Online information: the spider's sticky web.

Abstract

This case study examines the online experiences of nine participants and two faculty members involved in an undergraduate level course examining information literacy in an online learning environment. Participants took part in diverse evaluative Internet searches, and were then asked to examine and reflect on these techniques. They also considered ways in which they could integrate similar authentic processes of information access and dissemination into their own teaching strategies. Participants recognised the value of the asynchronous online discussion, and found that this had helped them to develop a deeper level of learning by providing the opportunity to reflect on their contributions in a way that was not possible in a face-to-face setting.

Introduction

This case study examines the online experiences of participants involved in an undergraduate level course entitled 'Information, Knowledge and Learning'. This course was designed to enhance teachers' information and teaching skills in a rapidly changing world, using a variety of information sources, particularly those of the Internet and online databases. Issues ranged from dilemmas of equity and access, to pedagogy and power, with the focus extending from the individual learner and teacher, to the institutional organisation and the global village.

Background to the course

The course was offered in an experiential manner, which is to say that, in addition to classroom presentations and debates, the participants took part in diverse evaluative online searches, and then examined and reflected on these techniques. As an extension of this process, they were required to consider ways in which they could integrate similar authentic processes of information access and dissemination into their own teaching strategies.

All the participants worked in the adult education sector, some as tutors, while others came from the public library and professional development areas. All had access to the Internet and used the Blackboard web management system to obtain material, to access additional external links and to communicate with one another. The use of Blackboard also enabled teaching faculty to recommend specific websites to students and to provide easy access for these students to online course material such as PowerPoint presentations. The course was delivered in 'blended mode,' in which face-to-face sessions were combined with significant periods of independent study supported by collaborative online group work. Information searching tasks during the face-to-face sessions took place on computers linked to the Internet and ranged from teacher-led to completely self-directed exploration. These included:

* Viewing recommended websites via Blackboard as part of class discussions and group tasks,

* Guided searches on faculty selected topics (i.e. definitions of information literacy),

* Interactive online quizzes, and

* Independent searches focussed on assignment topics.

As part of the overall course grading structure the online discussion was assessed based on criteria designed to encourage interactivity and promote deeper level learning (Campbell, 2001). These were:

* Regularity of contributions, so that on-going dialogue was encouraged throughout the course,

* Links or references to the comments of others, to allow the development of a social learning environment,

* Sharing of ideas and experiences, to place experiences in a practical setting,

* Demonstration of cognition, that could demonstrate the learners' depth of understanding and metacognitive processes, and,

* Reference to appropriate readings or Websites for the group to share.

The online discussion

Computer conferencing, used in this context as Discussion Boards, has been defined as, 'Asynchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) that allows participants in an electronic community to easily exchange (threaded) text messages free of the constraints of time and place' (Rawson, 1996).

The immediate application of the Discussion Board in this course was to provide a link between information search processes and reflective interaction among peers, irrespective of the differing abilities of group members in regard to their computer experiences or previous understanding of information search techniques. This collaborative endeavour was integrated into the participants' work as part of one of their assignments. The relevant section of the assignment required participants to organise themselves into groups of three or four and they were then presented with a three-stage task:

1. First, each individual was asked to outline a topic that related issues from the Information Society to the needs of their own students and link their comments to a variety of source material.

2. The remaining members of each group were then required to respond to this topic and, where possible, make comments and suggestions.

3. Finally, each participant was asked to reflect on and analyse their individual experiences during the process of locating and accessing information on the topic they had initially defined, or that had arisen from subsequent suggestions from their colleagues.

Each of these phases was allocated a week of time with the teaching faculty members adding their own comments and recommendations during the second week. Although the members of each group restricted their contributions to their own cluster, they were able to read the postings made in other groups. Within this learning community, the effect of scaffolding the learning experience enabled the less experienced participants to gain confidence by first reading the work of their colleagues (Panko, 2002).

Search and evaluation models used in the case-study

In the current information environment where the Web is recognised as a significant source of academic information (Kapoun, 1998), the need for students to be information literate has become increasingly acknowledged. Librarians have been talking and writing about information literacy for over ten years (Breivik & Gee, 1989) and this course attempted to integrate the concept of information literacy into adult educators' philosophies of teaching and learning. A modified version of The Big Six Skills model (Eisenberg & Berkowitz, 1990) was presented to course participants that describes an information literate person as someone who is able to:

* Recognise a need for information

* Construct strategies for finding information

* Locate and access information

* Organize and apply information

* Evaluate the information process and product

Using this model, course participants were then required to conceptualise the steps involved in the process of finding and using information. This task enabled students to both experience the process and critique the model itself. This critique led participants to explore alternative definitions and encouraged the development of individual understandings of information literacy.

Information Literacy Standards

Having considered the personal process of information usage, the students were then introduced to the CAUL information literacy standards (CAUL, 2001). These standards provided a model for assessment and were used by participants to identify competencies required within their own teaching and learning contexts. These standards state that an information literate person:

* recognises the need for information and determines the nature and extent of the information needed

* accesses needed information effectively and efficiently

* evaluates information and its sources critically and incorporates selected information into their knowledge base and value system

* classifies, stores, manipulates and redrafts information collected or generated

* expands, reframes or creates new knowledge by integrating prior knowledge and new understandings individually or as a member of a group

* understands cultural, economic, legal, and social issues surrounding the use of information and accesses and uses information ethically, legally and respectfully

* recognises that lifelong learning and participative citizenship requires information literacy

Having gained experience with these standards, participants were then encouraged to extend them into teaching strategies for their own students.

Evaluating information

Although evaluation of online information already existed as a significant element within the design of the course, it soon became clear that this issue was also of major concern to the participants in both their own learning and teaching strategies. As the course progressed, experience with Kapoun's (1998) evaluation criteria enabled participants to become increasingly confident users of online information. These criteria are: accuracy; authority; objectivity; currency, and coverage.

Participants' comments

Participants' perceptions of their online learning were explored via observations of discussion board dialogue, in conjunction with focus group comments obtained at the end of the course.

Discussion Board contributions After a tentative start, participants took an increasingly active role, freely sharing their ideas with the rest of their group. Even those who, during their first face-to-face session, indicated initial reluctance to communicate online, entered into the discussion with a growing sense of responsibility and collegiality, which they acknowledged in classroom meetings. Their deepening involvement could be seen through the increasing number of postings, the number of times the discussion was accessed by the participants and on a more pedagogical basis, the Higher Order Thinking (Salmon, 2000) exhibited in their comments. Participants used their own experiences to support their colleagues' teaching strategies, as indicated by Colin in the following extract:

   Hello David, In your first post you certainly have a lot of
   unanswered questions. I think the issue of preparing students for
   student centered learning in technology is the same as any other
   learnable skill. The only difference I feel is the guidelines and
   amount of direction or self-direction should be proportional to the
   level of student. It is no good letting the pre-trade students loose
   on the Interact unsupervised or no work would be done, however we
   would expect the level 6 Diploma students to have a fair idea on how
   to achieve under a self-directed learning schedule. I am developing
   some lessons in Web quest which I hope may address this very problem

In addition, participants charted their own progress in developing information literacy as well as recognising difficulties experienced by their own students:

   What an eye opener this has been for me, this part of the course
   (searching for information) has highlighted my limited skills in
   this area ... The lesson for me in this is that it is imperative to
   establish at what level the students are in their information search
   learning and to support and guide them until they are proficient in
   the technique. Being left to struggle on their own will deny them
   the ability to utilise a vast source of information that is
   imperative to their ability to contribute to our modern society and
   their own personal growth and development.

This progress, which was apparent in the online discussion, was reinforced by the comments gathered at the final interviews.

Focus group responses The comments from the students fell into three main areas: their reactions to studying most of the course in an online environment; their evaluation of whether the experiential model used had achieved the aims of the course; and whether the collaborative discussion board activity had enhanced this experience for them. There was overall agreement that the provision of the course in an online setting had been useful in allowing participants to work and contribute at their own time and pace. One stated that, in spite of some technological difficulties, 'I couldn't have achieved [the outcomes] if it hadn't been online', while another accepted that libraries can be 'scary places for many people', and accessing information via a home computer had minimised this negative reaction.

This realisation led to general acknowledgment that one of the most valuable results of the course had been to develop empathy with their own students in their searches for information, 'a daunting process'. From this stemmed a number of comments emphasising the need to put parameters into place for supporting students' initial forays on the Internet so that they are able to gain confidence in searching and evaluating information. Several agreed that this involved not making assumptions about students' prior abilities and the danger that failed searches can 'put people off' or start a process of random surfing, 'wasting time reading articles that aren't any good'. Indeed, one participant likened the Internet to some of the less attractive aspects of a spider's web, 'a sticky trap that could be hard to escape from'.

In relation to the experiential nature of the course, feelings were more diverse. Some found that they had gradually developed increasing proficiency in searching the Internet and online databases, one saying that the ability to evaluate web sites by, 'drilling down for dates and credentials' had been a valuable acquisition. However, others felt that the perceived lack of direction to specific sites had caused them to waste time. One person agreed that while all students, including his own, should be encouraged to develop online evaluation abilities; this was more of a life skill and that, 'When I pay for a course I like to be given the information, so that it can be applied, used and assessed rather than to spend hours looking'. This led to considerable debate amongst the group on the nature of deep and surface learning and whether the former could be achieved by simply feeding all necessary information to the students.

From the faculty perspective, it had been the use of the online asynchronous discussion that brought about the biggest change in the dynamics of the class and the beginning of a sense of collaborative community. This appeared when one reluctant contributor decided to get online and respond to the inputs from other members off his group so that he would not disadvantage their learning.

Conclusion

The online discussion fulfilled a number of roles in this course. Initially it worked as a model for the use of a range of different information formats in online teaching. The online discussion validated the use of student ideas and conversation as one of the recognised information resources. This information was easily accessible, readable and relevant to participants' immediate learning needs. Blackboard facilitated ease of access and the ability to revisit the dialogue throughout the period of the course. Secondly, the online discussion encouraged participants to use reflection as an effective tool to enhance their understanding of the ways information might be used in a range of teaching and learning settings as they acknowledged in the final focus group interview.

From the perspective of the teaching faculty members the use of the online Discussion Board facilitated cognitive growth (Nastasi & Clements, 1992) by allowing developmental change to occur as a result of either explicit interpersonal cognitive conflicts or from reciprocal sense making where individuals attempt to problem-solve through discourse. Harasim (1995) has also stressed other advantages of computer conferencing in terms of the role it may play in collaborative learning and teaching and the benefit it brings for active learning. Harasim contended that computer conferencing amplifies intellectual development by supporting divergent thinking through idea-generating activity. However, it should be remembered that the participants in this course had the benefit of meeting face-to-face in addition to their discussions online. Arlidge (2002) suggested that this blended mode encourages more meaningful online interaction as a result of students' physically embodied relationships with their classmates. Furthermore, this provides opportunities for "legitimate peripheral participation"(Lave & Wegner, 1991), which occurs when students and teachers are building relationships and learning face-to-face. For these reasons migration of the course to a totally online environment is not anticipated at this time.

At the outset participants acknowledged a diverse range of reasons for undertaking this course, some driven by a desire to enhance their own proficiency while others were compelled by external factors to attend, and then did so with considerable reluctance. This made the early days of the course challenging for participants and faculty alike. However, as the course progressed these tensions diminished and, as the comments from the students show, this appeared to be partly as a result of them working together in a collaborative manner. Participants recognised the value of the asynchronous online discussion, and found that this had helped them to develop a deeper level of learning by providing the opportunity to reflect on their contributions in a way that was not possible in a face-to-face setting.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the participants on this course (whose names have been changed in this article) and our colleague, Richard Smith, who conducted the focus group interview.

References

Arlidge, J. (2002). Body-to-body: Students' experience of an online course. Unpublished M. Ed Thesis. University of Auckland.

Breivik, P. S. & Gee. E.G. (1989). Information Literacy: Revolution in the library. New York: Macmillan, 1989.

Campbell, N. (2001). The life and times of an online discussion. Paper presented at the ODLAA Forum 2001. 25-27 September. Education Odyssey: Sydney.

CAUL (2001). Information Literacy Standards. Canberra: Council of Australian University Librarians. http://www.caul.edu.au/caul-doc/InfoLitStandards2001.doc

Eisenberg, M. B. & Berkowitz R. E. (1990). Information problem-solving: the Big Six Skills approach to library & information skills instruction. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.

Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning Networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Kapoun, J. (1998) Teaching Undergrads WEB Evaluation: A Guide for Library Instruction." C&RL News (July/August): 522-523.

Lave, J. & Wegner, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Nastasi, B. K., & Clements, D. H. (1992). Socio-cognitive behaviours and higher order thinking in educational computer environments. Learning and Instruction, 12, 215-258.

Panko, M. (2002) Small group learning in online discussions: staying in your own backyard or peering over the garden fence? ASCILITE Conference, UNITEC, Auckland 9-11 December (In press).

Rawson, J. H. (1996). Using Computer Conferencing in Courses: Some Suggestions for Faculty, Faculty Focus (pp. 8). Maryland: University of Maryland.

Salmon, G. (2000). E-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. London: Kogan Page.

Semple, A. (2000). Learning theories and their influence on the development and use of educational technologies. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 46(3), 21-28.

Mary Panko, School of Education, UNITEC, Auckland, New Zealand
Jane Arlidge, UNITEC Library, UNITEC, Auckland, New Zealand

Mary leads a professional development programme in Higher Education, and is researching online discussions for a PhD. Jane is an academic librarian who has recently completed a Master of Education thesis on online learning.