Though I was unable to watch the various groups’ presentations live, I found the recordings did a perfectly respectable job of showing me what I missed. I thoroughly appreciated how each of the presented technologies — H5P branching scenarios (Grymaloski et al., 2021), Discord (Joubert et al., 2021), and Video-Based Learning (Koval et al., 2021) — introduced me to new angles and considerations I had not previously considered. Due to my prior experience using Slack and Microsoft Teams as a learning technology, I was particularly interested Team 4’s presentation on Discord as a tool to facilitate a Community of Inquiry (CoI) (Joubert et al., 2021). Outside of our cohort’s informal Discord server, I have not seen Discord used as an educational communication tool and I was eager to see Discord’s educational functionality in action.
My current experience is with Microsoft Teams as my school’s required communication tool for all courses. The tool is somewhat like Discord in that it allows for text, voice, and video communication, multiple channels within a “server,” along with numerous other similarities. Our school uses Teams for synchronous video classes and text-based chat areas for general announcements and team communication, with each course having its own area in Teams which are set up by the school rather than the instructor. The way the team integrated Discord into the presentation provided an opportunity to see this similar technology used in a new way, but appeared to suffer from similar issues that I have experienced with Teams. The Discord server offered a strong structure for educational communication but was unable to provide a space for private communication outside of direct messages or a separate server. From my discussions with students, I have found that our Teams setup makes students feel somewhat monitored and unable to be completely open about their learning experience. As was discussed in the presentation, students benefit from the construction of their own social space which is difficult to have when they feel the teacher is reading their messages. In fact, I have found that students will sometimes set up their own Discord server to create a space for free and open communication.
This brings up something that seems to be a touchy subject for post-secondary education: giving students freedom. If students need space to communicate without feeling like the institution and teacher are watching, why do we not provide it? Could Discord or Teams provide students with a separate area (or areas), free from their teacher, that mimics the school coffee shop or pub (Keengwe et al., 2013)? This could show students that the educational institution trusts them to behave like adults and, if it is still under the jurisdiction of the school’s account, could have necessary information gathered if offensive behaviour occurred within the space. As Garrison et al. (1999) said, social presence should include “risk-free expression” (p. 102), and can that happen when an instructor is able to hover of their communication? I would really like to see these communication technologies — and the schools that use them — include a built-in space where students could communicate freely without instructor presence. My attempts to find examples of schools doing this turned up empty, which is quite frustrating. Yes, there would be challenges, but isn’t that the cost of treating people like adults?
References
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6
Grymaloski, W., Dougan, S., Guichon, P., & Norum, S. (2021, May 11). Critical Analysis of H5P Branching Scenario Simulations. MALAT Webspace. https://malat-webspace.royalroads.ca/rru0132/critical-analysis-of-h5p-branching-scenario-simulations/
Joubert, J.-P., Rowe, C., Tran, V., & Yu, E. (2021, May 12). Team 4 Presentation: Implementing a Community of Inquiry using Discord. MALAT Webspace. https://malat-webspace.royalroads.ca/rru0157/team-4-presentation-implementing-a-community-of-inquiry-using-discord/
Keengwe, J., Adjei-Boateng, E., & Diteeyont, W. (2013). Facilitating active social presence and meaningful interactions in online learning. Education and Information Technologies, 18(4), 597–607. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-012-9197-9
Koval, D., Senini, A., Carpenter, J., & Beebe, K. (2021, May 14). Assignment 1: Critical Inquiry Part 2 – Team Awesomest Presentation. MALAT Webspace. https://malat-webspace.royalroads.ca/rru0154/307-2/
MacKay, M., Piechnik, D., Stoesz, R., Nix, C.-H., & Ruth, S. (2021, May 11). LRNT 526 | Assignment 2 | Part 2 | Augmented and Virtual Reality in Education. MALAT Webspace. https://malat-webspace.royalroads.ca/rru0158/lrnt526-assignment2-part-1/
David,
I find it funny that education aims to create self-sufficient critical thinkers, yet, when the opportunity comes to allow such possibilities, it is often shunned under the guise of safety or some other related idea. You speak of the concept of treating students like adults, but I would take that even further and state it is to treat them with the respect and self-determination needed to develop well-rounded people. To me, it is about control. Perhaps it is the view that good educators are in complete control, control of the learning process, the ideological development of their students, and the learning methodology. It shows that despite the “recent” changes in educational philosophy, there is still a prevailing view that the educator is the source of knowledge and the students are nothing more than vessels to deposit said knowledge.
Michael, I loved your phrasing of “respect and self-determination.” A lack of respect for students and a need to control the learning environment are fairly widespread in my experience. There appears to be an underlying sense that if you gave a student any room they will abuse it and then do whatever they can to offend everyone around them. How this could prepare them for graduation from either high school or post-secondary is beyond my understanding.
This is certainly an interesting topic. On one hand, college-level students naturally establish their social clicks and gravitate towards various social media platforms, like Facebook, to establish communication and to bicker about their academic issues to one another. On the other hand, when I think back to some of my undergraduate science classes, it would have been nice to use a platform like Discord to connect with learners I otherwise might not communicate with outside of class. The problem is that any platform a teacher suggests students use to communicate could easily be viewed as controlled or monitored, even when the network is completely private. It almost seems as though some form of privacy guarantee would have to be established between the teacher and the cohort, independent of the platform used. Perhaps some form of waiver could ensure learners their communications are private and outside of the reach of faculty? Maybe this would spark even more debate amongst students.
I am certainly not well-versed in the area of privacy and data protection, but perhaps this level of student privacy is a few innovations away still? Have you ever used a platform like Discord with your students and had everyone feel safe and protected from instructor/institutional monitoring? If so, I’d be really interested in knowing how you pulled it off!
-Jonathan
You’re very right, Jonathan, that students will be wary of being monitored on any recommended platform. There is really nothing keeping students from starting their own separate communication space (as we did) if they really want to be completely private. Just like a cafe or bar on campus doesn’t guarantee privacy, neither would a faculty-less space in Discord or MS Teams. Other students could screenshot and “snitch,” and the school might like the ability to pull chat transcripts in severe cases. The internet is not really a great space for privacy.
Have I have managed to convince my students that a space in a school-sanctioned platform was safe and protected from monitoring? Ho boy. No, not really. I know they’ve created their own spaces and, to be honest, I don’t see them communicating much at all outside of group work. I wish they’d do more. In group work last term I created private rooms in MS Teams for each group and informed them that I had access but wouldn’t snoop unless they wanted me in. There were times I had to enter their spaces to help them (or they accidentally tagged me) and I noticed that they were complaining about feedback and being pretty honest about things. It was almost like they trusted me when I said I wouldn’t go snooping without their invitation. The thing is, I typically wouldn’t be able to find out if they trusted me because I wouldn’t find anything unless I was snooping. Trust is funny that way.