 |
||
 |
||
    |
||
 Increasing
Students' Participation via
Multiple Interactive Media Chris Dede and Audrey L. Kremer |
||
© Copyright 1998-99 by Chris Dede (cdede@gmu.edu) and Audrey L. Kremer (kremer@mitretek.org) . The right to make additional exact copies, including this notice, for personal and classroom use, is hereby granted. All other forms of distribution and copying require permission of the author. |
|
Section Six: Townhall was the threaded discussion site used for the asynchronous computer-mediated communication portion of the course. Four of the class sessions were held strictly in Townhall. Questions on the readings were assigned, and students were expected to participate in the weeklong discussion. Participation was monitored and graded. High participating students were commended, low participators were encouraged to become more active. Townhall was also used by many as the medium of choice for an additional distance class session, as well as for discussions of projects and topics of mutual interest. Given the frequent use of Townhall, students became relatively fluent in the workings of a threaded discussion forum. For that reason Audrey decided to research the discussion forum experiences in more depth to see how these discussions compared to the experiences of other electronic communities (listservs, MOOs, etc.) Four of the weeklong discussions were analyzed in depth.. Overall, we saw a relatively high rate of participation and commendable quality of discussions. The average number of postings per discussion was 105. This seemed a significant level of response given how much longer it takes to read others’ postings and craft a thoughtful response than it would take to make a comment in a face-to-face situation. The depth of many of the postings showed the benefits of more time to reflect on the discussion at hand and the option for students to respond at their own pace, when it was convenient for them. As would be expected in a university course, there was a significant rise in the number of postings on the last official night of a discussion, typically the night prior to the next class session. The fact that the discussion database creates a semi-permanent record of the discussion probably affected all students in some way. Some students may have felt a need to be more accurate or thoughtful in their postings. Others may have been intimidated by the idea that other students at GMU could see their postings and that these would be available for others to reread later. As in a classroom environment, some students participated well above or below average rates; to some extent, this reflected their degree of comfort with the rhetoric of asynchronous, threaded discussion. In particular, the asynchronous nature of Townhall might have allowed students who tend to be quiet in class to participate more fully. Students tend to participate in class in ways which are consistent with their personalities and background and which are in keeping with the nature of the classroom environment. There are often patterns to participation; for example some students dominate and others rarely participate. Many of these communication styles may be linked to gender or ethnicity. Researchers have posited that computer-mediated communication (CMC) might change the characteristics of communications and make them more democratic by giving all participants a greater opportunity to express opinions and contribute to the discussion. In studying EDIT 611, Audrey examined gender issues in particular. Most researchers on gender issues in computer-mediated communication mention "flaming" (overly aggressive argumentation), sexual harassment, or adversarial relationships; this is where they saw most of the differentiation between men’s and women’s postings. We found no evidence of gender-oriented communication styles and no untoward arguments, acrimonious disagreements, or controversial or negative postings. The EDIT 611 Townhall discussions were characterized by respect, support, and often an interest in other’s contributions—a sharp contrast to the open chatrooms and listservs other researchers have studied. The men in the class participated more frequently than the women, consistent with previous research that found males spoke more often both in classroom settings and in computer-mediated communication environments. But in EDIT 611 the level of imbalance was much smaller than previously reported (Cherny 1994, Herring 1993 & 1994). Women posted an average of 3 times per discussion while men posted an average of 3.5 times. There was not significant difference in which gender was more likely to start or stop a discussion or more likely to change the direction of a discussion. The typical response was about 180 words, 2-3 paragraphs in length; male postings were only slightly longer. There are several possible explanations for why this education course’s CMC may have shown atypical gender communication characteristics. Education tends to be a female dominated field (two thirds of the students in the class were female), and this may create an inherently more supportive environment than more male-dominated topical areas. Education as a field may also attract men with atypical characteristics, more interested in collaboration than competition. The class population is, after all, a self-selected group of individuals who have an interest in learning and teaching, environments where social skills are highly valued. The female majority, and the education-oriented environment created an unusual situation that may have encouraged women to be more vocal and to establish discussions with a tone consistent with women’s ways of communicating. "Entire lists can become gendered in their style as well. It is tacitly expected that members of the non-dominant gender will adapt their posting style in the direction of the style of the dominant gender. Thus men on women’s special interest lists attenuate their assertions and shorten their messages," (Herring, 1994, p 5). This informal study does not answer the question of whether women in EDIT 611 posted more (than predicted by the research literature) because they were more comfortable, or men posted less and acted less competitively because they were emulating the postings of the dominant group. Also, the experiences we report on the discussion database are likely to be different for different student populations, different course contents, and different instructional styles. Overall, these case study findings offer considerable promise for improved educational outcomes and for the transformation of conventional instructional settings by use of mixed interactive media for distributed learning. Moreover, many other faculty working with these media report similar insights. However, case studies are only suggestive; and extensive, rigorous, and generalizable research is needed to further elucidate the cognitive, affective, and social affordances—and limits—of new Internet-based media for learning. From such research will come instructional design methodologies more sophisticated than those currently in use. These strategies will require more complex pedagogical planning from instructors, but can lead to more powerful learning outcomes. Next Section:The Evolution of Distributed Learning Previous Section: Insights: Complex Optimization |