Field+Study+Fall+2009

Using a Sharepoint Discussion Board with Differentiated Learners: Discussing Current Events in an Asynchronous Learning Environment
 * __

Field Study Summary __** December 2009 Susan Nishimura For my field study this past term, I implemented the use of discussion boards in my class so that students could discuss current events online. I have always wanted to have a forum for discussion of world events and I thought this would be the perfect way to do it. I also wanted to provide students, with differentiated learning needs, a medium that would be familiar, easy to access and user friendly. Specifically, the online discussion boards allowed those who needed extra time the opportunity to respond at their own speed. In some cases they responded to the current events at home rather than at school. Discussions that occurred online as opposed to face to face were especially good for students with anxiety issues. Those who were low or reluctant readers could focus on cues such as article headings and question prompts rather than sifting through newspapers to find an appropriate article. Finally, those students with written output concerns had fewer written language conventions to contend with. The process for my field study was as follows: 1.) Introduction of current events and formal face to face sharing 2.) Introduction of my SharePoint site and discussion boards 3.) Gaining access to the discussion board and posting a comment 4.) Finding an online article, linking it and asking a question for others to respond to  5.) Monitoring the discussion board  During the beginning part of the term, my aim was for the class to build community and rapport with one another. I also needed to teach them how to find an appropriate news article and share it with the class before they could attempt to do this online. These two criteria were essential to the success of my field study. Therefore, I spent the better part of September essentially setting up the field study.   I also hit a few road blocks along the way, which set my timeline back. For instance, the main breaker for the computer lab blew twice while my class was working on the computers. Then we were able to access the site but could not respond to one another on the discussion board. Lastly, there were several students who could neither access my SharePoint site from home nor school for weeks. When I finally got all the glitches ironed out, it was already mid-October. The students then spent the rest of October and the better part of November sharing news articles and responding to them on the discussion board. They did this by finding a current event online and linking it to the SharePoint site. The linking was a tricky thing for them, but through the use of Jing, I put together a learning object to assist to this end. After the article was linked, students then wrote a question pertaining to the article that they wanted their classmates to respond to. As the students got the gist of responding to one another, several interesting issues arose. Specifically, students began to mistakenly associate the discussion board as other forms of social networking tools such as MSN, Facebook, and Twitter etc. The responses I was getting to my questions were cryptic at best and verging on cyber bullying at worst. Through my monitoring of the discussions I realized that I needed to intervene and slightly change the set up of discussion. Thus, I divided the class into three groups and had students respond to two news articles within their small group during each 45 minute computer lab block. I also gave the students more responsibility to monitor themselves and those responding to their discussion question. Finally, I added another level of accountability in that I let them know they would be assessed on their contributions. As it stands right now, approximately half the class have posted a news article and question. The discussions have become more meaningful and individuals are monitoring themselves and those within their group. As I progressed with my research, I relied upon three academic articles and a blog site from the University of Nevada Online Learning WebCT to help make sense of my findings. The article that Stephen Whiffen shared with us during our Summer Institute was a great starting point for my studies. The key elements of this article that I applied to my field study were that online community and “presence” of an instructor are paramount to the success of discussion boards. Through feedback and comments on students’ posts, I was able to make myself “visible” and model appropriate online discussion. I also liked the emphasis on smaller group size to allow for more meaningful discussion among students. “The smaller group size allows for more interaction and the rotation allows students to still interact with all their classmates.” (Vesely et al p. 7) This belief was also echoed in two other articles that I chose. For example, the University of Nevada website suggests that “for large classes, divide students into "teams" with the stipulation that students post and respond to only the topic areas for their team.” (2003) Alley and Greenhaus (2007) also state that “o ne method of online role-playing includes dividing the students enrolled in a literature or social studies class into separate groups, giving each group a specific topic or situation to consider.” After this, students take turns monitoring the groups for appropriate discussion and to eliminate the “lurkers” – those that read but do not respond. Initially I had the whole class responding at the same time to one discussion board question. This worked well for a few sessions. Then, the discussion simply went around in circles and got off topic. I went back to my original proposal and divided the class up into three groups of nine students. Students responded only to the articles posted by those within their small group. This kept them focused and less likely to stray off topic. As the term progressed, I also became much more specific about how often to post and what the post needed to look like through a set of criteria. Other methodologies that I adopted from the researchers I investigated were to begin the discussion boards with a non-threatening “hook.” (Alley and Greenhaus) I asked the students a simple question about ice-cream to get the initial discussion started. Next, I modelled appropriate discussion questions and responses. (U. Of Nevada) Finally, I made my voice known, but did not dominate discussion by any means. An et al (2009) claim that “...the instructor should provide flexibility, and actively participate when initiating online discussions, until students are capable of taking the responsibility to sustain them on their own.” (p. 4) The data that I analyzed for the study came from my personal journaling, students’ discussions from my SharePoint website, students’ critical reflections and surveys. As I stated in my proposal, I had the students complete a survey at the start and then again at the conclusion of my field study. I used Survey Monkey the first time and then the SharePoint Survey the second time. I liked both formats, but I found the results of the final survey most helpful. This is in part due to the fact that I neglected to provide space for the open ended questions the first time and thus students ended up only responding to three questions. I also like the questions I chose for the concluding survey better than the initial. The surveys encapsulate a wealth of information and answered some of my initial sub-questions for the field study. It was interesting to note that 58% of the students surveyed had never used discussion boards at the start of the field study. Yesterday, I asked about their satisfaction with discussing current events on discussion boards and 74% enjoyed or really enjoyed it. The remainder, 26%, felt it was okay. With respect to addressing the specific needs of differentiated learners, the survey results indicate that 99% of students prefer to write on the computer as opposed to on paper because it’s “easier and faster.” Students also commented on the fact that they preferred to present online rather than to the class because they didn’t like getting up in front of their peers; primarily, it made them nervous. Finally, two or three students mentioned that they liked the fact that they could go onto SharePoint at home and take their time to read and respond to people’s comments. One of the key pieces of information from the students’ critical reflections are their comments with regards to monitoring their group`s responses. Of those students who posted a question, the majority stated that they monitored it. Some of the reasons they gave were “I wanted to see what people thought of my current event” and “I kept on checking because people weren`t responding.” My initial thoughts were that the students weren`t monitoring their questions because I rarely saw any responses by the monitor. Now I realize that they were simply reading and not responding – //lurking.// Although I had many ups and downs with my field study, my journaling reflects the satisfaction I felt when the students were finally able to access the discussion board and post their comments. I also recall that there was never a time that I had to encourage students to respond online. It was the opposite situation. When our computer time gotten taken away for whatever reason, the students got quite upset. The key pieces of learning in response to my field study inquiry are that my class on the whole really enjoys using discussion boards to communicate about current events. Furthermore, not only do the students with special needs benefit from this forum for discussion, but the whole class does. I`ve realized though that certain parameters have to be placed on the SharePoint site in order that students feel safe and willing to participate. This is not unlike the classroom situation in which we have to establish rules for behaviour. Furthermore, smaller groups are easier to manage and monitor. I will continue to be a visible presence online, in order to model appropriate responses and continue to develop the sense of shared online community. A couple of disappointments need to be noted and further analyzed before I can propose my next field study. They include the lack of legitimate peripheral participation by the class as a whole and the lack of contributions by my targeted differentiated learners. Both of these are significant to the results of my field study. For me, legitimate peripheral participation means that students reflect upon their discussion board responses in a serious and meaningful way. They look back at previous current event articles and find times in which they`ve responded. Then they take some time to comment on whether or not they fully answered the question, how their response changed those that came after it etc. Because of time constraints, the students did not get a chance to do this part of the study (Step 4 in the proposal). I would still like to have them do it in the future, because I think it will cause them to really analyze what they`ve been writing and hopefully become more thoughtful in the future. The last comment I will make is in regards to the logistics of my timetable. Ironically, the students I wanted to service most in my field study were often times being serviced in the resource room. They were receiving assistance with Language Arts or Math concepts when the rest of the class was in the computer lab. In the future, I will endeavour to try and coordinate my schedule with the student services teacher so that my differentiated learners can truly feel a sense of belonging, both offline and online. 1. Vesely, Pam, Bloom, Lisa and Sherlock, John. “Key Elements of Building Online Community: Comparing Faculty and Student Perceptions” in __MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching__. V. 3, n. 3, Sept 2007 9 pp.  2. An, Heejung, Shin, Sunghee, Lim, Keol; “The Effects of Different Instructor Facilitation Approaches on students’ Interactions During Asynchronous Online Discussions” in Computers and Education. V. 53, Issue 3, Nov. 2009. 11pp.  3. Alley, Jason, Greenhaus, Karen. “Turning Lurkers into Learners: Increasing Participation in Your Online Discussions” in Learning and Leading with Technology. August 2007  4. “Discussions: Best Practices Tips and Tricks” on University of Nevada Online Learning Webct site. http://teaching.unr.edu/OTL/webct/facres/discussions/dis_tips.html Last updated August 2003
 * __ Implementing the Plan __**
 * __ Reading and Responding to Literature __**
 * __ Analyzing the Data __**
 * __ Reflecting on the Discoveries __**
 * __ Citations __**