0.4 Discussion  (Page 12/23)

Laura was ambivalent about whether she should assign the students to watch the videos or simply recommend it, because two students were not able to access them with their dial-up connections. However, she recommended but did not require that they watch them, and they later discussed the videos in class.

Miller assigned the students to watch the videos from the website outside of class. Additionally, she showed some videos in class from the departmental library to help explain a particular theory. Showing videos in class had always been problematic for Miller, because there was never enough time to show them in their entirety. This caused her to skip around in the video, trying to show highlights. She was unhappy that the students never had the opportunity to watch a whole session with a practitioner and client. By having the videos on the web, Miller had hoped the students would be able to take their time to watch them and see it being performed. It is ironic that the most desirable technology feature of Online Day failed to perform as expected for most of the classes.

Discussion board

Only three of the instructors, Ken, Ed and Miller, used the discussion board feature, the most complex pedagogical tool in Online Day. Discussion boards offer an environment in which each student can have a say and the students can get to know one another through their writings ( An&Kim, 2006; Durrington, et al., 2006; Lewis&Abdul-Hamid, 2006; Moore, 1989 ). Because student contribution to discussion is required, many more participate than in face-to-face class discussions. Because the online messages are saved in the discussion board software, students’ postings remain visible for the entire semester. “The permanency of this electronic text, however brief, and ability to comment on or revisit it are motivating aspects of online learning” ( Bonk&Cunningham, 2003 ).

The instructors in this study faced some challenges in how to engage the students in online discussions. One challenge was to create provocative discussion topics that would stimulate the students’ thinking. Although reflective topics for each chapter were included in the e-textbook, Miller chose to create her own discussion topics. Ed and Ken relied on the reflections and case studies provided for discussions. Another challenge was how to encourage students to respond to one another, instead of addressing the instructor in their postings. The third challenge was deciding what degree the instructor should participate in the discussion, and finally, how to assess student participation.

Ken and Ed reported free-flowing discussions online, where students felt free to challenge and disagree with one another over time. They each hoped the online discussions would result in students learning from each other. The medium provided the opportunity for the students to read all the class essays and see where their work fit into the body of work of their colleagues. Ken felt that through reading each other’s papers, the students seemed to discover new ideas that they had not thought about before. Although the students were using the same resources, seeing what others chose to focus on broadened their understanding of the topic.