Asynchronous Learning: Learning Unbound

Unlocking the Chains

Credit: http://cloudyskiesandcatharsis.tumblr.com/

     A colleague of mine and I have been reviewing research of late on asynchronous learning, which, unlike synchronous learning, is freed from the chains of a set time and place. This model has become particularly attractive to colleges, universities, and even K-12 schools that are running online programs. It is based on a constructivist model of education that approaches learning as something that is "built" by the teacher and the student with assumptions that knowledge is constructed from experience, learning results from a personal interpretation of knowledge, and that learning is an active process born of meaningful negotiation from multiple perspectives (Smith & Ragan, 1999, p. 15). Tools for this kind of teaching and learning include virtual libraries of materials created by the instructor and the students, e-mails, discussion boards, all manner of social media, virtual portfolios, and other points of connection that make it possible for students to work at their own pace and at a time of their choosing. As I was recently reminded at a conference where I presented a paper and found myself defending online learning in a bloody academic battle that drove one student participant from the room in tears (luckily she sided with me), separating education from the death grip of traditional brick and mortar boundaries and bias will take a Promethean effort. My intellectual adversary, like many, had what I consider to be some common yet very mistaken notions about what online learning is. Uncommon was the degree of hatred that he had for it, in any form, synchronous or asynchronous. He saw it as part of some capitalistic conspiracy, designed to enslave us, assimilate us, and further sabotage efforts to achieve social justice.
     While it is true that some online courses are of the poorest quality, the same can be said of face-to-face classes as well. The medium is not the problem. Creating a learning community that values collaborative and reflective learning while also insisting on depth and breadth of content mastery is the ultimate responsibility of the teacher -plugged or unplugged. However, as the debate broadened and the assemblage of professors, students, and administrators began to weigh in, it became clear that many of the opinions illustrated points illuminated in the research that my partner and I had uncovered.

Thanks for Noticing Me

     It is clear that communication with fellow learners and with the instructor is a key to making the asynchronous model succeed. Woo and Reaves, in their study of web-based learning environments (WBE), found  that "most present-day Web-based learning environments do not live up to their potential for meaningful interaction" (Woo & Reaves, 2008). A combination of factors contribute to WBE's coming up short, including poorly trained teachers, lack of a dependable infrastructure, the daunting amount of information available via the Web, and a lack of authentic activities. Meaningful engagement does not necessarily await the development of new Web applications. Teachers should seek out social media habitats that are already familiar to the student. Northey, Bucic, Chylinski, & Govind, R (2015) used Facebook as the basis for a longitudinal study that showed that the popular site "increased student involvement, real world contextualization, and application of the student’s knowledge and skills (Northey, Bucic, Chylinski, & Govind, R, 2015). 

Credit: Bill Knapp www.slideshare.net

     Dziuban, Moskal, Brophy, & Shea, (2007) came to similar conclusions in a broad review of current literature. When utilized in a focused and organized way, Facebook, along with other social media sites such as Friendster and MySpace, greatly increased student satisfaction with asynchronous learning (Dziuban, Moskal, Brophy, & Shea, 2007). "Focus" is important as the lack of it has been shown to derail asynchronous learning by alienating students and contributing to the information brain freeze mentioned above. "One danger of asynchronous learning is its open-endedness," caution Rira-Marie Conrad and J. Ana Donaldson in Engaging the Online Learner. "There must be a distinct beginning and end to asynchronous activities in order to minimize overload and subsequent learner frustration" (Conrad & Donaldson, 2014).

Oh Captain, my captain

     While the research certainly points to the pivotal roles that collaboration and individualization play in successful asynchronous learning environments, there is also a clear indication that the instructor is still the key to their success. In an interesting study that followed full-time undergraduates, full-time postgraduate diploma students, and practicing professionals in training settings, Hew (2015) reported that, far from simply facilitating instruction or posting assignments, teacher roles expanded "to preventing discussion from going off track, resolving conflicts (especially on sensitive subject matters), and motivating discussions." A durable misconception of the intent of online learning is that instructors simply send out "packets" of assignments, bless them when they are returned, and enter a grade. Rather, online teaching at its best, particularly when asynchronous instruction is blended with synchronous teaching, depends on constant monitoring and adjustment by the instructor. It is far from passive and, in my own experience, reminds me at times of a hockey goalie trying to keep the puck in play. An interesting side note is that Hew's study was completed at the University of Hong Kong, in a country that is frequently compared to the United States in all things educational, though the differences in social and political contexts are immense. Two years earlier Hew participated in another study, this time among Asian Pacific graduate students, that highlighted a further challenge for online teachers in asynchronous WBE's - being sensitive to the cultural needs of students. Encouraging online participation hinges on an open invitation to students to join the conversation in a manner that is culturally sensitive as well as interactive (Ng, Cheng, & Hew, 2012).

Prometheus Unbound

     Certainly, especially in asynchronous online teaching, the nexus of the research my colleague and I considered reinforced a philosophy of education that is far from the teacher-centered approach that Paulo Freire railed against and that is assumed by many to be a common feature. To Freire a learning community's lifeblood is dialogue - dialogue that cannot exist unless "dialoguers engage in critical thinking - thinking which discerns an indivisible solidarity between the world and the people and admits of no dichotomy between them - thinking which perceives reality as a process, as transformation, rather than as a static entity - thinking which does not separate itself from action, but constantly immerses itself in temporality without fear of the risks involved (Freire, 1993). Dialogue in an asynchronous WBE takes place around the clock, in different places and across many pathways. Still, as the research my colleague and I have reviewed so far indicates, students expect - and deserve -  to connect with their classmates in a meaningful, collaborative, teacher-mediated, and enhanced workshop of ideas and concepts.

     Only then can Prometheus be loosed, and real learning can take place.

References

Conrad, R-M. & Donaldson, J. (2004). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for

creative construction. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, p. 22.

Dziuban, C., Moskal, P., Brophy, J. & Shea, P. (2007). Student satisfaction with asynchronous
     learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,11(1), 87-95.

Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed (Revised Edition). New York: Continuum, p. 73.

Hew, K. F. (2015). Student Perceptions of Peer versus Instructor Facilitation of Asynchronous Online
     Discussions: Further Findings from Three Cases. Instructional Science: An International Journal
     of the Learning Sciences, 43(1), 19-38.

 

Ng, C., Cheng, W., & Hew, K. (2012). Interaction in asynchronous discussion forums: peer
     facilitation techniques. Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning, 28(3), 280-294.

Northey, G., Bucic, T., Chylinski, M., & Govind, R. (2015). Increasing Student Engagement Using
     Asynchronous Learning. Journal Of Marketing Education, 37(3), 171-180.  

Smith, P.L. & Ragan, T.J. (1999). Instructional design (2nd Edition). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
     Prentice Hall, p. 15.

Woo, Y. & Reeves, T. (2008). Interaction in asynchronous web-based learning environments:
     Strategies supported by educational research. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks,
     12(3-4), 179-194.