The most interesting and useful content that was explored in this week’s reading was in Chapter 11 of Barbara Gross Davis’s work “Tools for Teaching, which focused on strategies in online discussions. I have been exposed to online learning for many years; my previous master’s degree and my current degree program are both taught in an online format. This course – COMM 702 – is the first time I have taken a course on a campus in five years.
I found the content interesting because it helped me understand the methods that the instructors are utilizing to guide the courses, though I wish it would have focused some attention on ensuring clarity and context in student work. One of the most difficult parts of online learning is that technology creates an impersonal environment that inevitably hampers class discussions; individuals misinterpreting the intentions of a writer on the discussion boards. Personally, I was hoping for some insight in how to manage that situation when it arises, for it always seems to come about in every course. The use of emoticons can be useful, at times, in deterring these situations, yet their use can only ‘express’ so much.
The discussion principles reviewed in the readings would be easy to apply, in some degree, in an online setting, because participation on the course’s discussion boards is the student’s ‘attendance’. If the student fails to contribute to the discussion at hand, then the professor would not know whether the student had even ‘shown up’ to class. Online classes do provide an opportunity for the quiet individuals to state their mind with minimal embarrassment, as well as provides individuals an opportunity to form their thoughts and opinions prior to expressing them.
The downfall in the course discussions does not usually come from the instructors; who tend to ‘devise question or specific tasks’. The short comments – ‘Me too’ and ‘Good point’ – tend to be focused on lengthy responses in which individuals write a well-formed response to the professors question that leaves little room for others to discuss. The short comments come from the student’s unwillingness to rewrite what another individual had stated so succinctly. In thus, I feel that in order to have a formally developed discussion board it would be in the best interest of the instructor to focus on questions that have numerous ‘correct’ answers, ensuring the over-lap in answers are kept at a minimum.
The only question I had when reading through this is: how do you get individuals that are not truly interested in the subject matter to become more engaged in class? There are numerous classes out there that individuals must take in undergrad that do not appeal to them; they are primarily called ‘core courses’. The information provided in the chapters assumes that the individuals in the hypothetical classes are ready and willing to learn, and the only thing they need is someone to lead them in their endeavors. It fails to mention the individuals that are going through the courses because they have to, and not because they want to.
