Planning Proposal for Ashford University

Below is a Planning Proposal I wrote for another class and I wasn't sure I wanted to share it with the University. If you read it and have any feedback, I would definitely welcome any comments!  It may inspire me to submit it afterall.  

Planning Proposal

Lezli Stroh

COM 340 – Technical Writing

Instructor Andrea Roberson

June 25, 2012

 Dear Ashford University Administrators:

Introduction: Ashford University is actively participating in one of the most cutting edge methods of educational instruction by its use of distance learning technology.  Studies performed by agencies like iNACOL, The International Association for K-12 Online Learning, show that distance learning is successfully providing the opportunity of education to those who cannot travel to a local classroom or modify their personal work and family schedules to participate in traditional classroom instruction.  I am also among those who would not be able to complete my degree without access to on-line learning.  However convenient and accessible online education is, there is an area of concern that I believe Ashford University can easily correct by implementing a real-time, interactive classroom environment in a cost-effective way because the technology already exists.

Body:  There is growing concern about the online classroom environment creating a disconnected and impersonal experience because of the lack of face to face classroom interactions with Instructors and other students.  On a formal level, I found a study entitled The Limits of Information which reveals this concern in their study. 

“We believe it is just this focus on information alone that is potentially damaging to the “softer” goals of education. Given that instructor-student and student-student interaction is important in achieving the “softer” goals of the classroom experience, it would stand to reason that anything that intervenes between the instructor and the student (and between the students as well) would tend to inhibit the achievement of these goals. In particular, technology-mediated communication may limit the feelings of belonging to the class, and studies in other contexts have demonstrated this to be the case (cf. Salisbury et al., 1997, 1999).

In my own personal experience as a student of Ashford University, I have received emails from different classmates who go beyond the Ashford Café to reach out to all students in the course in hopes to establish a more personalized connection that could be of value in the professional environment through networking.  What the Ashford Café lacks is the dynamic interaction that happens naturally between students or Instructors in a traditional classroom setting.   Even upgrading the technology just to allow for real-time dialogue through a discussion forum or chat room could alleviate the sense of disconnect online students complain about.  Classmates who are in the classroom environment at the same time could not only respond to a post of a required discussion, but, could also have a dialogue with one or more students at the same time about relevant topics in a more social tone.  Interactions with Instructors during a particular hour could allow students to ask questions and get a real-time response which would improve the sense of connection in communicating with an Instructor.

Proposed Plan:  By implementing a program that allows for real time discussions with Instructors and Classmates, even if it is structured to be for one hour on a Thursday and one hour on a Monday, it would benefit both students and Instructors in a few ways.  First, active, real-time discussion would allow for more revealing Discussions which could provide an Instructor a more honest view of what their students know about a topic.  Instructors mention frequently in their Instructor Guidance sections that student interaction is critical.  However, it usually comes after the fact or as a reminder that students haven’t done enough to satisfy their requirement in a previous week.  If an Instructor sees that a student is checked into a real-time Discussion session and is actively participating, it would satisfy the ultimate goal of connecting with other students with a more effective outcome than the static responses, plus, the Instructor could gauge a student’s true understanding of a topic.

The importance of student interaction would be obvious if there were required sessions to meet.   On-line discussions could generate more true to life and raw discussions than the static environment we currently use.  Having the ability to write, re-write and ultimately reconsider our original ideas has its benefits.  However, real time Discussions would reveal real thoughts and ideas as they would happen in a face to face discussion.

            Ashford University could probably accomplish this new system with only the involvement of their current IT personnel to create an interactive feature within each classroom.  Student involvement would be required at least once per week and be given the option to attend one of three one hour sessions available during the week.  The Instructor would be available for questions during each hour, but, would mostly observe and monitor the interactions for content and to ensure students are adhering to school policy for appropriate discussions.  Students would be graded based on the same criteria as written Discussions but Instructors could get a real gauge more effectively at what level each student is learning.

Professors are grading our posts by how many other students we respond to, and vice versa, in order to get the most out of our dialogues with one another.  However, if we are actively sending and receiving messages on a topic then we could truly get the most out of an ongoing conversation.  The conversation does not have to be limited to one other student either.  If there were four or five students who could see that there is an “active” conversation happening, they might be inclined to join in on the dialogue.  Professors could get a real-time interaction between students recorded for review and could grade based on each student’s input on a Discussion topic.

            There might be some resistance to this idea of real-time interactions from both Students and Instructors.  Instructors may not want to commit to three hours a week where they must be available to all students who participate in the real-time discussions or chat rooms.  They might feel that they are creating more of a disconnect with students if they begin monitoring or “policing” their Discussions.  Students may resist the idea because they wouldn’t have the opportunity to revise their thoughts or responses before responding to a “live” question.  If they say the wrong thing, they would reveal their lack of understanding and may be embarrassed or choose not to participate.

Conclusion:  On-line students can step up their own game and improve the University’s collegiate rankings and accreditations by being innovative in creating a tool where real-time dialogue between staff and students is available.  Students could respond favorably to the occasion questionnaires and requests from the university to rate their experience when asked to evaluate the effectiveness of the learning instruments available to them in the distance learning environment.  

 References

The International Association for K-12 Online Learning iNACOL; "How States and Districts

Use Digital Learning to Support Education Reform". (2012, June). Technology & Business Journal,2160. Retrieved June 24, 2012, from Career and Technical Education. (Document ID: 2686542571).

Salisbury, W., Pearson, R., Miller, D., Marett, L. (2002). The Limits of Information: A Cautionary Tale about One Course Delivery Experience in the Distance Education Environment. e-Service Journal, Volume 1, Number 2, Winter 2002, pp. 65-81

Schultz, M., Schultz, J., & Schultz, J.. (2012). An Evaluation of Examination Results between Students in Management Courses Being Video Monitored Verses Those in a Traditionally Monitored Environment. The Business Review, Cambridge, 20(1), 76-82. Retrieved June 24, 2012, from ABI/INFORM Global. (Document ID: 2692211631).