best pedagogical practices for online learning curt bonk, indiana university president,...

Best Pedagogical Practices for Online Learning

Curt Bonk, Indiana University

President, CourseShare.comcjbonk@indiana.edu

http://php.indiana.edu/~cjbonk

http://CourseShare.com

Who are some of the key players…

Tips for SuccessUniv of Missouri Extension, Distance

Learning Design Center (DLDC)http://dldc-courses.ext.missouri.edu/dldcwww/dlplanning/

Give pts for participation & contribution. Set time limits for task, feedback, etc. Set quantity for regular participation. Provide chat transcripts for those unable to

attend. Reward early submission. Make first online discussion an ungraded ice

breaker.

Karen Lazenby Instructor Qualities

(University of Pretoria, Nov., 2001, klazenby@tsamail.trsa.ac.za)

• Web-Smart (technology smart)• Flexible (ability to shift between roles)• Patient• Responsive• Friendly• Positive• Supportive

Online Strategies(Karen Lazenby, University of Pretoria, Nov., 2001)

• Limit lecturing online—promote self-directed learning

• Set clear rules for posting and interaction• Explain tasks and overlooked info.• Let learners synthesize key points.• Publish best work of students (with

permission)• Involve participation from outside experts

Guy Kemshal-BellTechnical & Further Education (TAFE) in Australia

(guykb@iprimus.com.au)

(Had Instructors Rate 21 Online Teaching Competencies From TAFE Questionnaire)

Online Teaching SkillsThe Online Teacher, TAFE, Guy Kemshal-Bell (April, 2001)

• Technical: email, chat, Web development

• Facilitation: engaging, questioning, listening, feedback, providing support, managing discussion, team building, relationship building, motivating, positive attitude, innovative, risk taking

• Managerial: planning, reviewing, monitoring, time management

========================================– From provider to content to designer of learning experiences.– From oracle to guide and resource provider– From solitary teacher to member of team

Key Skills or Attributes (scale 0-3)The Online Teacher, TAFE, Guy Kemshal-Bell (April, 2001)

• Ability to provide effective online fdbk (2.86)• Ability to engage the learner (2.84)• Ability to provide direction and support (2.82)• Skills in online listening (2.76)• Ability to use email effectively (2.70)• Ability to motivate online learners (2.66)• Positive attitude to online teaching (2.66)• Skills in effective online questioning (2.65)

Less Impt Skills or Attributes (scale 0-3)The Online Teacher, TAFE, Guy Kemshal-Bell (April, 2001)

• Higher-level Web page development (.606)• Use of video/audioconferencing (1.06)• Ability to develop simple Web pages (1.45)• Skills in using online chat (1.84)• Ability to build online teams (2.10)• Skills in planning, monitoring trng (2.20)

Ability to say dumb things.Ability to offend people.Ability to sleep 24 X 7.Ability to get distracted.

Three Most Vital SkillsThe Online Teacher, TAFE, Guy Kemshal-Bell (April, 2001)

• Ability to engage the learner (30)• Ability to motivate online learners (23)• Ability to build relationships (19)• Technical ability (18)• Having a positive attitude (14)• Adapt to individual needs (12)• Innovation or creativity (11)

Let’s brainstorm comments (words or short phrases) that

reflect your overall attitudes and feelings towards online teaching…

Feelings Toward Online TeachingThe Online Teacher, TAFE, Guy Kemshal-Bell (April, 2001)

(Note: 94 practitioners surveyed.)

• Exciting (30)• Challenging (24)• Time consuming (22)• Demanding (18)• Technical issue (16); Flexibility (16)• Potential (15)• Better options (14); Frustrating (14) • Collab (11); Communication (11); Fun (11)

E-ModeratingE-Moderating: The Key to Teaching and Learning Online,

(Gilly Salmon, (1999) Kogan Page)

1. Know when to stay silent for a few days.

2. Close off unused or unproductive conferences.

3. Provide a variety of relevant conference topics.

4. Deal promptly with dominance, harassment, etc.

5. Weave, summarize, and archive often.

6. Be an equal participant in the conference.

7. Provide sparks or interesting comments.

8. Avoid directives and right answers.

9. Acknowledge all contributions.

10. Support others for e-moderator role.

Pedagogical Recommendations(Berge, 1995, The role of the online instructor/facilitator)

• Draw attention to conflicting views• Don’t expect too much/thread• Do not lecture (Long, coherent sequence

of comments yields silence)• Request responses within set time• Maintain non-authoritarian style• Promote private conversations

Managerial Recommendations(Berge, 1995, The role of the online instructor/facilitator)

• Distribute lists of participants• Provide timely administrative info—books,

enrollment, counseling, etc.• Change procedures that are not working• Change misplaced subject headings• Decisively end discussion sessions• Don’t overload

Research on Nine Online Courses(Vanessa Dennen, San Diego State Univ)

• 9 case studies of online classes using asynchronous discussion

• Topics: sociology, history, communications, writing, library science, technology, counseling

• Range of class size: 15 - 106 • Level: survey, upper undergraduate, and graduate• Tools: custom and commercial• Private, semi-public, and public discussion areas

Deadlines

• Deadlines motivated participation– Message counts increased in the days

immediately preceding a deadline

• Deadlines inhibited dialogue– Students posted messages but did not

discuss– Too much lag time between initial

messages and responses

Modeling

• Instructor modeling increased the likelihood of student messages meeting quality and content expectations

• Modeling was more effective than guidelines

Guidelines and Feedback

• Qualitative discussion guidelines and feedback helped students know what their participation should look like

• Quantitative discussion guidelines and feedback comforted students and was readily understood by them

• Feedback of both varieties was needed at regular intervals, although the qualitative feedback need not be individualized

• Little or no feedback given

• Always authoritative• Kept narrow focus of

what was relevant• Created tangential

discussions, fact questions

• Only used “ultimate” deadlines

• Provided regular qual/quant feedback

• Participated as peer• Allowed perspective

sharing• Tied discussion to

grades, other tasks.• Used incremental

deadlines

Poor Instructors Good Instructors

Common Instructor Complaints

a) Students don’t participate

b) Students all participate at the last minute

c) Students post messages but don’t converse

d) Facilitation takes too much time

e) If they must be absent, the discussion dies off

f) Students are confused

Reasons why...

Students don’t participate– Because it isn’t required– Because they don’t know what is

expected

Students all participate at last minute– Because that is what was required– Because they don’t want to be the first

Instructor posts at the last minute

How would you respond?

1. Who invented ______?

2. Who was the most influential political figure of the 1990’s?

3. What were the 3 main points of the reading?

Common problems with online discussion prompts

Too vague– Learners have no idea how to respond

Too fact-based– Only one or two persons need to

respond

Lack directions for interactions– Learners don’t know what acceptable

participation looks like

Elements of a good prompt

• Specifies the desired response type • Allows for multiple correct answers

(perspective sharing, unique application of knowledge)

• Provides guidance for peer interaction• Fosters reflection, thinking, or

collaboration

A 5-Stage Approach: Async

1) Initial topic or idea generation

2) Initial response

3) Respond to peers (can continue for as long as desired)

4) Wrap up questions

5) Reflect

A sample 5-part prompt

Step 1: Idea Generation– Find a recent news story online or

announcement that provides an example of one of the issues or concepts in our recent readings. Post the URL and a brief summary of the article. Do not go into detail of what this is an example of or how it relates to the reading.

A sample 5-part prompt (2)

Step 2: Initial Response– Select and read one of your classmate's

contributions, and post a message under their thread that discusses what major issues this article relates to and support your assertions with references to our course readings. If there are secondary issues, mention those as well. Please respond to a message that has not yet received a response so that we can make sure everyone gets at least one response. You may, of course, respond to multiple threads if you wish.

3-sentence rule

Avoid overwhelming “I agree” type messages

Require that all students post messages of 3 sentences or longer

The result:1. I agree with you.2. That’s a good idea3. Ummm…. I have to actually say

something now!

Ron Oliver: Edith Cowan University in Australia

http://elrond.scam.ecu.edu.au//oliver/; r.oliver@cowan.edu.au

Professor of Interactive Multimedia, and the Director of the Centre for Research in Information Technology

and Communications

Collaborative and Constructivist Web Tasks

(McLoughlin & Oliver, 1999; Oliver & McLoughlin, 1999))

1. Apprenticeship: Q&A; Ask an Expert (chats & async).2. Case-Based and Simulated Learning: exchange

remote views; enact events online.3. Active Learning: Design Web pages and project

databases.4. Reflective/Metacognitive Learning: Reflect in online

journals, bulletin boards5. Experiential Learning: Post (articulate ideas) to

discussion groups6. Authentic Learning: PBL, search current databases

Pedagogical Techniques of CMC(Paulsen, 1995, The Online Report on Pedagogical Techniques for

Computer-Mediated Communication)

1. Collective databases, Access to Online Resources2. Informal socializing (online cafes)3. Seminars (read before going online)4. Public tutorials5. Peer counseling, learning partnerships

(Online Support Groups)6. Simulations, games, and role plays7. Free Flowing Discussions/Forums8. Email interviews9. Symposia or speakers on a theme10. The notice board (class announcements)

Framework for Pedagogical CMC Techniques(Paulsen, 1995, The Online Report on Pedagogical Techniques for

Computer-Mediated Communication)

1. One-alone Techniques: Online journals, online databases, interviews, online interest groups.

2. One-to-one Techniques: Learning contracts, internships, apprenticeships.

3. One-to-many Techniques: Lectures, symposiums, skits.

4. Many-to-many Techniques: Debates, simulations, games, case studies, discussion groups, brainstorming, Delphi techniques, nominal group process, forums, group projects.

Jennifer Hoffman, InSync Training (jennifer@insynctraining.com)

Ideal Environment of Synchronous Trainer

Jennifer Hoffman, Online Learning Conference (2001, Oct.)

A private, soundproof room. High-speed connection; telephone;

powerful computer; additional computer; tech support phone #

Studio microphone and speakers A “Do Not Disturb” sign Near restroom; pitcher of water

Other Survival Tips Jennifer Hoffman, Online Learning Conference (2001, Oct.)

• Prepare a class roster; prepare quick tour• Start promptly; load applic ahead of time• Welcome to the session/class; explain

goals; ask for feedback on goals.• Instruct on communication methods—hand

raising, chat, whiteboard, voice, email.

• Provide phone number for emergencies• Be ready for delays with planned ad-lib stuff

Considerations: The Event Jennifer Hoffman, ASTD, Learning Circuits, (2001, March)

• Log on early; students come 15 minutes early.• Do tech checks of microphones (sound check).• Check to see if students brought needed items• Perhaps call or send notes to missing students• Vary your instructional strategies; maximize

interactivity• Make it visual—color, sound, animation• Design 10-minute breaks every 90 minutes

Use Signals for Tech Checks & to Clarify Tasks

Dealing with Difficult Learners

• Situation: A joke is made early in the synchronous discussion and a student keeps referring back to it even though it no longer applies.

• Situation: Guest expert has trouble accessing the system and, in the meantime, students are making fun of him/her.

• Situation: Guest expert or instructor is located in one site and students are all located at another. Students begin to chatter about irrelevant things.

Redirect Off-Task Students

Dealing with Difficult Learners (Barbazette, Feb 2002)

• Confront known disruptive participants and ask for help before the event

• Know who question askers are and ask for their help before they interrupt

• Ask direct questions of talkers and nonparticipants

• Ask each person to make a summary of the learning pts

• Acknowledge various pts of view.

Dealing with Difficult Learners (Barbazette, Feb 2002)

Questions to Guide Learner Behavior:• …that’s an interesting question, how have

you handled similar situations?• …you have had a lot of knowledge

management experiences, what would you suggest?

• …how do others of you view this issue?

What else to do?

• Send out or post rules and procedures• Point to those on task as role models• Ask what interests them• Have an agenda or structure• Lead to peak moments• Break into small teams with goals• Focus participants!!!

If can’t control, then what to do?

• Join up

• Give up

• Commit suicide

• Find a new job

• Protest e-learning

Pedagogical Tips(Bonk 1998; Indiana University)

• Build peer interactivity• Utilize multiple forms of

assessment• Provide feedback cues (dots)• Embed choices (avatars, tasks,

etc.)• Simplify (everything!!!)• Offer early feedback• Scheduling something due early

Web Advice for Instructors(Bonk, 2001; Jamie Chamberlin, (2001, Jan), Digital Dissemination,

Monitor on Psych, pp. 64-67.

• Do some usability testing• Start small--Try 1-2 new things each time• Read free reports• Market/Share what do• Archive work, repurpose it, use it• Be flexible• Take a course online—be a student• Find a tech mentor, join a discussion board• Contact potential partners, interns, students

But how to determine the pedagogical quality of courses and

course materials you develop?

Just a Lot of Bonk

• Variety: tasks, topics, participants, accomplishments, etc.

• Interaction extends beyond class• Learners are also teachers• Multiple ways to succeed• Personalization and choice• Clarity and easy to navigate course

Quality on the Line: Benchmarks for Success in Internet-Based Distance Ed

(Blackboard & NEA, 2000)

Teaching/Learning Process• Student interaction with faculty is facilitated

through a variety of ways.• Feedback to student assignments and questions

is provided in a timely manner.• Each module requires students to engage

themselves in analysis, synthesis, and evaluation as part of their course assignments.

• Course materials promote collaboration among students.

– http://www.ihep.com/Pubs/PDF/Quality.pdf

Quality on the Line: Benchmarks for Success in Internet-Based Distance Ed

(Blackboard & NEA, 2000)

Other Benchmark Categories:• Institutional Support: incentive, rewards, plans• Course Development: processes, guidelines,

teams, structures, standards, learning styles• Course Structure: expectations, resources• Student Support: training, assistance, info• Faculty Support: mentoring, tech support• Evaluation and Assessment: review process,

multiple methods, specific standards

The Sharp Edge of the Cube: Pedagogically Driven Instructional

Design for Online EducationSyllabus Magazine, Dec, 2001, Nishikant Sonwalkar

• five functional learning styles—apprenticeship, incidental, inductive, deductive, discovery.

• http://www.syllabus.com/syllabusmagazine/article.asp?id=5858

New Methodology for Evaluation: The Pedagogical Rating of Online Courses

Syllabus Magazine, Jan, 2002, Nishikant Sonwalkar

The Pedagogical Effectiveness Index:(1) Learning Styles: (see previous page)(2) Media Elements: text, graphics, audio,

video, animation, simulation(3) Interaction Elements: feedback,

revision, e-mail, discussion, bulletin

http://www.syllabus.com/syllabusmagazine/article.asp?id=5914

For more info, e-mail: Nish@mit.edu

New Methodology for Evaluation: The Pedagogical Rating of Online Courses

Syllabus Magazine, Jan, 2002, Nishikant Sonwalkar

Summative evaluation instrument for rating online courses:

(1) Content Factors: quality, media, authentic

(2) Learning Factors: interactivity, testing & feedback, collaboration, ped styles

(3) Delivery Support Factors: accessible, reporting, user management, content

(4) Usability Factors: clarity, chunk size, layout

(5) Technological Factors: bandwidth, database connectivity, server capacity,browser

What are your quality standards?

What do we need???

FRAMEWORKS!

#1: Learner-Centered on the Web (Bonk & Cummings, 1998)

1. Safe Lrng Community: 6, 11

2. Foster Engagement: 1- 6, 11.

3. Give Choice: 8, 9, 12

4. Facilitate Learning: 2, 9, 11.

5. Offer Feedback: 3, 6, 8, 11, 13.

6. Apprentice Learning: 3, 6, 7-9, 11, 13.

7. Use Recursive Tasks: 1, 3, 8-9, 10, 13.

8. Use Writing & Reflection: 3, 8, 12-13.

9. Build On Web Links: 2-4, 8-9, 12-14.

10. Be Clear & Prompt Help: 2, 9, 11, 14.

11. Evaluate Dimensionally: 1-5, 14.

12. Personalize in Future: 6, 8, 10-13.

#2. Matrix of Web Interactions(Cummings, Bonk, & Jacobs, in press)

Instructor to Student: Syllabus, notes, feedback.

to Instructor: Course resources, syllabi, notes.

to Practitioner: Tutorials, articles, news.

Student to Student: Comments, sample work, links.

to Instructor: Votes, tests, papers, evals.

to Practitioner: Web links, resumes, reflections

Practitioner to Student: Internships, jobs, e-fieldtrips

to Instructor: Opinion surveys, fdbk, listservs

to Practitioner: Forums, listservs, prof devel.

#3. Models of Technology in Training and Education

(Dennen, 1999, Bonk et al., 2001)

• Enhancing the Training– computers for extra activities: drill and practice

CD

• Extending the Training– transcend the classroom with virtual field trips and Online

Collaborative Teams.

• Transforming the Training– allowing learners to construct knowledge bases

and resources from multiple dynamic resources regardless of physical location or time.

#4. The Web Integration Continuum (Bonk et al., 2000)

Level 1: Course Marketing/Syllabi via the WebLevel 2: Web Resource for Student ExplorationLevel 3: Publish Student-Gen Web ResourcesLevel 4: Course Resources on the WebLevel 5: Repurpose Web Resources for Others=======================================Level 6: Web Component is Substantive & GradedLevel 7: Graded Activities Extend Beyond ClassLevel 8: Entire Web Course for Resident StudentsLevel 9: Entire Web Course for Offsite StudentsLevel 10: Course within Programmatic Initiative

5. The Hats of the Online Instructor

(Berge, 1995; Bonk, Kirkley, Hara, & Dennen, 2001)

5. Four Key Hats of Instructors:

– Technical—do students have basics? Does their equipment work? Passwords work?

– Managerial—Do students understand the assignments and course structure?

– Pedagogical—How are students interacting, summarizing, debating, thinking?

– Social—What is the general tone? Is there a human side to this course? Joking allowed?

– Other: firefighter, convener, weaver, tutor, conductor, host, mediator, filter, editor, facilitator, negotiator, e-police, concierge, marketer, assistant, etc.

E-Moderator

• Refers to online teaching and facilitation role. Moderating used to mean to preside over a meeting or a discussion, but in the electronic world, it means more than that. It is all roles combined—to hold meetings, to encourage, to provide information, to question, to summarize, etc. (Collins & Berge, 1997; Gilly Salmon, 2000); see http://www.emoderators.com/moderators.shtml.

Online Concierge

• To provide support and information on request (perhaps a map of the area…) (Gilly Salmon, 2000).

Personal Learning Trainer

• Learners need a personal trainer to lead them through materials and networks, identify relevant materials and advisors and ways to move forward (Mason, 1998; Salmon, 2000).

E-Police

• While one hopes you will not call yourself this nor find the need to make laws and enforce them, you will need some Code of Practice or set procedures, and protocols for e-moderators (Gilly Salmon, 2000).

Online Negotiator

• Where knowledge construction online is desired, the key role for the e-moderator is one of negotiating the meaning of activities and information throughout online discussion and construction (Gilly Salmon, 2000).

Other Hats

• Weaver—linking comments/threads• Tutor—individualized attention• Participant—joint learner• Provocateur—stir the pot (& calm flames)• Observer—watch ideas and events unfold• Mentor—personally apprentice students• Community Organizer—keep system going

Still More Hats

AssistantDevil’s advocateEditorExpertFilterFirefighterFacilitator

GardenerHelperLecturerMarketerMediatorPriestPromoter

Sure…but Cat Herder???

Activity: Pick a Online Instruction Metaphor from 40 Options

Reality: ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

Ideal World: ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________ ___________

6.

Twelve forms of electronic learning mentoring and assistance

(Bonk & Kim, 1998; Tharp, 1993; Bonk et al., 2001)

1. Social (and cognitive) Acknowledgement:"Hello...," "I agree with everything said so far...," "Wow, what a case," "This case certainly has provoked a lot of discussion...," "Glad you could join us..."

2. Questioning: What is the name of this concept...?," "Another reason for this might be...?," "An example of this is...," "In contrast to this might be...,“, "Who can tell me....?,“ "What is the real problem here...?," "How is this related to...?,“, "Can you justify this?"

3. Direct Instruction: "I think in class we mentioned that...," Chapter ‘X’ talks about...," "Remember back to the first week of the semester when we went over ‘X’ which indicated that..."

4. Modeling/Examples: "I think I solved this sort of problem once when I...," "Remember that video we saw on ‘X’ wherein ‘Y’ decided to...," "Doesn't ‘X’ give insight into this problem in case ‘Z’ when he/she said..."

5. Feedback/Praise: "Wow, I'm impressed...," "That shows real insight into...," "Are you sure you have considered...," "Thanks for responding to ‘X’...," "I have yet to see you or anyone mention..."

6. Cognitive Task Structuring:"You know, the task asks you to do...," "Ok, as was required, you should now summarize the peer responses that you have received...," "How might the textbook authors have solved this case."

7. Cognitive Elaborations/Explanations: "Provide more information here that explains your rationale," "Please clarify what you mean by...," "I'm just not sure what you mean by...," "Please evaluate this solution a little more carefully."

8. Push to Explore: "You might want to write to Dr. ‘XYZ’ for...," "You might want to do an ERIC search on this topic...," "Perhaps there is a URL on the Web that addresses this topic..."

9. Fostering Reflection/Self Awareness: "Restate again what xyz did here," "How have you seen this before?," "When you did your internship, what was the first thing you did?,"

10. Encouraging Articulation/Dialogue Prompting: "Does anyone have a counterpoint or alternative to this situation?," "Can someone give me three good reasons why...," "It still seems like something is missing here, I just can't put my finger on it."

11. General Advice/Scaffolding or Suggestions:"If I were in her shoes, I would...," "Perhaps I would think twice about putting these people into...," "I know that I would first...," "How totally ridiculous this all is; certainly the “person” should be able to provide some..."

12. Management (via private e-mail or discussion):"Don't just criticize....please be sincere when you respond to your peers," "If you had put your case in on time, you would have gotten more feedback." "If you do this again, we will have to take away your privileges."

What About Student Roles???

Participant Categories

• Web Resource Finder• Starter-Wrapper• Researcher• Online Journal Editor• Expert Resource Gatherer• Technology Reviewer• Mentor/Expert• Instructor• Seeker/Questioner

Role 1: Starter/MediatorReporter/Commentator

• Summarizes the key terms, ideas, and issues in the chapters, supplemental instructor notes, journal articles, and other assigned readings and asks thought provoking questions typically before one’s peers read or discuss the concepts and ideas. In effect, he/she points out what to expect in the upcoming readings or activities. Once the “start” is posted, this student acts as a mediator or facilitator of discussion for the week.

Role 2: Wrapper/SummarizerSynthesizer/Connector or Reviewer

• Connects ideas, synthesizes discussion, interrelates comments, and links both explicit and implicit ideas posed in online discussion or other activities. The learner looks for themes in online coursework while weaving information together. The wrapping or summarizing is done at least at the end of the week or unit, but preferably two or more times depending on the length of activity.

Role 3: Conqueror or Debater/Arguer/Bloodletter

• Takes ideas into action, debates with others, persists in arguments and never surrenders or compromises no matter what the casualties are when addressing any problem or issue.

Role 4: Devil's Advocate or Critic/Censor/Confederate

• Takes opposite points of view for the sake of an argument and is an antagonist when addressing any problem posed. This might be a weekly role that is secretly assigned.

Role 5: Idea Squelcher/Biased/Preconceiver

• Squelches good and bad ideas of others and submits your own prejudiced or biased ideas during online discussions and other situations. Forces others to think. Is that person you really hate to work with.

Role 6: Optimist/Open-minded/Idealist

• In this role, the student notes what appears to be feasible, profitable, ideal, and "sunny" ideas when addressing this problem. Always sees the bright or positive side of the situation.

Role 7: Emotional/Sensitive/Intuitive

• Comments with the fire and warmth of emotions, feelings, hunches, and intuitions when interacting with others, posting comments, or addressing problems.

Role 8: Idea Generator Creative Energy/Inventor

• Brings endless energy to online conversations and generates lots of fresh ideas and new perspectives to the conference when addressing issues and problems.

Who do you think invented the Internet???

Alt Role: Connector/Relator/Linker/Synthesizer

Funny thing is that Al thinks he invented e-learning as well!!!

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY(June 26, 2002) *AL GORE IS TEACHING a distance-education course on the role of families in discussions about community development.    Videotapes of the two-semester course, made this past year, are available for other institutions to use.   SEE http://chronicle.com/free/2002/06/2002062601t.htm

Role 9: Questioner/Ponderer/Protester

• Role is to question, ponder, and protest the ideas of others and the problem presented itself. Might assume a radical or ultra-liberal tone.

Role 10: Coach Facilitator/Inspirer/Trainer

• Offers hints, clues, supports, and highly motivational speeches to get everyone fired-up or at least one lost individual back on track when addressing a problem or situation.

Role 11: Controller/Executive Director/CEO/Leader

• In this role, the student oversees the process, reports overall findings and opinions, and attempts to control the flow of information, findings, suggestions, and general problem solving.

Role 12: Slacker/Slough/Slug/Surfer Dude

• In this role, the student does little or nothing to help him/herself or his/her peers learn. Here, one can only sit back quietly and listen, make others do all the work for you, and generally have a laid back attitude (i.e., go to the beach).

What are your best practices???