A Malaysian Perspective Amelia Abdullah, Abdul Rashid Mohamed Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia. my This paper is made possible by the E-learning Project for Life Grant. Abstract This study explores roles of students in the development of a collaborative learning community through networked learning. The respondents for this multicase, single site case study involves twenty-three undergraduate TESL students in their ninth semester.
These students, undergoing the Introduction to Literature course, are pursuing their degree in a private institution of higher education in a branch campus in Perak. The study also comprises an instructor (tutor) as a respondent. This study employs the qualitative method as the research methodology. The instruments used in the data gathering process are interaction threads analysis and semi-structured interviews. Data are triangulated to justify the findings. The findings showcases that both students and the instructor play significant roles in developing the collaborative community.
The students’ roles are categorised into two types: positive roles and negative roles. The negative roles can be a threat to the sanctity of an online learning community, therefore these roles have to be minimised. On the other hand, the instructor need not be in control all the time as the students should learn to take control of their own learning process. In addition, the instructor should not disappear from the forum completely. She needs to monitor the students’ participation from time to time to make sure that there are no lurkers and everybody contributes in the community.
The Research paper on Successful Online Learning Community
1.Read “Read-Only Participants: A Case for Student Communication in Online Classes” by Nagel, Blignaut, and Cronje. 2.After reading the Nagel, Blignaut, and Cronje article, write a 250-500 word summary of it. 3.Refer to the guidelines for writing an effective summary presented in the Module 2 lecture for use as a guide. Review the assignment rubric as well prior to beginning the ...
Having said that, there are still room for improvement and measures can be taken by all parties (students, instructor and management) in the future to ensure that a totally conducive asynchronous networked learning environment is created. Keywords: students’ roles, networked learning, collaborative learning, asynchronous learning 1. Introduction With the dawning of the knowledge era, the field of education becomes more challenging. The sharing of ideas are no longer limited to formal education but also through electronic medium that transcends the time, geographical or disciplinary limits (Dzulkifli 2003).
The Information Communicaton and Technology has been the catalyst in the education reform in Malaysia. As the aspect of sharing and networking becomes more important in a techologically driven society, education has to cater to those needs. Johnson and Johnson (1996) have mentioned that the whole society has transformed from product based careers whereby the workers work individually to technological and information based careers where the workers need to work collaboratively and cooperatively.
Due to that fact, it is vital for every Malaysian to be equipped with positive social skills to work successfully in collaborative environment. 2. Background of the study The application of Internet in the Malaysian education system is a new scenario especially in the higher institution field. From this scenario, many terms such as virtual learning, online learning and cyber education (Rosenberg 2001; Jones 1999) as well as e-learning and networked learning are coined.
For the purpose of this study, the term networked learning or n-learning has been chosen as it refers to the learning process carried out through a computer network which emphasizes on collaborative learning among the learners and the instructor (Harasim 1997).
The research by Schutte (1996) as well a Phipps and Merisotis (in Paloff & Pratt 2001) illustrate that learners who are in a virtual collaborative class have shown significantly better results as compared to the learners who are in the face-to-face classes. Collaborative learning helps learners to achieve a more meaningful nowledge through the construction of the same goals, sharing and exploring together in building new meaning ( Pallof & Pratt 2001).
The Essay on Education Environment
1.Access the following policies on the Department of Education & Training WA website, http://www.det.wa.edu.au/education/ Staff Conduct: The purpose of this policy is to outline the Department of Education’s expectation & requirements for the standard of behaviour of staff at work. It provides instruction & direction for the appropriate behaviour in ethical risk situations and areas. ...
Collaborative learning is seen as an effective method that can equip the learners with valuable social skills to be used in the workplace. 3. Literature Review The rapid development of the education system causes massive changes in the roles taken by the instructor and the learners in the classroom. Learners become more independent and autonomous in a networked environment whereby they manage their own learning according to the individual needs.
The instructor merely acts as a facilitator, aiding the students to achieve their learning objectives. Both the instructor and the learners need to diversify their roles according to the demands of the learning process. Paloff and Pratt (2001) have identified several roles played by the learners in a networked learning environment: a. Knowledge Generators Learners construct their knowledge that they get from the learning process and adapt it according to their needs. The new knowledge will then be utilised in the everyday lives. b.
Collaborators As a part of a collaborative learning community, the learners should be able to work together with their peers as well as with the instructor to achieve the learning outcomes. In doing so, the learners need to be able to provide and receive feedback as well as self evaluate their learning progress. As Paloff and Pratt (2001) emphasize, in a networked learning environment the learners are expected to be able to collaborate successfully in constructing a deeper and more meaningful knowledge. c. Initiator and Wrapper (Hara et. al 1998)
Learners have to be active learning agents in a networked environment. On the other hand, the istructor’s role has become more minimal. Initiator starts the discussion going while the wrapper summarizes it. To ensure a successful networked learning environment, the learners have to be able to be initiators and wrappers. The instructor eeds to hand in the bulk of the reponsibilit to the learners and monitor the learning prcess to ensure it goes on smoothly. Other roles that can be taken by the learners in a collaborative learning community are: a.
The Essay on Foreign Language Errors Learner Learning
Introduction It is commonly assumed that where there are differences between L 1 and L 2, the learner's L 1 will probably interfere with the L 2 (negative language transfer), whereas, when L 1 and L 2 are similar, the L 2 will assist the L 2 learning (positive language transfer) (Ellis, 1994). Therefore, we tend to believe that most of the errors are account of negative transfer. This is partly ...
Mediator – the go between who attempts o solve indifferences or conflicts in the community b. Provoker – goading other learners to respond c. Discussion initiator – posing thought provoking questions to spark meaningful discussions d. social network builder (Rourke 2001) – using the online interaction to build a condusive sosial environment Apart from the positive roles mentioned above, there are also negative roles which are found in a collaborative learning community: A. Lurkers – learners who do not make any contributions in the learning community.
These learners lurk in silence or are simply being passive contributors. They only absorb the contributions of others and do not reciprocate in return. Extreme lurkers only register as a group members and then disappear completely from the community. According to Salmon (2000), there are three categories of lurkers: i. Freeloaders – those using the contributions of others without contributing anything back ii. Sponge – those who require more time to adapt themselves in the networked learning environment.
These sponges lurk in the begining and when they are more confident, they will start contributing. iii. The lurkers who lurk due to access problems or lack of computing skills. Preece (2000) also lists out reasons why the learners become lurkers: a. Lacking in confidence in providing ideas, feeling that their ideas are not good or tangible enough. b. Difficulties in accessing the network. c. Do not have the understanding of the concept of a learning community, therefore, do not have a close-knit and reliable relationship with other community members. d.
Having low motivation levels. e. More interested in obtaining knowledge without the online interaction. B. Flamers Learners who are frustrated with the entire situation illustrate their dissatsfaction through harsh words or revert to bullying other learners. These are known as flamers. Flamers will write comments that would offend their peers and even the instructor. The act of flaming is unprofessional and could disrupt the conduciveness of the collaborative learning environment. C. Dominance A dominant learner will conquer more that 50% of the entire discussion.
The Essay on Implementing the Professional Learning Community
Journal Requirements: Consider the benefits of the activities proposed in your discussion of professional learning communities. How can you implement these activities in your organization or how will you implement them in a future position that you will hold within an organization? Why would these benefit your organization or a future organization? What do you feel will be the outcome of this ...
In addition, a dominant learner does not necessary have the most knowledge. Some learners have the tendency to attract the attention of others and will not allow their peers to contribute the ideas. Paloff and Pratt (2001) further categorise dominance into two types: i. Personal dominance – learners dominate the discussion with issue unrelated to the learning process ii. Academic dominance – learners who are highly knowledgeable who tend to dominate the discussion by providing most of the information without allowing others to participate as actively.
These two types of dominance are able to hinder other learners from expressing their own views therefore halting the formation of a successful collaborative learning community. In short, these negative roles must be monitored and minimised. The instructor’s intervention is needed in curbing these negative roles so as not to let them get out of control. 4. The objective of the study The study is conducted to identify the roles played by the students in developing and maintaining a collaborative learning community through networked learning. 5. Research question
What are the roles played by the learners in developing and maintaining a collaborative learning community through networked learning? 6. Methodology The study conducted is qualitative in nature to find the answer to the question about roles undertaken by the learners in the development of a collaborative networked learning community. A qualitative research is deemed suitable for this study to obtain deeper understanding on novel issues as well as to garner details on naturalistic environment which could not be obtained though quantitative methods (Strauss & Corbin 1990).
This study employs the interpretive approach focusing on the whole online interaction and at the same time dissecting the meaning inside each utterance (Gunawardena et. al 1997; Fontana & Frey 1998; Hillman 1999).
7. Respondents of the study Twenty three undergraduate students (Bachelor of Education – TESL) who are undertaking the course part time in a private higher institution as well an instructor are involved in this study. The students comprise of in- service teachers who are teaching English in their respective schools.
The Essay on The Community Immersion Requisite Of NSTP
Immersion by definition is complete involvement: involvement in something that completely occupies all the time, energy, or concentration available. Thus, an NSTP student should define Community Immersion as an approach of developing among them the concept of empowerment and service as they reach out to the deprived, depressed and unprivileged communities and marginalized segments of society. In ...
The instructor involved has been a tutor for a year and has adequate online teaching skills. Each student is identified by codes such as SA, SB, SC until SW. The instructor is known as Mrs. S. The interview respondents consist of four students from the studied group as well as Mrs. S. A total of 303 online messages are archived and analysed for the purpose of this study. 8. The setting of the study The respondents go through a blended learning mode whereby the learning sessions are done online and through face-to-face.
However, this study is only focusing on the asynchronous online interaction between the instructor with the learners and among the learners themselves. 9. Duration of the study The study is conducted for 13 weeks (one semester).
10. Instruments of the study a. Asynchronous interaction analysis b. Semi-structured interviews 11. Data collection and analysis The data collected from the online asynchronous interaction and the interviews are archived, transcribed and coded according to the prepared coding scheme (see Table 1a and 1b).
Roles |Indicator | |Initiator and Wrapper |Initiator – learner who starts the discussion | | |Wrapper – learner who summarizes the discussion | |Discussion Initiator |Providing questions that can spark deep and meaningful | | |discussions among community members. |Knowledge Generators |Learners who frequently answers the instructor’s questions | | |Often starting the topics to be discussed | |Mediator / Problem Solver |Acting as the middle person to solve conflicts or differences. | |Sosial Network Builder |Developing an environment that has a social presence. | Table 1a : Positive Roles Roles |Indicators | |Lurkers |No contribution at all. Logs in merely to obtain information | | |from other members. | |Flamers |Using harsh and insulting words to offend the other members of | | |the community. |Passive Contributors |Sporadic contribution | | |Only agrees with others’ opinions without offering his/her own. | |Dominance |Dominates and controls more than half of the discussion and the| | |messages are not centered on just academic messages. | Table 1b. Negative Roles 12. Findings 12. 1. Positive Roles 12. 1. 1. Initiator and Wrapper
As mentioned before, an initiator is the one who starts the discussion while the wrapper summarizes the whole discussion (Hara et. al, 1998).
The Essay on Student Reading Discussion Guide
Note any words or phrases that are unfamiliar to you or that are used in a special sense. Define them and be sure to record the page number. A. Epochs (23) - a period of time that is very important in history. B. Vicissitudes (25) - a change of circumstances or fortune, typically one that is unwelcome or unpleasant. C. Dissenters (29) - labels one who disagrees in matters of opinion, belief, etc ...
The analysis shows that eight respondents take on the role of initiator. These students frequently start new topics to be discussed and debated. In addition, two of the eight students become initiators after the face-to-face tutorials have been carried out. ST is the biggest contributor in the community while PF is the most active participant who often poses question. “As we know, most of us cultivate reading habits from the reading materials that were interesting or with personal purposes.
We read for info, pleasure and general knowledge in extensive reading. In short, extensive reading matters most in this worls of knowledge. What is your take on this? ” (SF, Message 12, Tutorial 1) The initiator is vital in a networked learning community to ensure that the interaction goes on. With an active initiator, the instructor does not need to be the one who always starts the discussion. According to Hara et. al (1998), the wrapper has the responsibilities in summing up and closing the particular discussion. The findings illustrate that only five respondents act as the wrappers.
As a example, “Hi all, I agree with what Mrs said. I like to sum it up by sharing with you using the book ‘Tidy your room, Taya’ for Yr 4. I had to try out the conversation between all the characters in the boo as a short drama. Although it is simple and short but they really show their interest because they really enjoyed it. I think by doing this kind of activity, they can remember the story better and they are able to use the language. ” (SP, Message 24, Tutorial 5) From the findings, the researcher concludes that the initiators or the wrappers are not from those who contribute the most.
For instance, SJ is the second largest contributor in the online forum. However, SJ is neither the initiator nor the wrapper. Instead, she is more inclined to answer questions from the instructor or her peers. 12. 1. 2. Discussion Initiator There are some differences between initiator and discussion initiator: a. Discussion initiator : i) Does not start the discussion. Often poses a lot of questions while discussion is ongoing. ii) Poses questions to spark off a discussion. b. Initiator : i. Begins a discussion or a new topic ii.
Begins a discussion with opening statements. Through the threaded analysis, the researcher find that only four respondents show the characteristics of a discussion initiator. They are : SF, SQ, SI and SG. SG happens to be a late contributor. He starts to post messages after Tutorial 3. However, once he starts contributing, he becomes a proactive participant. A total of 12 messages have been posted by SG and those messages are thought provoking, as illustrated by the following vignet: “In pre-reading activities, it should be able to activate students’ background knowledge.
What do you think the kind of background knowledge we expect from our students in teaching Lit? Knowledge of the language or knowledge that relate to the poem or story? ” (SG, Message 20, Tutorial 5) The above message is successful in generating a lengthy discussion on the said topic. A number of 10 responds are recorded. Those with better and more abundance idea will pose questions to be discusses and debated together ( Respondent Two, interview).
Another indicator that shows the role of a discussion initiator is through the way the learner provokes his peers’ ideas.
The provocation should be academically and profesionally based. The learner will pose provoking statements to prod the other members of the community to respond. However, the findings from this study does not illustrate the presence of such provoker. The researcher assumes that the learners in this learning community feel that there is no need to resort to such act. Most of the time, the information given is detailed and in depth. A wrongly executed provocation can lead to a hostile learning environment and can lead to the breakdown of the community. 12. 1. 3. Knowledge generators
The role of a knowledge generator is divided into two categories: i. Frequently answering the questions from the instructor ii. Frequently sharing the information through the contribution of articles, illustrations or notes in the forum The analysis shows that there are three students who comply with the above characteristics. All three respond to every question poses by the instructor. The responses given are highly intelligent and are able to increase the understanding of the other students. “… How does a stylistic approach differ from Literature as content approach? (Mrs. S, Message 15, Tutorial 2) “Hi! A language based approach is studying of the text will help to intergrate the language. Students will be involved in detailed analysis of the language to make meaningful interpretation. In content approach, the history and characteristics of literary movements, social, political an historical background, rhetorical devices are taught. ” (SC, Message 17, Tutorial 2) “In stylistics-grammar items are stressed.
Literature as content involves scrutinising texts through under scope of exploring the texts which include developments of literary movements, politics and historical background. In short, stylistics approach require us to focus on language forms and functions to interpret the text. ” (SF, Message 19, Tutorial 2) For the second category of knowledge generators, the researcher finds seven students who show such characteristics. These students share a lot of information from various sources with their peers. They post messages with articles, notes as well as appropriate websites to be utilised by every community member.
The researcher also finds some knowledge generators provide detailed and in depth information while the others merely give out the website address or simplistic information without any explanation. “Here, I would like to share a short synopsis of The Drover’s Wife. The Drover’s wife struggles to protect her children from a dangerous snake. She and her faithful dog bravely fight and kill the snake. There is no rejoicing. The story is set in the Aust. bush. We are introduced to a very harsh and rough nature. Moral of the story – life is a series of struggles and one muse be brave and strong to overcome difficulties. (SP, Message 6, Tutorial 4) “I’ve some ideas in text selection to share: 1. Find natural boundaries if u need to divide it into sections. 2. Break the long sentences into shorter ones. 3. Remove as many adjectives as possible 4. Try to keep only content or keywords. ” (SA, Message 5, Tutorial 1) The kowledge generators has demonstrated the effort to obtain information from the other members of the learning community. This illustrates the willingness of the students to admit their own knowledge gaps and the desire to overcome those gaps.
As Bruffee (1993) and Barnes (2003) claim, the students are in the comfort zone of the collaborative learning community if they are able to admit their knowldege gaps and relying on their peers as well as the instructor to fill on those gaps. For instance: “Hi friends, Thank you for the ideas. But can you suggest any suitable methods or techniques that I can use for the lowest class? Not only to make it interesting but also to motivate my students to read more. ” (SN, Message 38, Tutorial 1) 12. 1. 4.
Problem solver / Mediator The problem solver helps in providing suggestions or solutions to the predicaments faced by his/her peers. The analysis shows that there are no particular students who undertake this role. The researcher finds that this role is played by the majority of the community members (15 students altogether).
Each student takes the initiative to help and guide the other members of the community without waiting for the response from the instructor. “I am teaching in primary school so it is difficult to me because some of them don’t understand my communication.
So how? Thanks. ” (SL, Message 72, Tutorial 2) “Since most of us are primary school teachers we can adapt to our students situation. Now in primary school in Yr 4 and 5, literature is introduced. What we can do is, start at most simple task as looking at the cover of the book, illustrations and ask your students to create their own cover and you will be surprise to see the result. ” (SM, Message 73, Tutorial 2)
A mediator’s role is different from that of a problem solver. The mediator refers to the person who acts as the pacifier solving conflicts among the members of the learning community. However, in this community, the researcher does not identify any instances whereby a mediator is present online. This situation is due to the absent of any conflicts or disagreements that cannot be resolved without the help of a mediator or the instructor. However, through the interview, it seems that sometimes disagreements do occur and someone will step in to resolve them. Sometimes I have to be the mediator when there is conflicting opinions and no one is backing down. I will try to resolve it as diplomatically as possible by giving suggestions which can be agreed by conflicting parties. (Respondent 1, Interview data) “When there is a conflict, the rest of the group will try to intervene so as not to let the disagreement get out of hand. In each community, there should be a good mediator. If there is no one who can be the mediator, the instructor is the best person to solve the conflicts. Sometimes conflicts are good so that the minds are more opened and susceptible to new changes. (Respondent 2, Interview data) 12. 1. 5. Social Network Builder According to Anderson (2000) and Rourke et. al (2001), social presence is vital to develop a condusive collaborative n-learning community. Social presence refers to the way students express their thoughts and ideas in a social context, through social cues. Social cues area statements or parts of statments which are not related to the learning content (Henri, 1992).
In other words, to build a learning environment with social presence, students need to be social network builders.
The interaction data shows that the students use informal statements in their messages. They even resort to using simple language that consists of short forms such Lit (Literature), Ss (students) and T (Teacher).
Data also illustrates that each student who makes posting online is a social network builder. The messages posted are in the form of greetings, closures and appreciation. Social cues also refer to statements in the forms of encouragement, motivation and the use of humour in the interaction (Henri, 1992).
However, the researcher does not find any evidence of humourous statements in the threaded discussion.
This is probably due to this : the students may feel that it is inappropriate for them to make jokes in an academic setting. 12. 2. Negative Roles 12. 2. 1. Passive Contributors Passive contributors refer to those who post messages sporadically and erratically. A total of four students have been identified as passive contributors in this community : SG,SI,SN and SO. Each of them has contributed less than five messages individually. SG merely posts in the ‘Assignment’ slot whereby she enquires about how to execute the assignment. She does not make any effort to join in the other discussions and soon falls out of the radar completely.
SI only posts three message altogether in the whole course of the study. Unlike SG, SI does attempt to answer some of the instructor’s questions. On the other hand, PO who makes five postings, tends to contribute deep and meaningful messages. It is a pity that he does not contribute regularly as he could have been a valuable contributor in thr collaborative learning community. “I feel the selection of texts by the teacher is an important factor. the selected text should be based on the students’ language competence, their background and interests. Only then they will be able to interact and enjoy the poems or short stories.
Also, teachers must bear in mind other factors affecting the students like maturity, experience, educational and emotional state. ” (SO, Message 45, Tutorial 3) All four students have waited until Tutorial 4 to start posting their messages. The researcher feels that the students do so as they are only interested in obtaining the 5% marks which is allocated for the online participation and that they are not interested in becoming a part of the learning community. This is evidenced from the quality and the quantity of messages they make. 12. 2. 2. Lurkers
As mentioned by Salmon (2000) in the previous section, there are three types of lurker: a. freeloader b. sponge c. lurkers who have problems in accessing the forum Data illustrates that lurkers in the (c) category is nonexistent. However, there are evdence of the presence of the other two categories. SW has been identified as the lurker in the (b) category. She, who also happens to be one of the inteview respondents (R1), only starts to post messages in Tutorial 3. However, once she feels comfortable and secure in the community, she becomes one of the most active contributor.
She has posted a total of 12 messages in the whole course. According to SW, this is due to the insecurities she feels initially. With the support from other members and the instructor, she becomes more confident in voicing out her ideas and opinions. In addition, SW feels that the forum has been the best platform for her in knowledge sharing and broadening her horizon. It is a totally different scenario with SB and SV who do not contribute anything at all in the forum. It cannot be certain for sure whether they just log in and lurk, or they do not access the forum at all.
The interview with SB (also known as Respondent 4) explains the reason why she does not contribute anything at all. SB is aware of the importance of her contribution to the development of the learning community. However, because of other pressing matters she has to forego the 5% marks allocated for the online interaction. Having very little time is given as the main reason for her not participating online. According to her, she has more important issues such as teaching exam classes and tending to her family needs, which demand her attention more than participation online.
Time factor is one of the main reasons why people refrain from interacting online. Data from the interview also highlights several other reasons for none participation: a. responsibilities to the family; small children needing attention, little or no support from the spouses b. financial problems – expensive telephone bills to access the Internet c. attitudes: i) being indifferent towards the importance of the interaction ii) laziness to go to the cyber cafes iii) assuming that 5% does not affect the overall grade iv) uncomfortable interacting online ) not interested in interacting online In ensuring that lurkers contribute in the online forum, the instructor has to play a significant role as well. Data shows that Mrs. S gives reminders once in a while to the learners to start contributing as early as possible. However, it should be the responsibilities of the students to contribute online. The instructor’s role is just to monitor and offer advise to the learners. Through the interview data, the researcher finds that the presence of lurkers is not well accepted by the rest. Lurkers are seen as selfish individuals who do not think as a community.
Once a learner registers online, he or she automatically becomes part of the community and should act as a responsible member of a learning community (McConnell, 2006).
Lurkers will only hinder the development of a successful learning community. Below are some of the opinions given by the interview respondents on lurkers: “It is fair that everyone should contribute something. However, the case with this group is different. Some just disappear right after registering. It is inappropriate for these people. Once you register, you should think as a group. Need to take the initiative and share ideas with others.
It’s not fair for the rest if you are only thinking of yourself. ” (Respondent 3, interview data) “To me, it is an unjust situation. The concept of sharing is the basis in online learning. It is ok if you are not active, it’s enough if you can contribute once in a while. This is a group effort. So, everyone has his own role to play in making sure the community functions smoothly. Those who sponge other people’s contributions are just thinking of themselves. ” (Respondent 1, interview data) 12. 2. 3. Flamers
The researcher does not find any evidence of flaming in the interaction. There is no sign of statements that have negative connotations or that can offend the others. However, through the interviews, the researcher finds that flamers do exist, albeit discreetly. “Obvious flamers are not present. On the other hand, there are some who use cynical words and snide remarks. There are also some whose style of writing tend to sound condescending. Maybe this is just their style of writing. To avoid conflicts from happening, we need to ask for clarification or just ignore the messages if you could. (Respondent 3, interview data)
According to Barnes (2001, flamers are more harmful compared to lurkers. This is due to the fact that flamers can drive the others away from the community. The harsh words used will offend others and eventually the other will stop contributing at all. Therefore, the instructor has to be aware of the presence of flamers and take immediate action if things start to go out of hand. 12. 2. 4. Dominance SF is the biggest contributor in the community. He posts 38 messages overall. However, the whole percentage of SF’s messages come up to only 12. 5%. Therefore, SF cannot be idenfied as a dominant contributor.
He is merely an active contributor. Through the analysis of the threaded discussion, the researcher finds that none of the members in this community act as dominant contributors. Each member has equal opportunity to make enquries or provide ideas and suggestions. The learners in this community, even with a few lurkers and non participants, do not depend on the instructor to achieve their learning objectives. 13. Discussions In a collaborative community , a learner does not work alone (Vygotsky, 1978).
The constructivist environment stresses on collaboration to construct a higher order knowledge (Jonassen, Myers & McKillop, 1996).
Due to this, learners in a collaborative environment need to play positive and proactive roles to ensure the learning process runs smoothly. This study has identified two types of roles learners play: positive roles and negative roles. The positive roles help in the development of a collaborative n-learning community whereas the negative roles could hinder the process from occurring. Eight learners have been identified as the initiators of the community while another five have been identified as wrappers. From this total, four students play both roles.
The number is enough for the community to work actively as according to Lewis and Allen (2005: 112), “a minimum of four or five members is required to launch off the interaction by providing the type of diversity of ideas and experience that will enable people to learn through collaboration. ” The diversity of roles helps in developing a conducive learning environment. Preece (2000) stresses that each individual in the community should have specific roles that can give an impact on the development of the learning community. From the study, 18 learners have been identified as knowledge generators.
Even though the quality of each individual message differs, the most important part is the effort done by the students in sharing the knowledge so that everyone benefits from it. The sharing of knowledge is at par with Alavi and Dufner’s (2005) opinions where they claim that the knowledge will be constructed effectively when the learners interact actively while trying to complete their tasks. The study is able to identify several roles which have the potential to hinder the development of a collaborative learning community. The findings show a total of six students (26. 09%) who have been identified as lurkers and passive contributors.
The percentage of these students is considerably lower compared to the findings from Salmon’s study (2000) which records at 30% and Preece (2000) which records between 80% and 90%. Graham & Scarborough (1999) stress that lurkers are not considered as part of the learning community whereas Youngblood, Trede and di Corpo (2001) see lurkers as students who have no discipline. Lurkers are seen as a normal phenomenon if the learners are new learners in the online learning scenario, for instance first year students (Barnes 2003; Graham & Scarborough 1999; Lewis & Allen 2005; Preece, 2000).
New learners need time to adapt themselves to the new environment. Once these learners are in their comfort zone, they will become active participants. On the other hand, the researcher feels that there should not be any lurkers in this community. This is because these students are in their final year and have been using the online mode of communication for the past eight semesters. They should have known what is expected of them online. Therefore, the presence of lurkers in this community brings about a lot of questions. For some communities, the presence of lurkers is due to an inefficient instructor.
An ineffective instructor who does not respond frequently can be the main cause of lurkers and dropouts (Mason 1991; McCabe 1998; McVay 2002; Nonnecke & Preece 2000; Salmon 2000).
However, the instructor in this community cannot be blamed for the presence of lurkers. Mrs. S has provided the students the time and opportunities for everyone to participate and even reminded them from time to time to post messages. The main reasons given by those who do not participate actively is time limit and having other responsibilities to tend to. For these students, they should get their priorities straight.
Once they have registered to be students in a learning community, they need to be a part of the community. They need to manage their time well to participate online although the marks allocated are small. It is the sense of sharing that is more important. The students do not have to access the forum every single day. It is enough if the students post messages once in every two days (Preece 2000; Salmon 2000).
McConnell (2006:42) has summed up the importance of each student to take up their responsibilities as online community members seriously: Group members need to understand their roles in the mutual group, and believe that each student is equally important and vital for the success of the collaborative group. This form of collaboration requires high order of involvement, high willingness to share and belief that individual development is enhanced by workin together. ” 14. Conclusion To build a successful n-learning community, learners need to participant to the optimum. Data from the study has shown that not everyone in the community participate in the constructing of knowledge.
Although the number is quite insignificant, the condition should be monitored so as not to let it hinder the development of the learning community. The passive contributors as well as lurkers have to change their attitudes. They can no longer think of themselves. Collaborative learning benefits every member in the community and not just specific individuals (Moll 1990; Vygotsky 1978).
There is no ‘individualism’ in collaborative learning. The learners need to think as a group and be ready to play different roles to share their ideas in constructing new knowledge. In addition, learners should not depend so much on the instructor to build a conducive learning community. They should shoulder that responsibilities together. As a conclusion, the most important things are the change of attitudes as well as adequate mental preparations from the learners to undergo their learning processes online.
