To claim one method of learning more valuable than another is like saying there’s only one right way to cook a potato. But we know that there are many ways to cook a potato, from mashed to scalloped to baked to fried, it all depends on preference.
In education the same theory can be applied to learners. Theoretical frameworks have been researched, developed and implemented to meet the needs of a wide variety of learners. Differentiated Instruction (DI) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) are two such frameworks that explore flexible teaching methods to ensure the learning preferences of students are met. Stanford and Reeves are proponents of DI because “...one style of teaching will not accommodate every student,” (2009, p. 3). The UDL framework ensures that resources, methods and strategies based on multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement are developed and used to meet the educational needs of all students (Brand, Favazza, and Dalton, 2012). Not everyone is going to cook the potato in the same way.
Post secondary institutions are doing a good job in many cases of offering students programming options, knowing that the needs of their students differ. Both face to face and online sessions provide learners with choices in terms of environment that can promote and enhance their learning experience. As a student enrolled in online graduate studies, I see the advantages and disadvantages of this type of programming. For some, the lack of connectedness and face to face dialogue can be disengaging for students. Although discussion boards and chat rooms allow participants interact with their peers, the immediate feedback and limited personal connection may affect academic results and engagement. One disadvantage of asynchronous instruction discovered by Murphy, Rodriguez-Manzanares & Barbour (2010) was a higher dropout rate than the synchronous environment. Could this be a mismatch in learning style and instructional method? Or could it be due to the lack of personal connection? I recently came across the article Helping the Poor in Education: The Power of a Simple Nudge, by Susan Dynarski that speaks of the power of a text message. A study of low income high school students who received text messages reminding them of their college application deadlines, were more likely to follow through with their application. Another group of college students also received text messages while enrolled in college courses. The results revealed that fewer students who received the text messages dropped out than those who had not received text messages. Would text messaging help students in asynchronous settings feel more connect? Knowing that someone cares about your participation or can guide you in meeting deadlines, could this help with retention and dropout rates? Can this be applied to a classroom setting for students who miss a great deal of school or those who struggle to complete assignments on time? Does the text message help students be accountable?
References
Dynarski, S. (2015). Helping the Poor in Education: The Power of a Simple Nudge. Nytimes.com. Retrieved 28 January 2015, from http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/18/upshot/helping-the-poor-in-higher-education-the-power-of-a-simple-nudge.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=mini-moth®ion=top-stories-below&WT.nav=top-stories-below&abt=0002&abg=0
Murphy, E., Rodríguez-Manzanares, M. A., & Barbour, M. (2011). Asynchronous and synchronous online teaching: Perspectives of Canadian high school distance education teachers. British Journal Of Educational Technology, 42(4), 583-591.
Stanford, B., & Reeves, S. (2009). Making It Happen: Using Differentiated Instruction, Retrofit Framework, and Universal Design for Learning. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 5(6), 3.
Trostle Brand, S., Favazza, A., & Dalton, E. (2012). Universal Design for Learning: A Blueprint for Success for All Learners. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 48(3), 134-139. doi:10.1080/00228958.2012.707506
Hi Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteGood analogy at the beginning. Not everyone likes the same things and not everyone does well in the same situations/environments.
When I went to elementary and high school, there was only one method of instruction. It was face to face and it occurred in a classroom. When I did my undergrad, distance education courses were available, and I did take a couple, but they were paper-based as the Internet was not as prevalent in our lives. Today, even high schools offer courses in a variety of methods. For example, I work in adult education, and we have an online school component for those students who find it difficult to attend class at specific times.
I feel that it is important for post secondary institutions to offer a variety of programming options. For example, if The University of Calgary did not offer an online Master's program, I would not be able to attend classes in person. I was looking specifically for a completely online Master's program, and this is the one that suits my needs the best.
I agree that the lack of connectedness and face to face dialogue could be disengaging for some students. If this is the case, these are students who would need to take classes in a face to face setting. Online courses are not for everyone.
The article by Murphy et al. does mention that asynchronous instruction does have a higher drop out rate, but how could they just leave it at that and provide no evidence or reasons? This is my seventh course in this program, and I have been taking classes with many of the same people for the duration of my program. So that is proof that asynchronous learning does work, but perhaps that is because all of us work full time and we require an online program. For those who are able to attend programs in a face to face setting, asynchronous learning may not be the best option.
Is a text message any different than an email or a phone call? Personally. I don't really see the difference. However, to a teenager, I think a text message could be seen as more personal and direct. This indicates that someone cares about his/her progress, and this could lead that student to remain involved in the course. However, I also see that this text message could easily be ignored. If an individual is not interested or involved in the course, sometimes there's not much that can be done to retain that person.
Thanks,
Terry
Hello Lindsay,
ReplyDeleteI strongly believe that the lack of personal connection is where the largest issue in regards to the questions regarding asynchronous, synchronous, and blended learning. I feel as if absolutely everything else follows from there.
When you become part of a community where you are supported, support others in turn, you are a participant in a safe community in which it is nearly impossible to fall through the cracks. Text messages or even brief, informal e-mails from peers or instructors checking in on you – methods you describe that that begin to appeal to me strongly – could very effectively create a sense of being valued within one’s peer group. It would combat the very real and present threat of “…students [feeling] isolated and out of the learning communities” (Zi-Gang, 2012, p.287). Style and instructional method aside, the human touch and human connection are what make a true learning *community* where ideas, thinking, and the like of every stripe are welcomed, and students feel safe enough to share and take part. If a student feels like someone cares, even if they ignore text messages as Terry points out, I would argue they are far more likely to feel included.
I do not intend to state that there is no value in the strictly F2F approach, or that either synchronous or asynchronous learning is the most effective, or that there is absolutely perfect method. Nor am I saying that a text here and there will make it all work. I still personally am a believer in blended learning when it comes to online education. I feel that it can easily made to support differing learning styles given how many options there are, allowing students to prepare their potatoes in a way that makes sense to them. Different recipes can all be prepared in similar kitchens. It is the human connection, *whatever* form it may take, that allows students to feel comfortable enough to swap their recipes.
REFERENCE:
Zi-Gang, G. (2012). Cyber Asynchronous versus Blended Cyber Approach in Distance English Learning. Journal Of Educational Technology & Society, 15(2), 286-297