Sunday, September 30, 2012

Unit 2, Collaborative Learning Models, ECI 517



Unit 2 Blog Post

     Unit 2 focuses on learning theories/models that are based on collaboration and communication.  In Guided Design Process (GDP), Cooperative Learning (CL), Problem Based Learning (PBL) and Situated Learning (SL) a major focus of the instruction is based on group interaction and effective communication. This is especially true for GDP, CL and PBL where most of the learning takes place within a group setting. Placing learners into a group helps team members learn from each other, take ownership of the problems they are asked to solve, and, usually, teaches the group members better communication skills. Having groups analyze and research answers for themselves, versus listening to a fact-filled lecture, develops higher order analytical, critical-thinking and problem-solving skills. These skills benefit the learners for the rest of their lives, long after the facts are forgotten. Although these models have much in common, there are also some differences to be aware of.  For example, even though Guided Design uses group work as a major component of the instruction, there is also an instructor that is involved in multiple stages of the learning process who helps guide the discussion and group dynamics. Problem Based Learning, on the other hand, relies less on instructor guidance and more on the instructor pointing the learners to the resources and tools they need to use in order to develop solutions to their assigned group problem. Cooperative Learning focuses on group processing skills.  Group members are taught to help each other because the group can only succeed if all the members succeed. Situated learning may, or may not, use group activities to promote learning, instead the focus is on the premise that learning takes place best when the problem being solved has some relevance to the learner’s life. Situated Learning places instruction in the context of “why does it matter?”

     Each of these models, when implemented correctly, can offer great benefits to learners and instructors.  Learners benefit by the higher order thinking skills that they develop, by learning to take responsibility for their own instruction and by learning to work with others in a positive manner.  These skills are critical when learners enter the work force.  Indeed, employer surveys show that “interpersonal work skills such as self-motivation, a positive work attitude, high ethical standards and the ability to work as a team player clearly dominate hiring decisions.” (Mutual Gains from Team Learning: A Guided Design Classroom Exercise. Wilson, Paul. 2004 pg.3) Instructors benefit from these models through increased learner understanding and knowledge retention.  Their students are learning more through cooperative learning than from traditional methods.  A big area of concern, though, with these collaborative models is that students accustomed to traditional methods of instruction don’t know how to work effectively in group settings. This may lead to poor group dynamics where students can’t work well with others or where there is not enough self-motivation to research the answers on one’s own initiative. Instructors using these models need to be careful that they successfully instruct the learners on group dynamics by making sure that the students assign roles to each other, take turns leading the group and use positive communication skills. When problems from negative group interactions are thwarted, the potential for learning is great.

     All the models mentioned in this unit have great potential to improve learner outcomes and have the flexibility to be used in a variety of settings.  I would like to try all of them at some point, but the model that I think would be most effective where I work is the Guided Design Process model.  Most of what I teach involves new technology and most of my learners are adults who are familiar with more traditional methods of instruction.  Since the subject matter I teach involves new concepts and products that the learners may not have a frame of reference for, Guided Design may offer a little more instructor assistance than another model such as Problem Based Learning. Using Guided Design would allow the learners to become familiar with the new product and then use the group interaction to help each other determine how to effectively use the product in the classroom. The group interaction would allow the learners to share ideas with each other that they may individually not develop on their own. We have actually used similar techniques to Guided Design for implementing products, such as document cameras, at our school.  

     A few years ago using these collaborative models would have been very challenging in a web-based environment.  Now there are many excellent tools that allow for synchronous and asynchronous interaction among group mates.  One set of tools that has become very popular in educational settings is the Google set of applications.  We recently started using Google Educational Apps at the school where I work. The price is right – free. Google hangout, where you can have a video chat with up to 10 people, works well along with a shared Google document used to record minutes. A shared Google spreadsheet can be used to create a Gant chart for setting up a timeline for the group project. Dropbox allows users to store and share files and, alternatively, Box does the same thing without having to download and install software on your computer. A Lino It bulletin board allows group members to share sticky notes with each other so that they don’t have to constantly send a slew of e-mails out to everyone.  Audacity can be used to record audio portions of group discussions.  The list is very long with new products being developed almost daily.

10 comments:

  1. Great blog post Marion. Sounds like you already have a pretty good grasp on the elements of guided design at your school. I think google has a lot of potential to make a big impact. As a teacher and trainer, free is my friend. Only if google could make an LMS like Moodle or Sakai! The ease of use and learning curve for google products such as google+ apps is very low and low is good. Perhaps a google LMS may be in the works, who knows.

    In our next Module, I am hoping to take the PBL approach in attempt to make a group based activity simulating realistic scenarios.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I haven't used OpenClass, but it might be worth checking out. It's a free LMS that integrates with google. I've heard mixed reviews.

      http://www.openclass.com/open/home/index

      Delete
    2. I'll have to look into OpenClass - it sounds intriguing.
      Marion

      Delete
  2. Hi Marion,
    I like hearing your thoughts on participants working at the employee level, rather than student level. Do you think that the inherent motivation differs from student to employee (or adult) participants? Or does it depend on the individual, the task, and the instructor? As you mentioned the instructor really does need to set the tone and instruct clearly.

    Do you have any best practices to help your participants who end up in a group with a negative dynamic? This has always been difficult for me, because usually the situation is more complicated than it would appear. I would love to hear any thoughts you have on this!


    Thank you!
    Amanda C.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Amanda,
      Those are great questions! I'm not sure that the inherent motivation of students and adults differs that greatly. Both groups want to be involved in something that they see adds value for the work required. It is up to the instructor to show them that value, as much as possible.

      Negative group dynamics are frustrating because they lead to so much unproductivity, not to mention the potential for bruised feelings. I'm not sure I have any best practices for negative group dynamics because ee are in a somewhat unusual position in that our technology initiatives are all voluntary, thus the adults we are working with are very motivated to learn the skills and applications required to successfully use the products. We don’t have the resources to put Ipads, mouse mischief set ups, kindles, etc. in every classroom. Thus, if teachers request a piece of technology they first have to fill out a technology initiative form that asks them what they want to use the equipment for, what the learning objectives are and what the potential outcomes are. This way the teachers have already thought through what they want to accomplish and are more excited about learning the skills. We very often work with an entire grade at a time, which usually consists of three teachers (because they may end up sharing a piece of equipment). These teachers are already used to working together and if there are difficulties they can be referred to their principal. The bottom line, though, is that there seems to be less negative group dynamics if the participants are really motivated to learn. What we have also discovered is that, as these teachers are using the various technology tools with success, the other teachers (who may have originally been nay-sayers) are seeing the positive results and are getting excited about incorporating more technology into their classrooms also.

      Of course, that is a totally different story when it involves a non-voluntary technology initiative, such as upgrading to a new operating system. Situations like that seem to bring out a lot of negativity and I would love to have any suggestions as to how to deal with that.

      Delete
    2. This is very interesting. I really like the idea of a technology initiative form. I might have to implement something like that. Could you send me a copy of it? lillis@email.unc.edu

      Also, I have the same experience when teaching a group of professors. It's all very positive and they are very motivated. Though I can tell you they've been know to miss some deadlines. I find this personally funny because they are so strict on students for missing them and then act like they can't believe they would be held to one. :)

      Delete
    3. That is so interesting, Rachel! I would never imagine professors to be late with deadlines. I am sure it's interesting dealing with that as the instructor!

      Marion, thank you so much for you response. I think you are right about that particular group of learners, as compared with students who may not be quite as inherently motivated.

      Delete
  3. Hi Marion,
    Enjoyed your post. Very nice way of addressing the similarities, differences, advantages, and your feelings about each. I totally agree with your thoughts on these models. Each can be valuable to use in on online setting and I think it would depend on whether the facilitator wanted to take on a pegdaogy or andragogy strategy of delivering the content. I personally prefer the CLM model because of the accountability placed on the learner. I also like that it emphasizes group work and allows the facilitator to fade out of the process. I will have to investigate the programs you mentioned: Audacity and Google hangout. Sounds interesting. I look forward to reading more from you.
    Sincerely,
    Cynthia

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Marion. Great Blog. It is very clear that you have experience with these models. I think Guided design is great because it helps direct the learners more in the direction they need to go. I think PBL would also be useful to combine with guided design and it would encourage participants to thinks of different solutions. Do you think this would be good model to teach soft skills? I think it might with scenarios etc. Nice job. Gena Gutierrez

    ReplyDelete
  5. I really enjoyed reading your blog and found that you really grasped an understanding of these methods. I think that one of the key points you made was that they are all great models if used appropriately. Our school started working with Google apps this year and I will have to try out these free ones you mentioned...gotta love FREE! ;-)

    ReplyDelete