediated discussions
• Student moderated discussions
• PBL
Below are some questions that may be relevant to your own research.
- How do these strategies suggest use of cognitive theories in the design of online courses? (A question relevant to Rebecca’s topic)
- Are there certain standards of interactively that should be required in all online course? (A questions relevant to Tracy’s topic)
- How do we know that these strategies are effective and can they be compared to face to face activity? (A question relevant to Sandi’s topic)
- How does AI interactions compare to the strategies employed here for engagement in an online environment? (A question relevant to Adam’s topic).
- What are some strategies for interaction for medical education? Would these strategies suffice? (Questions relevant to Tom’s research)
- How do you set expectations with adults for highly interactive online environments (A question relevant to Allan’s research).
- What implications does m-learning have on interactively and engagement? (A question relevant to Dan’s research).
- Does discussion forum technology support those with disabilities? (A question relevant to Tushar’s research).
- Do the strategies presented in this article support ESL learners? If so how? (A question relevant to Adriana’s research).
- Are students satisfied with the approaches for interactivity presented in the article? What is there preferred method? (A question relevant to Nilda’s research).
posted by sgoss @ 13:16
7 comments
7 Comments:
I found this article very informative, the discussion about how students demonstrate "positive attitudes towards high levels of interaction." At the beginning of the article the statement about "Instructors are faced… developing effective instruction" to meet student's needs was right on the mark. Many instructors should take that lesson to heart. The development of discussion lists, strategy, and how to bolster students posting came very close to the heart. The use of PBL is an important requirement but I believe that it will depend on the type of course given/taken to see if PBL will really work. The rubric is a great tool to use in any form of class experience. The last sentence should be etched in wood, and posted in every instructor's office. I have known many an instructor in f2f or online that do not / did not create "a stimulating, interactive learning environment" Allan
Argh! I had just posted when my computer had a hairball moment and it all went awry.
What I had said was that I found this article very interesting - more than anything, I liked the way it asked the instructors to check in with their students and make sure things were happening as expected - many times we think that just by posting a rubric it will force the students to action. To me, it sounded like there was a lot of importance placed on feedback, whether it was to a quiet student to make them participate more, or to a moderator, to let them know what they were doing well or could modify.
All in all, a very interesting article.
This article is very timely for my own topic. My thoughts on this however, lean more toward why it has taken so long for educators to adopt this strategy. Interactivity such as forums and chats have been around for more than two decades. In higher education, the University of Phoenix was the first to implement interactivity in their distance learning programs through the use of Compuserve's Information Manager application. Forums with branching topics, such as the one now used by NYUonline has been one of the key interactive features of CIM, that promoted participation among members.
Asynchronous interactivity is important, particularly if your learners are scattered around the world. This strategy is ubiquitously employed among institutions such as Embry-Riddle and the University of Maryland (UMUC) whose programs attract students currently serving in the military.
Rebecca
The article notes that "DL can be as effective as F2F when the technologies are appropriate." It is interesting to note that the article does not suggest any strategies for choosing appropriate interactions. We all know that interactions are important, but when should you do problem-based, when should you use a discussion and when should you try a simulation? This shows why instructional design keeps being reinvented as Universal Design, Backwards Design, etc. It is really hard, but very possible, to create clear objectives (constructs) and when properly written these objectives will pretty clearly point to the type of interactivity to include in the course. You can have a course jam-packed with interactivity, but the activities need to align with the goals and the assessments for high student satisfaction.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
The authors do us all a service in reminding us to set standards and make expectations clear -- if you don't know what you want, you'll have a tough time getting it. I agree with Marc -- it is all very well to state that appropriate techniques and technologies will improve the effectiveness of DL (or anything else), but figuring out what to apply and when to apply it is the real trick. The rubric provided at the end of the piece is very helpful in this regard.
Interesting point that Alan made regarding instructors of f2f classes who do not make the class stimulating and interactive. Not all instructors know how to create a stimulating environment. Many understand the subject, but have difficulty in motivating students and maintaining the learners' interest. The article offers a number of good strategies, but when and how to implement these strategies is the challenge for instructors.
Post a Comment
<< Home