Kath Holden and Steve Poole University of the West of England, Bristol

1. Exploring staff and student engagement with discussion boards in the post graduate history programme at UWE, Bristol Kath Holden and Steve Poole University of the West of England, Bristol

2. Key evaluation questions • Pros and cons of different strategies using the discussion board for • A) staff • B) students • What was the impact of compulsion and assessment?

3. Margie, ‘Using interaction in Online discussion’ (Educause quarterly 2005) successful use of Discussion Boards: • Requires student participation • Grades students efforts • Requires a hand-in assignment • Involves learning teams • Relates discussion to course objectives

4. Why evaluate MA modules? • Evening classes with some w/e workshops • Recruitment to ensure continued viability is difficult • Less integration -students are part time and some live at a distance • Experiments in blended learning, mixing face to face with distance elements, prioritised at UWE • Discussion boards seemed an obvious option as part of this approach.

5. Why Discussion boards? • Improved communication: sharing insights/resources/ problems between classes despite wide geography. • open-ended collaborative learning environment – not bounded in space and time • Discussion of tutor-controlled learning questions, problems and issues. • Allows more reflective/cautious/less-confident students to make strong contributions to discussions that they may find more difficult to make in class. • All reflective learners have more time to make considered contributions, possibly after self-guided research.

6. Family and Community History in southwest England 1850-1960 • 9 students (October 08-Jan 09) • Monthly attendance for classes; most teaching remote via DB (unassessed). • One forum per week. Tutors posted questions for students to research using the online resources • Students either in work groups or left to choose which question to answer • Students posted allocated work summaries to comment/discuss one another’s summaries. • Students contributed well in first 5 weeks then tailed off.

7. Research Techniques in History • 12 students (October 09- Jan10) • weekly attendance for classes • One forum per week; plus reflective forums for each assignment • Summative assessment: 10% - students’ contributions to DB assessed throughout the module. They were told it was being assessed in a similar way to a seminar presentation. • Students invited to post a 500word reflective commentary on their personal contributions to threads throughout module. This was assessed but not compulsory • Total postings in first 8 weeks: 138

8. Crime, Protest and Popular Culture in South west England, 1720-1832 • 8 students (Feb- May 2010) • Weekly attendance for classes but fortnightly offered; one weekend workshop • Tutor posts forum for each class and suggests possible questions; students create own threads and are advised to post twice (minimum) in each forum. • Students not assessed for their own contributions, but for summative 2500 word critical summary of module issues, drawing upon everybody’s DB postings • Total postings in first 8 weeks: 290

9. Evaluation Staff and students surveyed separately to identify: • what worked best? what didn’t work? • what difference compulsion and assessment made? • How far DBs were a satisfactory alternative to face2face teaching and learning? • How far staff intervention was welcomed or thought necessary?

10. Student views – Plus points • Students could exchange ideas without tutor being ‘in room’ and in their own time • Tutor accessible to group throughout week • Created level playing field for both cautious and adventurous students • Kept sense of debate alive all week • Tutor interventions are valued because they are permanent and can be referred to – unlike spoken remarks in class. • Particularly good for complex analysis of primary material • Improved social cohesion • Some advantage in having just one forum (rather than fragment into live classroom, blog, chat room, DB...)

11. Student views – minus points • Some students tend to ‘twitter’. • Threads can be hard to follow as debates because multiple voices go off in too many different directions. • Frustration at getting no immediate replies to posts (unlike chat room). ‘Debate’ becomes too protracted and lacks spontaneity. • Feeling of inadequacy if have nothing to say, but feel pressurised to post something anyway because of assessment requirements • Irritation with some students who post too much and who leave nothing for people with less time on their hands to say • No substitute for personal face2face contact. • Blackboard unattractive and clunky.

12. Staff views • Staff like the idea that DB sets up forum for student-centred independent learning and exchange • Staff like the idea that DB keeps class socially in touch with itself between meetings • Some staff worry that debate issues may be exhausted before class, making class meeting second best or reiteration • Staff worry about responsibility to monitor, read and comment – time consuming

13. Situations in which DB worked best • Works best on focussed modules where everyone working on related projects • Works best when series of specific critical questions are posted by tutor • Works best when blended with frequent classes; students don’t readily engage on DB with people they don’t know. • Works best where staff intervene/guide/monitor, but without jumping in too early which tends to close discussion down

14. Impact of assessment • Some students like being rewarded for their work • Students who felt most comfortable about assessment were those who were confident users of DB anyway. Didn’t worry or even think much about assessment as a result. • Most students dislike pressure put on them by compulsion • Students worried that if the first person to comment makes all the best points, they’ll be marked down if they make the same points (because unoriginal) and marked down if they don’t (because it will appear they haven’t got any ideas). Repeating what’s already been said is bad for debate but seemingly necessary for scoring points! • Students worried that posts become determined by what they think tutor wants to see, rather than what they actually want to say.

15. Impact of lack of assessment • Students contributed most at start of module when tutor questions were closely related to the first assignment (a historiographical essay). • They contributed least in later thematic weeks in which the content was did not always relate directly their individual project work • With exception of two older male students, students only contributed if they wanted to – less commitment to the DB as a forum for discussion

16. Conclusions • Too many variables between modules to draw any clear conclusions • Assessment of the DB meant higher participation rates • Student views lead us to question how useful assessment is • Students are not totally in support of Margie’s view that participation should be required and graded • We are interested in your views on this