Links
Archives
This site exists as a repository for my evolving thoughts and quotations about transactional distance in online learning.
Friday, December 10, 2004
Mentorship - Martinez and Wolf. 2003.
Martinez Witte, Maria, and Sara E. Wolf. 2003. Infusing mentoring and technology within graduate courses: Reflections in practice. Mentoring & Tutoring: Partnership in Learning 11 (1):95-103.
How on teacher deals with it: Through mentorship
eg
WebCT has been the primary course material delivery mechanism for a series of three classes developed at a large southeastern university. Reflecting on this form of computer-mediated communication has provided relevancy in describing effective mentoring practices. While the courses meet regularly in a face-to-face environment, class discussions, administrative communication, student collaboration, class presentations, and other forms of content-delivery are mediated through the tools available in WebCT. On the part of the instructor, the mentoring role is similar to Mullen’s (2000) collaborative mentoring model described as ‘practitioner centered, experiential and research oriented, reflective, and empowering’ (p. 4). The instructor uses several processes to reflect on practice within the classroom. These include professional dialogue in order to identify technological problems that impact instruction as well as discussions concerning the authenticity of specific work-product assignments within a course. Also, the instructor is part of a campus community of
WebCT users. This community of adopters regularly conducts e-mail exchanges, informal conversations, and brainstorming sessions concerning the potential use of specific tools within WebCT for particular courses. However, the most important tools of reflection available to the instructor are daily personal journaling activities that document successes, failures, challenges, and solutions; and the feedback from students enrolled in the courses. Through the personal reflections of the participants within each learning experience, the instructor can identify patterns of things that work and do not work, as well as emotional factors that influence success or failure at a student level. (p99)
In a mentoring capacity, the instructor employs various interactions that include the communication tools within WebCT, structured activities in class to orient students to the interface, and keeping the specifics of certain projects flexible within the bounds of the course objectives. The instructor and students utilise electronic mail in order to communicate about class announcements, to ask questions clarifying content covered in class, or to arrange group meetings for team projects.
Students are asked to make contributions to the discussion board (an electronic bulletin board feature) by introducing themselves to the other members of the class, discussing current topics as they arise in the course of the semester, and providing feedback to their peers about work completed as part of in-class activities and discussions. For instance, the instructor frequently has students navigate to online locations containing both poor and exemplary examples of work-products similar to those being developed for class. Students are then asked to analyse them and report back to the class so that patterns of quality can be identified as well as generalisations concerning scope and format made. These interactions help to decrease the transactional distance between student and peers and between the students and the instructor, since they can be accessible regardless of time or place. Also, these practices assist in fostering interaction with the content since students must access various outside resources at times in order to evaluate and synthesise information from a variety of sources.
Student–interface was approached in a graduated manner. For the first class, elements were used within WebCT that paralleled the everyday lives of each of the students. Primarily, this included the e-mail feature, the discussion board, and the ability to access outside websites from the class site. However, as each semester progressed, new tools were added to the repertoire of the students and the instructor, thus modelling the importance of being a continuous learner, another characteristic of a good mentor.
For instance, during the first semester the instructor primarily used WebCT for document delivery (syllabus, handouts, etc.), basic administrative communication (changes in the schedule, answering group questions about assignments, etc.), personal communication with students (setting appointments, troubleshooting technical issues, etc.), and as a way to organise xternal websites for use during class instruction or discussion. During the second semester the instructor expanded the document delivery element to include providing examples of work-products the students would produce, utilised the discussion board feature to post student work from in-class activities, and encouraged the use of the chat-room feature for student collaboration on project planning activities. The third semester course (taught during the summer term) saw a continued expansion of the electronic communications tools, the use of student responses to posts on the discussion board as a part of the overall evaluation of student learning, and included the first instance of direct student input into course materials used in
the evaluation of student products (rubric design) as well as use of the online quizzing feature to evaluate student understanding of class readings. Currently, these courses have begun another cycle of instruction. For the first time, the instructor has utilised the chat-room for a virtual guest speaker experience. Also, students are being placed in the roles of facilitators of discussion postings for class readings. (100-101)
How on teacher deals with it: Through mentorship
eg
WebCT has been the primary course material delivery mechanism for a series of three classes developed at a large southeastern university. Reflecting on this form of computer-mediated communication has provided relevancy in describing effective mentoring practices. While the courses meet regularly in a face-to-face environment, class discussions, administrative communication, student collaboration, class presentations, and other forms of content-delivery are mediated through the tools available in WebCT. On the part of the instructor, the mentoring role is similar to Mullen’s (2000) collaborative mentoring model described as ‘practitioner centered, experiential and research oriented, reflective, and empowering’ (p. 4). The instructor uses several processes to reflect on practice within the classroom. These include professional dialogue in order to identify technological problems that impact instruction as well as discussions concerning the authenticity of specific work-product assignments within a course. Also, the instructor is part of a campus community of
WebCT users. This community of adopters regularly conducts e-mail exchanges, informal conversations, and brainstorming sessions concerning the potential use of specific tools within WebCT for particular courses. However, the most important tools of reflection available to the instructor are daily personal journaling activities that document successes, failures, challenges, and solutions; and the feedback from students enrolled in the courses. Through the personal reflections of the participants within each learning experience, the instructor can identify patterns of things that work and do not work, as well as emotional factors that influence success or failure at a student level. (p99)
In a mentoring capacity, the instructor employs various interactions that include the communication tools within WebCT, structured activities in class to orient students to the interface, and keeping the specifics of certain projects flexible within the bounds of the course objectives. The instructor and students utilise electronic mail in order to communicate about class announcements, to ask questions clarifying content covered in class, or to arrange group meetings for team projects.
Students are asked to make contributions to the discussion board (an electronic bulletin board feature) by introducing themselves to the other members of the class, discussing current topics as they arise in the course of the semester, and providing feedback to their peers about work completed as part of in-class activities and discussions. For instance, the instructor frequently has students navigate to online locations containing both poor and exemplary examples of work-products similar to those being developed for class. Students are then asked to analyse them and report back to the class so that patterns of quality can be identified as well as generalisations concerning scope and format made. These interactions help to decrease the transactional distance between student and peers and between the students and the instructor, since they can be accessible regardless of time or place. Also, these practices assist in fostering interaction with the content since students must access various outside resources at times in order to evaluate and synthesise information from a variety of sources.
Student–interface was approached in a graduated manner. For the first class, elements were used within WebCT that paralleled the everyday lives of each of the students. Primarily, this included the e-mail feature, the discussion board, and the ability to access outside websites from the class site. However, as each semester progressed, new tools were added to the repertoire of the students and the instructor, thus modelling the importance of being a continuous learner, another characteristic of a good mentor.
For instance, during the first semester the instructor primarily used WebCT for document delivery (syllabus, handouts, etc.), basic administrative communication (changes in the schedule, answering group questions about assignments, etc.), personal communication with students (setting appointments, troubleshooting technical issues, etc.), and as a way to organise xternal websites for use during class instruction or discussion. During the second semester the instructor expanded the document delivery element to include providing examples of work-products the students would produce, utilised the discussion board feature to post student work from in-class activities, and encouraged the use of the chat-room feature for student collaboration on project planning activities. The third semester course (taught during the summer term) saw a continued expansion of the electronic communications tools, the use of student responses to posts on the discussion board as a part of the overall evaluation of student learning, and included the first instance of direct student input into course materials used in
the evaluation of student products (rubric design) as well as use of the online quizzing feature to evaluate student understanding of class readings. Currently, these courses have begun another cycle of instruction. For the first time, the instructor has utilised the chat-room for a virtual guest speaker experience. Also, students are being placed in the roles of facilitators of discussion postings for class readings. (100-101)
