By Stuart MacKay, Department of History
Over the past few years, online courses have exploded in popularity amongst universities all over North America. Ranging from Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) to smaller online courses, online learning presents both problems and opportunities for teaching assistants. Teaching assistants, accustomed to small groups with face-to-face interaction, must now deal with remote students as well as complex material online. In order to deal with this new learning environment, teaching assistants must first understand the difficulties of online learning and then alter their pedagogy in order to reflect the online learning environment. First, they must adjust their notion of learning support to adapt to the fluid nature of online discussion. Furthermore, teaching assistants must utilize the principles of active learning to avoid passive learning in an online environment. Finally, teaching assistants must design and encourage deep levels of cognitive processing in online discussion forums to create a more effective learning experience. Making the shift from standard discussion group teaching techniques to understanding how online learning works will help the teaching assistant become a true online learning facilitator rather than an empty online avatar.
Having facilitated discussion groups for a number of history courses, I was unsure how a deeply thematic course such as the “Madness in Modern Times” would translate to the online learning environment. The previous survey courses that I had been a teaching assistant for were predicated on quantifiable learning outcomes, such as the causes and factors in the development of European history. “Madness” posed a particular problem, because while it was designed to examine the evolution of a modern understanding of mental illnesses, the themes within the course were often abstract. As Andrew Scull has noted, madness is an elusive and difficult subject to understand, wavering between psychological and somatic explanations of its causes. However, Scull suggests that “such antinomies may be badly framed, posing these questions as either/or questions, when reality may need us to see them as both/and formulations” (5).
Because of these formulations, it is essential to understand how best to support the online learning of such a complex subject. The very nature of the course itself precludes a simplistic, progressive march through an array of dates and subjects. Because of this, a course such as “Madness” must accommodate the reality that, over its duration, new possibilities for learning will unfold in numerous and unforeseen way. During our course, online discussions have become a key component of the not only the course grade, but also how students interpret the source material. As Mary Thorpe has stated, the “quality of the learning experience is heavily dependent on the resources the group brings to bear and on the skill and commitment of their online tutor” (109). Therefore, she argues, online learning needs a new definition of learning support that transforms it from a strictly functional approach to a new approach that incorporates three essential and interrelated elements: identity, interaction, and time/duration (109). Developing a familiar online identity allows the teaching assistant to humanize the online learning process, creating deeper interaction between the learning supporter and the students. Time and duration require the teaching assistant to respond and act within certain parameters in order to move the course discussion one way or another. The benefits of recognizing these three elements, and incorporating them into your toolkit, as an online teaching assistant are immeasurable. For my course, a better utilization of time management techniques to offer a welcoming online presence will assist me to better moderate complex discussions online.
Transferring active learning strategies to the online environment is another challenge faced by teaching assistants. One of the key concerns is that online discussions lend themselves to shallow discussion, as opposed to the deeper, more complex discussion expected in a classroom setting. However, research has shown that online instruction is a useful tool in enhancing active learning through discussions. As Kerstin Hamann, Phillip H. Pollock, and Bruce M. Wilson have shown, online discussions “are potentially lengthy, cognitively deep, and indicative of a student orientated environment” (132). One key suggestion within their article is that ensuring discussions groups remain gender-balanced, as evidence has shown that gender-balanced groups generally are more likely to post longer statements that engage with the course material and their colleagues’ opinions. In addition, they suggest methods of rewarding students who post online discussion material with points that eventually are incorporated into participation marks. This ensures that the discussions remain on topic, and that students are actively involved in posting (Hamann, Pollock, and Wilson, 131-141). In “Madness and Modern Times,” teaching assistants allocated each student a leadership role in the discussion group, requiring them to start the discussion group that week. This allows the students a leadership role and gives them a sense of ownership of the course itself. Strategies such as this ensure that students remain active participants instead of regressing into passive participants.
Although both these suggestions may help create a deeper and richer discussion, teaching assistants must still understand how students use metacognitive strategies in online discussion. As C.Y. Chen and S. Pederson have argued, participants who use these strategies tended to have a richer and more fruitful online learning experience. Their research suggests that larger online discussion groups that required reading multiple threads resulted in less student interaction. By dividing the discussion group into five students, students engaged in a more thorough examination of the discussion points, with participants linking facts and ideas, offering new information, and presenting a wider perspective. While metacognitive learning is influenced by a wide variety of internal and external factors, the authors suggest that facilitators could offer guidance in how best to utilize the discussion system as well as help students take control of their learning by offering guidance on how best to practice time management. These suggestions offer a new way of connecting with students in an online environment, and while it may take some time and effort, the research suggests that the impact on student learning is significant. A teaching assistant for an online course must constantly engage with best practices to increase student learning. By altering their notions of learning support, encouraging active learning, and emphasizing deep metacognitive learning that enhances student engagement with the course, teaching assistants can transform their role from a distant and uninvolved online avatar to a welcome guide on the pathways of online learning.
References
Chen, C.Y, and S. Pederson. “Learners Internal Management of Cognitive Processing in Online Learning.” Innovations in Education and Teaching International 49 (November 2012): 363-73. doi:10.1080/14703297.2012.728873.
Hamann, Kerstin, Philip H. Pollack, and Bruce M. Wilson. “Does Active Learning Enhance Learner Outcomes? Evidence from Discussion Participation in Online Classes.” Journal of Political Science Education 3 (2007): 131-42. doi:10.1080/15512160701338304.
Scull, Andrew. Madness: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011.
Thorpe, Mary. “Rethinking Learner Support: The Challenge of Collaborative Online Learning.” The Journal of Open, Distance, and e-learning 17 (2002): 105-119. doi:10.1080/02680510220146887a