Reflection - General 2

Now is the time to monitor students’ collaboration in computer-mediated collaborative problem-solving. How do functions such as tracking, motivation and emotional state play out in this situation? To analyze the effects of these factors, Zumbach, Reimann and Koch (2006) concluded from two empirical researches that feedback is advantageous on processes of group well-being, parameters of participation, collaboration, and interaction. Combining feedback approach for monitoring and fostering collaborative behavior with a design-based approach using distributed learning in the second study, the authors suggest that by distributing learning materials, collaborative behavior can be positively influenced. There was no significant effect on cognitive outcomes in both studies.

Online collaboration is important to keep focus and engage in meaningful discourse. Therefore, it is important that, facilitators provide guidelines and ask specific questions to elicit responses on particular topics. How often do we see learners drift off the main topic and drag the process endlessly, without making any meaningful contributions? According to Beaubin (1999), person-to-person interaction plays an important role in e-learning. The learner-learner interactions and team processes including team task, team development, peer relationships and communication media as regards the dynamics of online collaboration is expertly articulated by Zhang and Ge (2006). The dynamics of this learning environment is complex, involving intensive task definition, engagement, exploratory activities as well as identification of other relevant factors to move the process. However, constraints that may impact negatively on the process must be identified and addressed.

Inter-subjectivity defined simply as shared understanding that helps (facilitators) to relate one situation to another is a topic discussed by Bober and Dennen (2001). These authors focus on technological means to foster inter-subjectivity in knowledge construction graduate level courses and programs in online environment. I am most fascinated by Gilbert and Dabbagah (2005) on how to structure online discussion for meaningful discourse. This is one of my favorite articles. It is authentic and practical. They define meaningful discourse as the ability of learners to demonstrate critical thinking skills by relating course content to prior knowledge, interpreting content through the analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of others understanding, and making inferences. Relating this definition to the FIT project, I found the learners to be only engaged in relating the contents to their experiences. However, what was lacking was the critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. The process was too superficial with no deeper insight.

Tsu and Gory (2003) discuss asynchronous communication strategies in designs and management tactics. Methods suggested include discussion, case study, role plays, debates read and respond, and publishing. These are relevant learning methods, and through careful planning and management, will possibly contribute to improvement in the learning and facilitation processes. I will agree that online discussion is not only about posting and responding to questions and queries. Learners must be actively engaged in problem-solving through critical thinking, analysis and synthesis of the problem.

JAL