Picture of Judith Wisniewski
Improving Discussion Participation with Web 2.0 Tools
by Judith Wisniewski - Thursday, March 21, 2013, 3:53 PM
 

College-level studio design classes are project-based, whether face-to-face or online. Students usually develop a personal solution through a series of steps from concept through completion. Solutions to each phase of the project are discussed with the class and instructor, in both individual and group settings.

In many online design courses, students post their work along with a statement on a discussion board, receive written or video feedback from the instructor and members of the class and then move on to the next phase of the assignment. In a face-to-face classroom, these exchanges are synchronous and usually take place over a one to three-hour period.

While students are looking for personalized online course materials, in this week's video, Prof. Matthew Allen suggested that online instructors make the mistake of spending far too much time engaged with students on a one-on-one basis (McIntyre and Watson, 2011). His point was that discussion groups and collaborative spaces allow for better time management.

Here is a typical instructor video response posted to student typography class work mid-project:

http://www.screencast.com/t/DEjQ71O0

[It was created with Jing, with a 5-minute time limit and stored on Screencast.com]

Log files for the course indicated that very few of the students viewed videos other than those that responded to their own work, even when prompted with additional questions.

Based on Module 3's readings concerning good discussion board practice and/or your evaluation, review or use of Web 2.0 tools, propose some ways that the instructor of the typography course can create interest, response, and collaboration while still integrating student-specific expert guidance.

 

 

 
Picture of Victoria Thornley
Re: Improving Discussion Participation with Web 2.0 Tools
by Victoria Thornley - Thursday, March 21, 2013, 7:18 PM
 

Hi Judith,

Interesting class - typography. Hmmm.  Perhaps the instructor could use one of the collaboration tools like Yugma to do video or audio conferencing with  the student to provide feedback for the midterm presentation.  If there is a tool that allows the instructor to enhance certain parts of the work while talking about it that might be useful.  I'm not sure if the students were supposed to view each others critiques but I suppose the instructor could hold a webinar and go over the submissions with all student present - depending on the number of participants in the class.

Vicki in Texas

Picture of Judith Wisniewski
Re: Improving Discussion Participation with Web 2.0 Tools
by Judith Wisniewski - Thursday, March 21, 2013, 9:44 PM
 

Hi Vicki:
That was me with the ums and lovely Philly accent. To clarify, the idea is to put back what was lost in the translation from on ground to online, namely, students participating in a critique of all of the work. This is not midterm, it is simply mid-project and there are usually 5 projects. So this is a time intensive course to teach. And, yes, they learn much more when making connections between the work. The confines of the course are that it has to stay asynchronous. Some schools are using VoiceThread (in Module 2 readings), but it is not a free resource. 

I do not know Yugma. Will look that one up. This is what Iove about putting all of these minds together!

Judi in SC

Picture of Victoria Thornley
Re: Improving Discussion Participation with Web 2.0 Tools
by Victoria Thornley - Friday, March 22, 2013, 5:12 PM
 

Hi Judy,

Just want to say I'm super impressed with your critique of the student's work.--you were right to the point and very thorough.  Didn't even notice an 'uhm'!

Vicki

Picture of Judith Wisniewski
Re: Improving Discussion Participation with Web 2.0 Tools
by Judith Wisniewski - Saturday, March 23, 2013, 8:58 PM
 

Vicki:

Hmmm. I thought I responded yesterday, but maybe not. Thank you for the kind words. This was a course that I taught 5 years ago or so. I enjoy the material. Sometimes it is disconcerting to put many video critiques out there and not have the sort of direct response that you would get in a face to face class. 

You also get to be more succinct (ums or no ums), when you need to do 30+ videos in one evening.

Thanks for your interest.

Judi in Charleston, SC

Picture of Sally Millermon
Re: Improving Discussion Participation with Web 2.0 Tools
by Sally Millermon - Thursday, March 21, 2013, 10:55 PM
 

Judi,

Maybe the teacher could have used PB Works which can be used to “capture knowledge, share files and manage projects” according to their website (www.pbworks.com). The teacher could create a separate work space for each class where she could upload work samples from everyone in the class. Then have all students comment after giving general guidelines. This could also be done in a blog, like WordPress. She could also make videos of her critiques for each student’s work, but add in different screen shots—maybe some close-ups of the areas she’s critiquing—to make it more interesting. Then share those videos with the student that authored the work. She could also use a tool, like Animoto, to make an engaging video reviewing some of the concepts of typography and upload it to PB Works or the class blog.

Sally in Wisconsin

Picture of Judith Wisniewski
Re: Improving Discussion Participation with Web 2.0 Tools
by Judith Wisniewski - Saturday, March 23, 2013, 8:53 PM
 

Hi Sally: Thank you for your response. I like the idea of close ups, which were not integrated into the critique example. I think that those could easily be added in real time on-screen with key commands.

The scenario as given in the prompt "really happened" and the lectures, readings, and rubrics were "set" by the school; no changed allowed.

There was no gallery function in this particular LMS, so any intro or critique had to be a video link or an attached file. The sheer volume of critiquing and turn around time was what begged for some innovation. I was hoping between the discussion board and Web 2.0 readings and collective experience and wisdom, to collect some ideas that I did not discover on my own.

Regards,

Judi in Charleston, SC

Skip Navigation

Navigation