Authors: Lisa Gedak & Leigh McCarthy
Designing and fostering inclusive online learning environments where all students feel supported to learn, contribute, and participate is essential and increasingly complex. There are various barriers to student participation, based on a range of personal and ‘glocal issues’ (Campbell and Schwier, 2014), and there is convincing evidence that these barriers affect a variety of students from diverse backgrounds who often do not have a voice. Some examples of these students can include English as a Second Language (ESL) students, indigenous students, LGBTQ2S students, and students of various cultural, and socioeconomic backgrounds. These examples are just some of the identified demographics who face systems that are not designed to be inclusive, often resulting in missed deeper-learning opportunities (Black & Hachkowski, 2019; Eliason & Turalba, 2019; Westwood, 2015). Explored through the Hasso Plattner Institute’s design thinking process (Stanford University, 2019), we cross-compared our educational contexts and explored our direct experience teaching French as a Second Language (FSL) in the K-12 learning environment, and first-year post-secondary courses. We concluded that the problems of students engaging in intellectual risk-taking and building inclusive online communities is cross-generational, and affects many students from both learning contexts. Additionally, we discovered common drivers of change affecting both contexts, adding to the glocal complexities of our learners’ needs; informing the need for learner-centered, inclusive digital learning environments (L. Gedak & L. McCarthy, personal communication, November 23, 2019).
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) proposed that learning environments not only be learner-centred, but also profoundly personal (Crichton & Carter, 2017, p. 18). As we explored a solution to our common problem, these two components resonated with us, and we agreed that hearing student voices we might otherwise not hear from, would prove invaluable. We sought a tool that could foster independent opportunities to share verbal reflections with an instructor but allowed for learner agency in sharing with classmates. The free mobile application Flipgrid (Microsoft, 2019) met this criterion, and we focussed on the video reflection component of this platform as a potential solution in our students taking intellectual risks. Johnson and Skarphol (2018) successfully used Fligrid as a platform for connected learning in secondary art classes, with one of their students describing Flipgrid as “‘all-inclusive and enjoyable because it allowed me to talk to my peers and give them honest answers about their work or receive honest opinions on mine’” (in Johnson and Skarphol, 2018, p. 31). Using Flipgrid, students can record, and re-record their responses until they are satisfied with their submission. Creating an authentic sense of inclusion in digital learning environments through short, personalized video recordings of responses will motivate students from both contexts to become more actively engaged in the digital learning environments and communities that we design.
Flipgrid is a creative tool that can foster actively engaged students from diverse demographics, engaged in experiential learning, to enrich online learning communities. Bates (2019) explored the strengths of open educational practices, open pedagogy, and “experiential learning in which students demonstrate understanding through the act of creation” (University of Texas Arlington Libraries in Bates, 2019, para. 3). Hall, Vue, Strangman, and Meyer (2003) postulated that the intersection of differentiated instruction and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) involve a curriculum that is “enriched with multiple media so that many paths are provided to develop the talents of all learners” (p. 10). As cross-generational instructors, we know that for students of any age or demographic to verbalize their learning calls for a higher level of cognitive and metacognitive processing and self-reflection (L. Gedak & L. McCarthy, personal communication, November 23, 2019; Leutwyler, 2009; Máñez, Vidal-Abarca, Kendeou, & Martinez, 2019). Implementing Flipgrid in designing a safe space for our students from K-12 to post-secondary in online learning environments, will mitigate intellectual risk-taking and result in our students being more actively engaged in our online learning environments.
References
Bates, A. W. (2019). Chapter 11.4 Open Pedagogy. In Teaching in a Digital World. 2nd ed. BC Campus.
Black, G., & Hachkowski, C. (2019). Indigenous learners: What university educators need to know. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(8), 1092-1108. doi:10.1080/0309877X.2018.1450495
Campbell, K., & Schwier, R. A. (2014). Chapter 13: Major movements in instructional design. In Zawacki-Richter, O. & T. Anderson (Eds.), Online distance education: Towards a research agenda. AU Press.
Crichton, S. & Carter, D. (2017). Section 2: Making the connection: Designing, making, and a new culture of learning. In Taking Making into Classrooms Toolkit. Open School/ITA.
Johnson, M., & Skarphol, M. (2018). The Effects of Digital Portfolios and Flipgrid on Student Engagement and Communication in a Connected Learning Secondary Visual Arts Classroom. Retrieved from https://sophia.stkate.edu/maed/270
Hall, T., Vue, G., Strangman, N., & Meyer, A. (2003). Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL implementation. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. (Links updated 2014). Retrieved from http://aem.cast.org/about/publications/2003/ncac-differentiated-instruction-udl.html
Leutwyler, B. (2009). Metacognitive learning strategies: differential development patterns in high school. In Metacognition Learning 4(2), 111-123. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/10.1007/s11409-009-9037-5
Máñez, I., Vidal-Abarca, E., Kendeou, P., & Martinez, T. (2019). How do students process complex formative feedback in question-answering tasks? A think-aloud study. In Metacognition Learning, 14(65). Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/10.1007/s11409-019-09192-w
Mattelmäki, T., Vaajakallio, K., & Koskinen, I. (2014). What happened to the empathic design? Design Issues, 30(1), 67-77. doi:10.1162/DESI_a_00249
Stanford University Institute of Design (Producer). (2016). A virtual crash course in design thinking [MOOC]. Retrieved from https://dschool.stanford.edu/resources/a-virtual-crash-course-in-design-thinking
Westwood, P. (2015). Commonsense Methods for Children with Special Educational Needs. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral-proquest-com.ezproxy.royalroads.ca/lib/royalroads- ebooks/detail.action?docID=200201.
Attribution
Photo by Ana Flávia on Unsplash
December 3, 2019 at 1:31 pm
Hi Lisa and Leigh,
Thank you for such a thought provoking post. Inclusivity is a subject that is an important issue with today’s learners. With the continual blending of human populations and increasing accessibility our classrooms are often very diverse. This diversity demands critical thought and consideration.
You indicate that your identified problem is “cross-generational” which prompted my thoughts to return to LRNT521 where we examined the concepts surrounding Prensky’s 2001 study examining the Digital Native and Digital Immigrant and White and Cornu’s typology of a digital Visitor and Resident.
How will you mitigate any potential reluctance from your mature aged students from engaging with Flipgrid?
My initial concern would be learner’s ability to implement the chosen platform sufficiently to enable learning. White and Cornu note that:
“Online literacies differ between platforms, although to an outsider the skills required may seem equivalent and there is a certain commonality in the acquisition of transferable skills. However, the notion of social networking platforms masks the fact that for many ‘expert’ Facebook users Twitter is relatively undecipherable. At one level this can be accounted for by the difference in functionality, but it also relates to the literacies required for the respective platforms, together with the motivation.” (White and Cornu. 2019 para 30 )
This quote speaks to 2 particular platforms but I believe the observation applies to any digital application. Will you offer any sort of guidance for the use of flipgrid in the capacity you envision?
Regards, Sandra Kuipers and Owen Lloyd
WHITE, D., CORNU, A. Visitors and Residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, [S.l.], aug. 2011. ISSN 13960466. Available at: . Date accessed: 03 dec. 2019. doi:https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v16i9.3171.
December 3, 2019 at 9:33 pm
Hi Sandra and Owen,
Thanks for your thoughtful questions and feedback! You are right, the diversity of our classrooms (online or otherwise) today demands critical thought and consideration.
Great connections to Prensky (2001) and White and Cornu’s (2011) typology of digital Visitors and Residents. Our desire to address our cross-generational learner needs and interests in building inclusive online communities led us to agree that Flipgrid could be an effective online component in this quest.
The way that we would mitigate any potential reluctance from our mature aged students from engaging with Flipgrid would be to ask students to make occasional submissions to Flipgrid that would only be shared with the instructor. Students could then have the option of deciding if they wanted to share those submissions with their colleagues/classmates.
You initial concern, regarding whether or not the learner’s ability to implement the chosen platform of Flipgrid sufficiently to enable learning, is valid, specifically in light of White and Cornu (2011) observations about today’s digital Visitors and Residents. However, we are confident that Flipgrid is widely accessible in to cross-generational learner abilities and interests. The White and Cornu quote that you shared is relevant and worthy of future discussion. More to come in our critique and further reflections to come this week! Thank you!
You also asked, “Will you offer any sort of guidance for the use of flipgrid in the capacity you envision?” Lisa would be using Flipgrid as an instructional designer in various course settings, with post-secondary students, for various communication and reflective tasks. I (Leigh) would be using Flipgrid, as I previously have, as a reflection tool for French as Second Language students from grades 3-12. Students seemed to really enjoy using Flipgrid (even high school) and it helped them to build confidence in articulating their ideas, as well as practicing communicating in a second language.
Are you asking if we would offer any sort of guidance to you in response to your post on this blog? Or are you asking if we would offer more guidance for the use of Flipgrid “in the capacity that we envision” in our critique for Part B of the Assignment?
Thanks for your comments and thought-provoking questions!
Best regards,
Leigh McCarthy and Lisa Gedak