By Katie, Dean and Zach
Any problems in formatting you notice are evidence of the issues we present in collaborative tools.
Our Design Challenge: How might we get online & F2F Learning, Design, and Technology students to talk to each other?
Our Research Methods
- We set out to conduct interviews of LDT students and faculty and non-LDT people who telecommute to work (outside field).
- Students and faculty were online and face-to-face students
- Faculty were non-responsive to emails
- Non-education telecommuters were male & female, single & married, managerial & staff and representative of business, software design, banking and STEM fields
- Students and faculty were online and face-to-face students
- Interview procedure
- Semi-structured
- Goals of understanding what challenges and eases virtual participation allows, what participants preferences are, and what tools are useful or desired
- Interviews were done in various methods: in-person, email, Skype, phone call (based in needs of interviewee)
- Self-Assessment done by Zach and Dean as members of the LDT community
Summary of Research
- Collaboration- most collaboration is occurring in text format, or graphics.
- There is not yet a good tool to collaborate in a drawing format as you would on a white board. Hard for those working on design to share their drawings in a (good) collaborative way
- Tele-conferencing is happening in business in group settings in specified rooms with mics, cameras, privacy, allowing F2F and virtual collaborations synchronously
- Communication
- Students- limited to readings list in Angel often, with limited replies to blog posts to meet course minimums
- Student quote: “I also enjoy taking the RI courses and have developed relationships with students in those classes that I enjoy learning alongside. It is easier to learn alongside folks in the face to face classes due to the nature of the classes. We do more group work and have more conversations. We are able to discuss course assignments etc. before and after class easier.”
- Non-education- Instant Messenger is preferred, then video conferencing because email is asynchronous. Virtual participation also leads to “out of sight, out of mind” mentality. Those who are not there do not get promoted or utilized as readily (can be good or bad depending on how you view it.)
- Students- limited to readings list in Angel often, with limited replies to blog posts to meet course minimums
- Community Formation
- Locale barriers are self-inflicted – automatically place social barrier because of physical one
- Question: Would you like to know more students in either program? Student response: I live in South Carolina, so I feel that would be difficult. If I still lived in the State College area, of course.”
- Existing communities negate the personal need to form new ones
- Members of existing communities (education or professional) who have an existing community don’t seek out new ones.
- Question: Do you feel like part of a community? Are you learning with or alongside others? Student response: I receive daily emails that update me on Penn State life, that is all I need. When I visit, I tend to see friends from my undergrad.”
- Lack of community in new users- members are not proactive in seeking community
- “This is my first experience with a world campus course and I am really surprised with the lack of community and dialogue surrounding the readings and assignments.”
- “I do not feel like being a part of the community yet, but this is my first semester. I assume it will get better.”
- The student is assuming it will get better and is expecting something from the program that will not come.
- Do you feel like you are a part of a community?
- “No, not in my WD [World Campus] program as a student. I feel part of a Learning Designer community through my job though.”
- No, not even as a resident UP student. Since I work full-time and don’t spend much time outside of class with my classmates or in the School of Education buildings, I only really relate with my peers in class. And truly this only happens if the professor enables a collaborative assignment.
- Locale barriers are self-inflicted – automatically place social barrier because of physical one
- Solution-Oriented Comments: Some of the solutions being used in business, but not by education:
- “Family Fun Time”- synchronous meeting of online and F2F employees with chance to have chatter about non-work things (sports, TV, families, etc.)
- Microsoft Lync (being used by most telecommuters) – offers video conferencing, instant messaging, screen sharing capabilities
Current understanding of the problem
- Barriers, whether inherent or self-imposed cause for a lack of community building within courses and degree programs. We’ve conditioned students to complete minimum requirements that do not facilitate engagement.
- Online and F2F students have a lack of awareness of members the other program.
- Tools that enable collaboration are limited and exist for synchronous, text or audio-visual communication only, whereas online education tends to traditionally be asynchronous.
- The personal, social relationship building is critical to creating a good collaboration in the professional/academic realm- lack of relationship leads to a lack of investment from the student