SpeakEasy vs. WebCT
Having just finished reading about a study involving the SpeakEasy knowledge integration environment, I was thinking about how the experiences of the students in the study related to my own. In the experiment, the students were assigned use of the discussion board for homework, making it a compulsory task. In my science degree, we had access to WebCT. It was mainly used as a document storage area, for students to be able to download their lecture notes and submit assignments digitally, though in some instances there were also practice quizzes available. There was also a discussion board which was open to the students in a particular subject. However, I found the discussion board very ineffective. The main reason for this was because no one used it. However I think the reason that no one used it was because it was not structured or utilised in the subject effectively, it was just…there. There was no structure to the board itself – no categorisation of areas into subjects or topic areas. Contrast to this, in my current degree, discussion boards are also used. However, use of the discussion board is a compulsory part of the course, and further more, students are given guidelines for topics to discuss. The board is structured into weekly subject areas, which helps to guide discussion and organise posts. Thus making the discussion component much more effective. I feel that if the discussion board were set up properly in my science degree, students would have used it more. Those students who did try it were discouraged because they often received no resposne from other students. Though in the SpeakEasy experiment it was not expected that the teacher would also contribute to the online discussions, at a tertiary level such as my own degree, we as students hoped that there would be some lecturer involvement in guiding the discussion or assisting with areas of the subject that students were struggling with, however the lecturers never looked at the discussion board, rendering them pretty well abandoned by the students.
It’s clear the discussion board can work effectively though, as indicated in a study that compared online delivery with face to face delivery of a histology course. In this study, the majority of work performed by the online students occured over a discussion board and in live chats with the lecturer. The lecturer was thus involved in the online learning process and the students reported that they felt a closer bond with their lecturer than they felt they would have developed in a face to face course. Given that my science course was technically blended, it still felt very much like an entirely face to face course, which I found disappointing at the time, but I didn’t realise how much so until begun reading for this assignment.
References
Schoenfeld-Tacher, R., McConnell, S., Graham, M. 2001. Do No Harm – A Comparison of the Effects of On-Line vs. Traditional Delivery Media on a Science Course. Journal of Science Education and Technology, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 257-265.
Hoadley, C. M. & Linn, M. C. (2000) Teaching science through online, peer discussions: SpeakEasy in the Knowledge Integration Environment, International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), p. 839-857.
