Assessing Collaborative Efforts

The growth of structured collaboration and group learning within distance education has contributed to student engagement and brought new challenges for educators. As Dr. Siemens stated in the course video, “The challenge is: How do we change an assessment model based on individual learning to a model based on collaborative learning?” (Laureate, 2008). As the transition is occurring between an individual learning model and a collaborative learning community there are several assessment options to consider. Instead of looking at assessment as a separate component to teaching or learning it is more appropriate to view each component as an interdependent piece of the education process. Assessment, learning objectives, and instructional strategies must all be aligned to achieve the highest degree of success. If collaboration and group work is part of the learning objectives then they must also be included in assessment. Some of the possible options for assessment in an online learning environment include peer assessment, providing opportunities for participation in online communities where students receive direct feedback, assessment based on the value of student contribution, and assessment based on computer collected data (Laureate, 2008).  To provide the most comprehensive assessment more than one strategy should be used.

Another important consideration for developing the assessment component of an online program is whether the assessment is fair and equitable. “Assessment should be: fair and direct, based on stated outcomes, and equitable” (Laureate, 2008). It is also worth considering the weight placed on specific levels of achievement vs. student growth. There must be balance between these two aspects to create an accurate, fair, and equitable assessment component.

In addition to these considerations an educator should also consider the unique and individual characteristics of the students who will be enrolling in this program. Each student learns best in different ways and even has what Howard Gardner identifies as multiple intelligences. Students who are strong in the interpersonal intelligence will naturally do well in collaborative and group work. Those who are weak may struggle in this area. In order to meet the needs of these students it will be necessary to differentiate both instruction and assessment. Educators must also consider student growth as well as provide clear and measurable goals for student collaboration.  When these steps are taken students who may struggle with working in groups will have the best chance for success within the distance program.

Reference

Gardner, H. E. (2000). Intelligence Reframed: Multiple Int. Perseus Books Group.

Laureate Education, Inc. (2008). Principles of distance education: Assessment of collaborative learning. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Distance Education the Next Generation

Distance education is certainly an area of education that has seen its share of change over the years. While distance education is not a new phenomenon the growth of internet resources over the past couple of decades has brought rapid growth and change to this educational arena. Dr. Simonson defines distance education as, “Formal Education that is institutionally based where the learning group (the teacher, the students, and the resources) are separated by geography and sometimes be time” (Laureate Education, Inc. 2008). Using this definition to limit the scope of research it is possible to examine how the distance education programs of institutions have evolved. Some of the greatest ways in which distance education has changed over the years is seen in the increase of equivalent programs for distance students. Modern resources make collaboration and communication more practical to the point that students can attend distance programs that are based on the other side of the world. An examination of almost any higher education institution will reveal an, “explosive e-learning growth, most colleges and universities are willingly evolving to this new environment and providing some, if not a significant portion, of their educational offerings in web-based or other nontraditional formats” (Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. 2008, July/August). The increase in distance programs is not limited to higher education. This trend is also seen in corporate training and even in the K12 sector.

Considering the three articles covering the Evolution of Distance Education and the video clip from Dr. Simonson there seem to be a great deal of similarities. Dr. Simonson sees the future of distance education growing but not exploding or replacing the traditional brick and mortar university (Laureate Education, Inc., 2008). Moller, Foshay, Huett, and Coleman tend to focus more on the growing pains or current limitations found in the various distance education models. In the corporate training area of distance education the limitation center around poor quality and limited qualified instructional designers (Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J., 2008, May/June). Higher education communities are struggling with the time and effort needed to produce quality courses as well as the negative social stigma attached to distance education (Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J., 2008, July/August). In part because of its rather new and rapid growth the K12 distance education programs seem to be inundated with students who are unable or unwilling to function in a traditional classroom (Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W. & Coleman, C., 2008, September/October). As a result the effectiveness of these programs is difficult to measure and often questioned.

Considering the various perspectives of these articles and Dr. Simonson’s video it is clear that distance education will continue to grow and be a substantial force within education as a whole. What remains to be seen is how each of the various facets of education will seek to overcome the challenges that come with the growth of distance education.

Resources

Laureate Education, Inc. (2008). Principles of distance education: Distance education: The next generation. Baltimore, MD: Author.

Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, May/June). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 1: Training and Development). TechTrends, 52(3), 70–75.

Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, July/August). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 2: Higher Education). TechTrends, 52(4), 66–70.

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W. & Coleman, C. (2008, September/October). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 3: K12). TechTrends, 52(5), 63–67.