making discussion forums work
DESCRIPTION
These are the slides accompanying my presentation "Making discussions forums work" at the University of Manchester on 2nd November 2012. They might be of interest to language and translation teachers looking for ideas to get their discussion forums off the ground. Please check the provisional proposed model and add your comments at: http://bit.ly/QYIozRTRANSCRIPT
Making discussion forums work
Benoît Guilbaud [email protected]
@benguilbaud
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
This work is licensed under theAttribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported
Creative Commons Licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0).To view a copy of this license, visit:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/deed.en_US.
Benoît Guilbaud, 2012
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Picture by pennstatelive via flickr.com
“More group work”
“I don’t know the people on my course”
“I feel isolated when I work”
Peer-feedback
Face-to-face
DistanceSocial
Sharing
Transparency
Openness
Open learning
Error correction
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Context
25 final year undergraduates (C1)
English ⇢ French translation (L1 ⇢ L2)
September 2011 - March 2012
Weekly contributions to discussion forums
18 texts18 weeks
1 hour / weekcontact time
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Weekly taskSharing part of the
homework on the forumsCommenting on one
another’s contributions
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
The study
Collect student feedback on use of OADs for peer-feedback
Measure student engagement with OADs
Gauge if interactions lead to collaborative learning
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Methodology
3 feedback questionnaires assessing
expectations & satisfaction
pre / mid / post-study
quantitative + open questions
Section(2(–(Social(networking(sites(7(for!all!purposes!other!than!translation
2a.$Are$you$a$member$of$one$or$more$social$networking$sites$(Facebook,$Twitter,$Google+,$etc.)?$Which$one(s)?
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
2b.$If$you$answered$‘yes’$in$2a,$please$place$one$tick$per$line$in$the$following$table:
When using social networking sites (not
for translation purposes)
Never Rarely Sometimes Often Very often Always
Not applicable / don’t know
I log in to my existing member account.
I read other members’ contributions and existing discussions.
I post contributions in response to other members’ activity.
I engage in longer discussions (more than 2 posts) with other members.
When another member has a question, I try and answer it.
Using$social$media$in$an$undergraduate$translation$class$–$a$case$studyPreliminary$questionnaire$X$Benoît$Guilbaud$X$2011
Page 4 of 5
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Methodology
Collection and analysis of
contributions to OADs using
Murphy’s collaboration model (2004)
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Findings
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Feedback
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Feedback
March 2012: “The platform was useful”
92%
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
“I think it works really well and is easy to access.”
“Working really well - maybe we could have a similar thing on other modules.”
“It would be useful to have it for other courses.”
“Very useful.”
Feedback
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
“Not enough students use it for it to be wholly effective. I think most students just
rely on the contributions of others.”
“It is just down to ourselves to make more of an effort this term, which I will attempt to do.”
Feedback
“Very useful. No improvements needed.”
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Engagement
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Contributions per week
0
13
25
38
50
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Num
ber o
f con
tribu
tions
to fo
rum
s
Week number
IdealActual
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Analysis of contributions
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Murphy’s collaboration model(2004)
Murphy’s collaboration model (2004)
A Producing shared artefacts
B Building shared goals and purposes
C Co-constructing shared perspectives and meanings
P Accommodating or reflecting the perspectives of others
I Articulating individual perspectives
S Social presence
Colla
bora
tion
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
A Producing shared artefacts
B Building shared goals and purposes
C Co-constructing shared perspectives and meanings
P Accommodating or reflecting the perspectives of others
I Articulating individual perspectives
S Social presence
Colla
bora
tion
Distribution of contributions per category (% of total)
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Distribution of contributions per category (% of total)
A Producing shared artefacts 0%
B Building shared goals and purposes 0%
C Co-constructing shared perspectives and meanings 33%
P Accommodating or reflecting the perspectives of others 2%
I Articulating individual perspectives 23%
S Social presence 41%
Colla
bora
tion
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Articulating individual perspectives (I)
A
Summarising or reporting on content without reference to
the perspectives of others (S)5%B
Summarising or reporting on content without reference to
the perspectives of others (S)5%
C
Summarising or reporting on content without reference to
the perspectives of others (S)5%
P
Statement of personal opinion or beliefs making no reference
to perspectives of others (O)18%I
Statement of personal opinion or beliefs making no reference
to perspectives of others (O)18%
S
Statement of personal opinion or beliefs making no reference
to perspectives of others (O)18%
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Accommodating or reflecting the perspectives of others (P)
A Coordinating perspectives (C) 1%
B
Coordinating perspectives (C) 1%
B
Introducing new perspectives (N) 0%C Introducing new perspectives (N) 0%
P Indirectly disagreeing with challenging statements made by another participant (I) 1%
I
Indirectly disagreeing with challenging statements made by another participant (I) 1%
IDirectly disagreeing with challenging statements made by
another participant (D) 1%SDirectly disagreeing with challenging statements made by
another participant (D) 1%
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Co-constructing shared perspectives and meanings (C)
A Sharing advice (S) 0%A
Responding to questions (R) 11%B Responding to questions (R) 11%B
Provoking thought and discussion (P) 0%C Provoking thought and discussion (P) 0%
P Soliciting feedback (F) 9%PPosing rhetorical questions (Q) 0%
IPosing rhetorical questions (Q) 0%
IAsking for clarification/ elaboration (A) 10%
SAsking for clarification/ elaboration (A) 10%
S Sharing information and resources (I) 4%
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Picture by HckySo via flickr.com
Identified issues
Identified issues
Lack of a common goal
Little reference to perspectives of others
Near-absence of disagreements
50% of questions left unanswered
Near-absence of source referencing & sharing
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Other issues
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Interface
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Impact of (non)assessment
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Impact of assessment on number of contributions
Guilbaud, 2012 McNeilly & Zhok, 2012
Level: BA Level: MA
Blended learning Distance learning
Not assessed Assessed (10% of unit)
Feedback mostly positive (92%) Feedback “overwhelmingly positive”
Average no. of contributionsper student per week = 0,27
Average no. of contributionsper student per week ≃1
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
Suggested model
Beno
ît G
uilba
ud, T
he U
niver
sity
of M
anch
este
r (U
K), 2
012
!Work in progress
© B
enoî
t Guil
baud
, The
Univ
ersit
y of
Man
ches
ter (
UK)
, 201
2
Suggested criteria for online collaboration
!Work in progress
© B
enoî
t Guil
baud
, The
Univ
ersit
y of
Man
ches
ter (
UK)
, 201
2
Suggested criteria for online collaboration
!Work in progress
Little reference to perspectives of others
Near-absence of disagreements
Lack of a common goal
50% of questions left unanswered
Near-absence of source referencing & sharing
Add your comments and suggestions at:
!
http://bit.ly/QYIozR
I think this could be improved by...
© B
enoî
t Guil
baud
, The
Univ
ersit
y of
Man
ches
ter (
UK)
, 201
2
Couros, A., 2011. Why networked learning matters. Education in a Changing Environment (ECE) 6th International Conference, Creativity and Engagement in Higher Education, 6-8 July 2011, University of Salford, Greater Manchester, UK.
McNeilly, E. & Zhok, A., 2012. The Online Discussion Board for Translation - An Undergraduate MFL Perspective for the Study of Italian and Russian. In: LLAS: 7th e-learning symposium. University of Southampton, 26-27 January 2012.
Murphy, E., 2004. Recognising and promoting collaboration in an online asynchronous discussion. In: British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(4) pp.421–431.
Wheeler, S., Yeomans, P. and Wheeler, D., 2008. The Good, the Bad and the Wiki: Evaluating Student Generated Content as a Collaborative Learning Tool. In: British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(6), pp.987-995.
Wheeler, S., 2012. Digital Pedagogy: Content is a Tyrant, Context is King. In: NAACE 2012 Annual Conference, 9 March 2012, Leicester, United Kingdom.
References