Elearning

Re-learning through e-learning: Changing conceptions of teaching through online experience
Reem Al-Mahmood Faculty of Education The University of Melbourne Catherine McLoughlin Faculty of Education Australian Catholic University, Canberra What can the duality of experience of being an online student/ online educator afford This paper draws on recent literature on reflective practice principles of online learning and teaching to explore experiences from those who have been on both sides ??” online educators and online students. Educators and online course developers need to hear from student voices in order to inform online pedagogical directions, create innovations and enrich and expand on how to provide stimulating and challenging online learning environments. Educators can do so through engagement in learner roles through experiential online learning, thereby enabling a reframing/ reconceptualisation of online teaching. By listening to student experiences, allowing for a heightened sense of awareness of learner needs, educators gain insights to improve pedagogical practice. By using qualitative in depth interview techniques with 5 online educators/ students across two Australian states, the study explores the vantage points afforded by these experiences. The findings can inform how educators can provide engaging and empowering online teaching and learning environments that move beyond traditional comfort zones and established pedagogies. Keywords: Reflective practice, online teaching and learning, professional practice, student online experiences, metaphors of learning online, phenomenology, qualitative methods.

Introduction: Finding the reflective zone
Re-learning through e-learning is about reflecting on teaching and learning practices in a creatively different way by changing roles from online teacher to online student. This moves beyond traditional paradigms of staff development programs that tell how to improve online practice or prescribe online teaching practices (e.g. Palloff & Pratt, 1999, 2001, 2003; Salmon, 2000; Cahoon, 1998a, 1998b; Harasim, Hiltz & Turrof, 1995; Hanna, Glowacki-Dudka & Concei o-Runlee , 2000). We often hear about reflective practice through professional development courses and quality assurance monitoring, but more often than not reflection as a practice needs to be propelled and practised. Reflection may not be an activity that we engage in easily as part of our day to day professional practice (Burge, Laroque & Boak, 2000), and especially during intensive teaching. However, reflection can stretch our traditional comfort zones to question and explore our underlying assumptions, values and beliefs and move us into uncomfortable zones to inform our praxis (action in reflection) (Brookfield, 1995). Ultimately, Reflection leads to self knowledge and this is fundamental to the development of our professional practice (Kuit, Reay & Freeman, 2001: 139), within formal and informal spheres ranging from staff development programs to individual practices. The impetus for this paper came about when one of the authors had the opportunity to be enrolled in a postgraduate online subject as a student, having previously been involved in tertiary teaching in online subject environments over 5 semesters. The experience afforded by being an enrolled online student triggered reflections on her own online teaching practices. In turn, the reflections confirmed, challenged and transformed some of her assumptions about online teaching and learning and became a starting point of discussion between the authors to reflect with others who had experienced both roles of online educator and online student. The paper draws some significant inspiration from the work of Elizabeth Burge et al. (2000: online) who emphasise that it is time now to encourage the writing of intrapersonally reflective and frank records of our experience with Web based practice , out of which began the investigation described in this paper. We first outline the literature on reflective practice and explore the reflective

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You Only $13.90/page!


order now

37

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

practices of web based practitioners. We then outline our methodology, results and discussion of interviews with 5 online educators/ students across two Australian universities. The research focuses on ways to rethink/improve online teaching through engagement in experiential online learning in order to improve pedagogical practices. Educators achieve improvement by reflecting on and extending their own roles and by listening to student experiences, allowing for a heightened sense of awareness of learner needs. The findings can inform how practitioners can provide engaging and empowering online teaching and learning environments that move beyond traditional comfort zones and established pedagogies. The reflective processes of being an experiential student, of shifting roles??” from online educator to online student, can then also contribute to staff development approaches in formal ways, or be part of an individual online educator s activities informally.

Reflective practices _ transforming practice
Reflection is a key factor in improving our teaching and learning and has been emphasised by many theorists and practitioners. Sch n (1983) was one of the first in his pioneering work to advocate that both knowing in practice and reflection in practice are innate practices and that reflection on practice is a retrospective practice. Reflective observation also became a key component of Kolb s (1984) learning cycle positioned in the second phase. It was indeed Dewey (1933) who first emphasised the importance of reflection based on experience. Since then many others have developed and expanded on the notion. The seminal works of Sch n (1983, 1987, 1995) suggest that the ability to reflect on action , which is to engage in a process of continuous learning, was a crucial feature of professional practice. He was strongly against professional training models of Technical Rationality which involved giving participants materials to apply later in the world of professional practice, and he argued that this contradicts how professionals think in practice . Sch n (1987: 123) saw knowing in action and reflection in action as increasingly complex components of reflective practice . Reflection in action requires restructuring, theories of phenomena, or ways of framing the problem … (Sch n 1987: 35). Reflection on action is a more retrospective process and another important component in Sch n s theory of reflection. The cultivation of the ability to reflect in action (during the event) and on action (after the event) have become important elements of professional training and staff development programs in many disciplines, at least in theory. However, some have found weaknesses in Sch n s approaches, such as Boud and Walker (1998) and Bleakley (1999) who warn of the dangers in reflective practice becoming a catch all phrase . Bleakley advocates moving beyond Sch n s artistry notion of reflectivity to holistic reflexivity which is reflection as action . He aims to complexify reflection beyond mere descriptions to address the difficulties of practising it innately and simultaneously reframing, as described by Sch n. In addition, Argyris and Sch n (1996) distinguish between single loop and double loop learning, where single loop learning involves evaluating something to improve it through reflection. In double loop learning , this reflection is part of a larger cycle on engaging in the reflection activity itself, hence double looped, similar to what Boud, Keogh and Walker (1985) suggest, and akin to what Mezirow (1990, 2000) would call transformative learning which is the essence of creative practice (McKee, 2003: 404). To add to the multiplicity of reflective practice issues, there are various other works on reflective practice and ways of doing reflection that have been used since Sch n s (1983) seminal publication, despite its suggested weaknesses and lack of reflexivity, as it still counterbalances techno-rationalist perspectives of developing professional practice. Reflection is now seen as a generic professional skill (Brookfield, 1987, 1995; Connelly & Clandinin, 1999; Sch n 1983, 1987, 1995; Kemmis & McTaggert, 1988). Some of these various methods advocated by theorists have been summarised by Kuit et al. (2001). Whilst there are many ways to do reflection, a useful generic definition is suggested by Boud, Cohen and Walker (1993) where reflection involves description of the processes of exploring experiences to enhance understanding. So even though reflection techniques are varied, it is one of the important ways of learning about one s own practices of teaching and learning that moves beyond prescriptivist telling modes of professional practice. Therefore, reflective practice is about the process of teaching rather than about a simple evaluation of teaching, questioning why we do something rather than how, and most important of all, learning by this process. This is a continual reiterative process, which can be visualised as an infinite line of connected loops with each loop representing a cycle of reflection (Kuit at al., 2001:130-131). Reflection in its various forms encompasses multiplicity and its aim should always be

38

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

learning transformations. Applying this principle to our research, the aim was to investigate the reflections of online teachers when they assumed the student role and learnt first hand the essence of an online student experience.

Reflective practices from online educators
There are a handful of notable online practitioners who utilise reflective practices as an integral part of their work. Notably Burge (1993, 1994, 1996, 2000a, 2000b), Burge and Haughey (2001) and Evans and Nation (2000) who have looked at reflective practices of teaching from an educator s perspective and investigated students reflective practices regarding online learning experiences. Gunawardena (2001: 119), another significant reflective practitioner, from the teaching and learning perspective adds: I continue to be interested in examining evaluation questions related to learning from two perspectives: What did participants learn about the subject that was discussed And what did they learn about the medium of computer conferencing and its influence on the learning process She also highlights that teachers reflections on facilitating online learning experiences provide an excellent means of engaging in practitioner evaluation and understanding the successes, frustrations, and messiness of online projects .one technique that has worked well for me is to work collaboratively with colleagues who have participated in online projects to reflect on and write about our own experiences (p. 122). She also discusses her own online role shifts from teacher centred to student centred teaching. Others such as Campbell-Gibson (2000) also explores her own reactions and reflections on her shifting role as an online educator based on her students reflections. Salmon (2000) also provides some reflections on the experience of being an online facilitator and suggests the need for more action research to inform practice. Many reflective practitioners have been calling for greater understanding of the student experience in terms of the lived experiences . Since Burge s (1993) significant doctoral research on student experiences online, she has also been highlighting the need for more phenomenologically based research of online student experiences to inform teaching practice. Others such as Paulette Robinson in her doctoral dissertation work (2000a, 2000b) examines the phenomenological experience of being in the online environment from student perspectives and also from her experiential online educator and online student perspectives. O Regan (2003) also reports on online student experiences from phenomenological perspectives, beyond quantitative analysis and course outcomes. In summary, these studies indicate that the impetus for investigation must come from educators and designers not driven by technology, but by student needs and the desire to create improved social spaces for learning. Both factors need to be tied in to reflective practices of educators about teaching and learning online. In recognition of this need, some universities now offer professional development programs in online teaching, for example, various staff development models are discussed by Wilson & Stacey (2003), some of which engage staff in reflective practice through experiential learning. Three different approaches are outlined below, moving from provision of online resources to immersion in the online experience. One example of online staff development for e-learning is provided by Lefoe (2000) which combines video of cases studies of effective teaching across different disciplines and a website with teaching resources and support structures. Another dimension presented by Ellis & Phelps (2000) was the recognition that the transition to online teaching involved more than technological skills??” it also requires change to work practices and the adoption of new pedagogies. These authors also suggest a collaborative action learning model for change management which provide opportunities for staff to learn together and share ideas and frustrations. In the model, staff were asked to keep a reflective journal to record their experiences, but were not directly involved in experiential learning practices online. In contrast, O??™Reilly & Ellis (2002) took the staff development process a little further and engaged participants in role play, adoption of student perspective and immersion in the online experience. This was augmented by opportunities for reflective practice through online journaling. This immersive approach to staff development for online teaching is supported by the findings of the present study, ie that teachers gain a great deal of insight into how to transform their practice by taking a student perspective, and by first hand knowledge of learning online.

Stretching comfort zones _ taking on new roles
The reflective practice literature about online learning described above is still in its infancy and has focused on reflection from either the teaching role or the student experience. What has not been done to date in any significant way, as far as our literature search has revealed, is to reflect on online teaching

39

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

roles and practices through shifting roles from online educator to actual online student (except for example, Robinson, 2000a and O Reilly & Ellis, 2002). What we are suggesting in this study is that this cross over can provide a powerful way to experience being an online student and hence, to inform teaching practice based on heightened awareness of the online lived experience . This however, requires stretching comfort zones and a willingness to engage in authentic student experiences. The accompanying reflective process is one that moves beyond the traditional paradigms of professional development courses that tell about how to teach and learn online. By actively shifting roles from online teacher to online learner, we can challenge Ball s (cited in Kuit et al. 2001: 129) notion that Reflection has become little more than a mantra rather than a model of practice . As our universities are requiring more evidence of good teaching, we are advocating engaging multiplicities of reflections to encompass insights and learning transformations that occur in reflection as action to inform teaching practices. As McKee (2003: 404) suggests: To enter each other s world, we must first know how to get here. But we also have to be willing to shift frames , to suspend the ways of looking that orient us to our own world . It is only when we are somehow enticed [emphasis in original] to have a look outside the frame, when we find ourselves curious about what might exist at the margins and in the gaps of what we know, when we have reason to doubt what we see clearly and completely, we sometimes discover the limitations of our frame (McKee, 2003: 403-404). The study drew upon data collected from online teachers who had also experienced being online students, as our major research questions were centered on: 1. how direct experience of learning online triggers reflection on online pedagogy 2. how the experience of being an online learner could lead to change in pedagogy.

Investigating online practice: participants and instruments used
Finding participants who had been on both sides ??” online educator and online student, involved calling upon colleagues and using snowballing sampling techniques (Patton 2002). The five participants were from across two Australian states and were educators at tertiary level in the higher education sector and one also had previous experience in the TAFE sector, with adult learners. All had been online educators first, prior to being online students, except in one case where the person had been an online student first. All had considerable experience teaching online ranging between 2-9 years. We designed our questions for in-depth interviews using elements of reflective phenomenology (Van Mannen, 1990, 1995), as Burge (1993) and others have called for more phenomenological explorations of being online from student perspectives. In designing our interview schedule (Appendix A), the variety of reflective practice techniques, described earlier, were used asking participants about their stories about online experiences. They were then asked to reflect on critical incidents and the best and worst online encounters, how they experienced interaction and support as learners, their perceptions of roles, learning and dialogue and how these experiences would in/trans/form their online teaching. These were elicited through reflective face to face interviews with participants. Given the time limitations for this paper, we conducted rich in-depth interviews with only 5 participants across two Australian universities across 2 states. Interviews ranged between 45 minutes to 2 hours. The interviews were recorded and transcribed and thematic analysis was used after listening and reading over the transcripts a number of times. Open coding and then axial coding was used for the emergent themes (Miles & Huberman, 1994; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Internal validity was sought based on thematic checking with content and cross checking of initial themes. In addition, the data was analysed by two researchers, in order to ensure inter-rater reliability. Interview transcripts were verified by each participant and a pseudonym was given to each participant to maintain anonymity.

Analysing the results of data collected
In the following sections, the results are segmented and outlined, while the overall emergent themes regarding shifting to the online student mode are discussed. Rich data from participants is used to illuminate each of the categories presented. In the final section we illustrate and discuss some of the reframing/ re-learning that participants described for their online teaching in the light of their experiences as online students. Applications and recommendations for practice are then drawn out of these scenarios.

40

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

Summary of emerging themes about online student experiences To summarise some of the emergent interview themes, we have used techniques by Ballantyne, Bain and Packer (1999) who surveyed university academics across Australia regarding their reflections on effective teaching and learning practices. We also complement and expand on the themes by illustrating these with quotations from our participants. The emergent themes from the posed questions regarding the online student experience are summarised in Table 1 below. We have chosen to categorise the responses under the 5 issues of (1) presence, relating to teacher presence, feelings of isolation and engagement; (2) access and equity, relating to technical matters and flexibility; (3) empowerment issues, relating to experiential dimensions such as autonomy, fear, emotionality, communicative ease; (4) metacognitive aspects, relating to learning about one s own style, learning preferences and motivation; and (5) pedagogical aspects which include matters of feedback, support, clarity of instructions and roles. To illustrate and validate these themes, some of the participants quotes are revealed. Table 1: Some emergent issues from online educators about being online students
Presence Visibility online Isolation Engagement Need to meet people Need for teacher voice Access and equity Convenience Flexibility Access to lecturer Access to resources Technical support Empowerment New skills learnt Own space Freedom Autonomy Different perspectives Open communication Metacogntion Reflection Time to think Awareness raising Learning about own practice Maintain motivation Pedagogy Expectations must be clear Progressive feedback needed Pressure to post Facilitation important Dynamic assessment Engagement needed

Each of the five categories is illuminated by using direct quotes from respondents. Presence issues The lecturer didn t come into the picture at all. I see a lazy lecturer who put up everything for everyone to read and that was it. But where is the lecturer s voice (Dianna) It s crazy to say that there s chemistry in an online course, but there is! (Connie) Access and equity issues I got a big buzz of being able to sit at home and access the journals, when I was in another country. (Brenda) Empowerment issues The best one [subject experience] that reinforced all my beliefs was just fantastic! It was mainly with international students and I adored it! Because of the time differences I couldn t wait to get up in the morning to see what had been posted up the previous night! Oh it was just totally addictive!.. We had such a lot of fun on this course! (Connie) Metacognitive issues [I] Learnt about my own learning style. (Anna) Pedagogical issues The best part was knowing that one could contact the tutor anytime and get some guidance. (Anna) With the best course I did, we got individual private feedback each week based on reflections from the teacher. Absolutely fantastic! (Connie) Interestingly, the strong themes that emerged in participant reflections involved interaction with students and visibility and commitment of the teacher relating to social presence online. Also, an element that emerged strongly in some of the responses and which is often absent in the literature was the importance of fun in learning, although the works of Hudson (2002a, 2002b) provide some excellent suggestions on how to do this. What has emerged is that teaching online is not just about content or technology, but

41

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

rather about using technology effectively to communicate and converse together with others. Adopting a learning perspective invites us to rethink the roles of technology and teaching. The role of technology is not to be a delivery system but rather to be an environment that enables learning, while the role of teaching is not simply to convey information but rather to engage students in actively constructing knowledge. The challenge of teaching with technology is to create a learning design that cues and supports the full repertoire of learning strategies (Olgren, 2000: 15). Another interesting aspect is the ability to deal with the unexpected effects, which are also highlighted by Herrmann, Fox and Boyd (2000). The data also revealed the centrality of the role of the teacher online, although the pedagogy is nevertheless student centred. The teacher, or if you wish the facilitator, plays a key role throughout the e-learning experience ??” even when the discourse and activities are controlled by the students. The teacher is an ever present and key person, managing and monitoring the process. We suggest that teacher presence is a necessary part in both formal and non-formal learning contexts (Garrison & Anderson, 2003: 75). It seems that in all learning, and especially online learning that: We learn, I believe, not from texts or other resources, but from someone. The best online resources take account of this: you have the feeling that there is somebody there, that the writers have taken care to put themselves into the production process at the level of some detail this is produced by people who have a deep love of knowledge which is expressed not just intellectually but aesthetically .quality is marked by the fact that somebody is there, that they care about what they are doing and they are doing it with a deep sense of educational purpose. (Walker 1997 cited in Johnson 2001) The themes are congruent with what has emerged in the literature about online student experiences. For example, many studies already reveal the importance of presence in its variety of forms from social, cognitive to teaching presence (e.g. Tu, 2002; Garrison & Anderson, 2003; Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997; Stacey, 2000; Hudson, 2002a, 2002b). Also, Burge (2000a) highlights that the type of strategies that adults use are metacognitive. Becoming oriented, managing the learning process, and evaluating outcomes all require metacognitive strategies in knowing how to plan, regulate, and assess learning (p.11). Her learners said that the most important skills in learning with technology are self direction, self-discipline, self-motivation, time management, taking initiative, staying on track, and skills in organising resources (p.11). Other studies have shown metacognitive aspects being used 4 times more by online students than students in a face to face environment (White, 1999; Olgren, 2000; Burge, 1994). Further issues that arose related to privacy and public aspects of having one s text online and its permanency and not having the opportunity to retract one s text. These ethical issues are also highlighted by Cahoon (1998a) and Holt (1998). Further, Hudson (2002a, 2002b) notes using metaphors with students to capture complex ideas and to dissolve traditional static frameworks to allow the voices of adult learners to emerge in collaborative explorations as useful devices in online classes. He advises knowing where one is online, as frustrations can arise from open ended aspects and he uses the metaphor of the jungle syndrome (being lost online) ? emphasising the importance of acknowledging this disorientation explicitly with online students, but noting that such disorientation is part of the challenge of adult online learning. Also, Herrington and Oliver (2003) suggest that for students to be engaged in the online environment successfully then they need to be provided with authentic complex learning. More importantly positive experiences can emerge because online courses can provide enormous opportunities for learners to be the teacher (Hanna et al. 2000: 20) students described the sharing of knowledge and the richness of the information as a highlight of the experience (Buckingham, 2003: 85). Recommendations for changing teaching online??” beyond the comfort zone The power of shifting roles from online educator to being an online student for all our participants has influenced their teaching significantly, in their view, moving them beyond their familiar notions of online teaching to reflect on their own teaching online and how they would reframe their teaching conceptions. The experience of being an online student was extremely valuable as Brenda indicated: raising awareness of the student view is important and Dianne said: It is a must for everyone! Given the range of online student experiences depicted by our participants, the predominant themes for changing pedagogy are aligned to the original categories outlined in Table 1, and relate to presence, pedagogical

42

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

issues, metacognitive and access and equity issues. Table 2 provides a summary of the way that the participants have suggested they would reframe and rethink their teaching as a result of their online student experiences. Table 2: Online teaching practices suggested by participants 1. Move beyond the comfort zone to explore possibilities beyond glorified text , such as blogging and wikis and explore what is possible. 2. Inspire, interact and establish presence by welcoming students online; communicating inspiration enthusiasm and fun; and being more visible! For example: ??? Use constructivist approaches! ??? Create a synchronous event(s) to get people to feel they belong! ??? Establish student web presence through web publishing and web pages! ??? Ask for feedback and be proactive. Feedback is 2 way! ??? Pause before responding to any written text and assume the best intentions! Remember the person at the other end of the text! 3. Improve assessment practices, for example: ??? Be explicit and clear about expectations! ??? Use more reflective and formative assessment! ??? Provide individual private weekly feedback! ??? Make discussion forums compulsory! ??? Pedagogy should drive the technology! 4. Be aware of technical constraints! For example, find all the online students in the first few weeks. Be proactive, so as not to lose anyone! 5. Be ongoingly reflective and learn about your own practices and preferences and stretch these comfort zones.

The emphasis by participants was to move beyond the comfort zone of present pedagogy into more challenging and student centred ways of teaching, moderating and supporting students online. These shifts were categorised as (1) Move beyond the comfort zone ??” to be aware of new possibilities, such as blogging and wikis; (2) Establish presence through greater visibility and proactive support, as Connie highlighted: I guess it s just about remembering that it is a person on the other end. That it is a person on the other end of the text it is flesh and blood ; and also emphasised by Brenda was the importance of establishing belonging: You must establish a sense of belonging! What people are not necessarily seeing when they move into online is the need to establish this feeling of belonging to the students or this feeling that someone out there cares and knows who they are and where they are and knows what s happening ; (3) Improve assessment practices and provide ongoing feedback; (4) Be aware of technical constraints and (5) Be ongoingly reflective and aware of your own teaching preferences.

Conclusion: Beyond the comfort zone of current practice
Re-learning through e-learning by shifting roles from online educator to online student presents a powerful phenomenological experience to inform online teaching praxis that is radically different to staff development courses of how to teach online. While these are valuable as part of various staff development models that enable educators to experience the online medium, and indeed this is one such technique, the richness gained from genuinely being in the online student position, is powerful. Whether these experiences are strongly negative or strongly positive or more measured, what is clear is that there is a heightened sense of awareness and significant impact gained from these experiences as indicated by the reflections of our participants. Perhaps our staff development courses about teaching and learning online could incorporate more of these experiential role shifts to enhance practice and facilitate reflection.

43

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

Connie, one of the participants in the study, reminded us: I think there is a real danger about, y know that we teach the way we were taught and then there is a danger for me about teaching online in that I will teach the way I have been taught online, so I have to keep reminding myself that there is more than one way of teaching online . Essentially, how we experience and reflect influence how we perform as online teachers. With our increasing online teaching and learning practices, the visible online capturing medium makes it more readily available to reflect on our public/ visible teaching and learning practices. Perhaps fortuitously in the online era, online teachers will have to always be online learners, reflecting on practice, whether it be by changing roles or deeply questioning teaching practices. Whatever the methods, our online learners will inevitably be our online teachers as we evolve our praxis. To propel us into relearning to e-learn, Burge (2000a) poses some of her brain burning questions : 1) How do I now think about learning technologies If any metaphors are involved, how do they illuminate my constructions of reality 2) Ethics: What does it mean to be an ethical user of any educational technologies 3) Walking my talk with learning technologies: Where are the difficulties in being congruent 4) What in general terms, does it take for an adult learner to act with competence and feel connected in a technologically mediated learning environment There are no answers, only more questions… (p.95) The essential feature that resonated from all the online teaching reflections is illustrated through what we know of good teaching in face to face: the importance placed on interacting with students, reflecting the belief that effective teaching requires two way communication, not one way broadcasting . (Ballantyne et al., 1999: 248). In addition, the importance of conversation in teaching is also acknowledged: I can define teaching in one word: teaching is conversation . This is a very basic concept for me so when I structure my learning activities, they revolve around engagement and conversation. Even independent learning takes place in social context (Ballantyne et al., 1999: 248). These highlight the importance of constructivist teaching and learning principles (Jonassen, 1998a, 1998b; Jonassen et al. 1999) that can be afforded and applied even more readily to web based environments. In summary, the reflections presented by participants in this study highlight that being reflective about our professional practices can help us engage in a dialogue between our thoughts, beliefs and actions to allow our practices to evolve creatively, and help us move beyond the comfort zone of current online practice to enhance our teaching. Professional development for online teaching needs to consider the centrality of enabling teachers to become aware of how students experience e-learning, and this can best be achieved by involving teachers in student roles. This form of experiential learning triggers reflection at a deep level and improves praxis.

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to thank the generous time and insights provided by the participants in this study. Their willingness to be so available, so open and so reflective has been most appreciated. We have valued their inspiration and reflections to further our own journeys and reflections.

References
Argyris, C. & and Sch n, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley. Ballantyne, R. Bain, J. D. & Packer, J. (1999). Researching university teaching in Australia: Themes and issues in academics reflection. Studies in Higher Education, 24(2), 237-257. Bleakley, A. (1999). From reflective practice to holistic reflexivity. Active Learning in Higher Education, 2 (2), 128142. Boud, D, Cohen, R. & Walker, D. (Eds) (1993). Using experience for learning. Buckingham. England: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press. Boud, D., Keogh, R. & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Croom Helm. Boud, D., & Walker, D. (1998). Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of context. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), 191-206. Brookfield, S.D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Brookfield, S.D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

44

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

Buckingham, S. (2003). Perspectives on the experience of the learning community through online discussions. Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 74-91. http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol18.2/buckingham.pdf Burge, E. J. & Haughey, M. (Eds) (2001). Using learning technologies: International perspectives on practice. London: Routledge. Burge, E. (1993). Students??™ perceptions of learning in computer conferencing: A qualitative analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, Ontario. [viewed 22 June 2004, verified 4 Oct 2004] http://www.lib.unb.ca/Texts/EducationReserves/Burge.html Burge, E. J. (1994). Learning in computer-conferenced contexts: The learner s perspectives. Journal of Distance Education, 9(1), 19-43. http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol9.1/burge.html Burge, E. J. (1996). Inside-out thinking about distance teaching: Making sense of reflective practice. Journal of American Society for Information Science, 47(11), 843-848. Burge, E. J. (2000a). Synthesis: Learners and learning are the issues. In E. J. Burge (Ed), The strategic use of learning technologies: New directions for adult and continuing education, 88. (pp. 89-96). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Burge, E. J. (Ed) (2000b). The strategic use of learning technologies. New directions for adult and continuing education, 88. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Burge, E. J., Laroque, D. & Boak, C. (2000). Bearing professional souls: Reflection on web life. Journal of Distance Education, 15(1). http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol15.1/burge.html Cahoon, B. (1998a). Adult learning and the Internet: Themes and things to come. In B. Cahoon (Ed), Adult learning and the Internet: New directions for adult and continuing education, 78. (pp. 71-77). San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass. Cahoon, B. (Ed) (1998b). Adult learning and the Internet: New directions for adult and continuing education, 78. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Campbell-Gibson, C.C. (2000). The ultimate disorienting dilemma: The online learning community. In T. Evans & D. Nation (Eds), Changing university teaching: Reflections on creating educational technologies. (pp. 133-146). London: Kogan Page. Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D.J. (Eds) (1999). Shaping a professional identity: Stories of educational practice. New York: Teachers College Press. Denzin, N. K. & Yvonne, S. (Eds) (1998). The landscape of qualitative research: Theories and issues. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation between reflective thinking to the educative process. Mass: D.C. Heath. Evans, T., & Nation, D. (2000). Changing university teaching: Reflections on creating educational technologies. London: Kogan Page. Ellis, A. and Phelps, R. (2000). Staff development for online delivery: A collaborative, team based action learning model. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 26-44. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet16/ellis.html Garrison, D. R. & Anderson, T. (2003). E-Learning in the 21st Century. London: Routledge Falmer. Gunawardena, C. N. (2001). Evaluating online learning and teaching. In E. J. Burge & M. Haughey (Eds), Using learning technologies: International perspectives on Practice. (pp. 115-124). London: Routledge. Gunawardena, C. N. & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. The American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8-26. Hanna, D. E., Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Concei o-Runlee, S. (2000). 147 Practical tips for teaching online groups: Essentials of Web-based education. Madison, WI: Atwood. Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Herrington, J., Oliver, R & Reeves, T. (2003). Patterns of engagement in authentic online learning environments. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 19(1), 59-71. http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet19/herrington.html Herrmann, A., Fox, R., Boyd, A. (2000). Unintended effects in using learning technologies. In E. J. Burge, (Ed) (2000), The strategic use of learning technologies. New directions for adult and continuing education, 88. (pp. 39-48). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Holt, m. E. (1998). Ethical considerations in Internet-based adult education. In B. Cahoon (Ed) (1998), Adult learning and the Interne: New directions for adult and continuing education, 78. (pp. 63-70). San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass. Hudson, B. (2002a). Critical dialogue online: Personas, covenants, and candlepower. In E. Rudestam, & J. Schoenholtz-Read, Handbook of online learning: Innovations in higher education and corporate training. (pp. 53-90). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hudson, B. (2002b). The jungle syndrome: Some perils and pleasures of learning without walls. In E. Rudestam, & J. Schoenholtz-Read, Handbook of online learning: Innovations in higher education and corporate training. (pp. 185-220). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Johnson, R. (2001). Teaching in an electronic environment: (e) research, (e)learning, (e)teaching, (e)ntrapment. [verified 4 Oct 2004] http://www.aare.edu.au/01pap/joh01197.htm

45

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

Jonassen, D. (1998a). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed) (1998), Instructional design theories: An overview of their current status (2nd ed.). NJ: Mahwah, Erlbaum. Jonassen, D.H. (Ed.). (1998b). Handbook of research for educational communications and technology. New York: Macmillan. Jonassen, D. H., Peck, K.L., Wilson, B.G., & Pfeiffer, W.G. (Eds). (1999). Learning with technology: A constructivist perspective. Old Tappan, NJ: Merrill. Kemmis, S. & McTaggert, R. (1988). The action research planner (3rd ed). Australia: Deakin University Press. Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood-Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Kuit, J. A., Reay, G. & Freeman, R. (2001). Experiences of reflective teaching. Active Learning in Higher Education, 2(2), 128-142. http://alh.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/2/2/128 Lefoe, G. (2000) Professional development through flexible delivery. Paper presented at the World Conference on Multimedia and Telecommunications, Montreal. McKee, A. (2003). Excavating our frames of mind: The key to dialogue and collaboration. Social Work, 48(3), 401408. Mezirow and Associates, (Eds) (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emanicipatory learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Mezirow, J. & Associates (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Miles, M. B. & M. A. Huberman (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. Olgren, C. H. (2000). Learning strategies for learning technologies. In E. J. Burge (Ed) (2000b). The strategic use of learning technologies. New directions for adult and continuing education, 88. (pp. 7-16) San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. O Regan, K. (2003). Emotion and e-learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 78-92. http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/jaln/v7n3/v7n3_oregan.asp O??™Reilly, M. & Ellis, A. (2002). In at the deep end ??” swapping roles through staff development online??™. IA. n Williamson, C. Gunn, A. Young & T. Clear (Eds.), Winds of Change in the Sea of Learning. Proceedings ASCILITE Conference. Auckland: UNITEC Institute of Technology, pp. 485-494. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/auckland02/proceedings/papers/206.pdf Palloff, R. M. & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Palloff, R. M. & Pratt, K. (2001). Lessons from the cyberspace classroom: The realities of online teaching. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Palloff, R. M. & Pratt, K. (2003). The virtual student: A guide to understanding and working with online learners. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Robinson, P. (2000a). In the Matrix: A Hermeneutic Phenomenological Investigation of Students??™ Experiences in Web-based Computer Conferencing (PhD Thesis). [viewed 22 June 2004] http://www.otal.umd.edu/~paulette/Dissertation/reflections.html Robinson, P. (2000b). The body matrix: A phenomenological exploration of student bodies on-line. Educational Technology and Society, 3(3). http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_3_2000/c05.html Rudestam, E. & Schoenholtz-Read, J. (Eds.) (2002). Handbook of online learning: Innovations in higher education and corporate training. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Salmon, G. (2000). E-moderating: The key to teaching online. London: Kogan Page. Sch n, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Sch n, D.A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action New York: Basic Books. Sch n, D.A. (1995). Knowing in action: The new scholarship requires a new epistemology. Change, 27(6), 27-34. Stacey, E. (2000). Quality online participation: Establishing social presence. Ch 13. [viewed 20 July 2004] http://www.deakin.edu.au/education/RIPVET/conferences/completed%20conferences.htm Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tu, C. (2002). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment. International Journal on ELearning 1(2), 34-45. [viewed 20 June 2004, verified 4 Oct 2004] http://www.aace.org/dl/files/IJEL/IJEL1234.pdf Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. Canada: Althouse Press. Van Manen, M. (1995). On the epistemology of reflective practice. Teachers and teaching: Theory and practice, 1(1), 33-50. White, C. J. (1999). The metacognitive knowledge of distance learners. Open Learning, 14(3), 37-46. Wilson, G. & Stacey, E. (2003). Online interaction impacts on learning: Teaching the teachers to teach online. In G. Crisp, D. Thiele, I. Scholten, S. Barker & J. Baron (Eds), Interact, Integrate, Impact: Proceedings20th ASCILITE Conference. (pp. 541-551). Adelaide, 7-10 December. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/adelaide03/docs/pdf/541.pdf

46

Al-Mahmood & McLoughlin

Appendix A
Interview Schedule Questions What is your philosophy about online teaching and learning How long have you been an online educator At which levels (undergraduate, postgraduate, industry ) 3. How and when did you become an online student What motivated you to become an online student 4. What was the online student experience like for you What was it like being a student online 5. Did anything surprise you about the online student experience 6. Were there any differences with your online educator expectations 7. What was/ were your best learning experience(s) during the online student experience 8. What was/ were the worst learning experience(s) while being an online student 9. What metaphor would you use to describe being an online student 10. Was the online experience valuable to you as an online student Why Would you be an online student again 11. Given your experience of having been an online student, how would you change any part of your online teaching now 12. What would you recommend to other online educators in light of your experience as an online student What are the most important/ essential aspects (e.g. I d do more .., I d do less of ..). 1. 2.

Thank you for your time. Your responses will be anonymous.
Can we quote from your interview responses directly o Yes o NO For your interview responses would you like to be de-identified with a pseudonym o Yes o NO

Reem Al-Mahmood can be contacted at [email protected] Catherine McLoughlin can be contacted at [email protected] Please cite as: Al-Mahmood, R. & McLoughlin, C. (2004). Re-learning through e-learning: Changing conceptions of teaching through online experience. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 37-47). Perth, 5-8 December. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/al-mahmood.html Copyright 2004 Reem Al-Mahmood & Catherine McLoughlin The authors assign to ASCILITE and educational non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The authors also grant a non-exclusive licence to ASCILITE to publish this document on the ASCILITE web site (including any mirror or archival sites that may be developed) and in printed form within the ASCILITE 2004 Conference Proceedings. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the authors.

47