Reflection of Peer Feedback

I really like the new format of roundtable to discuss our studies. It enables us to receive much more peer feedbacks than before. And we also have more interaction with our peers. Here are some valuable feedback from peers and instructor:

1.   Based on the data collected and due to the constrain of research method, it's better rephrase the first and second research question. For example, change the first research question from "How do online instructor perform when providing feedback?" to "What do online instructors do when they providing feedback?"  

2.   Rephrase the sub-headings of literature review section. Avoid using heading such as "Define Online Learning".

3.   I should have more citations and references for the literature review part.

4.   It's better to use tables/charts to summarize the statistic part of the findings. It will be easier for the audience to understand.

5.   It would be better to use pseudonym name for the participants in findings and discussion part so that the audience can match statements with participants, which they cannot do when the author just use "a participant" or "one of the instructors" to represent the participants.

6.   It's important to have a conclusion part after "Discussion" so that the audience won't get lost in all the findings and discussions.

7.   Avoid using indirect quote or citation. It's always better to use first hand resource when it's possible.

8.   I should explain and cite the terminologies that the audience might not be familiar with, such as "interview survey", "cognitive interview", and "constant comparative method", etc.

I really appreciate all the comments, suggestions, and questions from my peers and instructor.

My Theoretical Framework

My professional goal is to improve the quality of online learning through enhancing interactions in asynchronous online environment, which is greatly influenced by the scholars and their research mentioned below.

Bransford (1999) argues effective learning should be: community-centered; learner-centered; knowledge-centered; and assessment-centered. Since my focus area is online learning, I applied Bransford's four lens in online environment.

According to Ally's (2008) definition of online learning, online learning is:

The use of the Internet to access learning materials; to interact with the content, instructor, and other learners; and to obtain support during the learning process, in order to acquire knowledge, to construct personal meaning, and to grow from the learning experience (p. 17).

This statement implies the importance of interaction in online learning. Dewey (1938), Vygotsky (1978), and Anderson (2003) point out that interaction is one of the most important components of any learning experience, which also applies to online learning.

Moore (1989) identified three types of interaction: learner-content (without which there is no education), learner-instructor interaction (especially important at the point of application), and learner-learner interaction (a newer development to distance education and more important to younger or less autonomous learners) in distance education, which also applies to online learning.

And Anderson (2003) argues that deep and meaning learning will happen if one of the three types of interaction (student-content, student-instructor, student-student) is at high level.

Online learning could be either formal and informal. And I'm interested in learner-centered formal community-based online courses.

And this is how I come up with my big theoretical framework.

Reference:

Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of educational theory for online learning. Theory and practice of online learning, 15-44.

Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right: An updated and theoretical rational for interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2). Retrieved August 27, 2007, from http:/www. irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (1999). How people learn: Mind, brain, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Macmillan.

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction.

Vygotsky, L. L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.

My Big Research Question and So What

Currently, my big research question is: 

How to improve the quality of online learning through enhancing interactions in asynchronous online environment?

This question itself can answer the "So What" question to some extent. If we can figure out how to effectively enhance interaction, which includes teacher-student, student-content, and student-student interactions, in online environment, the quality of online learning, which could be measured by course completion rate, student retention rate, students' learning outcome and satisfactory, etc., could be improved.

Although online learning has been widely accepted and applied for years because of its remarkable potential and advantages (From Fall 2001 to Fall 2011, the number of post-secondary students taking at least one online course increased from 9.2 percent to 32 percent in U.S. (Allen & Seaman, 2013)), its issues and limitations can not be ignored. The high attrition rate (Welsh et al., 2003) caused by poorly designed online courses (Zaharias et al., 2009), lack of social interaction (Arbaugh, 2000), inexperienced instructors, and lack of support system (Frankola, 2001) has impeded the success of online learning. Since interaction has been identified as one of the most components of any learning experience by Dewey (1938), Vygotsky (1978), and Anderson (2003), for online learning, interaction is very important as well, maybe even more important than that of traditional learning. Several scholars (Bernard et al., 2009; Hawkins et al., 2013) have conducted research to investigate the relationship between interaction happening in online courses and students' course completion and learning outcome. And the results support that there exists positive relationship between interaction and student achievement.

And this is why I'm interested in this research question and how this can contribute to our field.

References

Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. Babson Survey Research Group

Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right: An updated and theoretical rational for interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2). Retrieved August 27, 2007, from http:/www. irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230

Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). How classroom environment and student engagement affect learning in Internet-based MBA courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 63(4), 9-26.

Bernard, R. M., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research,79(3), 1243-1289.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Macmillan.

Frankola, K. (2001). Why online learners drop out. Workforce, 80(10), 53-59.

Hawkins, A., Graham, C. R., Sudweeks, R. R., & Barbour, M. K. (2013). Academic performance, course completion rates, and student perception of the quality and frequency of interaction in a virtual high school. Distance Education, 34(1), 64-83. doi:10.1080/01587919.2013.770430

Vygotsky, L. L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press.

Welsh, L.T.,Wanberg, C.R., Brown, K. G., & Simmering, M. J. (2003). E-learning: Emerging uses, best practices, and future directions. International Journal of Training and Development, 7, 245–258.

Zaharias, P., & Poylymenakou, A. (2009). Developing a usability evaluation method for e-learning applications: Beyond functional usability. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 25(1), 75–98.

My Reflection on Dossier 2

Dossier 2 is not trying to make things difficult for students. It's not only for the faculties to evaluate students' progress in research, teaching, and service, but also for the students themselves to clarify their own professional goals and academic goals.

I learned a lot in the process of preparing my second dossier. Although I have confirmed that my research interest area is online learning by the end of first semester at IU, and proposed my first-author study when submitting my dossier #1, I had't established my theoretical framework until the later stage of my preparation. When writing my candidate statement, I summarized what I have done (e.g. literature reviews I conducted, my first-author study, projects that I was involved in, etc.), what I was doing (on-going projects), and what I planned to do in the future (following study, long term research goal, etc.). In this process, I was able to synthesize them together, and generate a clear picture of my theoretical framework. This process is also the process of making sense my study. In another word, I was trying to recall and explain why I was interested in this specific area, what were the key concepts and theories in this area, what the gap was, etc. to the audience and myself. In the summary and self-estimation, I identified my strengths and weak points that I need to improve.

Another thing I learned in preparing dossier 2 is: Finish your first-author study as early as possible. First of all, research is the most important perspective among the three perspectives that we should cover in dossier 2. And our progress in research is mostly reflected in our first-author study, which entirely demonstrates our knowledge in our interested area and our ability of designing and conducting empirical studies. Moreover, your understanding and perception of your focus area will be greatly deepened in this process.

Teaching and services should be aligned with your research goal. This is not only the requirement of dossier, it also makes your research relevant and meaningful. What you learned in research can help you improve teaching and services. Teaching and services can also help you confirm and refine your theoretical framework.

Practicing presentation in my research groups was extremely helpful for me. When I presented in my research group for the first time, I just roughly put everything together. Many issues and problems arose in this process. The faculties and group members provided many useful and constructive feedback and suggestion. After I modified my presentation according to those feedback, I presented in another research group. Great improvement was made in just two days. So, don't be afraid of being embarrassed when presenting imperfect presentation. There is nothing to lose in rehearsal. What I gained was much more than I could imagine before that.

It's important to control your excitement level on the presenting day. Don't get excited too early if you are not the first person to present. Adjusting the tempo of practicing could help you get your peak condition when you present.