Online learning in the workplace

For this blog, I was to answer a question by a peer in the course.  The question I chose was “What research exists to show that online literacy and numeracy learning is successful in upskilling employees in the workplace?”  Unfortunately I was unable to find any research which discussed the successes or failures of online literacy and numeracy learning in the workplace.  In fact, it was also a struggle to find research relating to online learning in the workplace in general.  A reason according to David, Salleh & Iahad (2012), is that there is far more research completed on online learning in the classroom but minimal on the workplace. 

Research suggests however, that there aren’t significant differences in educational outcomes between classroom learning and online learning.  A document summarizing the research in this area can be found online.  We can therefore assume that an online literacy and numeracy course would also be successful, provided of course that the students were digitally literate. Bridget has started a discussion on online learning and digital literacy which is one topic that definitely needs to be looked into further.

Kim, Bonk and Zheng (2005) conducted a survey with 293 training professionals actively involved in e-learning.  90% of respondents were supportive or optimistic about e-learning and about 80% were using e-learning to train employees.  These figures show the obvious demand for e-learning in the workplace.  Why is that?

In earlier posts I discussed online learning in general including best practice and individual learning styles which of course can also be used in training through online learning in the workplace.  However, there are added benefits for employers and employees if training is done online.  They are: Just-in time learning, cost effectiveness and employee control over learning (David, Salleh & Iahad, 2012).  Below is a summary of each.

Just-in time learning

·         Allows for flexibility – learning on an as need basis, learning specifically tailored for current situation

·         Ability to link learning with work – training utilizing equipment and technologies within the workplace

Cost effectiveness

·         Cost saving on equipment and technologies

·         Reduced travel expenses

·         Less time off work required

·         Value-added by using ICTs for work and learning

·         Focused content reduces learning time

Employee control over learning

·         Responsible for own training

·         Encourages information sharing, collaboration and interaction

·         Improves retention of knowledge for those whose learning styles favour an online learning environment

There are also negative aspects of online learning in the workplace such as employees with no or minimal computer knowledge.  Access could also be an issue especially for those organisations in rural areas with slower connections.  In addition, significant costs may also be required for technology needed to conduct online learning as well as ICT specialists.  However, online learning appears to also be on the rise within workplace training which suggests that from an employer’s perspective, the benefits outweigh the negatives.

David, O., Salleh, M., & Iahad, N. (2012). The impact of e-learning in workplace: Focus on organisations and healthcare environments. International Arab Journal of E-technology 2(4), 203-209.

Kim, K., Bonk, C., & Zheng, T. (2005, June). Surveying the future of workplace e-learning: The rise of blended, interactivity, & authentic learning. Retrieved from eLearn Magazine: http://elearnmag.acm.org/featured.cfm?aid=1073202

What about the different learning styles?

In my previous post I discussed good practice in the online learning environment.  Moving on from that I thought it appropriate to look at individual learning styles because we as educators may have the best pedagogical knowledge but as it has been argued, if the learning style and teaching style don’t match then this can cause issues with performance or discourage students (Chen, Jones & Moreland, 2014).  It can be a struggle for educators to address individual learning needs in face-to-face delivery let alone in an online learning environment.  So, how do they do it?  This post will offer an overview of learning styles and how to establish what students' learning styles are and how to address them in the e-classroom based on research in the field.

Much of the research based on learning styles tend to make reference to Kolb’s (1984) Experiential Learning Theory as a suggestive way to establishing learning styles.  There are also references to Gardner's Multiple Intelligences and VAK learning style models, however, we will just focus on Kolb's theory in this post. 

Kolb depicts four basic learning styles: Accommodative; assimilative; divergent; and convergent. Within each style are a combination of two of four learning modes: Concrete experiences; reflective observation; abstract conceptualization; and active experimentation.  Richmond and Cummings (2005) also emphasise the need to include Kolb and Fry’s four different learning environments which they assert are effective when catering for the different learning styles and learning modes.  They are: the affective learning environment, the symbolic learning environment, the perceptual learning environment and the behavioural learning environment.  Richmond and Cummings describe in detail the relationship between the learning styles, learning modes and learning environments however, the table and figure below gives you a conceptual view of the relationships and also suggests approaches to delivery.

 

 

So what next? Well, we need to find out what our students’ learning styles are so we can best cater to their learning needs.  Chen, et al. sought to do this in their study of accounting students in both traditional classroom settings and the online classroom.  In order to find out what the learning styles were, they administered a survey based on Kolb’s learning style inventory which is available online.  The results showed that online learners tended to favour the converging style with secondary emphasis on the assimilating style.  Students from the traditional classroom setting favoured the assimilating style first then the converging style.  With this knowledge, an educator would be able to add activities within their delivery to cater to their students’ needs.  We can then refer back to our table and figure above as to ways to do this.  For example, students who favour the assimilating style would require more emphasis on theory whereas accommodating style learners would prefer more application-based learning (Muir, 2001).  Muir’s article is also an invaluable resource for more information on instructional suggestions for the online classroom and even includes her perception of the ‘ideal online course’.

The students studying online are still the same types of people we occur in traditional classroom settings.  However, it is the learning environment which is different.  Establishing the types of learners you have, added with good practice conducive to their learning environment will surely assist in effective learning in your online classroom.

Chen, C.C., Jones, K.T., & Moreland, K. (2014). Differences in learning styles. The CPA Journey, (84)8, 46-51.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experential learning: Experience as the source of learning and developent. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Muir, D. (2001). Adapting online education to different learning stles. National Education Computing Conference "Building on the Future". Chicago, IL: Intelligent Education, Inc.

Richmond, A. S., & Cummings, R. (2005). Implementing Kolb's learning styles into online distance education. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning 1(1), 45-54.

 

 

 

What is Good Practice in the e-Learning Classroom?

As educators, do we even need to change our teaching approach if put in the situation where we need to work in an online environment or can we continue to deliver the same way we always have?  Can we use the same methods that we do to motivate our students in the classroom, in the online classroom?  These are all questions that any provider needs to discuss if they decide to enter the world of online learning.  Unfortunately it seems that this is usually not the case and discussions are mostly focused on teaching staff the technological aspects of online learning but not the pedagogical approaches they need to adopt (Morris & Finnegan; Oomen-Early & Murphy as cited in Bailey & Card, 2009) .  Therefore it is the aim of this post to look at some of the research around what good practice in the e-learning classroom is. 

Bailey and Card (2009), in their article on effective pedagogical practices for online teaching cite three pedagogical theories and principles which they used to form the basis of a study undertaken with e-learning instructors.  They are as follows:

·         Andragogy or self-directed study

·         Constructivism which encourages students to construct their own meaning of their learning

·         Transformative learning which focuses on critical thinking

Findings of their study with e-learning instructors highlighted eight pedagogical practices for effective online teaching:

·         Fostering relationships between faculty and students

·         Engagement through emails, class discussion boards, student biographies and student group projects

·         Timeliness with regards to grading assessments, checking emails and responding to questions, and assessing the amount of time needed for teaching online classes

·         Good communication by providing timely feedback on assessments, questions, communicating requirements and teacher availability.  Instructors should also be aware of communication styles and words used.

·         Instructors should have knowledge on the technology they are using within their online course

·         Flexibility and patience

·         Having high expectations through goal setting and learning objectives set at the beginning and throughout the course.

Brinthaupt, Fisher, Gardner, Raffo and Woodard draw (2011) on Bain’s book, What the Best College Teachers Do to explore some of the methods of classroom teaching which can be transferred into the online learning environment.  They focus primarily on:

·         fostering student engagement

·         stimulating intellectual development

·         building rapport with students

Chickering and Gamson’s seven principles of good practice have not only been recommended for use in the online classroom but also when evaluating effective online teaching (Bangert, 2004).  The principles include:

·         Encouraging contact between students and faculty in and out of classes

·         Encouraging cooperation between students

·         Active learning using structured exercises, challenging discussions, team projects, and peer to peer critiquing

·         Encouraging prompt and appropriate feedback on performance

·         Time on task for both educators and learners

·         Communicating high expectations

·         Providing diverse ways of learning

Bangert’s study on evaluating online teaching using the seven principles concluded that the majority of students felt that the teacher adopted the constructivist approach in their teaching.

Much of the literature suggests that best practice in the classroom environment can be transferred into the online environment.  However, more effort is required especially around building a community which encourages active communication through different modes and ensuring that there is a positive relationship between instructor and student.

Bailey, C. & Card, K. (2009). Effective pedagogical practices for online teaching. Perception of experienced instructors. Internet and Higher Education (12), 152-155.

Bangert, A. (2004). The seven principles of good practice: A framework for evaluating on-line teaching. Internet and Higher Education (7), 217-232.

Brinthaupt, T., Fisher, L., Gardner, J., Raffo, D. & Woodard, J. (2011). What the best online teachers should do. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching 7(4), 515.

 

How should teachers approach students with anxiety towards online learning?

I mentioned in an earlier blog why I wanted to discuss computer anxiety which was because I too have suffered from it.  This blog aims to help those with the same fears I have had in the online classroom.

Discussions on anxiety are not new in the teaching and learning field.  There have been many studies investigating student anxiety.  These studies have also extended into the numeracy field such as Boaler’s (2014) study on the relationship of timed tests and anxiety or Finlayson’s (2014) paper titled Addressing Math Anxiety in the Classroom.  E-learning is becoming more and more visible in education settings, so it is no surprise then that there also be studies investigating computer anxiety.

Before thinking about ways in which to address and deal with computer anxiety, we should first understand what it means.  Leso and Peck (as cited in Saade and Kira, 2009) define computer anxiety “as a feeling of being fearful or apprehensive when using or considering the use of a computer” (p. 179).  We may ask ourselves why someone would be fearful of using or thinking about using a computer.  Well, we could look at it the same as riding a bike for a first time.  If you have never ridden a bike, you would also feel somewhat apprehensive, maybe even a little scared at the thought of getting on that bike.  However, you try it anyway and yes, you are not good at it the first time, even the second or third.  By the fourth time though, you start feeling a little bit more confident and before you know it, you are riding that bike like a professional. 

Therefore, perhaps teachers should approach students in online classrooms suffering from anxiety using this analogy.  The students will become good with practice.  Simple, isn’t it?  There is only one slight issue.  It is an online environment so it is likely that there will be no face time with the teacher.  How then can the teacher deal with these students through cyber space?

I struggled to find research addressing this question however, I did find an article online by Michael Higley with a few suggestions.  Higley (2014) asserts that students with anxiety towards online learning need to feel a sense of connection because as we all know the online environment can be a very lonely place.  They also need to feel reassured and safe that they want to contribute in the online environment (Terry & Leppa; Hastie, Hung, Chen, & Kinshuk as cited in Higley 2014).  Higley goes on to further state that anxiety arises from a lack of interaction and that teachers need to provide a variety of communicative methods such as using discussion boards, forums and chat platforms.  Higley also emphasises that course design and structure is of extreme importance.  Time can be a factor in course development especially as online components in a course can often be added to existing plans and therefore Higley suggests collaboration among educators as a solution.

So basically it’s all about the teaching approach in the online environment that is key.  We have to adapt our teaching style, even our philosophies to suit this new learning environment.  It is without a doubt that e-learning is the new ‘fad’ in teaching and learning and as it develops so too will research and pedagogical approaches.  I am certain that in five years’ time, I would not struggle to find articles on ‘computer anxiety’ and how to deal with it.

Boaler, J. (2014). Research suggests that timed tests cause math anxiety. Teaching Children Mathematics 20(8), 469-474.

Finlayson, M. (2014). Addressing math anxiety in the classroom. Improving Schools 17(1), 99-115. doi:10.1177/1365480214521457

Higley, M. (2014, March 2014). e-Learning: Challenges and solutions. Retrieved from eLearning Indusry: http://elearningindustry.com/e-learning-challenges-and-solutions

Saade, R. G., Kira, D. & Nebebe, F. (2008). Computer anxiety in e-learning: The effect of computer self-efficacy. Journal of Information Technology Education, 177-191.

 

What is my teaching philosophy?

In my last blog I mentioned that I would like to research anxiety in the online learning environment.  However, before I do that I will be looking at my teaching philosophy.  The connection between teaching philosophies and anxiety will be revealed in my next blog.

I have not always had a teaching philosophy. At the very beginning of my teaching career I was very inexperienced both in practical and theoretical aspects of teaching.  My first ESOL teaching position was in Japan in 2003 and having a teaching qualification and or experience was not a requirement.  Therefore, my delivery was very impromptu and I just did what I could to maximise student engagement.  It was not until 2011 that I decided to do some formal ESOL teacher training and completed the Certificate in Language Teaching to Adults (CELTA).  The certificate is very practical based so it was good to know that I was doing some things right. 

“Philosophy inspires our activities and gives direction to our practices” (Kanuka, 2008, p. 2).  Before researching this topic, I had a fair idea of what my teaching philosophies were but perhaps not in technical terms.  I always thought of myself as an adaptable teacher; adapting my teaching to suit my learners, their levels and at times their mood.  I believe in student centred learning and that the teacher should act as a facilitator and guide their students.  Students are not the only learners; we as educators also learn from our students . 

I have enjoyed exploring my teaching philosophies further and the next few paragraphs will shed some light on what my philosophies towards teaching and technology are based on the research conducted on the topic.

I will firstly discuss my teaching philosophies as I have touched on them briefly above.  I identify strongly with the progressive and humanist approaches.  They are also quite similar to Pratt’s (2002) nurturing and developmental perspectives which I also favour in my delivery.  I like to experiment in the classroom and challenge the learners through problem solving.  I also think contextual learning assists in engaging the learners.  Research suggests that people learn best when the content is of relevance and it is because of this that I try and incorporate as much of their lives into the lesson.  Students want to feel supported in their learning but also in control.  Pacific people thrive in groups as community is very important in their culture and therefore I include a lot of the humanist view in my delivery with this group of learners. 

According to Kanuka (2008), there are three philosophies of technology that educators tend to identify with: user determinism, technological determinism and social determinism.  Social determinism combines the use of technology within society and culture while technological determinism puts technology as a contributor to societal change but in a negative way that sees it as distracting and possibly damaging to education.  Too much of anything is not good and the same applies to technology in education.  Whether we like it or not, technology will continue to advance so we need to make the best out of what is on offer and make good use of it in our classes.

User determinism focuses on technological use and how we use it in our teaching and learning.  There is also emphasis that technology should not be depended on for success but rather as a tool to assist learning.  This philosophy is in line with my beliefs.  There is a tendency for some educators to rely heavily on technology.  It is so easy nowadays to make an amazing lesson on PowerPoint and it is even easier to just sit there and click the button of a mouse.  Then, when you look at your class, half of them are asleep from boredom.  Technology can make the class more interesting but we need to ensure that student engagement and participation are also achieved throughout the lesson.

The attached video looks at developing your own teaching philosophy.  It is a little long but worth watching especially for those who have just entered in the teaching field and may be struggling a little to find their place in the classroom.  It has inspired me to think about my own philosophy statement and documenting it.  It would be interesting to see how it changes over the years as new technology emerges in teaching and learning. 

 

Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-in-practice. The theory and practice of online learning, 91-118.

Pratt, D. (2002). Good Teaching: One Size Fits All? New directions for adult and continuing education(93).

Yager, S. (2013, June 26). Writing a teaching philosophy statement. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/tbqS25mHCiM