Knowing a bit more now about student support, I realise that I have so far only focused on one - the pedagogical support. Even then, I have tended to limit support only to the content of the learning and not the process. For example, I have not thought about whether any support is needed to help people use the technology we are using. I have also failed to give much in the way of pointers for further research, other than the content that we provide. With the variety of resources now available on the web, this seems to limit the richness of material studied. The 10 scaffold supports given by McLoughlin are a good resource to expand on current practice. The spectrum of support from instructor-learner is also valuable for progressive reduction in scaffolding.
Looking at the support that encourages students to sustain their studies (Dearnley, 2003), there are several points here to consider. Although the core delivery mechanism of an online web tutorial does build some sense of community, the extent to which support goes on outside the tutorials is not obvious. I am aware that some connections have been struck up between individuals and the tutoring staff, but that has happened naturally rather than being an explicit design feature. Maybe these are examples of what Dearnley (2003) calls "informal professional networks". This is a feature which could be developed in future.
On occasions, an individual's personal commitments (holiday/family illness etc) has prevented them participating in a tutorial, but the fact that the session is recorded does at least let the person catch up what they have missed. This is a helpful support feature, it seems to me.
One aspect that is not covered in any of the readings is language. I invariably have at least one delegate out of the 8 who does not have English as their first language. Although there is no promise made that allowances will be made for difficulties in this area, I am wondering whether there is any support that can be made available. The fact that the core discussion forum is via a synchronous web conferencing system may well make it much harder for 'non-English speakers' to stay engaged. One option that comes to mind is that any content to be delivered is provided in advance, say, as a podcast, and that the discussion topics are also provided in advance to allow for preparation. A further option is to create a discussion thread in an asynchronous setting, which can supplement the live discussion, and give those requiring more time to think the chance to do so.
The final reading, Ludwig-Hardman, S. and Dunlap, J.C. (2003) has opened my eyes to what is probably the biggest oversight in my distance learning offers - what the student is looking to gain the learning. All my students are university educated and most also have a postgraduate qualification. However, it is rare that they have done any distance learning. The learning orientations assessment they describe provides a sense of the motivation that the learner has towards the learning outcomes of the programme, and can also point to the extent to which they are disposed to self directed learning. A version of this kind of assessment at the outset would provide information about the kind of support that each learner may need to achieve the outcomes they are looking for from the course.
Dearnley, C. (2003) ‘Student support in open learning: sustaining the process’, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, University Press/McGraw-Hill Education.
Ludwig-Hardman, S. and Dunlap, J.C. (2003) ‘Learner support services for online students: scaffolding for success’, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning [online] http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/131/211 (Accessed 1st June 2011).
McLoughlin, C. (2002), Distance Education Vol. 23, No. 2, Learner Support in Distance and Networked Learning Environments: Ten Dimensions for Successful Design.
No comments:
Post a Comment