Reflective Summary I

So far we have read many studies discussing the factors that should be taken into consideration when building an online learning community, reviewed a couple of virtual learning communities and had many implications regarding the features, structure, etc. of effective virtual learning communities. Now, it is time to synthesize and reflect how we will apply all our knowledge in future design of online learning environments. Below I will mention the context, learners and subject matter of the online course that I plan to design and develop as a requirement of this course, and then discuss my conceptualization of the design. Lastly, I will conclude by mentioning how I have developed my design frame.

Overview of My Project
I will design and develop an online course for the institution I work. The course is going to be about Fundamentals of Technology. That course will provide students with the fundamental concepts, principles, and ideas needed to understand how business is operated and managed in a rapidly changing global environment, which is needed for success in business-related careers. Basic computer, database and Internet skills will be covered. This course will also provide job readiness skills and soft skills that are critical for success in any workplace setting. Learners of this course are high school students and adults.

Conceptualization of My Online Course


















This will be a practice-based community. Riel and Polin (2004) suggest that ‘practice-based communities are groups with shared goals that offer their members richly contextualized and supported arenas for learning (p. 20)’. I will design this course based on situated learning theory (Collins, 1988; Lave, 1988). Collins (1988) defines situated learning as: ‘the notion of learning knowledge and skills in contexts that reflect the way the knowledge will be useful in real life’ (p.2). So, I will use authentic context and activities to ensure that the learning environment reflects the way the knowledge will ultimately be used (Collins, 1988; Jonassen, 1999). I will use a number of theoretically grounded instructional strategies and principles to ensure learning. First, the use of technology will be performed and demonstrated by instructors, and those demonstrations and modeling of processes will be provided in downloadable video formats as well as text and graphic based formats. According to the multimedia principle of Mayer (2009), “people learn more deeply from words and pictures than from words alone (p. 47)”. Second, analogies will be used to introduce complex and hard-to-visualize technological systems to the students (Smith and Ragan, 2005). Third, reflection opportunities will be provided to ensure transfer of knowledge to real world.
Social interaction will be an important feature of this course. Students will be encouraged to discuss and exchange information through forums and real-time communication tools. Subgroups will be formed for each career field, so the students in the same career field will develop their own information database, which will reflect their shared interests, goals and needs. For example, the students in Graphic Design career field will have a designated area to discuss their own professional goals, needs, interests, problems, etc. However I don’t know if it would be possible to develop structured collaboration activities. My concern is that students in individualized learning system study at their own pace. A student can enroll the classes at any Monday. So, each student in the class is at a different part of the course. I don’t know how realistic it would be to track where each student is at and pair the students at the same level.
Another important component of the course will be the application of the knowledge. Students will be encouraged to do hands-on activities to practice the skills they learned. For example, they will be asked to develop a PowerPoint presentation after they learn the procedure of presentation development.
Support will be provided throughout the course. The support should be including but not limited to technological support (Riel &Polin, 2004), promotion of intrinsic motivation (Collins, Brown & Holum, 1991), coaching (Collins, Brown & Holum, 1991; Jonassen, 1999), and providing opportunities to make choices (Kaptelinin & Cole, 2001). Also, students will be encouraged to sign up for a professional social networking site - LinkedIn to communicate with the practitioners of their field and improve their employability skills.

Conclusion
Each of the class activities (reading textbooks and PPTs, discussing with peers and instructor, reviewing virtual learning communities, writing blogs, etc.) was very helpful in framing these design ideas. While Renninger and Shumar’s (2002) text introduced the basic concepts and sample successful and unsuccessful virtual learning communities (i.e. WISE, MediaMOO, etc.), Koschman, Hall and Miyake (2001) provided the key consideration points in design of collaborative virtual learning communities. Especially, sample virtual learning communities (e.g. MediaMOO, WISE, Ning, MERLOT, etc.) let me see what works and what doesn’t work. Peer discussions and blogs were also helpful since they made me articulate what I learned and how I will use what I learned. Articulation of the knowledge required me to review the text back and forth, which made me see a new point each time. PPTs and additional articles provided by the instructor backed up the necessary design features theoretically. I am really looking forward to developing this online learning environment.


References

Collins, A. (1988). Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology (Technical
Report No. 6899). BBN Labs Inc., Cambridge, MA.
Collins, A., Brown, J. S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive apprenticeship: Making
thinking visible. American Educator, 6-11, 38-46. Reviewed by Dan Watola.
Jonassen, D. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 215-239). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kaptelinin V, Cole M. Individual and collective activities in educational computer game playing. In: Koschmann T, Hall R, Miyake N, eds. CSCL 2: Carrying Forward the Conversation. Mahwah, NJ, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum, Chapter 8, 2002:297-310.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in Practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2009). Multimedia learning (2nd ed). New York: Cambridge University Press
Renninger, K.A. & Shumar, W. (2002) Building Virtual Communities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK
Riel, M. Polin, L. (2004). Online Learning communities: common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments. In Barab, S. A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. (Eds.). Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 16-52.
Smith, P. L., & Ragan, T. J., (2005). Instructional Design (3rd ed.). NY: Wiley.

The Human Side of Collaborative Learning

I'd like to mention identity formation (Chapter 7, Suzuki & Kato, 2001) and individual and collective activities (Chapter 8, Kaptelinin & Cole, 2001) in this post. The common feature of these chapters is that both are discussing the human side of collaborative learning. The the seventh chapter Suzuki and Kato are discussing that individual's identity in the community is formed as the time goes by. I have to admit that I had never thought about that before, and actually it is a very interesting phenomenon. We are always shy or introvert when we join a new community. We don't want to be visible or the one in change. Self-perceptions of the individual in a community changes as he/she learns new things and gains experience. And some time is needed to develop a perspective on a topic or the field. Peers, instructor and resources are really affective in identity formation. The person shouldn't feel helpless or unsafe in the learning process. If she/he fells so, this would affect his/her identity development as well as learning process negatively.

As Kaptelinin and Cole (2001) suggest, there are times in which students cannot achieve their goals by themselves. They have to interact with other people to do collective activities and achieve shared goals. In that process, they are supposed to achieve their own individual goals, as well. So, social interaction has an impact in both the social development and the individual development. In order for the interaction to be very effective on the individual development and transfer of knowledge, the area of study should match with the interests of the individual. That way, learner can make more effort to develop the individual and group identity.

CSCL in University and Vocational Education

The characteristics of the learning environment described in third chapter (De Jong, Veldhuis-Diermanse and Lutgens, 2001) is pretty similar to the one in first chapter. Students develop a database (web-based version of Knowledge Forum) collaboratively. The phases have been stated clearly:

-Actualizing
-Planning
-Deepening
-Experiencing

The application of the model requires students to share their thinking and insight during the learning process. Students are expected to be aware of their own learning. To promote metacognitive skills, thinking type tags (i.e. My Theory, What is this about, etc.) are used. Perspectives, experiences and different interests have an important impact on the construction of knowledge. As the students reflect and relate the knowledge to their own life experiences, meaningful learning occurs.

Teacher's role has also been emphasized. He/she really needs to facilitate learning through coaching and monitoring. That's to say, teacher involvement is inevitable even in student-centered approaches.

De Jong, F. P. C. M., Veldhuis-Diermanse, E., & Lutgens, G. (2001). Computer-Supported
Collaborative Learning In University and Vocational Education. In T. Koschmann, R.
Hall & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL2 Carrying Forward the Conversation (pp. 111-128):
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Knowledge Building Communities

Hewitt (2001) is focusing on knowledge building communities in the first chapter of the CSCL 2 book. The benefits of understanding the knowledge as opposed to completing the task has been discussed. It has been stated that learning actively through knowledge building communities is more effective than traditional learning type in which the teacher is the one who transmits the knowledge to the students (Hewitt, 2001; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994). Computer Supported Intentional Learning Environment (CSILE), a networked learning environment developed by Scardamalia, Bereiter, McLean, Swallow and Woodruff (1989), is introduced and the classroom application of the model is being discussed. In the classroom application, the students are basically encouraged to select a problem and resolve the problem by developing a database collaboratively. They follow specific guidelines during the knowledge construction process. They have to address certain things such as "Problem", "My Theory", "I Need to Understand", etc. One of the key points in that process is that students have to share openly what they know, what they understand and/or don't understand. Otherwise, it is nothing but a "task to complete". Students should think as well as research in order to "understand the topic" and solve the problem.

Research and students' understanding of the problem are important components in the knowledge construction process. After an unsuccessful trial, Hewitt develops some strategies and tries to apply the model again and the results become more positive this time. Better scaffolding during the collaboration and discussion process have brought the success. In order to scaffold, the teacher made the discussion more structured, encouraged the students to respond to each other in a constructive and productive manner in which students offer new ideas instead of simply writing any response, and encouraged reflection to stress understanding. He even involved the parents of the students by encouraging them to ask their kids questions like "What did you learn today?", " What problems are you working on science?" instead of asking simply " What did you do today?". These are all very interesting strategies and they all make sense to me. Some of the key things to do to scaffold and create a constructivist learning environment is clearly depicted in this chapter.

Collin's (2001) response to Hewitt emphasizes the importance of a meaningful end product which would be a presentation, an essay, etc. I agree with Collin on that. If the small groups inside a class don't share what they have understood and/or resolved, would that be a real learning community? Even though they develop a database of knowledge, should they be expected to go back and review other group's resolutions? How practical and effective would that be? Other than that, I think those type of knowledge building communities do enhance learners' problem solving, critical thinking, communication and argumentation skills.

Collins, A. (2001). The balance between task focus and understanding focus: Education as apprenticeship vs. education as research. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.) Computer Supported Cooperative Learning (Vol. 2). Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hewitt, J. (2001). From a Focus on Tasks to a Focus on Understanding: The Cultural Transformation of a Torontio Classroom, in Koschmann, T., Hall, R., Miyake, N. (eds) CSCL2: Carrying Forward the Conversation, (Mahwah, NJ / London, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates).

Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., McLean, R. S., Swallow, J., & Woodruff, E. (1989). Computer supported intentional learning environments. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 5, 51-68.

Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1994). The CSILE project: Trying to bring the classroom into world 3. In K. McGilly, ed., Classroom Lessons: Integrating Cognitive Theory and Classroom Practice (pp. 201-228). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.

MERLOT - Virtual Learning Community

Introduction

After taking a look at a couple of online virtual communities, I have decided to examine MERLOT (Multimedia Educational Resource for Learning and Online Teaching) (http://www.merlot.org/merlot/index.htm). (see Figure 1). I have chosen that virtual community because it looked structured, well-organized and very comprehensive. Another reason of choosing is that MERLOT is a virtual community which has many well-developed resources of my own interests. So, I thought that being a part of that virtual community could be helpful in my own professional development.

“MERLOT is a leading edge; user-centered, searchable collection of peer reviewed and selected higher education, online learning materials, catalogued by registered members and a set of faculty development support services. MERLOT's vision is to be a premiere online community where faculty, staff, and students from around the world share their learning materials and pedagogy (http://taste.merlot.org/)”

My first impression of the community was very positive. I have created an account and had access to great online resources right away. Although I didn’t make a contribution to the community, I reviewed a couple of resources that other members posted and visited the profiles of some of the community members. I am impressed with not only the variety of the resources but also the easiness of the site navigation.
Type of the Community

MERLOT is both a knowledge-based learning community, in which members “construct, use, reconstruct, and reuse knowledge in deliberate, continuous cycles” (Riel & Polin, 2004; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994; Bereiter, 2001; Hewit, 2004), and a practice-based community, which arises around a profession, discipline, or field or endeveavor (Riel & Polin, 2004). MERLOT has been categorized as three portals: Discipline communities, Community of MERLOT Partner Academic Support Services (COMPASS), and partner communities. That means, users can reach the resources by selecting the discipline they are interested in (i.e education, agriculture, etc.), by selecting the type of material they are looking for (i.e. e-portfolio, online courses, etc.), or by selecting the institution and/or program that they are belong to (i.e. California State University - Business, World Futures Studies Federation, etc.). MERLOT aims at supporting all communities of disciplines. Since it is sponsored by higher education, corporate and community organizations, it is free for the users.

Structures of the Community

Every individual create a profile as they sign up for the site and manage their profile easily. Components of the profile include contact information, skills and interests, publications, experiences, etc. Users are not required to fill out every component of the profile.

Users can review peers’ works, make comments to the resources, become a guest speaker in the area of their expertise, join discussions and debates in MERLOT Voices forums, chat with people in real-time and participate in the annual international conferences to interact with each other and learn by collaborating.
I have observed a discussion in MERLOT Voices site about the topic: “How can we increase student participation in our online classes?” It was interesting to review people’s ideas about the topic. While some of them were stating their concerns, some others were sharing their experiences and ideas. One of the users linked to another source about the topic. The forum was looking very interactive and informative.
Design Features and Role of Technology

The site looks very organized and consistent. There are smaller groups within the site to connect people with common interests. Some of the examples are Faculty Development, Health Sciences Editorial Board and Virtual Worlds Taskforce. Users can join the groups and view multiple discussion threads about an area. Users can even invite friends and send gifts to each other. Also, users have access to their Twitter accounts from the site.

Each user has a page in which he/she can upload a photo, post a blog, add RSS, check inbox, update the status, add apps and videos. The page is very similar to a Facebook profile page. Other people can visit and write comments on the walls of each other. The pages are useful for personal use and for interaction with others.

Conclusion and Implications

I really liked the structure and tool features of MERLOT. It is an excellent online virtual learning community that could be used very interactively. Navigation is easy and simple and resources are varied. I believe that there is something in the site that every educator would find useful. I really cannot think of any suggestion for improvement.












References

Bereiter, C. (2001). Education and the Mind in the Knowledge Age. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hewitt, J. 2004. An Exploration of Community in a Knowledge Forum Classroom: An Activity System Analysis. In: S. Barab, R. Kling & J. Gray (Eds.). Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Riel, M. & Polin, L. (2004). Learning communities: Common ground and critical differences in designing technical environments. Chapter 3 in Barab & Kling (eds.) Designing Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Scardamalia, M. & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building
learning communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(}), 265-283'

NING Virtual Community

Introduction

I have been using NING network site for two days and really enjoying it (www.ning.com). NING is a platform where people can create their own social networking. I wasn’t aware of the presence of NING until Lee Nelson recommended me to check it out in blog interaction. As I signed up, I realized that it is very interesting and fun. People pick their area of interest (i.e. sport, music, art, education, etc.) and connect to multiple pages that have been created by members with the tag of that area.

As I signed in, I picked the category “Art” and started to visit the pages that are related to art. I didn’t participate in discussions but as far as I observed there were hot discussions going on in the discussion forums. The discussions were informal.

Then, I decided to create my own network. I was asked to fill out my profile and upload a photo. I selected a theme and gave a title to my network “page”. I found the site very nice. The tools are easy to use and all the graphics and themes are very appealing. Members are allowed to use their creativity and customize their pages. The site is very user-friendly.

Type of the Community

The site provides people a space to share information or products in an informal way. People discuss in forums, share photos, share videos, and follow the events. Smaller groups within the pages let people concentrate on specific topics. For example “Children Portraits” group within the “Photography” page lets people share specifically children portraits in that area. Those kinds of categorizations make the page easy to use, because it becomes easy to locate what you’re looking for.

Structure of the Community

Everybody has their own space in which they can create discussions, invite people, check their messages, etc. The interface is consistent in all pages, however the theme changes as you click on different people’s profile pages.
People can create groups, write comments to each other, share tutorials and tips. Subscription is a very easy way of staying updated.

A drawback that attracted my attention is that you have to sign up to each page in order to participate in the discussions, write comments to people’s posts, etc., and it takes some time for the administration to approve your membership. You can view everything but cannot interact with people before the approval.

Events make people highly interact with each other. For example photo contests make people take different photos and give constructive feedback to each other.

Design Features and Roles of the Technology

There are many design and technology features that encourage people to stay connected to the community. First, individual inboxes let people communicate privately, so members don’t have to share everything publicly. Second, everybody can manage their own place and decide what to have and what not to have on their pages. Following on Twitter and Facebook are other good features that people don’t have to sign in to see what is new on the site. Also, the site gives a lot of flexibilities to the users. They can change their mode of views, customize their profile pages easily and enjoy the nice graphics and themes. Lastly, real-time communication is enabled through chat feature.

Conclusion and Implications

I really liked to explore NING network. It is a nice place to spend free times and learn new things at the same time. I believe that it is a great example of a virtual community. Also I like that it is multimedia supported. You cannot only read the texts, but also watch videos, listen to podcasts, view illustrations, graphics, etc. and upload your own media. I believe that I will stay connected to it in the future.

Things to Consider: Knowledge Building Communities, Scaffolding and Social Networking

This week, what I have got to my pocket from Renninger and Shumar's texts are all moving around the concepts of knowledge building communities, scaffolding and social networking. I really liked the articulation of communities of practice: "Not merely peers exchanging ideas around the water cooler, sharing and benefiting from each other's expertise, but colleagues committed to jointly develop better practices (Brown and Gray, 1995)".."Learning is viewed as a social activity that occurs as newcomers and journeymen move through and established communities' professional hierarchy toward expertise (Lave&Wegner, 1991; Brown&Duguid, 1996; Wenger, 1998)". It seems that providing and sharing vast variety of resources is not enough for an effective learning community, instead, there is a need to create something out of the resources, generate ideas, apply knowledge, etc. The learners get resources, think critically on them, reflect upon them and do some type of application, then they can construct knowledge..And learning occurs..In that process collaboration, networking and guidance have important role. Learners should find social and technical support whenever they need. TappedIn uses several ways to scaffold the community members. Help desk, After School Online discussions, MeetMe mailing list are some of the services that has been provided. Similarly, WISE(Web-Based Integrated Science Environment) has many strategies to support the community members in the virtual environment. Those strategies include providing networks of personal relationships to help resource exchange, providing inquiry map as an activity guideline, the NetCourse and evidence pages, etc. (Especially "WISE Learning Communities" chapter provides great tips and guidelines to design effective virtual communities).

Social Networking is another interesting thing to think about. If collaboration is essential, social networking system has be an important design consideration. How to move the knowledge in the community? How to connect people to each other? I'd like to give an example of an excellent online tool which provides a very effective knowledge distribution. Some of you might know the free online bookmarking tool "delicious" which lets the users bookmark their favorite websites and tag them. As the users tag their websites, they not only categorize their resources, but also have chance to view the websites of other people with the same tag. So, a user can reach other people's collection of websites, too. Isn't it great? It is such a big network of people and resources! And it is not random or complicated. Everything is tagged! In virtual learning environments, the needs of the community should be analyzed and the most appropriate tools should be used to transfer the information as well as to stay connected with the other people in the community.

What are the implications of the power of the virtual communities to education after reading the TIMES articles and Chs. 1-3?
Virtual communities play an important role in education as they offer great opportunities for learners to communicate, share, create and apply knowledge regardless of the distance. Being able to collaborate, interact and learn in the comfort of the home is attractive as well as motivating for most of the people. As the learners explore the environment independently, they interact with people they want, reach the resources they need and construct their knowledge. It is obvious in Renninger and Shumar’s text that a well designed virtual environment can really help learners to develop their knowledge and skills while a poor virtual environment can fail easily.

I agree that teachers are losing authority regarding know due to student' extensive exposure and access to all kinds of information and resources. But still does it make us all experts in various ways?

With the emergence of technology and internet nowadays there is more room for students to research, self-study and explore. Students can reach to whatever information they need with one click, and obviously this has a big impact on the general shape of the education. Education is more learner-centered and research-based now. Teachers are not spoon feeding the information any more. Their role is totally different in technologically supported learning environments. Technology requires teachers to serve as a guide, not the primary authority!

How will education and the structure of schooling change in this digital age?

As I have said above, education is more learner-centered and technology-based in this digital age. Students are supposed be active learners and knowledge seekers. They don't sit in the classroom and listen to the lecture of the teacher, instead they collaborate, interact and apply. They use computers to complete their projects. Teacher is not a resource but a guide. She/he supports the learning environment by facilitating the peer group discussions, providing feedback, helping with the research, etc.

What do you think this hyper-connectedness mean to the future of nursing education?

Virtual learning environments provide great opportunities to apply the knowledge in health area. Being able to learn with simulations and case-based scenarios developed in digital formats make the technology very attractive and effective in medical science field. Especially since it is a matter of life and death, virtual trainings will continue to attract attention.