Collaborating within a Lockdown: Students’ Online Collaboration to Develop a College Readiness Workshop during the COVID-19 in-person restrictions

Abstract

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic created significant disruption within the educational setting, including the rapid shift to a fully online learning environment. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to explore how graduate students collaborated synchronously and reimagined an in-person academic service learning project into an asynchronous workshop format. Methodology/Approach: An explanatory single case study approach was used to explore how educational leadership doctoral students developed content for and transitioned the modality of an academic service learning project—a college readiness workshop for middle school students—during the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings/Conclusions: Overall, the development of and transition to a fully online workshop website format highlighted the importance and additional need for technology to support project content, the challenge of how to best incorporate audience engagement through an asynchronous platform, and the shift in roles and expectations of the graduate students throughout the workshop development process. Implications: Although this learning experience was adapted due to pandemic-related restrictions, this reimagined student-led project provided additional and unique opportunities for collaboration and technology integration that can be useful and applicable to the students’ post-lockdown lives.

Keywords

higher education student collaboration online learning situated learning

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Altomonte

Logan

Feisst

Rutherford

Wilson

(2016). Interactive and situated learning in education for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 17, 3. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJSHE-01-2015-0003

Baxter

Jack

(2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544–559. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2008.1573

Bazeley

(2013). Qualitative data analysis: Practical strategies. Sage.

Belland

B. R.

Walker

A. E.

Kim

N. J.

Lefler

(2017). Synthesizing results from empirical research on computer-based scaffolding in STEM education: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 87(2), 309–344. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316670999

Boud

Cohen

(2014). Peer learning in higher education: Learning from and with each other. Routledge.

Catalano

(2015). The effect of a situated learning environment in a distance education information literacy course. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 41(5), 653–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2015.06.008

Chang

Brickman

(2018). When group work doesn’t work: Insights from students. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-09-0199

Crawford-Ferre

H. G.

Wiest

L. R.

(2012). Effective online instruction in higher education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(1), 11.

Creswell

J. W.

(2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.

10.

Creswell

J. W.

Poth

C. N.

(2017). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.

11.

Crowe

Creswell

Robertson

Huby

Avery

Sheikh

(2011). The case study approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11, https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-11-100

12.

Curseu

P. L.

Pluut

(2013). Student groups as learning entities: The effect of group diversity and teamwork quality on cognitive complexity. Studies in Higher Education, 38(1), 87–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.565122

13.

Dorn

Hancock

Sarakatsannis

Viruleg

(2020). COVID-19 and student learning in the United States: The hurt could last a lifetime. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-and-social-sector/our-insights/covid-19-and-student-learning-in-the-united-states-the-hurt-could-last-a-lifetime

14.

Dumford

A. D.

Miller

A. L.

(2018). Online learning in higher education: Exploring advantages and disadvantages for engagement. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 30, 452–465. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-018-9179-z

15.

Gardner

(2020). COVID-19 has forced higher ed to pivot to online learning: Here are seven takeaways so far. Chronicle of Higher Education, 66(26).

16.

Gruber

Szmigin

Reppel

A. E.

Voss

(2008). Designing and conducting online interviews to investigate interesting consumer phenomena. Qualitative Market Research, 11, 256–274. https://doi.org/10.1108/13522750810879002

17.

Henry

Hinshaw

Al-Bataineh

Bataineh

(2020). Exploring teacher and student perceptions on the use of digital conferencing tools when providing feedback in writing workshop. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET, 19(3), 41–50.

18.

Hernández-Sellés

Muñoz-Carril

P. C.

González-Sanmamed

(2019). Computer-supported collaborative learning: An analysis of the relationship between interaction, emotional support and online collaborative tools. Computers & Education, 138, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.012

19.

Herold

(2020). The disparities in remote learning under coronavirus (in charts). Education Week. https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2020/04/10/the-disparities-in-remote-learning-under-coronavirus.html

20.

Higgins

Huscroft-D’Angelo

Crawford

(2019). Effects of technology in mathematics on achievement, motivation, and attitude: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(2), 283–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117748416

21.

Hillmayr

Ziernwald

Reinhold

Hofer

S. I.

Reiss

K. M.

(2020). The potential of digital tools to enhance mathematics and science learning in secondary schools: A context-specific meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 103897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103897

22.

Lave

(1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In Resnick

L. B.

Levine

J. M.

Teasley

S. D.

(Eds.), Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 63–82). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10096-003.

23.

Lave

Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.

24.

Janssen

Wubbels

(2018). Collaborative learning practices: Teacher and student perceived obstacles to effective student collaboration. Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(1), 103–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2016.1259389

25.

Campbell

(2008). Asian students’ perceptions of group work and group assignments in a New Zealand tertiary institution. Intercultural Education, 19(3), 203–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/14675980802078525

26.

Lincoln

Y. S.

Guba

E. G.

(1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). Sage.

27.

Lotzkar

Bottorff

J. L.

(2001). An observational study of the development of a nurse-patient relationship. Clinical Nursing Research, 10, 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1177/c10n3r5

28.

McMurtrie

(2020). Students without laptops, instructors without internet: How struggling colleges move online during COVID-19. Chronicle of Higher Education, 66(27).

29.

Merriam

S. B.

(2002). Assessing and evaluating qualitative research. In Merriam

S. B.

(Ed.), Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis (pp. 18–33). Jossey- Bass.

30.

Merriam

S. B.

Tisdell

E. J.

(2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.

31.

Michaelsen

L. K.

Davidson

Major

C. H.

(2014). Team-based learning practices and principles in comparison with cooperative learning and problem-based learning. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 25(3–4), 57–84.

32.

Miles

M. B.

Huberman

A. M.

Saldana

(2019). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage.

33.

Moreno

(2007). Optimising learning from animations by minimising cognitive load: Cognitive and affective consequences of signalling and segmentation methods. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 21(6), 765–781. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1348

34.

Penrod

(2022). Staying relevant: The importance of incorporating hyflex learning into higher education. EDUCAUSE. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2022/3/staying-relevant-the-importance-of-incorporating-hyflex-learning-into-higher-education-strategy

35.

Plastow

Spiliotopoulou

Prior

(2010). Group assessment at first year and final degree level: A comparative evaluation. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(4), 393–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2010.518427

36.

Quezada

R. L.

Talbot

Quezada-Parker

K. B.

(2020). From bricks and mortar to remote teaching: A teacher education programme’s response to COVID-19. Journal of Education for Teaching, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1801330

37.

Saldaña

(2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage.

38.

Salmons

(2014). Qualitative online interviews (2nd ed.). Sage.

39.

Schrameyer

A. R.

Graves

T. M.

Hua

D. M.

Brandt

N. C.

(2016). Online student collaboration and FERPA considerations. TechTrends, 60, 540–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-016-0117-5

40.

Scotland

(2016). How the experience of assessed collaborative writing impacts on undergraduate students’ perceptions of assessed group work. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 41(1), 15–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2014.977221

41.

Stake

R. E.

(1995). The art of case study research. Sage.

42.

Stake

R. E.

(2006). Multiple case study analysis. The Guilford Press.

43.

Stein

(1998). Situated learning in adult education (pp. 1998-3). ERIC Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education, Center on Education and Training for Employment, College of Education, the Ohio State University.

44.

Takeda

Homberg

(2014). The effects of gender on group work process and achievement: An analysis through self-and peer-assessment. British Educational Research Journal, 40(2), 373–396. https://doi.org/10.1002/berj.3088

45.

Talcott

K. S.

O’Donnell

J. M.

Burns

H. K.

(2013). Overcoming barriers in online workshop development: An ELITE experience. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 44(6), 264–268. https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20130501-41

46.

Tang

(2016). The use of technology applications to improve the students’ achievement and communication with the parents. Canadian Social Science, 12(5), 93–98.

47.

Weinberger

Stegmann

Fischer

(2007). Knowledge convergence in collaborative learning: Concepts and assessment. Learning and Instruction, 17(4), 416–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.007

48.

Wenger

(1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.

49.

Wenger

(2011). Communities of practice: A brief introduction. https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1794/11736/A%20brief%20introduction%20to%20CoP.pdf

50.

Yin

R. K.

(2017). Case study research: Design and methods (6th ed.). Sage.

51.

Zhang

Ohland

M. W.

(2009). How to assign individualized scores on a group project: An empirical evaluation. Applied Measurement in Education, 22(3), 290–308.