Discussion 5

Discussion 5 was due July 5, and we received the following instructions:

1. Description/summary of main ideas in chapter 5. (* Required component)

2. Select two of the following for discussion:

A. Discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the chapter

B. How could teachers/educators use the material/information addressed in the chapter to help improve their instruction or professional development?

C. What future trends do you see coming from the topics dealt with in the chapter? In other words, do you think the material/information discussed in the chapter has any relevancy to the future or is it just a passing fad?

D. What you learned from reading this chapter? If the article did not reveal any new information, explain what you already know about the topic and how you gained that knowledge (e.g., experience, word-of-mouth, research).

E. Did you feel this chapter helped in your understanding of the use of technology in education? Explain why or why not. Did anything confuse you? Did the chapter leave more questions for you?

My answer
Summary
An online classroom environment is becoming more than a synchronous place; it’s growing into an area with multiple communication channels that can be used as primary communication modes or supporting communication modes. In the traditional positivist learning environment, the thought is that primary instruction takes place between teachers and students. However, with constructivist learning environments, primary learning may occur between students and other students. The potential benefits of learning online can occur with an exchange of information that occurs synchronously with but is still physically separate from a primary communication node, which is called ancillary communication.

While we are in the first stages of Web 2.0 in education, we have already determined that the content needs to be centered on user generation. Students are no longer just consumers of information, but they are becoming producers of information as well. Another definition to note that goes hand in hand with this idea is constructionsim: the idea that students learn by building something in a public context. The teacher, in other words, has become more of a facilitator, and the students create the concepts discussed. Web 2.0 is also seeing changes in a desire for real-time interaction, shown by social media sites such as Twitter, AIM, Yahoo IM, and more.

The online class the researchers of this chapter studied showed that the tools they gave the students were not technically difficult to use, but the students had problems interpreting how to use them effectively and why they should use them in the first place. Another problem was that, while people understood the new technologies, making sense of multiple new technologies quickly became confusing.

The book's authors suggest that ancillary communication occurs frequently in classes. Through learner-instructor interactions, students work directly with the instructor. However, these interactions are less common in eLearning environments, and there is a greater prevalence of stand-alone instruction. In SOLEs (Synchronous Online Learning Environments), the authors noticed four sub-categories of learner-instructor interaction:

1. The instructor communicates with the whole class simultaneously through audio and visual channels.

2. The instructor communicates with the whole class through the chat window.

3. The instructor communicates with an individual student or a small group of students privately in the chat window.

4. The instructor communicates with the class as a whole via the chat window but does so as a private communication.

The key point is, however, that it is not the medium itself that affects learning outcomes: it is how it is used. Ancillary Communication, while difficult sometimes to implement, is a better way to harness new skills. The researchers also noted how ancillary communication can be used:

* through community building and shared experiences

* through shared work spaces

* through chat window summaries

* through chats which provide people the ability to comment, joke, and increase the collegiality of the class

* through the ability of students to manifest their cognitive processes instantly

There are many methods to employ ancillary communication, and the authors listed eight that they used in their own work: agree/disagree, elaboration, diverge, scaffolding, reiterate, emphasis, show relevance of, and social engineering. With rapid growth of thee new technologies, it is clear that Internet users and the face of Web 2.0 is moving toward instant communication.

What future trends do you see coming from the topics dealt with in the chapter? In other words, do you think the material/information discussed in the chapter has any relevancy to the future or is it just a passing fad?

This is definitely not just a passing fad. I see more classes that not only use instant messaging but also use something similar to skype. Yesterday, in fact, I had a student tell me he sent text messages to phones via Yahoo Text. How cool is that? I didn’t even know that existed!

Back to the point, though, while people are more prone to want instant chat, I do think that soon we’ll have classrooms where the teacher is seen via a webcam and perhaps students, too, will be seen with a webcam, and they all will be able to talk at the same time. Second Life isn’t really different from that, and I could see classes being held through Second Life.

Did you feel this chapter helped in your understanding of the use of technology in education? Explain why or why not. Did anything confuse you? Did the chapter leave more questions for you?

I’m still comprehending ancillary communication, honestly. I’m not sure why I’m having trouble understanding that; I’m sure it’s just something that needs to click in my brain. Other than that, I was really excited with this chapter with the potential future of eLearning.

Reference

Jones, M. & Harmon, S. (2010). Instructional Strategies for Teaching in Synchronous Online Learning Environments (SOLE). In Yang, H. H., & Yuen, S. C. (Eds.), Collective Intelligence and E-Learning 2.0: Implications of Web-Based Communities and Networking (pp. 78-93). Hershey, Pennsylvania: Information Science Reference.