1. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 1 Getting Participation Through Discussion - Martyn Clark - School of Computer Studies University of Leeds 성명 : 홍 승 희 전공 : 컴퓨터교육 학번 : 002CSE10

2. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 2 Contents 1. Introduction 2. Why Discussions ? 2.1 A view on teaching 2.2 Putting it into practice 3. Technology 4. Year one 4.1 The brief 4.2 The outcome 5. Version Two 5.1 The brief revised 5.2 Did it work? 6. Conclusion

3. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 3 Abstract ■ Student participation is a vital component ■ The key activity : participate in discussion. ■ This paper one teacher's experience (2 years) - encourage students to discuss concepts ■ The paper focuses on : - how the exercise has evolved - suggests guidelines

4. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 4 1. Introduction ① ■ Two forms of Learning activities ⇒ To learn from their own experience ⇒ Other people's experience, such as discussions. = Theories and concepts are to be learnt ■ Using Usenet as the vehicle ■ suggest some guidelines ■ The First year & Second year ■ suggestions further revision

5. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 5 2. Why Discussions ? ■ The aims of teaching exist at three levels: - course or program level, - module or unit level, - the level of the individual teacher. ⇒ Not just about acquiring high level knowledge ⇒ The teacher's understanding from year to year, ⇒ The role of the students is just listen and receive ⇒ Participation is a vital aspect of teaching. 2.1 A view on teaching

6. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 6 First year undergraduates to fundamental concepts Find a way to introduce discussion (electronic discussions) 115 students who were scheduled to meet only twice each week Each time as a single group. ■ Electronic discussions advantages : - students can plan their own schedule. - plan their contributions 2.2 Putting it into practice

7. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 7 3. Technology ■ Use : local implementation of Usenet.  Advantage (web or e-mail) : established and reliable understood well easy to use one of the normal channels of communication These newsgroups : effective medium in large classes Minimal impact on network traffic Require minimal investment to set up

8. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 8 4. Year one Group 1. Group 2. Group 3. Group 4. ■ Each group was to take responsibility - initiating, maintaining, concluding ■ Students were expected to participate in the discussions initiated by other groups.

9. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 9 ■ Students selected a question ■ Prepare a response of no more than 500 words. ■ This response ( key points ) - stimulate discussion - should be published on the newsgroup ■ Having initiated a discussion ■ make a posting terminating the discussion. ■ Summary / conclusion of the discussion 4.1 The brief ①

10. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 10 4.1 The brief ② ■ Assessed in three parts. Ⅰ. by staff (15 mark) - a group mark for the initial posting, the final posting - discussion they managed to stimulate. Ⅱ. An individual mark - participation in discussions initiated by other groups. Ⅲ. Up to 5 marks - students individually by the other members of their group.

11. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 11 ■ The exercise run period of six weeks ■ It was stressed to the students : - Plan their participation - get a good response to their discussion. ■ It was anticipated : - A steady flow of initial postings - Some discussions would be wound-up long before the conclusion of the exercise. 4.2 The outcome ①

12. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 12 ■ The activity successful in getting students to participate. ■ Most students thought it sufficient articles : (1-10). ■ Problems : - Discussions poorly threaded. - Students not familiar with its use. - The quality of discussion disappointing 4.2 The outcome ②

13. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 13 5. Version Two 5.1 The brief revised ■ The first major revision : ⇒ the group work element was scrapped. ■ A second key change ⇒ Students were not required to initiate any discussion. - Questions to initiate discussion : by staff ■ Attempt to get the exercise moving more quickly.

14. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 14 ■ The students not responsible for initiating, maintaining or concluding the discussion. ■ Marks were available for : - 'interest value of contributions', - 'threading contributions appropriately', - 'relevance of contributions', - 'evidence of relevant reading' - 'appropriate use of references'. ■ focused on : ⇒ improving quality of the articles

15. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 15 ■ Advance : - more then articles - encouraging participation - careful attention & newsgroup etiquette - quality of articles was much improved ■ Articles in order to : 5.2 Did it work? Version 1 : Comply with the coursework and get some marks Version 2: Engage with the material and the spirit of the exercise

16. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 16 6. Conclusion ① ■ Attempt to apply some ideas from educational research. ■ The first version ■ Version two : - some major successes and a number of lessons Lessons :  Don't over-complicate  Think about the volume of postings (students deal with).  Don't leave it to the students to get the discussion started.  Don't assume that students are familiar with using the technology.

17. 이화여자대학교 교육대학원 17 6. Conclusion ② ■ Two key changes of version three : (1) “Staff participation ” (2) “Reflective writing ”