Tools of Engagement on the Internet

Last year we examined the Weaning from the Classroom process and derived two products, the facilitators and the participants. These arose from the application of the Facilitated Interactive Learning paradigm to the situation. We will now consider the unions of the products during the Internet experience as the embodiment of a web-based class. The tools of engagement are manifold: including synchronous and asynchronous communication, interactive multimedia and html presentations, and interactive and home-based laboratory exercises.

Synchronous tools include the telephone, office hours, meetings, and web based chat rooms. Asynchronous tools include voice mail, email, discussion rooms, notes, files, html pages, and submissions. Interactive multimedia includes active and interactive java scripting/html pages and presentation and laboratory exercise CD-ROMs. The laboratory component includes virtual experiments (interactive CD-ROM), hands on local experiments (e.g. "kitchen chemistry "), and exercises which utilize a combination of the two. (For example, the use of web based color vision testing for the home based participant.)

The engagement is designed to be equivalent to both lecture and lab based course elements, providing a full spectrum learning experience. Facilitator - facilitator, facilitator - participant and participant - participant interactions are all critical to the learning process. The participant - participant relationship is consummated in the team. Individual and team building skills and Tools of Engagement are used to motivate and promote the learning process.

The team, teamwork, and team player assume central values with the new Tools of Engagement. Fostering the new paradigm is crucial to developing a manageable workload for the facilitator and essential for the development of a positive learning environment for the participant. The loss of the instructor - student relationship leaves a motivational void. While team building and esprit de corps provide an alternative, Internet courses do require a higher lever of participant self-motivation.

Both facilitator and peer evaluate participant performance. Facilitators have interactive web-based multiple-choice, true false, matching, fill-in, and essay examinations; class chats and discussions activities; and completion exercises, e.g., case studies and laboratory reports, submitted via email and snail mail. Peer evaluation mechanisms center on team chats and discussions activities. By including peer evaluation, the Tools of Engagement encourages greater participant involvement.

Moving from the classroom to the Internet fundamentally shifts interpersonal relationships and learning paradigms. Some years ago I developed a paradigm, Facilitated Interactive Learning (FIL), designed for operation under a networked learning environment. Last year, at Tech Ed 2000, we examined the Weaning from the Classroom process and derived two products, the facilitators and the participants. These arose from the application of the Facilitated Interactive Learning paradigm to the networked situation. We will now consider the unions of the products during the Internet experience as the embodiment of a web-based on-line course. The Tools of Engagement available include synchronous and asynchronous communication, interactive multimedia and html presentations, traditional learning tools, and interactive and home-based laboratory exercises.

Facilitated Interactive Learning (FIL) sought to cost effectively combine the advantages associated with Distant Learning, Interactive Multimedia, and Computer Aided Instruction. The facilitator, a teacher with special skills, is key to the concept and serves to integrate the learning activities. (While this is a pre WWW based paradigm and description, it integrates well with current Internet technology.)

Distant learning is a technique that uses synchronous audio and video broadcasts, in a one- or two-way presentation. The presenter delivers material, usually in a lecture format, with audio and video aides. During, or after, the presentation, questions are fielded and discussion occurs. Questions may be sent to the presenter for future discussion.

Interactive Multimedia is a computer-based technology, which allows the user to access large amounts of digitally stored information in audio, and video formats.

Computer Aided Instruction generally refers to instruction or tutorials presented in a computer format. It is asynchronous and, in general, is similar to interactive multimedia presentations except that it is linear with little or no interactivity. Preplanned lessons plans are modularized and presented by the computer to the participant.

FIL combined the advantages of these three techniques and designed to eliminate most of the disadvantages. The major innovation was that there was a facilitator on-line, somewhere, i.e., a virtual presence, that could be accessed by the participant within a reasonable amount of time. A second advantage was the ability to establish multi-participant conferences, this facilitated conversation, discussion, and Collaborative Learning. FIL sought to emphasize the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education with the substitution of Facilitator for teacher and Participant for student (Chickering, 1987).

The implementation of the FIL concept centered upon the establishment of a regional and/or local interactive network. The advent of the Internet and World Wide Web (WWW) eliminated this necessity and delivered to us the capacity for the On-line course.

The presence of the Internet and the World Wide Web offer the educator an opportunity to restructure the learning environment and to enhance the learning experience. As times, people and technology, change and evolve, so must pedagogical concepts and the methodologies utilized to transfer knowledge and encourage learning.

The teacher-student concept has been ingrained in our culture and society over the eons. It has diverged to spawn numerous types of relationships such as mentoring, internships, and apprenticeships. The bulwark of our educational system is still the classroom.

In the classic technique, the teacher and students are physically, in time and space, juxtaposed. The basic tools of the trade are the board (black, white, or green) and the overhead projector. The essence of the technique is the teacher. Ask any student, and you may remember your own days as one, and they will tell you that the instructor makes the course. (If you got a bad teacher, the best thing you could do was drop.) Assuming then, that the essence of the classroom paradigm is the teacher or instructor, to move beyond the classroom, requires that the instructor move beyond the classroom.

It is now possible, and in many instances desirable, to move beyond the physical classroom. This "Weaning From the Classroom" impacts both the participants and the process. This weaning has started, the questions is how can we encourage it to the ultimate benefit of all those involved. As the essence of the classroom was the teacher, so the essence of the on-line course becomes the facilitator.

Let us examine some desirable skills for the facilitator.

1. Educational competence - a strong background in the content of the particular subject areas or courses.

2. Experience and expertise - experienced in training and/or work in the particular areas.

3. Interpersonal skills - skilled and able to interact well in one-on-one situations, to stimulate group discussion, and the ability to motivate participants.

4. Computer skills - be network literate, familiar with the Internet language, connected to the WWW, and cognizant of network resources.

5. Programming skills - be able to modify subject matter programs to improve their performance based upon participant responses and discussions. But, perhaps most importantly, the facilitator has to be excited; excited about what they do, excited about how they do it. They need to communicate their excitement to the participants, infect the participants with it, and motivate them to do well.

The tools of engagement are considered to be the embodiment of a web-based on line course. These tools are manifold and including synchronous and asynchronous communication, interactive multimedia and html presentations, and interactive and home-based laboratory exercises. The work involved with an on-line course can be divided into administrative and educational components. In order to maximize the first rule of good practice, "Good practice encourges contact between participant and facilitator", tools are used to minimize administrative efforts and maximize interactivity with the participants.

Let us first examine some synchronous tools; these include the telephone, office hours, meetings (orientation), and web based chat rooms. The first two, telephone and office hours are traditional and old standbys of the instructor. They are mainstays of the Distance learning course and critical to the on-line course. I contend that their use can be minimized by proper course preparation, good technique, and use of other tools. The desirability of this minimization is because these activities tend to consume enormous amounts of time. The value of the tools are that they are one-on-one and provide the participant with the feeling that they are important and that their concerns are being heard. They provide the facilitator with an excellent opportunity to motivate and excite the participant.

Experience suggests that an in-person orientation meeting is critical to a well executed course. You know that there is only one chance to create a first impression. It is said, that the impression occurs within the first two minutes of a meeting. Given this limitation, it becomes imperative that the first two minutes of the on-line course go well. Often, this actually will be your web page or course syllabus; but the impression can be modified during the first face-to-face meeting. Also consider that most people decide within eight seconds whether what your presenting is worthwhile. Given your ability to prepare, stage, and orchestrate first contact, it is important to do this well. At an orientation, be prepared, excited, and enthusiastic - communicate this, tell them, show them, be congruent and motivational.

To establish rapport, I use a three by five index card. It contains personal information, name, address, phone number, e-mail and best times to reach them. I then ask them to answer three questions:

1. What is your background?

2. Why are you taking this class?

3. What do you expect from this class?

I find that the cards help me personalize each participant. Additionally, it can form the basis for the introductions, performed at the end of the orientation, and their home page on the web site. (A page accessible to their fellow class participants and useful for them in learning about their discussion group teammates.)

The body of the orientation is course and platform specific. They are shown how to log in, what URLs to visit, and e-mail information. A chunk of time is spent on the course syllabus and course specific performance expectations. This is an opportunity for them to match their course expectations to my concept of the course and expectations of them as a participant. In essence, we are negotiating a contract. I want their buy in to the course, a commitment to the work, and a pledge to perform.

The last portion of the orientation is devoted to the introductions. I introduce myself and participants introduce themself. This is an opportunity for participants to size up other participants and to from the basis for lab and/or discussion groups.

The last of the synchronized tools is the chat room. This is either a virtual office hour for the facilitator or on-line meetings for discussion groups or topics. Participants, facilitator, or a combination of either, can schedule these. The exact facilitation depends on content and purpose.

Asynchronous tools include voice mail, email, notes, files, submissions, html pages, and discussion areas. The voice mail or answering machine is an old standby. E-mail should become the major communication tool for the on-line course. An e-mail list allows the facilitator to broadcast specific comments to all of the participants with a personalized individual feel. (Use Blind Carbon Copies (Bcc) please!) E-mail and a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) section can deal with most questions and concerns in an expedient manner while expending a minimum amount of your time. Notes and files can be stored on the web and downloaded by participants on demand. While participant submissions can be performed electronically as, e.g., e-mail attachments, I prefer that these be snail mailed. There are several reasons for this. A prime concern is viruses that attach to e-mail attachments; typed in e-mails are significantly less virus prone than attachments. Second, I find it easier to read, comment, and evaluate on paper, and I do not want to have to print out all of these messages. Third, while I request that work submitted, be typed, they are requested to sign their work; this helps to authenticate their work. Also, if scores are later in question, their possession of a scored paper settles the dispute. (Our college provides mailing and mailing labels.)

The text, and its ancillary materials, web site, platform, and pages are crucial to the on-line course and to minimizing facilitator workload. Interactive multimedia plays a significant role in engaging the participant. Since much of our current generation has been raised on a diet of TV, advertisement, and entertainment, we must compete for their attention. Our ammunition includes active and interactive java scripting/html pages and presentation and laboratory exercise CD-ROMs.

As our course contains a laboratory component, special considerations were given to providing the necessary skills training and development. Feedback from participants and peers has modified our initial approach to one of providing a hybrid off/on-site program. The laboratory component includes on site training in equipment and technique, virtual experiments (interactive CD-ROM), hands on local experiments (e.g. "kitchen chemistry "), and exercises which utilize a combination of the two. (For example, the use of web based color vision testing for off site participants.)

The California Community College Chancellor's Office has been requiring alternatives to animal based laboratory experiments for properly documented requesting laboratory participants. The interactive CD ROM program allows this to be accomplished for a variety of experiments, including, e.g., muscle stimulus response. Offering on-line laboratory exercises can also satisfy disability and accessability issues.

Typical of a laboratory course, the notebook is central. Notebook maintenance is a classic requirement and difficulty. Students are notoriously lax in laboratory pre-preparation. "Read the lab before you come to class," often feels like a futile admonition. It often seems as if a significant portion of lab is devoted to getting students up-to-speed just to start the experiment. Since the on-line participant cannot start until they have finished all of the preparation, all "lab time" is productive. Preparation time, analysis, and report production time are off-line; notebooks are periodically reviewed and signed off.

Several alternative laboratory scenarios are under consideration. These include the drop-in laboratory, using, e.g., the Biology Auto Tutorial (BAT) lab (which we have on campus). An equipment "library" is contemplated which would allow participants to check out specialized equipment, e.g., "biopaks", blood pressure gages, or EKG monitors. These units would plug into the participants computer and the results be transmitted on-line to the facilitator or a "work" group. These practices are common in "telemedicine".

The engagement is designed to be equivalent to both lecture and lab based course elements, providing a full spectrum learning experience. Facilitator - facilitator, facilitator - participant and participant - participant interactions are all critical to the learning process. The participant - participant relationship is consummated in the team. Teamwork is a central element of the Collaborative Learning style. Collaborative Learning approaches give participants access to the shared knowledge, experience, and insights of other members of a learning team. It tends to be effective because it thoroughly engages members in helping each other learn. It is particularly important for high-order, critical thinking skills that must move beyond the passive memorization of facts to a deeper engagement in which students help each other to comprehend, assess, and apply information in ways that lead to new insights and understanding. (Gabbert, 1986) Individual and team building skills and Tools of Engagement are used to motivate and promote the learning process.

The team, teamwork, and team player assume central values with the new Tools of Engagement. Fostering the new paradigm is crucial to developing a manageable workload for the facilitator and essential for the development of a positive learning environment for the participant. The loss of the instructor - student relationship leaves a motivational void. While team building and esprit de corps provide an alternative, Internet courses do require a higher lever of participant self-motivation.

On-line discussions frequently fail to achieve the desired educational objective. Two kinds of common problems are that the interaction suffers from being insufficient and inappropriate, and educators fail to develop coherent pedagogical objectives and strategy for on-line interaction. To foster creative, integrative, and analytical abilities requires the use of, e.g., constructivist theory. This is exemplified by requiring students to produce academic deliverables, i.e., participant created products that can take the form of proposals, plans, reports/papers, case studies, debates, ideas from brainstorming, decisions, portfolios, brochures, kiosks, hyperstories, or special projects. (Klemm, 1998). A software conferencing system that organizes thought via hypertext, in-context linking, and document sharing is ideal for promoting constructivism.

Both facilitator and peer evaluate participant performance. Facilitators have interactive web-based multiple-choice, true false, matching, fill-in, and essay examinations; class chats and discussions activities; and completion exercises, e.g., case studies and laboratory reports, submitted via email and snail mail. Peer evaluation mechanisms center on team chats and discussions activities. By including peer evaluation, the Tools of Engagement encourages greater participant involvement (See rule four, good practice uses active learning techniques. (Chickering, 1987)).