Developing self-directed group discussions (SCWK2005)

From Elearning

SCWK2005 – Psychology for Social Work (2006) Designer – Ms Agi O'Hara Unit co-ordinator – Ms Agi O'Hara

Contents 1 Educational challenges 2 Agi’s design solution 3 The design in context 4 What the design facilitates 5 Adapting the design to your context 5.1 Technical considerations 5.2 Management tips 6 Ideas for other contexts 7 Cite as 8 Add a comment

Educational challenges

To:

• Satisfy the students’ wishes to extend the one-hour weekly tutorial time (without the budget for extra resources)
• Create a forum that allows students to practice thinking and writing both critically and independently about the core issues in the unit of study.
• Get the students to take the lead in discussions
• Develop a self-sustaining group dynamic

Agi’s design solution

1. Set up weekly topics on the discussion board that correspond to the tutorials.
2. To encourage quality participation, make discussions part of the assessment and provide a clear purpose to students.
3. Provide guidelines that explain how the discussions will run and a marking rubric, so that participants feel confident.
4. Model the behaviour and tone that you want on the board and take the lead in introducing the students to the medium and the activity (this can be done face to face as Agi does, or online as an Icebreaker)
5. Set aside weeks 2 & 3 for students to practice on the discussion board, experiment and consolidate relationships in the online medium.
6. From Week 4, divide the students into private discussion groups using identical groupings to their face to face tutorials.
7. Begin grading the discussions from week 4.
8. Get students to nominate which 2 postings they will submit for assessment, to keep academic workload in check.

The design in context

1. Students extend each of their one hour face-to-face tutorials for a further week using online asynchronous discussions in WebCT. They are required to make two postings per week (of at least 120-200w each) and at least one of these has to be a response to another student’s posting. Discussions are worth 13% of each student’s total mark.
2. The purpose of the activity (in this case preparation for final assignment and developing generic communication skills for social workers) is explained in the face-to-face context.
3. Agi provides marking criteria so students understand what constitutes a good posting in this context. (She explains in the face-to-face context that she places value on the development of students’ personal responses to the issues and theory, and reflection on their shifts in understanding or values).
4. Sample postings are also provided to give students a sense of the range of styles of responses that can be made (marks are not indicated on these).
5. The care taken in preparing the students for the activity and facilitating a strong online community pays dividends, because after the introductory weeks the students initiate postings and respond to others without input from the unit of study co-ordinator. *
6. A tutorial process diary with the aims of having students demonstrate an ability to critically evaluate the theoretical material, reflect on the connections between tutorials and apply this material to their own life and the practice of social work, complements the discussion task.
7. If students write more than 2 postings in a week they must indicate which are to be marked via a message to the discussion board which quotes the identification numbers.
8. Agi skim reads the board weekly and marks that week’s nominated discussions. Marks can be entered directly into WebCT. These go into the grade book and each student's marks can be automatically made available to him/her via the 'My Grades' tool.

Student numbers in 2006 = 74

View the written instructions provided to students on using the discussion board (excerpt from unit outline)

What the design facilitates

The opportunity for students to take the initiative in deciding what aspects of the topic they wish to discuss and develop independent thinking

• Weeks 1-3 (both online and face-to-face) contain information and activities that are designed to give students the skills and confidence to run their own online discussion.

More even participation from the group members than in purely face-to-face tutorials

• Students are required to make at least two postings during the week after their tutorial if they hope to gain full marks for the discussion component.

Students work more consistently throughout the semester because they have weekly assessment targets

• Topics are locked after one week to encourage the group to move on synchronously to ensure that students are not still thinking and writing about a previous week's tutorial topic when a new one has been introduced.
• Students who are less comfortable with speaking in public have the opportunity to develop their thoughts in a written 'conversation'.

The chance for quieter students to develop their confidence without scrutiny and with more time to reflect on their responses

• Online discussions can also be valuable for students from non english-speaking backgrounds because they allow the participants time to compose and review their responses before making them public.

Students are motivated to read the set texts

Improved interaction in the face-to-face context

• The additional time that the students have to develop their analysis of the lecture and tutorial topics online increases their understanding and gives them more material to draw on in the face-to-face tutorials.
• The assessment component motivates students to do the weekly readings in order to contribute quality online discussions. This in turn, strengthens the quality of the face-to-face interaction.

The strengthening of group bonds formed in the face-to-face context

• The discussion board allows students to support each other between classes. Conversations are sometimes centred around disclosure by students that they are finding concepts problematic and expressions of confirmation and support from their peers.

Adapting the design to your context

Technical considerations

You can obtain a WebCT unit of study shell from USyd eLearning at webct.helpdesk@usyd.edu.au

Management tips

Wait until week 4 to put the students into their private discussion groups

• This reduces workload for the unit of study co-ordinator because students often change their tutorial times over the first few weeks and this would necessitate altering the online groups. By week 4, the tutorial groups are stable.

Hear Agi on:

Why online discussions have a different and valuable quality compared to face-to-face interaction How she handles discussions on sensitive issues (such as depression and suicide) with a group of students with a broad range of life experience Changes in student response to online dicussions she has observed over the past year

Ideas for other contexts

• Members of the discussion groups can take turns to present a weekly summary on the board which includes concepts, theories or issues that the group are still grappling with. These summaries can be used by the unit co-ordinator and/or tutors to plan future face-to-face sessions.

• Discussion topics in WebCT CE6 can be set to allow peer-review.

* Recordings were made during a discussion with Sue Atkinson from USyd eLearning in December, 2006.

Cite as

O'Hara, A. (2006). SCWK2005 - Psychology for Social Work. Sydney: University of Sydney http://wiki.arts.usyd.edu.au/elearning/index.php/Developing_self-directed_group_discussions_%28SCWK2005%29

Add a comment