Using the Community of Inquiry in online learning environments

I’m in the process of putting together a workshop for the  facilitators of one of our modules that we’re restructuring in order to use a blended learning approach. Here are the notes that I’ve been putting together on the Community of Inquiry (CoI) for the workshop. Bear in mind that these notes are my attempt to get a better understanding of the CoI, and so lack academic rigor (i.e. there are no references). Finally, I apologise in advance for any errors or misinterpretation of the model, especially where I’ve given my own examples for our participants. Feedback, as always, is welcome.

The Community of Inquiry is a framework developed by Garrison and Archer (2001) as a way of describing favourable conditions to stimulate learning in online environments. Since a lot of the Applied Physiotherapy module will be conducted online, the CoI is a useful framework to guide our understanding of interactions in the social network we’ll be using. The CoI suggests that in order for meaningful learning to take place in online spaces, there needs to be evidence of 3 types of “presence”:

  • Social presence
  • Cognitive presence
  • Teaching presence

Social presence is about encouraging purposeful communication in a trusted setting, and developing interpersonal relationships by projecting personality. There are 3 categories of social presence;

  • Affective response: humour, emotional expression (e.g. emoticons, “lol”)
  • Open communication: recognition, interaction, reflection
  • Group cohesion: use names, greet students, use inclusive pronouns (e.g. “Hi Sue. This is a good question that we can all learn from”)
Social presence is an essential component in online learning, in that students who perceive that it is lacking (i.e. they don’t feel welcome and safe) demonstrate low levels of cognitive presence. Some of the ways in which social presence can be enhanced is by communicating in ways that are perceived by students to be “warm” (think; a caring attitude). Participate regularly, respond quickly, use chat when possible. In other words, create a sense of “being there”.

Cognitive presence refers to an ability to construct meaning through sustained communication. There are 4 practical components to developing a sense of cognitive presence, which are similar to Kolb’s cycle of experiential learning:

  1. Provide a triggering event or problem that is indicated by a sense of puzzlement. The idea is to create a conflict between a students perceived understanding of reality (“This is how I believe the world to be”) and a realisation that the evidence doesn’t support their perception (“The world is not how I believed it to be”).
  2. Opportunities for exploration of the problem. This is achieved by creating an opportunity for students to understand the nature of the problem (“How or why isn’t the world the same as my mental construct of it?”), find relevant information (“What evidence can I find that will help me to understand this problem better?”), propose explanations (“If this is true, then it means that…”), and exchange information (“Hey guys, here’s some information that will help us understand this better”). You can see from these examples that this is similar to the process we want to stimulate in our cases.
  3. Students must try to integrate the new information through a focused construction of new meaning based on the new evidence. They do this by connecting new ideas and concepts to old knowledge that they already have. An understanding of the Zone of Proximal Development would be useful here.
  4. There must be a final resolution of the problem i.e. it must be solved.

There are 6 practical suggestions for how cognitive presence can be facilitated in online spaces. I’ve tried to explain each of these suggestions in terms of how we might implement them because it turns out the when facilitators model the behaviour we want to see in students e.g. critical discourse with each other and constructive critique, students tend to do similar things. The idea is that if we succeed in doing things like what is outlined below, we create the favourable conditions for cognitive presence in the online space:

  1. Discourse. We should aim to be active guides by posing questions that are relevant to emerging topics of discussion. Be aware of entering a discussion and “breaking it” by being an authority figure and / or using “academic” language that students may not be familiar with. There’s little point in students’ continuing a discussion when one of us comes in and provides a definitive resolution (i.e. an “answer”) to whatever problem they’re discussing, or when we say things that they don’t understand. Remember that we want to stimulate a conversation for them, not end one they’re already having.
  2. Collaboration. Groupwork should aim to involve generating, sharing, critiquing and prioritising solutions. There are 2 key elements; availability of the facilitator and the intellectual engagement of the student with the content.
  3. Management. Students begin to take increasing control of the learning activities e.g. suggesting and developing their own projects, with feedback from the larger group guiding their implementation.
  4. Reflection. Students tend to spend more time deliberating on their reflections when they know that what they write will be read and commented on by others. This is why we will use “public” reflections online and students will be expected to read and comment on each others’ reflections. Reflection, simply, is forming relationships between your abstract view of the world (i.e. how you believe the world to be) and how the world actually is (i.e. the congruence between your belief and what actually happens in the world). Try to use language to help students make connections between the cases and personal experiences.
  5. Monitoring (self-assessment). Rubrics can be used to help students grade their own progress and understanding. They take responsibility for making judgements about their work, which is what self-directed learning is. In the professional world, it is rare that we have someone else telling us what we don’t know. It’s up to us as professionals to evaluate our skillset and make decisions about where we’re lacking and what we need to do to fill gaps in our knowledge and skills. We need to enable students to make judgements about what they know and don’t know. Peer- and self-assessment is one way of doing this.
  6. Knowledge construction. Students must make personal meaning (i.e. “sense”) of the information they gather. They must identify the problem (“The patient can’t weightbear on the ankle”), collect data related to the problem (ROM, history of the incident, functional ability, etc.), create an hypothesis (“I believe that the lateral ankle ligament has a grade 2 sprain”), test the hypothesis (send patient for stress test under X-ray), confirm hypothesis or collect more data if necessary, make a conclusion. This process is more effective in terms of “deep learning” than memorising the signs and symptoms of a sprained ankle.

Teaching presence is about directing the social and cognitive processes (see above) to develop personally meaningful and worthwhile outcomes. There are 3 categories of teaching presence:

  • Design and organisation i.e. developing and structuring the learning experience and activities
  • Facilitating discourse by maintaining student and facilitator interest, motivation and engagement
  • Direct instruction through “injecting knowledge”, dealing with issues around content and summarising discussions
There is a significant relationship between teaching presence and perceived learning / satisfaction with online courses. In the absence of synchronous, moment by moment negotiation of meaning available in the classroom, high levels of teaching presence in the online space is even more important, as it has a greater relative impact on cognitive presence when compared to students in a physical interaction.

Socialcognitive and teaching presence all interact / are dependent on each other. Studies have found that “teaching and social presence play a major role in predicting online students’ ratings of cognitive presence, and that teaching presence is strongly correlated with students’ satisfaction with the online learning experience and their sense of community. Furthermore, comfort in online discussion was the most significant factor in students’ perceptions of cognitive presence i.e. in order to develop higher order critical thinking, students need to feel comfortable with online discussion. It may be useful to ask students to reflect on their levels of comfort with online discussion. If they report low levels of comfort, further reflection on their part might identify why they feel this way and what might be done to improve their comfort levels, allowing facilitators to modify their approaches and / or the environment.

HELTASA conference, 2011 – day 2

 

Explaining, naming and crossing border in Southern African higher education
Prof Piet Naude

This was one of the most challenging presentations I’ve ever listened to. I didn’t agree with a lot of what Prof Naude said, but he made me question my own beliefs and biases.

Ontology: language is the house of reality (language shapes reality)
In political discourse, language precedes actual violent acts. In Rwanda, people called each other “cockroaches”, and it’s much easier to kill a cockroach than to kill a human being.

Crossing interpretive borders in higher education:

  • Utilitarianism: views universities as vehicles for the promotion of sectarian interests e.g. religious, political, economic → doctrines dictate the boundaries of science and denies the search for truth without fear nor favour (religious language abundant in university e.g. professor, sabatical, rector). University as a vehicle to continue the doctrine or belief e.g. when universities in South Africa advanced the notion of Apartheid in different fields (biology, politics, religion, etc.). “Truth” would be based on doctrine.
  • Scientism: views “real knowledge” on the basis of empiricist, quantitative assumptions and a correspondent theory of truth. Science is the future, Humanities is the past. Some scientists are blind to the social construction of scientific paradigms. Blind to the link between science and the power or use of science. Blind to the complexity of personal and societal development.
  • Liberalism: rests on presumed a-contextual and unversalist assumptions about the human person, rationality and knowledge whist actually reflecting post-Enlightenment, Western thinking. “Professional training is vicious”. I think therefore I am vs. ubuntu = I am who I am because of who we all are. “Vicious ideological nature of Western scientific thinking”. Are there non-empirical forms of validation that are equally valid as scientific ones? Are all forms of non-Western knowledge subject to verfication by Western evaluation practices?

If universities don’t exist for the public good, they become playgrounds for the rich. Commercial language can change the direction of education e.g. when a “vice chancellor” becomes a “CEO”

Crossing 5 metaphorical boundaries

  • Centre – periphery: where you are born will determine your ability to succeed in the world / geographical (in)justice
  • Conceptual – technical / applied (epistemic justice). People who work with their hands are not as “smart” as people who can “think”. In South Africa, we need a greater emphasis on technical / applied knowledge. More colleges, fewer universities.
  • Uniformity (globalism) – plurarility (glo-cality) (cultural justice): where everyone wears jeans, watches BBC and speaks English. Emphasise a system where I can function at a global level but remain true to my local context. What is the impact on language / culture of the homogenising effect of university?
  • Anthropocentrism – cosmocentric thinking (ecological justice): it’s a problem when science and technology seeks only to improve the lot of human beings at the expense of everything else.
  • Past / present – future (noogenic justice): the world is in a mess, we need to prepare students to improve the future. Challenge students to imagine a future that does not exist, and give them the knowledge and skills to create it.

 

Perceptions of PBL group effectiveness in a diverse pharmacy student population
Lindi Mabope

Study set out to evaluate student perceptions of differences in plenary vs small group work in a PBL context

4th years have better experiences with groups than 3rd years

Some students prepare only what THEY need to present in plenary sessions, whereas small groups mean that students must prepare better and more broadly

Students generally feel that the plenary sessions aren’t a “good way of learning”

Most students agree that working in small groups helps develop tolerance for language and cultural difference

Most students agreed that small group working helped them to work effectively

Cases in small groups helped students to clarify areas of difficulty

PBL seemed to work well across a diverse student group, perceptions were generally positive

Confusing / difficult conceptual work required the development of certain attributes e.g. communication, self-directed learning, tolerance

Some students found the small groupwork sessions frustrating and challening

Groups demand a large investment in time and energy, from students and staff

Problems must be resolved very early on

Continuous monitoring and evaluation of the PBL process is essential

Facilitators must pay regular attention of the changing needs of the students (students change and develop as part of the process, as do their needs, so facilitators must be aware of the changes and change the programme accordingly)

Use the positive benefits of diversity, rather than merely work around it (how can student diversity actually feed into the programme, encourage students to bring themselves into the cases, share their own life experiences in order to enrich the module)

Supporting and enabling PG success: building strategies for empowerment, emotional resilience and conceptual critical work
Gina Wisker

What are the links between students’ development and experiences: ontology (their sense of being in the world) and epistemology (how they construct knowledge)
Why do students undertake doctorates and what happens during their studies to help / hinder them?

Conceptual threshold crossing (Meyer & Land): the moments when you know that you’re being cleverer than you thought you were 🙂

What can staff do to enhance and safeguard research student wellbeing and nudge conceptual threshold crossing?

Building emotional resilience and wellbeing

Students kept learning journals for a duration of 3 years and included interviews during that period

“Troublesome encounters” (Morris & Wisker, 2011)

Doctoral learning journeys are multi-dimensional:

  • Meeting course requirements (instrumental)
  • Professional dimension
  • Intellectual / cognitive development
  • Ontological (how does it change the person?)
  • Personal / emotional

How do doctoral students signify their awareness of working conceptually?

How do supervisors recognise students’ conceptual grasp of research (this applies equally well to UGs conceptual grasp of the discipline)

Conceptual crossing is evidenced by:

  • Troublesome knowledge
  • Movements on from stuck places through liminal spaces into new understanding
  • Transformations (Meyer & Land)

Ontological change: seeing the self and the world differently and you can’t go back
Epistemological contribution: making new contributions to understanding and meaning

You have to find your own way, otherwise it’s a mechanistic process

Threshold concepts are:

  • Transformative: developing an academic identity
  • Irreversible: when you change how you perceive the world, you can’t go back
  • Integrative: forming relationships between what seemed previously to be disparate ideas
  • Troublesome knowledge: dealing with complexity

Learning moments that may indicate threshold crossings:

  • Coming up with research questions
  • Determining relationships between existing theory and own work
  • Device methods and engage with methods
  • Deal with surprises and mistakes
  • Analsyse and interpret data

There needs to be a number of conceptual leaps, otherwise the thesis is a box-ticking exercise

Make sure that the doctoral project has boundaries. The work is part of a greater whole, and the more focused the work, the easier it is to define the boundaries

Research is a journey (risks, surprises, deviations, even though it looks mapped), but a thesis is a building (ordered, coherent, organised, linked)

Constructive, intellectually challenging relationships

Student wellbeing is essential for postgraduate success:

  • Academic
  • Personal
  • Financial

There are factors in the learning environment that pose challenges to student wellbeing

What are the wellbeing issues for our research students?

Negative impacts cripples creativity and encourages you to take the path of least resistance, where the project is more about a qualification and less about innovation

Important to switch off from the process and engage in the world in different ways, as a coping strategy when experiencing difficulty

 

Crossing borders between face-to-face and online learning: the evaluation of an online tutoring initiative
Sanet Snoer

Collaborative learning has as its main feature a structure that encourages students to talk

Created an online module because student numbers increased, shortages of venues and tutors, timetable clashes, changing student profile and needs

Blended approach could help with logistical problems, expose students to a new way of learning, more challenging activities, develop wide variety of skills

Uses Gilly Salmon’s model for teaching and learning online as a point of departure, provides scaffolding to take students through a process of familiarising students with the environment

Students’ perceptions of online components were generally positive. However, students reported challenges with effective textual communication and typing, time management (which seems odd, since blended learning seeks to help with time issues), self-expression, understanding of concepts that are read rather than heard, poor familiarity with computers and the internet → disadvantage, feedback is immediate with face-to-face, relationships → face-to-face is a more personal interaction

Used Community of Inquiry framework to develop good online teaching practices (see Kleimola & Leppisaari, 2008 for breakdown of different “presences”)

Recommendations:

  • Needs to be agreement about turnaround time for feedback from facilitators
  • Purpose of each activity should be clear
  • Understand the benefits of the activities
  • Must model effective online behaviour
  • Communicate expecations clearly
  • Promote the mind shift that needs to take place
  • Create a non-threatening environment
  • Don’t assume students are familiar with the environment
  • Explain the role of face-to-face and online activities

Was there integration of online and offline activities? Used real-world examples to develop conversation around activities

 

Students’ learning satisfaction from a blended learning environment for physiology
Saramarie Eagleton

What aspects of technology provide benefits / advantages to the learning process. NOT whether technology is inherently good or bad

 

How collaborative groupwork affects students’ writing
Shena Lamb-du Plessis, Laetitia Radder

Aim was to get the students to write in as many different ways, and as regularly as possible during the course

Used group journal reflections and group progress reports

Peer feedback is valuable when students know from the start that they will be sharing their work with others

Developing a writing identity means pushing students to think for themselves and to imagine themselves as writers

A process of developing and clarifying thoughts by sharing them with an audience

Groupwork can shape the meaning of the work

Group dialogue helped to define / outline the writing requirements

Students felt that personal expression validated their viewpoints

Helped to develop self-confidence when they realised that others shared their experiences

Must introduce conflict management strategies, orient students to role allocation, discuss writing tasks to restructure meaning

 

Exploring the tension between institutional learning management systems and emergent technologies: staff perspectives at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology
Daniela Gachago, Eunice Ivala, Agne Chigona

What are “emerging technologies” and can they disrupt teaching practice?

The impact of technologies in education falls short of the rhetoric:

  • They are used to support and improve current teaching practices
  • Teachers and students use a limited range of technologies
  • Used to reproduce existing practice, as opposed to transforming practice
  • Supports passive, teacher-centred and didactic instruction

Need to redefine e-learning: “can no longer be viewed as a purely institutionally based or narrowly defined set of activities” (HEFCE paper, 2009, 5). Difficult because institutions are reluctant to give up their power and control

There is a shift of the locus on control:

  • Control moves to students and lecturers
  • Transfer of authority of knowledge and ownership of technology

Type I technologies replicate existing practices, Type II technologies allow students and lecturers to do things that they couldn’t do before

In complex-adaptive domains, knowledge doesn’t provide prospective predictability but rather, retrospective coherence. Learning should be self-organised and collaborative (Williams, Karousou, Macness, 2011)

“Hard” technologies: constraining and limiting, stifles creativity e.g. LMS
“Soft” technologies: freedom to play

Soft technologies require skill and artistry. It’s not just what you do but how you do it.

Qualities of disruptive technologies (Meyer, 2010):

  • Student-centred
  • Designed to offer options, motivate students, provide connections to the lives, jobs and communities of students
  • Capitalise on willingness of students to experiment and fail, to improve, and to keep at problems until solutions are crafted

Laurillard (2002, 141): We’re playing with digital tools but with an approach still born in the transmission model. There is no progress therefore, in how we teach, despite what is possible with the new technology

Laurillard’s conversational framework: there’s no escape from the need for dialogue, there is a constant exchange between teacher and student:

  • Discursive
  • Interactive
  • Adaptive
  • Reflective

Laurillard (2002). Rethinking university teaching.

No one approach is better than the other. We need to have a mix of approaches to get the maximum benefit of using different tools

“It’s a way of doing life. It’s not about computers. It’s not about mobile learning. It’s just learning – it’s just life”

 

Analysing teaching and learning at five comprehensive universities
Sioux McKenna

What are the mechanisms in the world that exist in order for us to have the experiences that we do?

Move beyond the statistics of higher education, and ask what must the institution be like in order for this to be (im)possible?

What is the role of Culture (ideas), Structure (process), and Agency (people)?

Most institutions continue to reflect their individual histories as rural/urban, disadvantaged/advantaged, traditional/university of technology. There seemed to be little cohesion in terms of what it means to be a comprehensive university.

Comprehensive universities emphasise the management discourse that focuses on the “complexity to be managed” rather than a “knowledge discourse” i.e. what is knowledge / research, etc.

There are implications for academic identify and research output

“Powerful ways of knowing”

Often students are constructed as deficits i.e. they are deficit in language, life skills, motivation, etc.

AMEE conference, 2011 (day 1)

Today was the first day of AMEE 2011, and a great start to my first international conference. Here are the notes I took.

Donald Clark – 21st century medical learning

“Death of the compliant learner” – almost all of my students are compliant, I hope Clark doesn’t buy into the idea that all of today’s students are somehow different? Even Prensky has moved on from the Digital Native debate

When the cost of education goes up, and the deliverable stays the same, you have the characteristics of a bubble → is higher education / medical education in a bubble (Malcolm Gladwell)?

Clark shows excerpt from Ferris Bueller’s day off to demonstrate poor lecturing style, gets a laugh but is caricaturing the format useful in terms of solving the actual problem?

Psychology of learning:

  • Spaced practice
  • Attention
  • Assessment
  • Learn by doing
  • Collaboration

“The internet is shaping pedagogy”, this is the wrong way around. Effective teaching practice should make effective use of the internet.

“Lectures are ineffective for teaching”

  • don’t inspire or motivate
  • no critical thinking
  • doesn’t emphasise values
  • no social adjustment
  • or behavioural skills
  • only useful for transmitting information

Student and lecturer’s attention begins to fall off after 25 minutes, yet lectures often continue for much longer. Clark’s solution → record lectures! OR…change teaching practice to make use of that time more effectively

Cultural reasons for not changing teaching practice

Assessment is skewed towards favouring cramming

Is technology supporting assessment?

Surgeons who play video games perform better with laparoscopic procedures than those who don’t

I think Clark’s emphasis on technology misses the point. This isn’t the right audience to make assumptions about what technology should be used with what teaching approach. The message he’s sending is that we should use digital tools because they’re better. But he hasn’t spent enough time explaining what it’s better for and how.

 

The future of online continuing medical education: towards more effective approaches
Panel discussion (John Sandars, Pat Kokotailo, Gurmit Singh)

How do we get the new evidence base to change behaviour in health professionals? By delivering content and hoping → behavioural change

Online CME is about transmitting content from an “expert” to the person at home, and competing with their social lives. Does this have the intended impact of actually changing clinician’s behaviour? Sandars says “No”

How can the intended impact be achieved?

CME vs CPD
CME process whereby people keep updated regarding medical information
CPD includes CME but is more broad

e-learning implies that technology is used to enhance T&L but no definition of what technology is. I wish people would stop talking about e-learning until we demonstrate that it’s fundamentally different in terms of changing learning behaviour

List of digital tools and blending them with f2f spaces

Issues in obtaining evidence of effective CPD:

  • Differing content in med ed → differing ways of delivering / teaching
  • Traditional curriculum vs no curriculum
  • Rare comparison between e-learning intervention and traditional intervention
  • Difficulty with educational RCTs (very “medical” to think that RCTs are an important evaluative tool in education)

Kirkpatricks model to categorise the level of evaluative outcomes

Majority of research looks at participant satisfaction, but limited research demonstrating performance change in practice, no studies demonstrated that web-based CME had any effect on clinical practice

Internet learning associated with large positive effects compared with no intervention, but the effects were heterogeneous and small (internet learning interventions were broad in terms of content)

Comparison of different virtual patient desings suggest repetition, advance organisers, enhanced feedback and explicitly contrasting cases can improve learning outcomes (Cook at al, Academic Medicine, 2010)

Which “e-learning” techniques enhanced learning experiences?

  • Peer communication
  • Flexibility
  • Support of a tutor who was also a moderator
  • Knowledge validation
  • Course presentation
  • Course design

Effectiveness of the online course is mediated by the learning experience

Cost effectiveness of online CPD is mainly based on self-report, so data not robust (Walsh et al, Education for primary care, 2010)

Most to least effective approaches (Bloom, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2005):

  • Interactive techniques (audit / feedback, academic detailing / outreach, reminders)
  • Clinical practice guidelines and opinion leaders less effective
  • Didactic presentations and distributed print material have little to no effect

Therefore, not much evidence for the use of online learning, and the effects that do exist, are small (smaller than traditional), course design is important, and interactivity appears to be key

Improving knowledge and skills without an associated change in behaviour, is useless

Discussion:

  • Isolated, invidualised online CME is focused on delivering content more efficiently but that misses the point
  • We need to integrate social components into the learning experience
  • We evaluate episodic events and expect to find behavioural change
  • It’s not about one approach or the other, we need to blend different teaching methods
  • We need to stop talking about e-learning, we don’t talk about overhead projector learning

Problems with CME (currently)

  • Exisiting models do not improve patient care
  • Current models are incomplete, and are used for different reasons
  • Use is unco-ordinated
  • Participation is low
  • Much research names existing models as “largely irrelevant”

Moving from knowledge and skills to changing behaviour. What is the / a new model?

The outcome must be: improving patient care. This comes about through supporting information exchange, opinion and advice to make sense of the complexity of practice

Technology used must be useful and relevant

Technology + pedagogy = outcome (is it this simple?)

Should move psychological learning theory to sociological theory

Professionals learns as they go about doing things, sharing tacit knowledge, discussing and interacting with others in social networks. As people interact they share ways of thinking, feeling and acting in daly life, which influences their behaviours and habits. We are living, learning and changing in practice. They are reflexive. Learning, behaviour and change are all dynamically connected in networks and make practice complex.

Learning practive should be embodied and emergent

Reflexive networks used in teaching and learning

We should be more strategic in collaboration, rather than having collaboration forced.

How do you evaluate outcomes?

  • CME credits
  • Self-report: was it relevant and useful?
  • Patient care audit: do patients have improved outcomes?

Tacit knowledge = useful knowledge

Practice and learning are inseparable

If individual practice is only part of the team approach, is it reasonable to expect that changing an invidual’s approach will actually impact on patient outcomes?

Interprofessional workplace-based learning using social networks
JM Wagter

Difference between in/formal learning

80% of learning is outside the formal context. How do we make the informal learning explicit?

Between whom is learning taking place i.e. identifying actors within the network by mapping relationships between teams, professions, etc.

Look at density and information and communication flows

Everybody is involved in informal learning within networks, but the relationships are assymetrical and not collaborative or reciprocal

Network analysis is a useful method to identify relationships between professionals, but what do you do with the information i.e. how do you change the relationships?

Patient attitude to medical students experience in General Practice
H Cheshire

Patients lack confidence to ask students to leave when receiving a personal physical examination by a GP

Female patients are less likely to have positive attitudes with regards a medical student conducting an assessment, although the numbers are quite high nonetheless

The context of the examination changes whether or not patients are happy to have students present e.g. sexual health, etc.

Learning at a clinical education ward: first and final year nursing students’ perceptions
K Manninen

Final year students have an emphasis on supervisor relationships and are more dependant on feedback and affirmation but don’t experience internal authenticity, which is what drives the understanding of the nursing role.

First year students focus on patient relationships with concomittant feedback

Creating a student ER
A O’Neill

Highly integrated, student-centred, emphasis on PBL → creation of a student ER

Organisation based on teams, rather than a hierarchy. Team sees the patient concurrently, rather than consecutively

Approach allows the student to manage the patient with a focus on structured feedback. Tried to avoid students managing those with obvious serious pathology, cognitive dysfunction, etc.

Supervisor behind the student, not the other way around

Received positive feedback from students, in addition to significant improvement in student note-taking ability, among other clinical skills

Evaluating medical grand rounds – 10 years later
Mary J Bell

High numbers of repeated evaluations in order to determine reliability

We tend to give colleagues higher evaluator ratings

Highest scores had less to do with knowledge and presentation of objectives, and more to do with presenter style, level of presentation and enthusiasm → edutainment

When grand rounds were done using digital video, overal presenter ratings went down, seeming to concur with social learning theories i.e. we want to be in the same room as those we’re learning from (but is social just about physical presence?)

Twitter Weekly Updates for 2011-07-11

Posted to Diigo 05/21/2010

    • What do I mean by presence, and why do I think that it is relevant to PLEs?
    • 1. Presence as social richness
    • Communications are expected to somehow express the ‘social, symbolic, and nonverbal cues of human communication’, which is of course difficult in an online environment.
    • 2. Presence as realism
    • By creating a sense of reality  in the pictures they produce and create an experience that would be plausible in real life (Lombard & Ditton, 1997)
    • 3. Presence as transportation
    • The idea in this form of presence is ‘the degree to which participants of a telemeeting get the impression of sharing space with interlocutors who are at a remote physical site’ (Mulbach et al, 1995, p.293)
    • the participant perceives to be immersed in a virtual environment
    • 4. Presence and immersion
    • 5. Presence as social actor within a medium
    • A heightened form of presence is created, where it seems that an interaction with the viewer or another person is taking place on the screen, while in reality this is not the case
    • 6. Presence as medium as social actor
    • deep and meaningful learning results if three forms of presence play a role in education. They highlight cognitive presence, that ensures a certain level of depth in the educational process, which could be compared to “intensity” as highlighted by Shedroff (2009) in developing web-based experiences and “Vividness” by Lombard and Ditton (1997) in the creation of meaningful online experiences
    • Anderson (2008) also refers to social presence, which would be similar to the social presence described by Lombard and Ditton
    • in a formal educational environment that of a teacher presence
    • In PLE based learning the teacher presence is not there, but you could argue that there are knowledgeable others out there on the Web who might to a certain extent take on that role
    • The higher the number of human senses engaged in the activity, the higher the presence experienced will be
    • ‘visual media have more social presence than verbal (audio) media, which in turn have more social presence than written media
    • ‘The number of inputs from the user that the medium accepts and to which it responds’ could affect presence and the level of experience, while the type of input by the user, ie. through voice, video, or button clicks, and the type of response received was also seen as an influence on the level of presence (Lombard & Ditton, 1997, p.18)
    • So the higher the level of presence, the higher the level of involvement in the online activity and the deeper the experience. The question of how to create presence in the design of a PLE is an important one as at the heart of PLE-based learning would be a high level of engagement and depth of learning
    • The fruit of collective intelligence, which I (and others) have described as an emergent phenomenon, results from the linkages and connections between individuals, and not a counting of properties (such as survey results) of those individuals.
    • This emergent knowledge is not intended to compete with, or replace, qualitative or quantitative knowledge
    • Connective knowledge, in other words, does not refute or overturn existing knowledge; rather, it offers us a *new* type of knowledge, that *cannot* be confirmed or refuted by simple observation of data
    • why shouldn’t students’ work be available to other (future) students.

      Instead of binning their work after they get their marks, why shouldn’t we be making it available to others so that they can learn from their peers, from what others have done.

      He talks about this as if it were so obvious. Yet in academia we’ve always made sure to hide students’ work… ooohh the plagarism…. [it’s better to avoid plagiarism at all cost than actually educate not to plagiarise…]… in real life, we all look at what other have done to improve our work. Something isn’t right here!

    • Providing information is not really creating knowledge
    • there has always been and there will always be good pedagogy with or without technology