Assyntk's List: DCL_course

New technologies provide the opportunity for teachers to make learning interactive and collaborative by using a social constructivist approach to teaching and learning. This involves creating a student-centred approach where the teacher takes the role of the facilitator and the students engage in peer learning. This paper reflects on the author's role as a facilitator in a higher education online unit that was designed for science and mathematics teachers who were geographically and socially isolated. The goal in designing the unit was to create a networked community of learners that encouraged peer learning and focused on reflective thinking. Qualitative data from students' and teacher's postings to the Activity Room were analysed to identify the diverse roles of the online instructor in creating an online learning community. The 'four hats' metaphor of pedagogical, social, managerial and technical actions was used as a framework to discuss the activities of the instructor and to examine the extent to which she was able to establish and maintain a community of learners. This framework also served as a tool to analyse the pedagogies used by the instructor to promote peer-learning and reflective thinking.

Some scholars argue that students do not achieve higher level learning, or cognitive presence, in online courses. Online discussion has been proposed to bridge this gap between online and face-to-face learning environments. However, the literature indicates that the conventional approach to online discussion – asking probing questions – does not necessarily advance the discussion through the phases of cognitive presence: triggering events, exploration, integration and resolution, which are crucial for deep knowledge construction. Using mixed methods, we examined the contribution of four scenario-based online discussion strategies – structured, scaffolded, debate and role play – to the learners' cognitive presence, the outcome of the discussion. Learners' discussion postings within each strategy were segmented and categorized according to the four phases. The discussion strategies, each using the same authentic scenario, were then compared in terms of the number of segments representing these phases. We found that the structured strategy, while highly associated with triggering events, produced no discussion pertaining to the resolution phase. The scaffolded strategy, on the other hand, showed a strong association with the resolution phase. The debate and role-play strategies were highly associated with exploration and integration phases. We concluded that discussion strategies requiring learners to take a perspective in an authentic scenario facilitate cognitive presence, and thus critical thinking and higher levels of learning. We suggest a heuristic for sequencing a series of discussion forums and recommend areas for further related research.

This chapter shows how the interpersonal action-learning cycle (IALC) can be used to invite thinking,
attentive comprehension from learners in conversation. It explains what the IALC is, where it comes from,
how it works, and why. In particular, it offers a logical demonstration that all interpersonal learning
takes place within the IALC, and that all competition for dominance lies outside it—suggesting conscious
use of the IALC as a desirable practice. The chapter goes on to explore linguistic factors that routinely
disrupt use of the IALC, and that can hide its very existence. Strategies for restoring and stabilizing it are
offered. Routine use of the IALC can have profound implications for teaching and instruction, collaborative learning, assessment, course evaluation, and professional development. These are explored

Managing commercial forums. Tips for creating good atmosphere.

The challenge addressed in this article is how to achieve a win-win balance between 
quality and workload for students and instructors participating in asynchronous online 
discussions. A Discussion Guideline document including minimum requirements and best 
practices was developed to address this need. The approach covers three phases: 
design and development, setting up expectations, and launch and management. The 
goals of the approach, based on a commitment shared by all full time and adjunct faculty, 
are high quality of education as well  as retention of both students and qualified 
instructors