This session will report on findings from a three-year study that explored how different communication tools may impact small group collaborative learning projects in an online course. The primary goal of this session is to share successful techniques for organizing and facilitating small group collaborative projects in online and blended courses.

1. Students' Perception of
Collaborative Small Group Projects
Using Synchronous and
Asynchronous Tools
David Wicks
Andrew Lumpe
Arthur Ellis
Seattle Pacific University

2. Abstract
This session will report on findings from a three-
year study that explored how different
communication tools may impact small group
collaborative learning projects in an online
course. The primary goal of this session is to
share successful techniques for organizing and
facilitating small group collaborative projects in
online and blended courses.
2

3. Central purpose: Compare graduate students' perceptions and
practices of collaborative small group work in three different
sections of the same online course.
Section A Section B Section C
Super Wiki Wiki Discussion
Board-Only
n=27 n=24 n=21
Asynchronous ✔ ✔ ✔
Discussion
Blackboard Discussion Board
Asynchronous ✔ ✔
Wiki
Learning Objects Wiki
Synchronous ✔
Word Processing/Chat
TypeWith.Me
Same Professor ✔ ✔ ✔
Same Course ✔ ✔ ✔
3

4. Goal of Education: Develop Expertise
Collaborative learning
Develop expertise environments are Within such
(Bransford,1999). designed to develop environments:
expertise by:
Deep factual
Experts have more
knowledge bases can
access to content Helping users discern be developed
patterns
Knowledge easily
Easily retrieve content
retrieved and shared
Create meaning in
Can adapt and change, non-static,
collaborative settings Conceptual
and recognize when to
frameworks built
apply knowledge
4

5. Project-based approach
Challenging Shared
Long term
question/task goal/purpose
Group members
Deliverables
negotiating Student voice
produced
shared meaning
http://bie.org
5

6. Instrument - Community of Inquiry
Elements Categories Indicators (examples only)
Cognitive Presence Triggering Event Sense of puzzlement
Exploration Information exchange
Integration Connecting ideas
Resolution Apply new ideas
Social Presence Affective Expression Expression of emotion
Open Communication Risk-free expression
Group Cohesion Encouraging collaboration
Teaching Presence Instructional Management Defining & initiating
discussion topics
Building Understanding Sharing personal meaning
Direct Instruction Focusing discussion
Swan, K., Shea, P., Richardson, J., Ice, P., Garrison, D. R., Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000, p. 4
6
Cleveland-Innes, M., & Arbaugh, J. B., 2008

7. Teaching Presence
• The design, facilitation, and direction of
cognitive and social processes for the purpose
of realizing personally meaningful and
educational worthwhile learning outcomes.
• Course Examples
– Collaborative Script
– Project Phases
http://communitiesofinquiry.com/teachingpresence
7

8. Collaborative Script
http://tinyurl.com/collab-script
8

9. Phases
Phase Phase 2: Phase 3: Phase 4: Phase 5:
1: Team Essay- Essay- Essay- Meaningful Final
charter Why Student student learning? Product
teach? needs? Classroom as a and team
Qualities What does a place of reflective reflection
of a good good practice?
teacher? classroom
look like?
9

10. 10

11. 11

12. Social Presence
• Ability of participants to identify with the
group or course of study, communicate
purposefully in a trusting environment, and
develop personal and affective relationships
progressively by way of projecting their
individual personalities (Garrison, 2011, p.34)
• Course Examples
– Team Charter
– Private Journal
12

13. Team Charter
Palloff and Pratt, 2010 13

14. Private Journal
14

15. Cognitive Presence
Post to Personal Collaborate on
Area, Outline Deliverable
Collaborative (Charter, Essay, or
Response Presentation)
Review Complete
Collaborative Deliverable,
Script Questions Reflect on process
Practical Inquiry Model
15
Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000)

16. Sections were compared on their perception of teaching, cognitive, and social
presence in the course using the Community of Inquiry Survey
• There is a significant difference between the Wiki
and Discussion Board-Only sections on the Open
Communication subscale of Social Presence. The
specific subscale questions are:
– I felt comfortable conversing through the online
medium.
– I felt comfortable participating in the course
discussions.
– I felt comfortable interacting with other course
participants.
16

17. 17

18. Super Wiki Section Reflection
“In our opinion our products all turned out very well! The process
for all of them went well too. We did a good job getting organized
and all putting our fair share of work and effort into each
product. The process of this project was dependent on both our
individual thoughts and our ability to collaborate to create a
product. The essays contained individual thoughts from each of
us. They and the final presentation would not have been as
thorough if only one of us had contributed to the project. In
addition, the group had exceptional ideas and were able to
articulate them. There was also mutual respect for each others’
opinions which resulted in a comprehensive product.”
18

19. Wiki Section Reflection
“I was very pleased with how our team worked
together. We were all supportive of each other.
When others needed assistance another team
member always stepped up to help. We listened
to everyone's ideas and everyone contributed to
the project equally.”
19

20. Discussion Board-Only Reflection
“Our team was not completely balanced. One
person was dealing with family, job and health
issues and was only there for part of the time.
The other member was very much an achiever.
Part of me felt that even though I was
contributing I just didn't have ownership in the
project.”
20

21. Charter & Phases
“I just want to reiterate how much of a difference
the team charter made in this group. I am used to
getting saddled with lazy groups and negatively
expected the same of this group at the start.
Because I quickly saw that I was in an effective,
skilled group, the team charter with the roles that
we defined for each phase at the start, kept me
from taking over the group like the control freak
that I am--I knew that I had to stay within the
boundaries of my role. Again, this group project
proved far my valuable than my initial, pessimistic
expectations.”
From Wiki Section
21

22. Nine Collaboration Tips
Collaboration vs.
Collaborative Script Authentic Project
Cooperation
Phases Team Charter
• Multiple Points of • Communication
Team size Assessment • Goals
• Individual and Collaborative • Deadlines
Assessment • Deliverables
Use of Tools
Individual and Group • Discussion Board
Areas for Content and • LMS Wiki vs. Public Wiki Length of Project
Reflection • Collaborative Word Processor
(Super Wiki)
22

23. Comments or Questions?
David Wicks Andrew Lumpe
Assistant Prof Associate Dean
Director of School of Ed
Instructional Technology
Seattle Pacific U
Seattle Pacific U
lumpea@spu.edu
dwicks@spu.edu
Blog: http://lumpe.wordpress.com
Blog: http://dwicksspu.wordpress.com
Twitter: lumpea
Twitter: dwicksspu
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of
this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, 171
Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.