Online Collaborative Learning

Abstract

Learning online for over twenty years, and having completed over two degrees, the online learning experiences were subjected to exposure to several universities' online teaching styles. Including discussion-based and collaborative learning, non-collaborative and mentored learning, and mentored learning only, each has provided positive and negative learning challenges. Although over one-third of university programs are now online, and universities have reacted to employers' calls for graduates who are collaboratively trained, not all online universities and online students have adapted successsfully to the online teaching-learning environment. How instructors' mentoring styles affect collaborative learning with their students, how universities design collaborative learning curriculums using online tools, and how online students' motivation to accept responsibility for learning in a collaborative setting are all challenges to successfully learning collaboratively.

Collaborative Activities

Identification of some of the issues affecting successful collaborative online teaching and learning activities, and investigating the potential solutions to those issues promotes the first step in assuring successful collaborative teaching and learning. Depending upon one's online teaching and learning experiences at various universities, the issues affecting good collaboration can vary. Regardless of those experiences, there are challenges facing instructors, universities, and students from the perspectives of (1) the instructors' mentoring styles, (2) the universities' curriculum design using online collaborative tools, and (3) online students' motivations to accept responsibility for learning in an online setting that can be identified, investigated, and proposed.

Diverse Affectors of Instructors' Mentoring Styles

Instructors' mentoring styles can affect successful collaborative teaching and learning experiences for their students. The Illinois Online Network (2011) reported that the goal of mentoring is to "promote learner development drawing out and giving form to what the student already knows…(serving) as a guide rather than a provider of knowledge and…introducing students to the new world, interpreting it for them, and helping them to learn what they need to know to function in it" (para 14). However, achieving such a goal is negatively impacted by such problems as a "lack of time to plan and deliver an on-line course; lack of support and assistance; burden of training time to learn and update technology skills; (and) inadequate compensation and incentives" (Dennis et al., 2007, p. 42).

The lack of time to plan and deliver an on-line course is a serious prohibitor when a university requires such work from an instructor. Although the time invested in planning an online course occurs before the start of a course, delivering an online course requires a constant delivery mode if the course is to be successful in achieving learning outcomes (Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke, 2009). Even if the university has created a course independent from the mentor's input, the mentor is responsible for ensuring its delivery.

The lack of support and assistance from an instructor's employer not only increases the amount of time the committed instructor must invest in planning and delivering an online course, it can also break the instructor's flow or rhythm when mentoring. For example, the lack of support can originate from a university's administration who is prone to not listen to the instructor's advice (whether the university created the course or not), and does not provide the tools that the course requires. Clearly, a paradox exists when an instructor is given a course's objectives to carry out but the university inconsistently provides support.

Online teachers new to e-learning must be able to adapt to teaching paradigms that require "greater initiative, tenacity, and self-discipline" (Dennis, Bunkowski, & Eskey, 2007, p. 37). The burden of training time to learn and update to new paradigms and technology skills as well as other new skills and behaviors to interactively communicate with students (Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke, 2009) seriously impedes an instructor's ability to invest time in collaborating with students. Every university has its particular culture, which includes the teaching software platform. Assuming that an instructor has prior experience with a university's platform, and not providing adequate time to use a teaching platform prior to the course's initiation can significantly prohibit an instructor's ability to use that platform successfully. Furthermore, when a university does not adequately orient an instructor about its teaching mission, an instructor cannot be using the time element to its best advantage.

Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke (2009) reported that an inadequate or uncompetitive amount of compensation and incentives can seriously impede an instructor's commitment to teaching and mentoring. Instructors need motivators as much if not more than students. For example, instructors invest a very significant amount of time and money in becoming an instructor as do students invest in learning. When an instructor's quality of living, which is impacted by salary, pension, health insurance and other incentives, is negatively affected, their willingness to devote time and talent to collaborating with students online is not going to be fulfilling to anyone.

Solutions for Improving Instructors' Mentoring Syles

The potential solutions for improving instructors' mentoring styles for affecting successful collaborative learning experiences for their students can include that the mentor initiates frequent communications between the mentor and student. For example, the mentor can initiate the use of weekly or even daily journals, which can be passed between the mentor and student via the learning portal's or personal e-mailing systems. Such a constant dialogue affects the development of a positive relationship between the mentor and student, and enables the mentor to take advantage of a constant dialogue for issuing feedback, and answering a student's questions, concerns, and issues (Illinois Online Network, 2011, para 15).

"Mentors in education teach by interpreting the environment and modeling expected behaviors, (and) support, challenge, and provide vision for their students" (Illinois Online Network, 2011, para 15). As noted above, the lack of time to plan and deliver an on-line course, the lack of support and assistance by the employer, the burden of increased training time to learn and update technology skills, and an inadequate level of compensation and incentives (Dennis et al., 2007) all impede the instructor's ability to support such modeling. To address and solve such issues in order for collaborative learning to be supported, instructors should carefully negotiate matters in writing with their employer that adequately supports the university's mission: provide adequate training to instructors that is specific to the university's culture and technology prior to the course's initiation, provide ongoing and obvious support to the instructor, collaborate with the instructor to gain professional insight into the course's development and delivery, and continually provide not only competitive compensation and incentives but additional perks that promote an instructor's commitment to the university.

Mentors can also support collaborative learning by using motivational tools to instruct. For example, Dennis, Bunkowski, & Eskey (2007) developed "Nine Events of Instruction" (p. 48) to offer guidelines to online instructors for motivating collaborative learning. Instructors must ensure that students' learning styles, which are addressed in the next section, are paramount to the delivery of the collaborative instructional events shown in the chart above. Generically-used motivators must never dominate an instructor's teaching style. Rather, customizing instructional motivators according to each student's learning style must take precedence. In addition to the points noted in the chart above, Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke (2009) found that after reinstituting a policy of grading group projects, motivation increased for students in the smaller study groups but did not increase for the larger study groups. Therefore, instructors should set group size at three to four members.

Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke (2009) identified several strategies for instructors to use to inform online learners about improving their learning outcomes. The strategies focus upon (1) the significance of collaborating, and (2) improving motivational techniques. The strategies are: enabling instructions and expectations to be transparent; using ice breakers, seeding, and providing expectations to the students about participation, etiquette, behavior guidelines, interaction standards, available tools, and techniques to use the tools; conducting exercises to aid learners in using online tools for retrieving, evaluating, and applying research, detailing of the requirements to participate in a study group in the course syllabus; encouraging participation in the study groups; being open and clear when explaining the purpose and process of online study groups; providing succinct project details in order for students' invested time to center on sharing ideas and workload rather than clarifying and understanding the task at hand; ensuring that the project's themes offer an opportunity for meaning-making and relevance in order for students to apply learning to a real life situation; and enabling exchange and
peer review of the completed group projects to foster an opportunity for enhancing learning. (para 36)

Diverse Affectors of Universities' Online Collaborative Tools Design

Universities' designs of collaborative learning curriculums using online tools is a challenge to successfully delivering collaborative learning. The Illinois Online Network (2011) reported that online instruction can be effective if learning experiences are appropriately designed and facilitated. Furthermore, universities acknowledging that learners use one or a multiple number of learning styles must design learning activities addressing those modes of learning. Each student's learning style(s) should be aligned with collaborative activities, which supports the university's technology that is used for teaching. "Hallmarks of metacognition include a heightened awareness of one's thinking, selection of processing strategies from a repertoire, reflection and readjustment, and sustained motivation to achieve" (Dennis, Bunkowski, & Eskey, 2007, p. 39). Instructors must be cognizant of whether learners exhibit such hallmarks or not, and if they do, address them.

Universities' sourcing of online collaborative course designers must be tied sufficiently to text and online teaching and learning suppliers. Sourcing should be tied to suppliers who are innovative, up-to-date, committed, and who can provide full support. Although governmental entities can affect a public university's ability to freely choose its suppliers, significant strides must be taken to retain sources for teaching software that has been proven to integrate best online teaching practices.

While investigating and retaining designers and suppliers, a university's information technology team and administration should work jointly to integrate the purchased e-tools into the university's software and hardware components. Retaining and integrating e-tools without budgetary approval, and commitment to long-term investing, will not result in a satisfactory e-learning platform for instructors or students, and will significantly impact the university's bottom-line when retention of good instructors and students declines.

Solutions for Improving Universities' Online Collaborative Tools Design

The potential solutions for improving Universities' designs of collaborative learning curriculums using online tools can include pre-assessments before each course's initiation of students' technology skills, learning styles, and collaborative abilities. Designing and reviewing the pre-assessments should be jointly shared by the instructor, administration, the university's information technology team, and the supplier. Course design should introduce and integrate e-tools that are more suitable to collaborative learning such as "wikis, social bookmarking, RSS, and Skype" (Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke, 2009, para. 42). Furthermore, the sourcing of course designers, text and online teaching suppliers should be mandated by the same group. A university's inhouse technology support team should demonstrate via quality reporting that the university's e-learning objectives are being met.

Bhati, Mercer, & Rankin (2010) reported that since e-learning tools have progressed from stand-alone to packaged sets of e-tools to address the request to positively affect improved collaborative learning, universities are impacted by instructors' hesitation to adopt to new technologies. The learning institution must clearly communicate to their instructors that teaching includes learning and using multiple technologies for collaboratively teaching such as "Second Life, Blackboard Vista, Moodle, MS Messenger, Hot Potatoes" (p. 7), and so forth. Hence, universities must provide to instructors the time and resources required to use them.

Diverse Affectors of Online Students' Motivations for Learning Collaboratively

Online students' motivations to accept responsibility for learning in a collaborative setting is a challenge to successfully learning collaboratively. Dennis, Bunkowski, & Eskey (2007) recognized that students need greater "initiative, tenacity, and self-discipline…to take courses in the online environment" (p. 37). In addition, students seeking learning flexibility in online classes often perceive group projects as barriers to learning. Rather than embracing collaborative learning, many students barely tolerate it (Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke, 2009). Brindley (et al., 2009) also reported that negative motivators to collaborative learning occurs when learners are not allowed to have personal control of tasks' content, process, intentions, goal setting, consequences, and outcomes. Allowing personal control of such elements, which has been shown to solidify students' engagement, a sense of responsibility, and heightens task relevance, should be addressed by the instructor and university. In addition, instructors must recognize that learners' disengaging in online discussions need to be motivated, and that a weak social infrastructure may need additional development (Deng and Yuen, 2007).

Solutions for Improving Online Students' Motivations for Learning Collaboratively

The potential solutions for improving online students' motivations to accept responsibility for learning in a collaborative setting can include instructors building a framework to scaffold learners using increasingly more complex interaction skills, which provides e-learning that focuses upon: communication with other learners, collaboration wherein learners share ideas and resources, cooperation between learners, and a community that seeks a common purpose (Brindley, Walti, & Blaschke, 2009). Such a framework provides support of students needing greater "initiative, tenacity, and self-discipline" (Dennis, Bunkowski, & Eskey, 2007, p. 37), who are seeking learning flexibility but believe that collaborative learning is a barrier to learning. The framework also provides students with a personal control of their own learning, and provides instructors with an ability to recognize and address students who are disengaging.

Conclusion

Identifying some of the issues affecting successful collaborative online teaching and learning activities, and investigating the potential solutions to those issues promotes the first step in assuring successful collaborative teaching and learning. The challenges facing instructors, universities, and students from the perspectives of (1) the instructors' mentoring styles, (2) the universities' curriculum design using online collaborative tools, and (3) online students' motivations to accept responsibility for learning in a collaborative setting were identified, investigated, and proposed. Whether there is a desire and an acceptance by instructors, universities, and students to accept and implement the potential solutions identified for improving collaborative learning, which originated from this writer's experiences, is yet to be realized.

References:

Bhati, N., Mercer, S., & Rankin, K. (2010, March). Barriers and facilitators to the adoption of tools for online pedagogy. International Journal of Pedagogies & Learning, 5(3), 5-19. Retrieved from EBSCOHost.

Brindley, J.E., Walti, C., & Blaschke, L.M. (2009). Creating effective collaborative
learning groups in an online environment. Retrieved from http://www.irrodl.org/
index.php/irrodl/article/view/675/1271

Deng, L., & Yuen, A. (2007, November). Connecting adult learners with an online
community: Challenges and opportunities. Research & Practice in Technology
Enhanced Learning, 2(3), 195 - 212. Retrieved from EBSCOHost Education Research
Complete.

Dennis, K., Bunkowski, L., & Eskey, M. (2007). The little engine that could -- how to start the motor? Motivating the online student. InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching, 2, 37 – 49. Retrieved from EBSCOHost Education Research Complete.

Illinois Online Network. (2011). Instructional strategies for online courses. Retrieved from http://www.ion.uillinois.edu/resources/tutorials/pedagogy/
instructionalstrategies.asp