Cathy Burke (cathy@windses.free-online.co.uk)
Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:41:13 +0100
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 1999 10:41:13 +0100 From: Cathy Burke <cathy@windses.free-online.co.uk> Subject: Re: IFETS-DISCUSS Digest - 3 Mar 1999 to 4 Mar 1999
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.gmd.de/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to comment on the points made by David Geelan and Heather
Williams who both connect with my recent experience in the field of
collaborative on-line learning.
David said,
Assessment is a related but in some ways more difficult question. We
believe that some of our students' best learning occurs in discussion,
and have found that students are very good at 'playing the university
game': they will value most and work hardest on what we assess, because
they believe - quite justifiably - that this is what we value most. So
we're moving toward an approach that includes a greater proportion of
the grade coming from on-line assessment.
Assessment is, I think a key issue in this area of discussion. Boud,
1988, suggests that 'assessment methods and requirements probably have a
greater influence on how and what students learn than any other single
factor'
The modular structure preferred by many H.E. programmes these days is
arguably encouraging of a narrowing of the learning experience.Students
can succeed in spite of focussing on a relatively small aspect of the
whole for assignment purposes. One of the intentions of my research has
been to assess how far on-line discussion can enable a more total
involvement with the course content.
I agree with David that students will play the game - and can and do
get away with focussing on their assignments to the extent of 'switching
off' from other aspects of the course. This will depend on the module
area to some extent, but as an historian, I have seen this happen
frequently.
But why does acknowledging this suggest a move towards including 'a
greater proportion of the grade coming from on-line assessment '? Is
this to enhance learning, or to promote the use of technology in
learning - not necessarily the same thing!
I, like Heather Williams, have recently carried out an action research
project - this time, with undergraduate Child & Family Studies students
in their second year at Bretton Hall College, University of Leeds. Here,
one of my objectives in grafting on an element of on-line working within
a traditional modular taught course, was to see to what extent this had
the effect of encouraging more total engagement with the whole content.
I would argue, having utilised student evaluation of the experience and
from my own observations, that the collaborative group discussion
on-line did facilitate a wider engagement - because in order to
understand what each of the participants was talking about, from the
point of view of their own chosen focus within the course, the others in
the group had to find the appropriate point in the associated web pages
and read around the issue, in order to be able to comment and support
their fellow learner. I have argued that this is condusive to a
deepening of the learning process.
Web pages http://panizzi.shef.ac.uk/med/cathy/intro.html
Cathy.
--Catherine Burke 7 The Windses Grindleford Hope Valley S 32 2HY Tel: 01433 631907
Dr. Catherine Burke Lecturer in Education: Child & Family Studies, Bretton Hall College West Bretton WF4 4LG 01924 830261
--------------------------------------------------------- Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/ Forum's contact person: kinshuk@ieee.org Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html ---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri 05 Mar 1999 - 11:41:35 MET