Christopher D. Sessums :: Blog :: Online Learning Community Design Issues

http://xl-medium.net/WPblog/2008/02/24/online-learning-commu

This essay is a review of the following article written by V. Charalambos, Z. Michalinos, and R. Chamberlain entitled The Design of Online Learning Communities: Critical Issues, published in Educational Media International (2004), v. 41(2), pp. 135-143. Elements of this essay are incorporated in a literature review I am working on associated with peer-reviewed journal articles that focus on online learning communities.

In this study, the authors share lessons learned in the creation of an online learning community sponsored by the United States Distance Learning Consortium called STAR-Online (Supporting Teachers with Anywhere/Anytime Resources), a Web-based educational technology teacher professional development program/model.

According to the authors more than 20,000 teachers have participated since its inception in 2000. Each participant registers online, takes a pre-survey as a means for directing them to suggested learning modules which he or she can complete as directed. All participant data and modules he or she completes is stored in a personal online portfolio. Participants are given access to a number of professional development resources. These include Teacher Resources (lesson plans, digital artifacts, audio and video), communication tools (listserv, chat room, and online bulletin boards.

Professional development modules or lessons are built upon several components. Each contains an overview of the topic(s) to be presented, a set of competencies to be addressed, lessons/activities to engage in, a lesson plan development and integration activity, a sharing out feature which asks the participant to describe how the lesson plan worked, and what impact it had with students, and an evaluation form that is submitted to the module development team for feedback and assessment purposes.

Lessons learned After systematic research and evaluation, the authors suggest that there is no systematic formulae or step-by-step guarantees on how to build and structure successful, highly engaging, online learning communities. However, the authors do suggest that online learning community planners and developers can glean much from reviewing what others have experienced and learned from such endeavors. As such, the authors share what they believe to be successful characteristics of an online teacher professional development learning community.

Successful online communities have several of the following characteristics (pp. 138-139):

• They consist of people who cannot meet face-to-face because of place and time constraints and who meet online to work together on a shared task.
• The tasks and sub-tasks on which members work online are clearly defined and participants have a clear understanding of the expectations.
• A common sense of responsibility exists among participants towards the assigned task and peers.
• Easy access to technology and Computer Supported Collaborative Work (CSCW) tools is available to all members.
• The tools for communication are accessible and usable.
• There is good leadership and co-ordination of online activities.
• There are capable moderators that provide facilitation, help, guidance and support as needed to the members of the community.
• Ongoing interaction among members is based on constructive dialogue.
• A joint vision, control and ownership of the community, its goals and artifacts are equally shared among the members of the community.
• There is mutual support among its members and sub-groups.
• The rules that govern participation in the community are clearly defined.
• A system is in place monitoring member participation and behaviour and a system to sanction certain inappropriate behaviours.
• It is a safe environment where participants can freely express their opinion and ask questions without the fear of being 'attacked' by others.
• Activities completed are evaluated regularly and feedback is provided in a timely manner.
• There is a certain degree of structural dependence that establishes the need for members to interact and share resources.
• Smaller groups within the community provide a peer-support group smaller than the larger community (Levin et al., 1990; Palloff and Pratt, 1999; Salmon, 2000; Harasim, 2002) [authors' citations].

As a set of general principles or guidelines, the above list provides a set of ideas for online community designers and developers to consider. Combined, these principles relate to elements of Anklam's (2007) definition of a network. In this sense, networks are built upon "webs of relationships that we tap into in order to accomplish something that we could not do by ourselves" (Anklam, 2007, p. xi). As an organizational form, networks offer us a range of choices for managing and interacting with people, ideas, and work. Every such network has a particular purpose, an implicit or explicit organizational structure, a style or way in which participants engage and interact with resources and others, and such networks provide some form of value or the network itself probably would not need to exist. While networks will never replace hierarchical structures or markets, they can offer participants new ways to think and act.

As such I have difficulty accepting the authors belief that there are no systematic formulae or step-by-step guarantees on how to build and structure successful, highly engaging, online learning communities. Research on professional learning communities (DuFour, 2004), communities of practice (Wenger, 1998), and organizational networks (Anklem, 2007) suggest that there are specific steps that can be taken to create online learning communities that offer considerable value to participants.

The authors then go on to outline and consider questions and issues associated with planning the creation of an online community for professional development as well as offer practical recommendations derived from their work and the works of others.

While the planning and development suggestions are practical and offer meaningful insights, the authors only occasionally offer any real theoretical grounding for their suggestions outside their own experience. Team building, cooperative learning, and other models for organizing people to work and learn together are abundant. I am curious why the authors left these or other structural or organizational models out of their analysis of planning and creating online learning communities?

The authors conclude by acknowledging the complexity associated with learners, learning, and community design. They note that like learning itself, online learning communities involve a certain level of disequilibrium or struggle with the problems and possibilities of their own creation and capacity. Thus so much depends upon how structural decisions are negotiated among organizers and participants.

However, it does seem a bit disappointing to listen to the authors cite the importance of the experience and research of others in planning and creating online learning communities without offering reflections or citing the work of others in this growing field. As such, I find myself somewhat skeptical of their findings.

References:

Anklem, P. (2007). Net work: A practical guide to creating and sustaining networks at work and in the world. Burlington, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Charalambos, V., Michalinos, Z., & Chamberlain, R. (2004). The Design of Online Learning Communities: Critical Issues. Educational Media International, 41(2), pp. 135-143.

DuFour, R. (2004, May). What is a "Professional Learning Community"? Educational Leadership, 61(8), p. 6.

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.