Randee Lipson Lawrence
National-Louis University 2000
In the Fall of 1998, the adult education faculty at National-Louis University implemented the masters program online. Our goal was to offer the same courses in our face-to-face program in a format that would extend our audience beyond our geographical area. This presented many challenges. Our program is cohort based. Students complete all of their course work together as a small group over a period of sixteen months. Collaborative learning is one of our basic philosophical foundations. Collaborative learning can be defined as students and teachers engaged in a process of mutual inquiry and reflection through the sharing of ideas, experiences, and perspectives. It involves exploring problems and issues through dialogue from the multiple viewpoints of the participants in order to arrive at a deeper level of understanding. In collaborative learning groups participants learn from their peers, teach their teachers and create knowledge together. (Lawrence, 1996).
Over a fifteen year period of working with adults in cohort groups, I have witnessed first hand the interactive learning communities that form when adult students are together over an extended period of time. Students begin to view themselves as part of a unit. The success of every member is as important as individual success. Could this happen online as well? The persistence rates for online learners are considerably lower than in face-to-face classes. One of the reasons cited has been the isolation students feel when they have only their computer for company.
This paper will describe how one university program intentionally created an online learning community. Areas to be addressed include: the residential workshop, the circle, the class lounge, commitment, communication, creating a safe space, telephone and email, and the role of instructors.
Residential Workshop
A critical feature that we implemented was a three day residential seminar at the onset of the program. In the spirit of the Danish folk schools, this experience immersed students in a living/learning environment where they got to know each other quickly. They now had faces, voices and memories of shared experiences to give fuller dimension to the words on their computer screen in the months to come.
The Danish folk schools were established in the early 1800’s by founder N.S. F. Gruntvig. The concept included a mutual exchange of knowing by students and teachers while eating, sleeping, working and playing together. Gruntvig advocated a process of "reciprocal teaching" where students and teachers were engaged in an ongoing dialogue that allowed them to gain insight into themselves and their world. (Warren, 1989) The opportunity to temporarily detach oneself from other life commitments and the continuity of the learning experience beyond the time parameters of a traditional classroom are among the benefits of residential learning (Fleming, 1998)
The primary goal of the residential experience is to give co-learners the opportunity to establish and develop relationships which will sustain them throughout their collaborative learning journey. A secondary goal is to immerse the students in the work of the first two course (taken concurrently online over an eight week period): Adult Development and Learning (introduction to the theories, practice and literature of adult learning and adult development), and Adult Learning in Groups (a grounding in collaborative learning process in the context of adult education), as well as critical thinking and its role in learning. The students participate in a second residential weekend at the end of the program to integrate their learning, share research and bring closure to their group experience. One participant described her experience with the residential workshop:
"I feel that the residential experience is essential to any distance learning program. I don’t think I would have felt as ‘involved’ if I hadn't bonded with my cohorts. Also, in a way I feel responsible for their learning as well as my own, since we are in this thing together. I feel as though we will sink or swim together."
It is important to be intentional about the learning experiences offered to the students during the residential weekends. It is not enough to simply bring people together for three days (Lawrence, 1999). One of the activities involved a group problem solving exercise where the participants were charged with planning a distance learning program. There was a wealth of knowledge in the group which was tapped into as ideas were shared, listened to, built upon, challenged and explored. This activity served the tri -purpose of identifying strategies for future online communication, team building and creating opportunities to observe and study group dynamic behavior. Another activity was a field experience based on the work of Lawrence and Mealman (1996). Students were engaged in a number of experiential activities designed to deepen awareness and work collaboratively.
As important as the formal activities of the residence were, participants highly valued the opportunities for informal learning outside of planned activities. These opportunities occurred during meals, on the porch steps, during walks on the grounds and during evening social activities. One participant reflected on the pace of life.
"Perhaps part of my frustration ... I will become overwhelmed with my schedule and duties-that my experiences may drown of neglect in a sea of deadlines and assignments and daily responsibilities. The residential weekend was designed to help take us away from the rat race for several days and have opportunity for reflection. The times for this that I enjoyed the most were when several of us would sit on the steps outside the center and talk. That was very relaxing, and conversation flowed naturally and freely."
The residential experience helped the students to form bonds which have sustained them through the times when they work alone on their assignments in the middle of the night at distant sites. As one student observed:
"This cohort group at the retreat bonded quickly when they were able to meet each other and take advantage of body language in their getting acquainted process. this residential retreat provided the group a framework to comprehend future comments online"
Most students in cohort groups form close bonds through their many shared experiences. The residential seminar tends to accelerate this process. It is not known how long it would have taken the online group to bond or if they would have bonded at all had they not met each other through the residential workshop. As one participant observed:
"Group dynamics would have been more "distant" had we not met face to face. It would have taken longer to achieve a comfort level with each other and perhaps we would have been more superficial."
The Circle
The circle has become a norm in adult education classrooms. Students and teachers sit in a circular formation which minimizes the hierarchy found in a traditional class. Everyone can see everyone else, so dialogue tends to be directed at one another, rather than to the instructor. While online students don't literally sit in a circle, the circle exists at a metaphorical level none the less. Baldwin (1994) teaches a process called circling where people gather to create community, make cooperative decisions and accomplish specific tasks. Participants enter into a social contract where they agree to support one another. A key concept of this circling process is known as "holding the rim" (p.234). This means that all members of the circle are equally responsible for the whole. If one member is struggling, the group shares the responsibility. The open space in the center of the circle is also significant. Palmer (cited in Sheridan, 1989) saw this open space as the place where students and teachers connected to one another's ideas and engaged in dialogue. In this way, an open community for learning is created.
The online students created their circle at the residential weekend. A small table was placed in the center of the circle and students were invited to place objects that were personally meaningful or symbolic of the group experience. One day a leaf appeared that had points equal to the number of students in the group. The students continue to hold their circle in their virtual learning environment.
Class lounge
One way we facilitated a learning community was through the establishment of a class lounge online. This virtual coffee room allows space to discuss anything not related to specific course content. Conversations are similar to what occurs in break areas on campus. Students share family stories, worklife happenings, complain, ask for help, share resources such as interesting books or websites, and offer advice and encouragement to others.
Adult students often experience significant life events that challenge them. Cohort members have provided support and encouragement through several "crises" including computer crashes, car accidents, family health problems, moves and job stress. If anyone is struggling with the course work there is always someone to provide help. This support also occurs on an individual level through email and telephone conversations. Additionally, they celebrate one another’s successes such as a new job or promotion.
The lounge is also a vehicle to get to know aspects of the students which may not be revealed through the course discussions, such as their interests in astronomy or art or current events in their particular geographic community. A unique use of the lounge online was when one student posted digital photos of the flowers in her backyard so we all could see them. The lounge helps keep the group together since it is continuous and intact even as instructors come and go.
Commitment
Commitment is an important component of cohort groups. Lawrence (1997) identified four levels of commitment: commitment to self, to the group, to the individuals within the group and to the process. All levels of commitment are necessary for a successful online community to flourish. One participant referred to it as "conscious commitment" Online students need to make a special effort to "show up and be present".
This takes internal motivation and self-direction since there are no predetermined class hours. A student may decide to devote Wednesday from 8 to 10 P.M. to do course work, yet it is very tempting to get distracted by other commitments or decide one is too fatigued. When the commitment is conscious, the student will hold this time sacred.
Participants also need to commit to their classmates to share the work load during collaborative projects. When this level of equity is not present, the students who are doing the greater share of the work feel as if they are being taken advantage of. This feeling seems to be more acutely experienced in an online community since there are fewer opportunities to communicate one’s needs and feelings.
Communication
One of the limitations of online communication is that it is text based only. Without the benefit of voice inflection (emoticans only go so far) the meaning of one’s comments can easily be misunderstood. For example, a comment meant to be sarcastic may taken as serious and unintentionally offend. Knowing someone helps create a context to view one’s comments. This level of knowing starts with the residential experience and deepens over time as the students take all of their course work together and share a multitude of experiences. As Lawrence (1996 p.49) discovered among face to face cohort groups, "As people got to know one another and shared their experiences, they developed insight into each other so that later, when comments were made, they knew more about where that person was coming from. They were able to respond to the whole person, rather than just his or her words."
On the other hand, familiarity with one’s classmates can lead to "automatic vision" (Lawrence and Mealman, 1996 p. 35) where an individual assumes that he or she understands the meaning of a classmate’s words and gives them only cursory consideration, which may lead to misinterpretation. In an online learning community, it is important to make a conscious effort to check out the validity of one’s assumptions about the meaning of another's text.
In an online environment it is important to be aware of one's own emotions and how they are being communicated as well as the emotions of others. This takes more effort than in voice to voice conversation where one's feelings can be communicated by voice tone pitch or tempo. Emotions can be expressed by naming the feeling i.e. "that makes me so angry" or asking others to articulate their emotions.
The degrees of participation are significant in an online learning community. There is a major difference in the power dynamics as compared to a face to face classroom. In a classroom certain students (usually males) tend to dominate discussions leaving quieter, more reflective members feeling silenced and without voice. A major advantage of asynchronous communication is that one cannot be interrupted. In a classroom students are often stopped in mid sentence by someone who just can't wait to get their opinion heard. Alternately, they may lose their train of thought while waiting for an opportunity to get into the conversation. Online learners can take as much time as needed to consider and voice their responses. As one participant shared: "I have been able to express myself more freely than I believe I would have face-to-face." The participation of the quieter class members is increased which changes the communication dynamics in a major way.
The role of silence in an online environment takes on a different meaning. In a face to face classroom, one can be silent but classmates and teachers know from their nonverbal behavior that they are engaged. Silence online is more obvious, particularly when the group is relatively small. When one is silent online it is not known if he or she is reading but not responding, not logging on at all, or if the student has decided to withdraw from the class. In a cohort group students count on everyone's contribution. Learning from one another becomes an expectation. Students who do not participate, deprive the group of their knowledge. It is important to create norms and expectations around frequency of participation. Our students are required to post substantive responses at least 3 to 5 times a week and many log on daily.
Creating a safe space
Although it's important to acknowledge that not everyone will feel safe at all times, it is desirable to create a space where communication is honest and authentic. In a respectful environment, people feel free to self-disclose, disagree and engage in critical discourse. Students need to be able to trust that what they say will stay within the group. In an online community there are additional safety and ethical issues. Students' comments remain on the conference board for the duration of the course for all to view and review. It is important for them to know who has access to this information at anytime. If anyone, other than the students and course instructors is going to be viewing the text, their presence must be announced in the same way a visitor is invited to a face to face class.
Telephone and Email
Another way the community is maintained is through the use of telephone and email. Students are often asked to work on collaborative projects in small groups. This can be a challenge if they live in different states. Email works well for sharing writing. Students also phone each other in order to have a "real time" conversation. A chat room is available for small and large group meetings.
At times students phone each other just to make contact, or to share their concerns. Communicating only online can be isolating at times. As one participant stated: "I think it’s important to talk over the phone whenever you get a chance, just to make that human connection." It is also a way to clarify confusion that one may have over the meaning of a fellow cohort’s textual response.
At the end of one course, the class had a teleconference in order to bring closure to the term. The students felt this was a valuable way to connect with one another although the logistics of coordinating multiple schedules across three time zones was not easy.
Role of Instructors
Online instructors have a significant role to play in creating and sustaining learning communities. Instructors can promote collaboration, creating opportunities for the students to get to know one another by encouraging them to share from their experience. Another strategy is to assign group projects which require students to work together in various configurations. They can encourage communication by posing reflective questions and giving students space to voice their views. This means that instructors need to be judicious about when to enter the discourse. When instructors comment too frequently, the students tend to dialogue with the instructor rather than with each other. Because the instructor is often taken as the voice of authority, despite our efforts to help students to view themselves as valid sources of knowledge, (Horton and Freire, 1990), discourse is often prematurely cut short. They accept the instructors views as truth and do not continue to explore alternative viewpoints. On the other hand, when instructors do not comment frequently enough, students wonder whether they are being heard.
I have learned that online students have a greater need for feedback from their instructors. In the absence of nonverbal cues and opportunities for informal commentary before or after class, instructors need to make a special effort to give feedback to students both online as part of group discussions and individually via email or telephone.
Another way instructors can help to promote community is by involving students in the planning of instructional activities and sharing the leadership. One strategy that worked particularly well for us was asking each student to take responsibility for facilitating a discussion on one of the assigned readings. This shifted the responsibility for maintaining the community onto the students which is important since the students remain together for sixteen months whereas the instructors change every eight weeks.
Summary
This paper addressed the question of whether online students could create a learning community. I have concluded that while it is quite possible; it does not happen automatically. Instructors must create a climate that intentionally fosters collaboration. A residential learning experience at the start of the program that allows people to get to know one another and build collaborative relationships is critical. The supportive climate that is fostered during the residence needs to be followed up by ongoing maintenance to the online environment including the establishment of a class lounge to encourage informal dialogue, and attention to communication patterns: including participation, silence, emotion and power dynamics. Additional mechanisms for community include: establishing a safe environment for discourse, the use of telephone and email to support textual discussion, and instructors who pay attention to online classroom dynamics, share leadership, give frequent feedback to students and do not dominate online conversations.
Online cohorts expand the definition of community from the local to the global arena. Learning opportunities are increased through the potential of reaching a more diverse population. As new technologies continue to evolve, the possibilities for creating connections among human beings are limitless.
References
Baldwin, C. (1994). Calling the circle. Newburg, OR: Swan Raven & Co.
Fleming, J.A. (1998). Understanding residential learning: The power of detachment and continuity. Adult Education Quarterly, 48 (4), 260-271.
Horton, M. & Freire, P. (1990). We make the road by walking: Conversations on education and social change Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Lawrence, R. L. (1999). Transcending boundaries: Building community through residential adult learning. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Midwest Research-to- Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, St. Louis, Missouri.
Lawrence, R. L. (1997). Building a learning community. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Midwest Research-to-Practice Conference in Adult, Continuing, and Community Education, East Lansing, Michigan.
Lawrence R. L. (1996). Co-learning communities: A hermeneutic account of adult learning in higher education through the lived world of cohorts. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Northern Illinois University.
Lawrence, R. L., & Mealman, C. A. (1996). Seizing learning opportunities: Embracing a collaborative process. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Alliance/ACE Conference, (pp. 29-51). St. Pete Beach, Florida.
Sheridan, J. (1989). Rethinking andragogy: The case for collaborative learning in continuing higher education. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 37(2), 2-6.
Warren, C. (1989). Andragogy and N. F. S. Gruntvig: A Critical link. Adult Education Quarterly, 39 (4), 211-223.
Lawrence, R. L. (1999). Cohorts in Cyberspace: Creating Community Online. Proceedings of the 19th Annual Alliance/ACE Conference. Saratoga Springs, NY.
