Subject: [IFETS-DISCUSSION:918] Fear and Learning in Distance Education
From: adamson (adamson@mail.sp.myu.ac.jp)
Date: Wed 17 Jan 2001 - 04:52:06 MET
From: "adamson" <adamson@mail.sp.myu.ac.jp> Subject: [IFETS-DISCUSSION:918] Fear and Learning in Distance Education Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2001 12:52:06 +0900
This is a modified version (an additional paragraph at the end) of my
previous message. Somehow the unfinished version slipped out of my computer
while I was working on it and before I attached my signature block. My
appologies for any inconvenience this caused.
Muhammad Betz wrote:
> If the on-line instructor distributes rules for discourse at the outset
> of the course, the need for censure should be reduced, which in turn could
> reduce student fear and/or intimidation and lead to the sustaining of
> student participation throughout the course. End result: more learning.
>
Isn't the situation a little more complicated than a simple "more
participation equals more learning"? Many students learn many things better
by observing or listening rather than discussing. Instead of a blanket
statement that more participation means more learning, I think that we need
to consider both the content of the course and the goals. For example,
consider a course in computer programming. Some students will benefit from
discussions, but others, the majority in my experience, will not find this
to be an efficient way of learning. They will benefit most from reading (or
listening to lectures) and then doing it themselves. The only discussion
necessary would be an occasional question. On the other hand, a course
where the teacher does not have all the answers, a literature appreciation
course, for example, would require a large amount of interaction between
students as they explored various ideas. Thus, we seem to have a continuum
with one extreme requiring participation for more learning, but at the other
extreme no participation at all.
My field is language learning. Here interaction 'about' the language
produces few if any results. However, using the language is important. This
could be through interaction with other students and/or the teacher, or it
could be through using the language along (writing, for example). Thus,
usage rather than participation in discussions is important.
An example of how class goals effect this question would be the case of
language classes: one directed toward increasing vocabulary and the other in
fluency. The first class would require no participation at all, while the
second would almost totally depend on participation.
I am not arguing against participation or efforts to increase it. I am only
saying that we should be sure that it is necessary before trying to increase
it. It could be possible that decreasing student participation is simply an
indication that the students are changing to a more effective teaching.
The same type argument can be made about fear. Some kinds of learning can be
enhanced by fear, but not the kind that is usually found in on-line course.
Fear, for example, does wonders in basic training when the military is
making soldiers out of civilians.
Charles Adamson, Ph.D.
Professor, Faculty of Nursing
Miyagi University
1 Gakuen, Taiwa-cho, Kurokawa-gun
Miyagi-ken 981-3298, Japan
---------------------------------------------------------
List address to send message to everyone:
ifets-discussion@catfish.valdosta.edu
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.ieee.org/discussions/discuss.html
Forum website: http://ifets.ieee.org/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@massey.ac.nz
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.ieee.org/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a24 : Wed 17 Jan 2001 - 10:30:29 MET