1. Glenna Decker Danielle Lake Engaging the Online Learner: Building Community through Asynchronous Discussion

2. How do you define / describe student engagement? How important is it to student learning?

3. Learning is Social: Dewey; Vygotsky – Learning occurs as a result of interaction with others – Zone of Proximal Development Online: reduce isolation, increase motivation What I can’t do What I can do with help What I can do (ZPD)

4. The “traditional ideal in higher education has been discourse and reflection in a collaborative community of scholars. It is argued here that constructivist approaches and community are necessary for creating and confirming meaning and are essential for achieving effective critical thinking. Therefore, constructivist approaches and community must be necessary parts of higher education. In online higher education, building community is particularly important because it cannot be taken for granted” Swan & Garrison

5. US 201: Danielle Lake Students pre-/post-survey designed to track their feelings about social class issues their place in their virtual or face-to-face classroom (do they see themselves as outsiders or as a part of a community?), their willingness to speak honestly and openly, and their own perceptions about how varied course content and dialogue impacted their perspective on social class.

6. Current Age Year in School

7. In-Seat Sense of Community 8.6/12 Social Class Structures 16.2 to 14.8 out of 28 Comparisons Online Sense of Community: 9.16/12 Social Class Structures 15.7 to 15.5 out of 28

8. 8. in order to pay tuition. 9. in order to pay for education expenses As a college student I will/have had to work

9. “I have had to work in order to pay tuition.” 60% of online students answered this was true “most” or “all semesters.” Only 39% of in-seat students answered “most” or “all semesters.”

10. GROUND RULE SAMPLES Acknowledge our OWN biases. Respond thoughtfully to one another. Try not to be experts. Feel free to think out loud. Adopt a “not-knowing stance.” Ask questions of GENUINE INTEREST. Acknowledge the complexities and inconsistencies in our own views. Speak only from our own experience. Create a safe space for honest reflection by respecting confidentiality.

11. Online Differences Instructor de-centered Instructor can be “everywhere” Students’ contributions – more equitable – Often more articulate, nuanced, detailed Student-student, student-content, student-instructor interactions more seamlessly interwoven

12. Moving Forward Case Studies? Personal voice, narrative, poetry, story, movies Dialogue with the goal of collective problem solving?

13. Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000 Community of Inquiry (CoI) Framework A process model of learning Grounded in a social-constructivist epistemology Assumes effective learning requires the development of a community of learners that supports meaningful inquiry Learning occurs because of the interaction of social, cognitive and teaching presence http://communitiesofinquiry.com/

14. Community … community means meaningful association, association based on common interest and endeavor. The essence of community is communication… John Dewey, 1916 Vaughn, N. (2011) Designing for an inquiry-based approach to blended learning. Presentation at New York University

15. Inquiry Is problem or question driven Includes critical discourse Incorporates research methods such as information gathering and synthesis of ideas Vaughn, N. (2011) Designing for an inquiry-based approach to blended learning. Presentation at New York University

16. Supporting Discourse Setting Climate Selecting Content Educational Experience Social Presence Cognitive Presence Teaching Presence Structure & Process Community of Inquiry Framework Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000

17. Cognitive Presence The extent to which learners are able to construct and confirm meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in a critical community of inquiry. Teaching Presence The design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes. Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000 Community of Inquiry Framework Social Presence The ability of participants to project themselves socially and emotionally, as well as the degree to which they feel socially and emotionally connected to others

18. Social Presence Cognitive Presence Teaching Presence Community of Inquiry Framework Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000 Online Discussion

19. Inquiry 1.Triggering event 2.Exploration 3.Integration 4.Resolution

20. Online Discussion research Evidence of practical inquiry Cognitive presence? – Exploration phase: sharing and brainstorming However, progressed to resolution – when challenged to resolve a problem – Explicit facilitation & direction Swan & Garrison

21. ONLINE DISCUSSION Considerations for

22. 5 Overarching Considerations 1.Online Discussion is different 2.Know what you want 3.Provide clarity for students 4.Accommodate the pace and scale 5.How does it fit

23. 1. Online Discussion is different. Online discussion is fundamentally different from a traditional in-seat class discussion We assign the same paradigm to two very different approaches because we use similar language for them Use the medium for its own strengths

24. 2. Know what you want What are your objectives? Exploration? Integration ? Resolution ? Discussion, dialogue, and discourse Formal? Informal? Structurally, grammatically correct? Citations? Opinion? Informed by literature, research, or fact?

25. Deliberation/Dialogue Dialogue – focus on mutual understanding Deliberation – Shared problem, and – Developing a solution

26. Signs of good deliberation 1.Reasons expressed 2.References cited 3.Disagreement 4.Equitable contributions 5.On-topic 6.Student-Student engagement

27. 3. Provide clarity for students Be clear about your expectations Provide specific guidelines – Quality & Quantity – Time frame Rubric

28. 4. Accommodate the pace and scale Adapt the course to include online discussion Course-and-a-half syndrome Schedule enough time for the discussion

29. 5. How does it fit Consider the whole of your course – Online, hybrid, or web enhanced? How will you integrate it? How much do you value it? Model it. Presence.

30. Presences Critical Thinking Teaching Social Cognitive

31. From the Critical Thinking Guide: 3 Types of Questions One System: – there is a correct answer No System: – A subjective opinion Multi-system: – Requires evidence and reasoning within multiple systems

32. http://www.criticalthinking.org/files/Concepts_Tools.pdf Paul, R. & Elder. L. The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools, Foundation for Critical Thinking, Dillon Beach, CA, 2009, 5th Ed.

33. Critical Thinking Clarity – Could you elaborate further? Accuracy – How could we verify or test this? Precision – Could you be more specific? Relevance – How does that relate to the problem? Depth – What factors make this a difficult problem?

34. Critical Thinking Breadth – Do we need to look at this from another perspective? Logic – Does all this make sense together? Significance – Is this the most important problem to consider? Fairness – Do I have any vested interest in this issue?

35. Activities Problem based learning (case study, critical incident) – Perfect for Collaborative activity Debate Peer writing / review Synthesize – class reading assignment – End of week forum

36. Discussion audit: – What are the two most important ideas that emerged from this week’s discussion? – What remains unresolved or contentious about this topic? – What do you understand better as a result of this week’s discussion? – What key words or concept best captures our discussion this week? – What are some resources (e.g., websites, articles, books) that could be used to find further information/ideas about this topic? Brookfield & Prescott (2005)

37. Student led discussion: These are peer-led, small group or whole class discussions of concepts fueled by single or multiple text sources. Students work together to build abstract understandings from the facts, data, and details provided by a variety of resources. Variations include students assuming the role of the professor, asking guiding questions, & facilitating the discussion. Pickett, A. 50 Alternatives to Lecture for Your Online Course. http://tlt.suny.edu/documentation/tlt_alternatives.shtml

38. Panels: A an online discussion among a selected group of students with an assigned leader Students are broken into Groups/Panels, given a topic The discussion in each group is restricted to group members but members from other groups are assigned to pick other panels to follow and then at a specific time are invited to pose questions to the panel and participate in the discussion. Pickett, A. 50 Alternatives to Lecture for Your Online Course. http://tlt.suny.edu/documentation/tlt_alternatives.shtml

39. General Reminders Introductions / ice breakers Time to adjust before assessed Assign Roles: – Facilitator – Summarizer – Challenger – Researcher Small Groups to Whole class

42. References Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Macmillan. Arbaugh, J.B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S.R., Garrison, D.R., Ice, P., Richardson, & Swan, K.P. (2008). Developing a community of inquiry instrument: Testing a measure of the Community of Inquiry framework using a multi-institutional sample. The Internet and higher Education, 11(3- 4), 133-136. Archibald, D. (2010). Fostering the development of cognitive presence: Initial findings using the community of inquiry survey instrument. The Internet & Higher Education, 13(1-2), 73-74.

43. Akyol, Z., Garrison, D. R. (2011). Understanding Cognitive Presence in an Online and Blended Community of Inquiry: Assessing Outcomes and Processes for Deep Approaches to Learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(2), 233-250. Brookfield, S. D., & Preskill, S. (2005). Discussion as a way of Teaching (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Original work published 1999) Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer,W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105 Garrison, D. R. (2011). E–Learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice (2nd Edition). London: Routledge/Falmer.

44. Garrison, D.R., Arbaugh, J.B. (2007). Researching the community of Inquiry Framework: Review, Issues, and Future Directions. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(3), 157-172. Ice, P. (2010). CoI Theory & Practice. Lecture presented at the Sloan-C course “Using the Community of Inquiry Survey for Multi-Level Institutional Evaluation”, Online through the Sloan Consortium, http://sloanconsortium.org/‌. Lehman, R.M., Conceicao, S. (2010) Creating a sense of presence in online teaching. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.

45. Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2009). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools. (6th ed). Foundation for Critical Thinking, Dillon Beach, CA. Richardson, J.C., Ice, P. (2010) "Investigating students' level of critical thinking across instructional strategies in online discussions." The Internet and Higher Education 13(1-2) 52-59. Swan, K. & Shih, L.F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9 (3), 115-136.

46. Glenna Decker deckerg@gvsu.edu 616.331.2598 Danielle Lake lakeda@gvsu.edu 616.331.