|
In
principal, the idea of students learning in an online forum in their own time, at
their own speed and in their own space, is one of the obvious potentialities of learning in this Internet revolution. But there have been very few examples
that I am aware of involving history or history teachers.
The Guardian Learn.co Versailles Experience
and johndclare.net
are
two that I can think of. So why has there been such reluctance?
Security
of the students is clearly a concern. How to guarantee that only the right
people have access to the students and vice versa? Reliability of both software
and hardware is also an issue. Until recently, forum software could be slow and
relatively complex, particularly a problem if students were unfamiliar with the
medium. School hardware and Internet connection is notoriously unreliable and
again until recently, most students had no other means of access. A final
problem is the unrestricted nature of the Internet. What if students fail to
recognise the forum as an extension of the classroom and contribute with
inappropriate language and comments? Can we trust them?
The
recent Spring Day forum organised and hosted through the ‘Homework Help’
student forum at Schoolhistory.co.uk and involving two schools,
Neale-Wade
Community College in England, and the International School of Toulouse in France, suggested that at least some of the above problems might be
overcome. The software platform used was Invision
Power Board, a powerful,
flexible and secure forum environment.
The Spring Day Event
Launched
on March 21st and open for one week, the forum centred around 10
discussion questions about European issues. Whilst anyone who accessed the
website could view the contributions, only those registered by the two teachers
could contribute. As a consequence, all the contributors were known by either
of the two teacher ‘administrators’. In
theory, approximately 50 students were involved, but largely as a consequence of
unreliable Internet access, only about 20 students made more than 5
contributions. Students were restricted from contributing new discussion
‘threads’, but otherwise their contributions were unmediated. If any student
made a contribution that might cause offence or took discussion significantly
‘off-topic’, they might be placed in ‘moderation’. This resulted in all
future contributions having to be approved by a teacher before
publication. This happened on three occasions when comments became
‘personal’; but without prompting, the students apologized and the
moderation period became a temporary ‘sin bin’ experience.
In
total, there were 411 contributions to the main event and 11 to the
supplementary evaluation period, approximately 37000 words in total. The forum
topics were ‘viewed’ 2970 times. The most popular topic was on the meaning of
‘nationality’, which received 65 contributions. The least popular (11
contributions) was on the question of whether Europe should have a single seat
on the UN Security Council. The most contributions by any one student in the
week was 51.
Breaking down the classroom barriers of space
and time
(i)
The when, where and who of online forums
One of
the central features of the ICT revolution in education is said to be that
learning can potentially take place at anytime and anywhere. Student forums are perhaps a
good example of how this might happen in reality. Despite
some class time being given over to the forum, approximately 85% of
contributions were made in the students’ own time. The fact that the
International School of Toulouse is a ‘laptop’ school certainly accounted
for the fact that students at Toulouse made by far the most contributions. Many
of these contributions were made during lesson breaks, lunchtime and immediately
before and after
school. There were even some contributions made in ‘quiet’ periods in other
teachers’ lessons. But of the non-class time contributions, considerably more
were made from home than in school. It was quite a bizarre experience to log-on
early Sunday morning to find half a dozen students already busy discussing the
nature of the ICT revolution on education. The busiest time on the forum was in
fact the last Friday evening of the debate, with students competing until
midnight to have the last word.
Grouping
of students is usually limited by the physical boundaries of classroom walls and
whole school timetables. Boundaries are necessary in education but in a forum
they can be created flexibly. A forum can allow us to create appropriate
spaces. Certain students can be
given access to particular resources and can be only allowed to communicate with
whomever the teacher requires. Groups can be created of any size with any
students who happen to be anywhere. This has obvious potentiality for
transnational projects such as Spring Europe but it also has less obvious
potential for vertical grouping of students who are nominally members of the
same institution. The student who made most contributions to the Spring Europe
forum was a quiet, unassuming student in a younger year group than most on the
forum. The forum has had interesting consequences for how he is perceived by
older students in the school.
(ii)
Neither
written work or class discussion: a ‘third-way’ of learning?
A forum
clearly creates a different format for learning. It is neither traditional
written work or classroom discussion, but a ‘third way’, somewhere between
the two. Students who contributed most to the Spring Europe forum were not
necessarily strongest ‘linguistic’ learners, neither were they those who
might be expected to dominate normal classroom discussion.
Of the
two formats, the forum was certainly closer to classroom discussion; but discussion with a
difference. The students contributions were more considered and often relatively
sophisticated.
In class discussion students are often too concerned about what they are
going to say and then building up the courage to say it. In the forum, students
had to listen (read) each other carefully if they were to make a meaningful
contribution. Furthermore, students could read each other contributions as often
and as slowly as they liked, without distraction.
And when they were ready to make a contribution, they could take as much
time as necessary. Paradoxically
perhaps, the discussion appeared far less contrived than it might in a normal
classroom environment, because the students had decided to join the
debate at that particular moment. There were other advantages. In a class of 30 students
in a normal classroom environment, how many students might be
expected to make a meaningful contribution in an hour-long discussion? How many
students would be able to concentrate for that hour? How much of what is said by
others is remembered? How does one revisit it? Perhaps
the depersonalised nature of the discussion also contributed to the more reasoned
approach of the students. 'Live' discussion and debate always relies somewhat on a
performance from the students; how things are said, as much what is said. In the
forum, it was the ideas that mattered. It was interesting to note how many
students changed their minds as they listened to each other. It was even more
interesting to note how many publicly acknowledged that their position had
changed.
The role
of the teacher was also, in some ways, similar to a normal classroom discussion:
we watched and ‘listened’ carefully, prompted and guided as necessary. But
because students were obviously much more comfortable in the time and space
allowed for contributions, the teacher’s role became much less prominent.
Occasionally discussion needed to be ‘steered’, but a more interesting
teaching role developed where there was a genuine need for traditional
didacticism. A student might raise a question or seek clarification and the
teacher sought to provide this. Because this was an online forum, the
possibility existed of the teacher providing a hyperlink to a further
appropriate resource. Such 'real time' differentiation in normal class
discussion is impossible. This form of teaching is already very common on the
‘Homework Help’ student forum at Schoolhistory.co.uk. But in a discussion
forum such as this, it further extends the ‘just-in-time’ learning ethos that
apparently characterizes the ICT revolution in education. The learner
acquires the skills or knowledge necessary to move the learning on, at the
moment the skills or knowledge are required. This is
efficient learning because it is driven by need and personal motivation.
The
Future
Over the
following months and years we will see many other such experiments in
forum-based learning. Many of the problems highlighted at the beginning of this
report will continue to be overcome: teachers will become more confident that
the technology can be used in a secure environment; students will become
increasingly competent with the format; software designers will continue to
enhance the flexibility and usability of their forums; and ultimately students
and teachers will have access to reliable hardware and fast internet connection.
As I
have found teaching in a technology rich environment, ICT provides many
interesting possibilities to create innovative ways of learning. (see Richard
Jones-Nerzic Laptop
Revolution) But it does not generally provide a panacea of solutions to age-old
educational problems. As with most things ICT based, we have always to look
beyond the novelty value. Students will be motivated to use forums not because
they generally enjoy using forums and chat rooms in their spare time, but
because they find a particular forum stimulating or useful. Similarly, it is
always important to avoid using hi-tech because it is hi-tech. The least
successful aspect of the forum occurred in the one lesson dedicated to using the
forum when all my students were in the same teaching room. The
contributions shortened and became less considered; the issues could have been
much better dealt with in a traditional classroom discussion.
There
are lots of questions to be considered in the future. What is the appropriate
role for the teacher in such a learning environment? What about assessment? Are
certain subjects more appropriate than others? In which other ways does the
technology need to be improved? In transnational projects can the software help
overcome the language barriers?
In the
meantime, let me conclude with the optimistic comments of one 13 year old in
his 51st contribution to the forum: ‘I'm not sure if this will be
one of the most common ways of communicating in the future, but it should be.’
Richard
Jones-Nerzic
Head of Humanities
International
School of Toulouse - April 2003
Back to
IST Spring Europe Home
|
