855 1283McCarthy John 072844 111506090839

Slide1: 

Electronic Discussion Boards to Enhance Graduate Student Learning in AAC John McCarthy, Molly Schock, Rashida Zojwala Ohio University INTRODUCTION template design only ©copyright 2006 Ohio University Instructional Media Services • 740.593.2673 It is important to identify methods to maximize on preferred learning styles to help increase interest in new technologies. Distance learning technologies, such as remote broadcasting, electronic discussion boards, and online chat, can potentially be helpful tools in aiding pre-service professionals to learn about assistive technology for individuals with severe communication impairments (Lebel, Olshtain, andamp; Weiss, 2005). Burke, Beukelman, Ball and Horn (2002), found that intervention specialists and pre-service professionals preferred to learn about technology in small interactive groups and did not like direct instruction methods. They also found that pre-service and current professionals’ interest in technology is low, despite knowledge of its importance. To gauge the potential applications of online discussion boards, an analysis of student results and experiences is needed. Fortunately, there are resources on data analysis of focus group data (Kitzinger, 1994). The use of a multi-step method of data analysis is suggested for research using inductive approaches to produce thoughts and theories for educational purposes. The current study utilized qualitative methods to obtain a better understanding of the use of discussion boards to facilitate learning in a classroom setting. These discussion boards allowed the students in the class to answer questions posed by the professor, as well as interact with one another, to better understand the material presented in class. The discussion boards also allowed the students to post threads and participate in the discussions at times that were convenient and suitable for them. Blackboard, Inc. (1997-2006). Blackboard Academic Suite 6.3.1.505® (Computer software). [http://www.blackboard.com/us/index.aspx] Burke, R., Beukelman, D.R., Ball, L., andamp; Horn, C. (2002). Augmentative and alternative communication technology learning part 2: Pre-professional students. Augmentative andamp; Alternative Communication, 18(4), p242-250. Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health and Illness, 16, 103-121. Lebel, T., Olshtain, E., andamp; Weiss, P. L. (2005). Teaching teachers about augmentative and alternative communication. Opportunities and challenges of a web-based course. Augmentative andamp; Alternative Communication, 21(4), p264-277. Lincoln, Y. S., andamp; Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications. Rovai, A. P. (2000). Online and traditional assessments: What is the difference? The Internet and Higher Education, 3, 141-151. Nineteen graduate students enrolled in a graduate course in AAC participated. Participants had the following demographics: between ages 22-32; female; 2nd year graduate students in the SLP masters program at Ohio University; enrolled in the course for credit. The procedures in the study consisted of the following: students had hands-on, in class learning with four different groups of AAC technologies (simple digitized, dynamic display, iconic encoding, traditional orthography-based); following presentations, students had one week to participate in a follow-up online discussion through the Blackboard Academic Suite® with guidelines for participation adapted from a rubric by Rovai (2002); each discussion thread was converted into an Excel spreadsheet; posts were divided into thought units according to the definition of a thought unit as '…the smallest piece of information about something that can stand by itself… interpretable in the absence of any additional information other than a broad understanding of the context in which the inquiry is carried out' (Lincoln andamp; Guba, 1985, p. 345); each thought unit was reviewed and organized into themes depending on the thread topic and content of the statement; the data were coded by defined themes and sub-themes; each participant of the discussion boards filled out a survey regarding their reaction of the use of the discussion board; responses were combined in a Word document and analyzed for content. RESULTS (Adapted from Rovai, A.P. (2000). Online and traditional assessments: What is the difference? Internet and Higher Education, 3, 141-151.) Percentage of Thought Units per Theme per Forum Special Thanks to Julia Smith and the Graduate students who participated in the study. Effective way to generate discussion and student reflection Efficient use of class time demonstrations and presentation of additional material that would have been omitted if student discussion had taken more class time Professor plays an integral role in implementing the discussion board generate prompts for student replies monitor the discussion forums Future research should include comparisons of alternative approaches to facilitate classroom learning, including electronic discussion boards, to conclude which option is the most effective and efficient. Simple Digitized [Cost]: 'It will be up to the SLP to become a strong advocate for our clients and/or their parents [when funding is an issue for choosing a device]. We will have to use our experience, knowledge of the research, and any other means possible to prove that communication does not, in fact, have a price.' Dynamic Display [Strength]: 'Much of what we say everyday are composed of novel sentences in order to express our thoughts and ideas.  The vast amount of choices of words and phrases on a dynamic display device can be easily combined in order to generate these novel productions, which I think is a very important feature.' Iconic Encoding [Who Would Benefit]: 'I think the iconic encoding devices would work well for people who cannot read.  They can be taught each picture and will have a wider range of vocabulary by using icons over individual pictures.'  Traditional Orthography-Based [Computer Access]: 'If a child with special needs has the potential to use [a traditional orthography-based device], it may be a better idea to invest in one computer that can be used by other children also, rather than a device that only one child can use.' = 'Each client will be different and it is very important that you look at all of their communication needs and then make a decision with the individual and his/her family about what device is best suited to fulfill their communication needs.'