Online Class Meetings

Stella Porto, Learning Specialist, Inter-American Development Bank talked last year (October 2020) about the history of online education during a Quality Matters session. Porto discussed how accessibility and technology limitations made online education mostly asynchronous. During the shift to emergency online teaching, instructors used synchronous class meetings to simulate the in-person meetings. However, Porto mentioned that transitioning everything to synchronous was a pitfall during the pandemic, especially for those just lecturing.

Porto paused to define the terms synchronous and asynchronous. For synchronous environments, Porto explained that a “sense of a session” must be part of this modality. Porto did explain that several new technologies allow both synchronous and asynchronous options and clarified that texting is asynchronous. Collaboration, Porto suggested, should be looked at separately from asynchronous and synchronous course design. This makes sense to me as in a class there may be different ways of collaborating depending on the course objectives and assignments.

Reviewing the literature, Porto highlighted the importance of the Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework that includes social, cognitive and teaching presence. Synchronous meetings enhance the sense of belonging which in turn reduces frustration and isolation and promotes self-confidence, stated Porto. Porto then described some of the benefits and requirements of synchronous sessions including including active learning, tutoring others, and the need for planning lessons. However, Porto did mention that asynchronous communication allows for multiple conversations through discussion threads, for example. As we are aware by now, synchronous session requires equipment and connectivity.

Porto talked about the Grow’s Staged Self-Directed Learning model and how it may be applied to online learning. For asynchronous courses, there is an assumption of some level of self-direction. Porto talked about the different stages of self-directedness in this model that include dependent, interested, involved, and self-directed. Porto hypothesized that “synchronous might mitigate lack of self-directedness” and then we may be able to transition to asynchronous. I had not thought about this! Porto explained how the synchronous mimics face-to-face at first and then once students adapt, there can be a transition to asynchronous (or less synchronous). Porto went on to suggest having synchronous sessions that become less frequent once students become independent. Synchronous session, Porto explained, are well-suited for collaboration on complex problems, early social connections, presentations, debates, and discussions. Active learning in synchronous sessions, Porto warned, requires more planning and for students to be ready to engage. Examples of active learning in synchronous class meetings that Porto shared included:

• minute papers for feedback and formative assessment
• polling
• using the chat (I have enjoyed learning from Carly and others about prompts and “chat waterfalls”)
• breakout rooms or working in pairs
• prompt questions for people to answer
• sharing screens or working collaboratively on digital whiteboards
• assign student responsibilities so that they feel relevant

Porto ended by talking about how this past year how we teach our courses had to change. Issues of equity were brought up in the question and answer portion of the session. Porto talked about the demands of synchronous sessions for connectivity and dedicated learning spaces, for example. Porto repeated a line used at the beginning of the session that is worth quoting below. This quote resonates with me as I have truly enjoyed and continue to take Quality Matters courses to design better online experiences using the wealth of knowledge from this community.