1 / 32

Work-integrated Learning (WIL) On-line Community

Work-integrated Learning (WIL) On-line Community. Anita M. Todd Associate Professor Division of Professional Practice University of Cincinnati. Agenda. Introduction The Spark Purpose Research Project Methodology Research Questions Theoretical Framework Research Design. Cycle 1 and 2

sorena
Download Presentation

Work-integrated Learning (WIL) On-line Community

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Work-integrated Learning (WIL)On-line Community Anita M. Todd Associate Professor Division of Professional Practice University of Cincinnati

  2. Agenda • Introduction • The Spark • Purpose • Research Project • Methodology • Research Questions • Theoretical Framework • Research Design • Cycle 1 and 2 • Sample • Data Sources • Analysis • Findings • Discussion • Community Design • Theory Modifications • Limitations • Future Research • Thank You

  3. Anita M. Todd • 02–Pres.: Asst./Assoc. Professor, Professional Practice, UC • EE, EE ACCEND • IT Responsibility • SWE Faculty Advisor • 95-02: Director, Engineering Cooperative Education, PSU • 89-95: Product Development Engineer, Cummins Engine Company • BS ME (89) Penn State, M Ed. (05), D. Ed. (Exp. 11) UC • Four co-op experiences • Cummins Engine Company, NY / Walt Disney World, FL • Actively involved in regional, national, international co-op/intern organizations

  4. University of Cincinnati • Urban research university • Public, 37,000+ students • Founded cooperative education in 1906 • More than 5000 placements per year • 1600+ companies • US and abroad • Mandatory programs • Engineering and Applied Science • Design, Architecture, Art, Planning • Optional Programs • Business • Arts and Sciences

  5. Program Specifics • Start co-op in sophomore year • Four to six quarters of co-op • Five-year program • Introduction to Cooperative Education • Individually meet with each student • Students complete learning objectives, student project, student report, post co-op meeting • Employers complete employer assessment • Students registered with university – 0 credit • EE Program • 40-50 per class year • 200 student load

  6. The Spark • Concerned about student engagement with the university while at work • Students not talking about their co-op experiences amongst themselves • Technology today allows us to engage students • Social networking extremely popular • Believe there is a missed opportunity for learning at work

  7. Literature Review Benefits of student engagement • Linking colleagues and friends, and creating networks (Maidment, 2006; Mayer, 2002; Roberts-DeGennaro, Brown, Min, & Siegel, 2005) • Linking university and curriculum lecturers to students (Mayer, 2002; Roberts-DeGennaro et al., 2005) • Creating a venue for seeking advice/strategies/resources/cognitive support/psychological and emotional support (Hatton & Smith, 1995; Maidment, 2006; Mayer, 2002; Paulus & Scherff, 2008; Roberts-DeGennaro et al., 2005) • Receiving timely information related to their field practicum (Roberts-DeGennaro et al., 2005) • Creating a communal knowledge database (Roberts-DeGennaro et al., 2005) • Providing a venue for students to compare and contrast experiences (Keegan, 2007; Mayer 2002) • Providing an additional method of reflection (Hayward, DiMarco, Kranz, & Evans, 2001) • Supporting a collective process of learning (Keegan, 2007) • Learning to use computer mediated communication / virtual communities (Canale & Duwart, 1999; Witmer, 1998)

  8. Literature Review • Few studies attempted to link engagement to leaning • Students learned practical knowledge • Students learned through interaction, collaboration, and reflection

  9. Literature Review • Technical engagement • Wide variety of technologies • Primarily non-technical majors • Primarily female

  10. Research Project • Phase 1 • Design-based research study to develop a WIL online community for students at work • Phase 2 • Assess effect on student learning • Social interaction • Collaboration • Reflection

  11. Methodology Design-based research stems from the works of Brown (1992) and Collins (1992). • The simultaneous development of a learning environment while refining learning theories. • This process takes place over continuous cycles of design, release, evaluation, and redesign (Cobb, 2001; Collins, 1992). • The research must lead to sharable theories. • The research must account for how the design functions in an authentic educational setting. • The research should be documented such that it shows how the environment development process connects to the outcomes of the design and learning theory. Design-based Research Collaborative 2003

  12. Research Questions • How can students’, employers’, faculty, and field experts’ prior knowledge and experience be considered in the online community design? • How can students’, employers’, faculty, and field experts’ design ideas and experiences using the online community influence the design of the community? • How do students’, employers’, faculty, and field experts’ design ideas and experiences using the online community influence the underlying community design theories?

  13. Theoretical Framework Community-Based Online Learning Model (Palloff & Pratt, 2003) • People • Purpose • Process • Social Interaction and collaboration • Reflection

  14. Research Design • Cycle 1 • Faculty, field experts • Focus groups/survey • Students, employers • Survey • Develop Prototype Community • Cycle 2 • Faculty/Field Experts/Students/Employers • Review Community/Complete Survey • Finalize Community Design

  15. Cycle 1 – Initial Community Development

  16. Sample

  17. Analysis • Transcribed focus groups • Downloaded survey responses • Coded comments by gender and status • Categorized by theoretical framework • People, Purpose, Process • Organized into themes

  18. Findings

  19. Findings • Process • Ideas to support interaction and collaboration (professional and social) • Synchronous/asynchronous discussions, event posting, internal e-mailing, e-mentoring, wiki, file share, networking, group projects, etc. • Purpose • Need for a purpose/goal • Need to be professional • Practical Considerations • Privacy/security, unwanted spam, time commitment

  20. Findings • People • Being connected/making connections • Being “in the know” • Concerns about over-sharing • Other • Concerns about two many networks • Concerns about student communication skills

  21. Cycle 2 – Initial Community Design

  22. Prototype Community

  23. Sample 57% retention rate

  24. Analysis • Downloaded survey responses • Coded comments by gender and status • Categorized by theoretical framework • People, Purpose, Process • Organized into themes

  25. Findings

  26. Findings • Purpose • Value/purpose and netiquette • Need emphasis • Too text heavy • Professional • Practical Considerations • Font, format page to page, graphics • Menu, security notices • Moderation and oversight

  27. Findings • People • Strength of resource section and calendar • Add RSS Feed • Home page with latest updates • Process • Value of collaborative elements • Concern about depth of reflection • Other • Too many social networks

  28. Discussion • Community design • Let’s take a look • Enhancements to the Model for Community Based Online Learning • More emphasis on over sharing • Moderation can help • Too many social networks • Consider other platforms • Concern about student communication

  29. Limitations • Engineering based • Full-time alternating co-op program based

  30. Future Research Does the community meet the goal of increasing: • Social Interaction • Collaboration • Reflection Does this affect learning? Comparing software platforms Effect on communication skills

  31. Thank You • OCEA • Provided a research grant • University of Cincinnati • Provided a co-op student • Supporting faculty research • Provided a faculty development grant for next phase

  32. Anita M. ToddAssociate ProfessorDivision of Professional PracticeUniversity of Cincinnati anita.todd@uc.edu Sign in with e-mail to get copy of paper Please complete evaluations www.uc.edu/propractice/pal Student link Login: Visitor PW: visitor

More Related