Figure 1: Site map
| Australian Journal of Educational Technology 2001, 17(2), 150-168. |
AJET 17 |
Drama, because of its practical requirements, would seem to be one of the last courses to benefit from the incorporation of online learning technologies. Yet, by embedding web based conferencing in the curriculum, and utilising the graphic and communication capabilities of the web, there is an exciting opportunity to enrich the learning environment in drama. Predictably, such innovations have an impact on the pedagogy. In this paper the authors (unit coordinator and educational developer) report on evaluations conducted over two years in Elements of Drama, a first year university unit. We particularly refer to the impact of the introduction of a compulsory, online collaborative assignment and the change this made to the teaching and learning outcomes. We discuss the changing pattern of delivery of this unit which now affords both on campus and distance students more opportunities for interaction and communication. We evaluate the effectiveness of the online assignment and discuss the factors that contributed to its success.
The adoption and incorporation of web based communication tools into Elements of Drama has had the (not unexpected) effect of encouraging the teaching team to re-examine their goals as teachers and their desired outcomes for students. For instance, where and how do students best learn about drama? In the classroom? In rehearsal? In the foyer after a theatrical performance? In an Internet bulletin board? As Carr and Kemmis (1986, p.41) remind us: 'Some of the knowledge teachers have, like the notion that classrooms are the appropriate place for education to go on in, has its roots in habit, ritual, precedent, custom, opinion or mere impressions'. The team has concluded that substantial education can take place online and that web based technology does have a place in introductory drama. At the same time its use does not diminish the importance of practical workshops and face to face interactions. It can in fact be used to enhance them.
As assessment online was a central concern of our study we drew on the work of Crooks (1988), Laurillard (1993), Morgan and O'Reilly (l999), Nightingale et al (1996), and Kendle and Northcote (2000). These authors emphasise the centrality of assessment as a major factor in realising learning outcomes. We believe this is equally true for online and face to face environments.
As the literature failed to provide evidence of practice elsewhere specifically in drama, we conducted a limited search of websites and surveyed twelve universities across Australia by telephone in order to gain an understanding of the use of online technology in drama courses at the first year level. We asked about the use of the Web as a means of flexible delivery for drama, and provision for distance education students. Only six institutions used the Internet to distribute unit information (unit home pages), and only two offered drama or theatre units to distance students. None of the universities contacted made use of online communication as an integral part of their units. At least three of the universities expressed an interest in using the Internet in their teaching. A check of 21 university websites nationally at the time of writing indicated that the status quo had not changed.
Preliminary investigations of drama courses offered online in the UK reveal very little use of the Web beyond basic unit information. There appears to be an emerging use of web based technology to support individual theatre units in the USA, e.g. Arizona State University in Texas. From this it appears that the use of the Web and online assessment tasks may still be limited in drama courses worldwide. The use in our unit of a compulsory, structured bulletin board discussion to critique a theatre production is probably not yet replicated elsewhere.
In l998 the University introduced a Bachelor of Creative Arts degree (BCA). Taking a multidisciplinary approach, students complete a major study in the arts in addition to compulsory units in business and marketing. Elements of Drama is a core unit within both the Drama and the Visual and Performing Arts majors. BCA students are expected to be conversant with new technologies as they apply to the arts: to develop management liaison and technology skills suitable for employment in the arts, and arts related organisations; and to combine practical skills with the ability to research in and think critically about the arts.
The University provided a development grant to create and improve the flexible delivery of 17 units for the BCA. As a result a website for use by all students in Elements of Drama was established, using a WebCT template. By providing drama students with online resources and communication facilities it was hoped to increase drama and BCA students' exposure to web based technology and to provide better communication for distance students, thereby enriching their learning experience.
Figure 1: Site map
When considering the options for online learning the team was interested in creating an opportunity for ongoing dialogue amongst the on campus and distance students. We were also concerned that although on campus students worked closely together in practical workshops they had limited opportunity to discuss theoretical topics within a tutorial framework. With the introduction of the website students had access to communication tools and additional resources which we hoped would address these problems. In the publicly accessible section of the website there was general unit information and examples of students' practical creative work displayed as stills and QuickTime movies. Included in the website was the full unit outline, a calendar, bulletin board and private mail facilities, hyperlinked resources, selected still images of rituals which related to the assignments, and QuickTime and RealAudio sound files of guest lecturers with accompanying images. Figure 1 shows the structure of the website.
One of the four assessment tasks for the unit was the review of a professional theatre production (worth 15%). In the pilot offering (1999) students were given the option of writing a 1000 word theatre review or contributing 4 x 100 word responses to a threaded bulletin board discussion over a two-week period. Students were expected to read, reflect, respond and build on the postings of others. They were required to begin two new threads (ideas) and respond to the postings of others. This made for a highly structured, group learning task. Figure 2 demonstrates the beginning of the threading process for students reviewing the production, 'Ship of Fools'.
Figure 2: Threaded discussion example
While the task was not initially conceived as collaborative, we were well aware of the benefits of 'shared knowledge making' online (Jonassen et al, 1995; Bonk et al 1996; Rimmershaw, 1999; Tam, 2000; Mason & Weller, 2000; Bernard et al, 2000; Cecez-Kecmanovic & Webb 2000). The richness of the collaborative process only became evident to us as we monitored students' responses. Bernard et al (2000) say that at a minimum collaborative learning should include (a) a shared learning task, (b) combined expertise, knowledge and skills which improve the quality of the learning process, and (c) the building of or consolidation of a learning community (p.263). Using these criteria, the task set for our drama students was demonstrably a collaborative one. Furthermore, it was an authentic task, it actively engaged the students in the construction of knowledge via a process of contextualised and shared meaning making, allowing students to test and evaluate their own hypotheses: clearly a rewarding constructivist environment (Jonassen et al, 1995).
All students were graded individually. Students were assessed on their ability to identify and critique the various theatrical elements of the production in addition to their skill in successfully building and reflecting on the comments of others. This requirement to engage at the theoretical level with the postings of others ensured that students were not simply pasting isolated comments or a pastiche of others' contributions. Teaching staff had an important role in supporting and guiding students in this process via the main forum area and in face to face classes. However it should be noted that staff monitored but did not contribute to the students' private forums.
Following evaluation of the pilot offering, the Internet assignment was made compulsory for all students in 2000. Data collected indicated that all students would be able to regularly access the website in order to complete the task. The exceptions were six distance students who made a case for alternative assessment, citing difficulties in travelling to the city to view a theatre production. These students were set a traditional essay as an alternative.
The remaining students signed up for one of four theatre productions. They were divided into private forum groups of ten students for the online task. All students had access to general comments in the main WebCT forum area, but to only one private forum group for the online assessment. Some groups contained both on campus and distance students. In 2000, students were given a longer eight-week period in which to submit 5 x 100 word comments to the discussion.
| Age (survey group) | 18 -20 | 21 - 30 | 31 - 40 | 41+ | No answer |
| 1999 (n=96) | 76% | 23% | 1% | 0% | 0% |
| 2000 (n=99) | 75% | 16% | 7% | 1% | 1% |
| Year | Enrolled at end of semester | Total enrolment | Completed survey | Gender | ||
| On-campus | Distance | Female | Male | |||
| 1999 | 133 | 91%(121) | 9%(12) | 90%(120) | 10%(13) | 72% (96) |
| 2000 | 160 | 81% (129) | 19%(31) | 88%(141) | 12%(19) | 62% (99) |
| Year | Logged onto the web site | Completed online assignment | Completed alternative assignment | ||
| On campus | Distance | On campus | Distance | ||
| 1999 (n=133) | 68%(90) | 17%(22) | 0%(0) | 74%(99) | 9%(12) |
| 2000 (n=160) | 96%(153) | 81%(129) | 16%(25) | 0%(0) | 4%(6) |
Our data provided an abundance of rich material for analysis and discussion. For the purposes of this paper we have concentrated on the changing teaching and learning outcomes, assessment online, integration of the technology, and student and staff perspectives of online learning.
The increased opportunities for students to discuss theoretical components with their peers beyond the practical workshops introduced considerable change to the unit. Traditionally, unit material was presented in lectures and practical workshops for on campus students, and via a print study guide and book of readings for distance students. Theoretical exploration of the content was limited to workshops and individual reflection as the timetable did not provide room for formal tutorial sessions. By replacing the individual essay (theatre review) with a structured and assessable bulletin board task, students were able to engage in a critical and contextualised dialogue with others. This additional opportunity for shared dialogue meant that unit objectives were more effectively achieved.
| Year | Yes | No | Not sure | No ans | |
| Did you find the online assessment option to be an effective form of assessment? | 1999 (n=22) | 64% | 0% | 5% | 32% |
| 2000 (n=160) | 51% | 11% | 29% | 9% | |
| Did you read and reflect on the comments of others before posting your own responses? | 1999 | 68% | 0% | 9% | 23% |
| 2000 | 71% | 5% | 14% | 10% | |
| Did reading the comments of others provide you with more material on which to base your own response. | 1999 | 41% | 5% | 32% | 23% |
| 2000 | 47% | 17% | 26% | 9% | |
| Would you have preferred to submit a formal written essay rather than contributing to a bulletin board as an assessment task? | 2000 | 16% | 63% | 12% | 9% |
Table 4 shows that more than 50% of students who completed the assignment thought it was effective. The following comments are indicative:
Access to other students' answers broadened my views and helped me to think more laterally.Students who completed the online assignment were asked to select the statement that best described their attitude following the task. Students' positive responses to the task and the reported increase in their computing and Internet skills (Table 5) must be substantially attributable to this unit.You spent short amounts of time reflecting and learning from others' views, better than an essay, you get immediate feedback and more insight...
As a first assessment for the course, this option allowed you to discuss dramatic elements, but without restriction (and ensuing terror) of a formal essay.
| 1999 | 2000 | ||
| 1. | I now feel quite comfortable with the Internet and contributing to a bulletin board discussion. | 14% | 32% |
| 2. | I now feel quite comfortable with the Internet and contributing to a bulletin board discussion and I would be very interested in completing similar assessment tasks in other online units. | 27% | 42% |
| 3. | I realise I have to acquire more skills in computer technology if I am to make further use of online materials and tasks. | 41% | 8% |
| 4. | Having tried the online assessment option in ECHL111 I would now be unlikely to participate in similar online options in another unit at Macquarie. | 0% | 6% |
| No answer | 18% | 11% | |
Notably the computer literacy skills that these students are developing are within the context of a practical and arts based unit not normally associated with online learning. Data from the focus groups, interviews and questionnaires indicated a growing awareness amongst students that they cannot ignore the new communications technology. The majority of students in both years said that the technology had a place in a practical subject like drama (89% and 81%, see Table 6).
| Do you think this technology (web site and online discussion group) has a place in a practical subject like drama? | Year | Yes | No | No comment |
| 1999 (n=96) | 89% (85) | 9%(9) | 2%(2) | |
| 2000 (n=99) | 81% (80) | 9%(9) | 10%(10) |
Two students commented:
I think today that technology is relevant to all subjectsDespite the success of the integration of technology into the unit, face to face practical workshops will remain. They are fundamental to the development of interpersonal and dramatic skills. As one student remarked:Yes it has a place in our life - why should drama be an exception.
While technology increases in everyday popularity and importance, I believe that nothing can substitute personal contact in a subject relating to the human existence such as drama.
Students commented positively on being able to view each other's work (Table 4) and said that the process enhanced their understanding of a production's theatrical and dramatic elements:
Sometimes it pushed me to look further into the play and in fact I enjoyed the play more and it broadened my knowledge of drama.Our evaluations also support the findings of Bullen (1998), ie for many students the online environment can be liberating because it allows sufficient time to contribute thoughtfully constructed messages. In a face to face tutorial, competition from more verbally competent students can inhibit some participants, or invite a more hurried response to tutorial questions.This has been an easy and simple process. Making elements of drama more clear and understandable in a single glance.
What others said sparked new ideas and viewpoints other than my own.
Furthermore some students appreciated being able to see the standard of other's writing skills.
I was curious to see the standard of everybody's responses. I found that I was about average in comparison in my use and handling of language.
In summary, the authors noted the following learning outcomes for students in terms of the curriculum as a whole:
| Did you have any technical difficulties accessing the online material? | Year | No | Yes |
| 1999 | 59(61%) | 26(27%) | |
| 2000 | 76(77%) | 23(23%) |
The combination of reliable technical support from centralised services, clear print support documents and a user friendly interface ensured access problems were minimal.
Previous research (Bullen, l998; Nicholls & Philip, 1999) indicates that adopting the new technologies may involve risks for students. The lack of consistent and reliable access to a computer, failure of the technology, and poor self efficacy in regard to the ability to manage the technology successfully are sufficient reasons for students not to choose an online assessment, given the option. As Toohey (1999) points out both staff and students need support with change management in order to adapt and gain new skills. Furthermore, it is not equitable to introduce innovations into the curriculum unless they are pedagogically sound and staff can be reasonably sure that students will not be disadvantaged. Taking a staged approach to technological innovation is one way of ensuring issues of access and equity are addressed and desired assessment outcomes are achieved.
The results of the 1999 research surprised us because they indicated, potentially, a better level of access than expected. We envisaged that access would be problematic for several years to come, so were reluctant to make the online assignment compulsory. Evaluations from stage two of the project (2000), however, confirmed that 96% of respondents said they had sufficient access through the University Library computers, workplace arrangements or from home to complete the online task. Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 2001) show that in 1998 one in eight households in regional and urban Australia had home access to the Internet In 2000 it was one in three, and by December 2001 it is expected to be one in two. The ABS figures confirm our findings (Table 8) and the findings of Stein and Annemieke (1999) that student access to the Internet is rapidly improving.
| Where did you most regularly access the website? | Year | Home | On campus | Work | Other |
| 1999 | 47(49%) | 22(23%) | 1(1%) | 8(8%) | |
| 2000 | 74(75%) | 15(15%) | 6(6%) | 8(8%) |
Our students reflect the growing use of information technologies in our society. In our view, there is a recent shift from a resistance to learning about computers, particularly in humanities based subjects, to an emerging attitude that is more accepting of the technology. Drama is no exception, and our data shows that most students acknowledge their responsibility to become computer literate.
Furthermore, as work and study patterns change, students need more flexible options to allow them to successfully complete tertiary study. George and Luke (1995) note that computer literacy 'is the enabling process, a meta-skilling which is critical to flexible delivery methods in formal contexts and the on-going personal pursuit of knowledge beyond the walls of the university'. Like Stein and Annemieke (1999), we note the closing of the gender gap with regard to computer literacy, competency and efficacy. This is interesting, as our student cohort is predominantly female, recent school leavers enrolled in their first semester of tertiary study. It is encouraging to see that these students are enthusiastically acquiring generic computer literacy skills, especially given that this may be the first assignment that some students complete at university. Even over a two year period it is observable that students' attitudes towards the technology have become more positive. This change in attitude is likely to affect students' ability to overcome and quickly deal with technical problems. This view is supported by McMahon et al (1999), Palloff and Pratt (1999) and Rimmershaw (1999) who recognise the importance of rapid mastery of the technology for successful online study.
The following comments are typical of student reactions to the new technology:
It is such a growing area that any subject should be involved with technology. It was easy to use and made the assessment different. I found I was motivated and inspired by the originality of the subject.Definitely a new innovative way of doing assignments which broadened my knowledge on Internet use. New and exciting teaching method.
Notably, however, one staff member still had reservations about the new assessment, but acknowledged her caution may have related to her level of comfort with marking traditional essays. The other two teaching staff believed that the task opened up a wider and deeper critique amongst students, and that the substance and quality of the online dialogue was comparable to writing found in individual essays, even though in a different form. One staff member commented that the task was a 'rich way for students to contact each other'. Staff valued the analytical and communication skills students developed by contributing concise, considered comments so as to build a shared understanding of a theatrical experience. Had students only written an individual essay this opportunity for substantial shared dialogue, so important to the educational experience (Laurillard, 1993; Jonassen et al, 1995), would not have been available to all students. Through the scaffolding process of accessing and building on the comments of others (see example in Figure 3), we believe students were better prepared to undertake the final assignment - the large director's project.
Figure 3: Example of scaffolding process from the play 'Stolen'
Overall staff successfully created a learning environment based on constructivist principles. It fostered personal meaning making and discourse which enabled students to construct the knowledge that was most meaningful to them, rather than 'requiring them to "learn" the teacher's interpretation of that experience or content' (Jonassen et al, 1995, p.13).
What made the project work?
Bernard, R.M., Rojo de Rubalcava, B. & St-Pierre, D. (2000). Collaborative online distance learning: Issues for future practice and research. Distance Education, 21(2), 260-77.
Bonk, C.J., Appleman, R., & Hay, K.E. (1996). Electronic conferencing tools for student apprenticeship and perspective taking. Educational Technology, 36(5), 8-18.
Bullen, M. (1998). Participation and critical thinking in online university distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), 1-32.
Carr, W. & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge and action research. Deakin University, Geelong, Victoria.
Cecez-Kecmanovic, D. & Webb, C. (2000). Towards a communicative model of collaborative web-mediated learning. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 73-85. [verified 26 Apr 2002]
http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet16/cecez-kecmanovic.html
Crooks, T. (1988). Assessing Student Performance. HERDSA Green Guide No 8, Higher Educational Research and Development Society of Australasia Inc, Campbelltown NSW.
Falk, D. (1999). The virtual community: Computer conferencing for teaching and learning social work practice. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 16(2), 127-143.
Foley, G. & Schuck, S. (1998). Web-based conferencing: pedagogical asset or constraint? Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 14(2), 122-140. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet14/foley.html
George, R. & Luke, R. (1995). The critical place of information literacy in the trend towards flexible delivery in higher education contexts. Learning for Life Conference, 30 Nov - 1 December 1995, Adelaide. [verified 16 Aug 2001] http://www.lgu.ac.uk/deliberations/flex.learning/rigmor_fr.html
Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J. & Bannan Haag, B. (1995). Constructivism and computer mediated communication in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 7-26.
Kendle, A. & Northcote, M. (2000). The struggle for balance in the use of quantitative and qualitative online assessment tasks. In R. Sims et al (Eds), ASCILITE 2000: Learning to Choose-Choosing to Learn. Refereed proceedings of the 17th Annual Conference of ASCILITE. December, 2000, Southern Cross University, Lismore. [verified 16 Aug 2001] http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/coffs00/papers/amanda_kendle.pdf
Kember, D. & Kelly, M. (1993). Improving teaching through action research. Higher Education Research and Development Society Australasia, Campbelltown, NSW.
Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking University Teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London & New York, Routledge.
McMahon, J., Gardner, J., Gray, C. & Mulhern, G.(1999). Barriers to student computer usage: Staff and student perceptions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15(4), 302-311.
Mason, R & Weller, M. (2000). Factor's affecting students' satisfaction on a web course. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(2), 173-200. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet16/mason.html [verified 16 Aug 2001]
Nicholls, J. & Philip, R. (1999). Enriching the learning environment for drama students: on- and off-campus. In Open, Flexible and Distance Learning: Challenges of the new millennium. Collected papers from the 14th biennial forum of the Open Distance Learning Association of Australia (ODLAA), Deakin University, 27-30 Sept 1999, 382-387.
Nightingale, P., Te Wiata, I., Toohey, S., Ryan, G., Hughes, C. & Magin, D. (1996). Assessing Learning in Universities. Sydney, University of New South Wales Press.
Palloff, R. & Pratt, K. (1999). Building Learning Communities in Cyberspace. California Jossey-Bass.
Parashar, A. & Philip, R. (1999). Online assessment and legal discourse: Dialogue and choice. In R. Corderoy (Ed), ASCILITE '98: Flexibility the Next Wave. Proceedings of the 15th annual conference of ASCILITE, 14-16 December 1998, University of Wollongong. [verified 16 Aug 2001]
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/wollongong98/asc98-pdf/parasher0083.pdf
Rimmershaw, R. (l999). Using conferencing to support a culture of collaborative study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 15(3), 189-200.
Toohey, S. (1999). Designing courses for higher education. Buckingham UK, Open University Press.
Stein, A. & Annemieke, C. (1999). The web, chat and laptops: IT practices and skills of transition students. In J. Winn (Ed), ASCILITE 99 Responding to Diversity. Proceedings from the 16th Annual Conference of ASCILITE, 5-8 Dec, l999, 341-350. [verified 16 Aug 2001]
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane99/papers/steinannemieke.pdf
Tam, M. (2000). Constructivism, instructional design, and technology: Implications for transforming distance learning, Educational Technology in Society, 3(2), http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_2_2000/tam.html [verified 16 Aug 2001]
Thorpe, M. (1998). Assessment and 'third generation' distance education. Distance Education, 19(2), 265-286.
Van Dusen, G. (1997). The virtual campus: Technology and reform in higher education. George Washington University, Washington DC.
| Authors: Jennifer Nicholls Lecturer, Australian Centre for Educational Studies Macquarie University, NSW 2109, Australia jenny.nicholls@mq.edu.au
Robyn Philip Please cite as: Nicholls, J. and Philip, R. (2001). Drama online. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 17(2), 150-168. http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet17/nicholls.html |