Module 3

I think in order to fairly assess students in an collaborative learning community, you have to decide are you assessing knowledge or are you assessing prescriptive participation? Anderson puts it this way: “The demands of a learning-centered context at times may force us to modify the proscriptive participation in communities of learning, even though we may have evidence that such participation will likely advance knowledge creation and attention.” (Anderson, 2008, p. 52) I think sometimes we grade participation more on quantity than quality, even though both should be reflected in the rubrics we use. Both need to be reflected because sometimes it takes more discussion to really get the best thoughts out of someone on any particular topic. Swan lists some criteria typical to rubrics of this type

• Make participation in discussion a significant part of course grades.
• Develop grading rubrics for discussion participation.
• Require discussion participants to respond to their classmates postings and/or to respond to all responses to their own postings. (2004)
  

The challenge becomes to write rubrics that address the goals of the content as well and to rate the effectiveness with which a student meets these goals. If an effective learning community has been established, then student to student interaction may be the best way to assess this, that being how we argue or defend our positions. Siemens (2008) also stresses that it is the experience of the community that is important, and that it should count but not a huge percent of the total grade. It should also be stressed that an important aspect of this assessment should be the interaction itself, that is to say the depth with which we read and respond to one another in the learning community and the evidence that this is taking place by the incorporation of others ideas into the responses (Pratt and Paloff, 2007, p. 208).

The issue, in turn, also becomes what to do when there is one “dead limb,” so to speak, in a learning community. This is a situation that I know I have struggled with in the past, because if the whole community doesn’t live up to their responsibility (deadlines, etc.) it can hold back the entire development process. I think it is everyone’s responsibility to try everything that they can to encourage group member participation. If that is not effective, than it becomes the instructors role to do what is in the best interest of the learning community. I think the group should be not suffer academically for the failings of one member. The related sufferings, in terms of slowing academic development and progress, are enough tangible consequences. The instructor can also rebalance communities and even merge them if necessary as the facilitator.

Anderson, T. (Ed.) (2008). The Theory and practice of online learning (2nd ed.). Edmonton, AB: Athabasca University Press.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Siemens, G. (2008). Transcript of video program: assessment of collaborative learning featuring George Siemens.

Swan, K. (2004). Relationships between interactions and learning in online environments. Sloan Consortium.