Bringing it all together: it's about teaching!

As the discussion comes to a close, a recurring theme has presented itself to me: what we do with learning resources is the key. This, I believe, is supported by both anecdotal evidence and broader educational research.

I have been particularly challenged by the work of John Hattie. When talking about improvements in student learning – which is, of course, what we should be focused on – Hattie (2003) concludes, ‘[t]hat which makes the difference is clear – it is the person who gently closes the classroom door and performs the teaching act’ (p.9). While the students themselves make the greatest impact on their learning (see the above pie-chart), the teaching is the aspect that we can actually have some control over.

When working with exciting new innovations in technology or newly developed curriculum, we can sometimes lose focus on what is our actual task. It is my contention that ICTs need to serve student learning. I have to confess that, at times, using an exciting technology in the classroom has been the primary reason for developing a learning activity, rather than thinking carefully about how the technology will enhance the learning experience of the students. Lang (2010), completed a study which focused on “276 high school students' participation and interaction in a project-based learning environment...mediated by an asynchronous computer-mediated communication (CMC) tool.” The results of this study suggested rather emphatically that the CMC tool did not adequately challenge students or provide a context for them to engage in high-order thinking. The CMC tool was an effective platform for students’ “comparing and sharing information” which comprised 82.7% of their notes. However, “the discovery and exploration of dissonance or inconsistency among ideas, concepts or statements” made up just 13.5% of their note-taking. And, disappointingly, “negotiation of meaning/co-construction of knowledge” was only evident in 3.7% of the notes.

So, what is the conclusion? Should we not utilise ICTs in education? Well, of course not. What it highlights to me is that: a) ICT education developers need to think carefully about what constitutes good learning when constructing e-learning programs and environments and; b) teachers need to become more adept at using these ICTs in the classroom.

Judd et. al (2010) have also conducted research which highlights the fact that quality teaching is primary to the technological tool itself. They write, “Wikis are widely promoted as ‘collaborative tools’, yet this and other research indicates that while aspects of their functionality can support collaboration, their success or failure strongly depends on the way in which individual activities are designed and implemented” (emphasis mine). A similar view is affirmed by Dell et. al (2010) whose research findings suggest that “methods of instruction are more important than the delivery platform” in regards to student achievement.

All this leads me to conclude that the focus of our research, practice and debate should not be which is better out of asynchronous and synchronous e-learning, but how do we design and deliver more effective e-learning so that student achievement is enhanced? So finally, when thinking about our priorities in educational policies and planning, in the words of John Hattie (2003), “We need to ensure that the influence of teachers is optimised to have powerful and sensationally positive effects on the learner. We need to direct attention at higher quality teaching”. This is fundamental both in regards to e-learning and face-to-face instruction.

Thank you all for your thoughtful contributions, links and prompts along the way during this discussion. I hope we have all found this experience an enriching one, prompting us to become better educators.

Stephen