Strategies for effective faculty involvement in online

Strategies for effective faculty involvement in online activities aimed at promoting critical thinking and deep learning Nina Abdul Razzak

Education and Information Technologies The Official Journal of the IFIP Technical Committee on Education ISSN 1360-2357 Educ Inf Technol DOI 10.1007/s10639-014-9359-z

1 23

Your article is protected by copyright and all rights are held exclusively by Springer Science +Business Media New York. This e-offprint is for personal use only and shall not be selfarchived in electronic repositories. If you wish to self-archive your article, please use the accepted manuscript version for posting on your own website. You may further deposit the accepted manuscript version in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later and provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be accompanied by the following text: "The final publication is available at link.springer.com”.

1 23

Author's personal copy Educ Inf Technol DOI 10.1007/s10639-014-9359-z

Strategies for effective faculty involvement in online activities aimed at promoting critical thinking and deep learning Nina Abdul Razzak

# Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Abstract Highly-traditional education systems that mainly offer what is known as direct instruction usually result in graduates with a surface approach to learning rather than a deep one. What is meant by deep-learning is learning that involves critical analysis, the linking of ideas and concepts, creative problem solving, and application (Harvey & Kamvounias, Higher Education Research & Development, 27(1), 31–41, doi:10.1080/07294360701658716 2008)- all of which prepare graduates for life in the 21st Century. It is precisely this kind of deep learning that the current national educational reform initiatives in Bahrain are trying to promote, in contrast to what has usually been offered historically. Unfortunately, this noble aim is not always achieved and teaching methods need to be examined and developed, since there definitely are a lot of alternatives to stereotype lecturing in academic institutions (Annerstedt, Garza, Huang-DeVoss, Lindh & Rydmark, Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 107–127, 2010). One such alternative suggested in this paper is that of increasing faculty involvement with students in online contexts, as a means for promoting critical thinking and deep learning. Keywords Critical thinking . Deep learning . Online tools . Faculty involvement . Curriculum analysis . Bahraini education

1 Introduction Highly-traditional education systems that mainly offer what Paulo Freire called “the banking education” or direct instruction, which tends to focus on rote learning and memorization instead of on active engagement, critical thinking, application, and discovery-learning, usually result in graduates with a surface approach to learning rather than a deep one. What is meant by deep-learning is learning that involves critical

N. Abdul Razzak (*) Bahrain Teachers’ College, University of Bahrain, Sakhir Campus, P.O.Box 32038 Zallaq, Bahrain e-mail: [email protected]

Author's personal copy Educ Inf Technol

analysis, the linking of ideas and concepts, creative problem solving, and application (Harvey and Kamvounias 2008). It is precisely this kind of learning that the current national educational reform initiatives in Bahrain are trying to promote, in line with research-based studies that emphasize the need for education to include a critical component, so that students become equipped to “go beyond…information…to figure things out” for themselves (Bruner 1996, p.129). Included in the national educational reform initiatives is the introduction of a number of school improvement projects, among them the infusion of higher-order thinking skills (HOTS) and other 21st Century skills in the teaching of all curricular areas to promote deep learning. Unfortunately and in general, this noble aim is not always achieved (Arend 2009); for, while instructors try to cover more material in depth and with critical analysis, they simultaneously continue to struggle with “growing class sizes, limited funds, and restricted contact time” (Mandernach 2006; 41). This type of time-limited group setting acts as a challenge for critical thinking in face-to-face classrooms (Cheong and Cheung 2008) and as Mandernach (2006) explains, “often dictates a more didactic teaching strategy” (42), usually known as lecturing. Teaching methods therefore need to be examined and developed, since there definitely are a lot of alternatives to stereotype lecturing in academic institutions (Annerstedt et al. 2010). One such alternative conceptually suggested towards the end of this paper is that of increasing higher education faculty involvement with students in online contexts, as a means for promoting deep learning and critical thinking, which are needed for success in the 21st Century. The rationale behind such a suggestion is this: many students are being pumped into higher education institutions from K-12 with poor critical thinking and deep learning competencies and so there is a serious need for some type of remedy for this weakness in higher education. In addition, students of today are fluent digital natives and, based on learning style theories, may therefore be taught such skills more easily and thoroughly through means that speak their same digital language- means like edublogs, electronic discussion boards, wikis, e-portfolios, etc.

2 Literature review Several research studies have pointed to the positive effects that online activities in a blended learning context, which are supplementary to traditional classes, have on student performance and higher-order thinking skills. For example, a study by Jang (2009) showed that online (web-based) interactions enhanced students’ creativity. This is usually because of the accessibility, abundance, rapidity, diversity, and renewability of information on the Internet, which contributes to greater generation and screening of ideas needed in problem-solving activities (Bhattacharya 2004). The abundance and variety of information on the Internet also provided students in a study by Chang (2012) with the resources they needed for forming metaphors and analogies that helped them produce new and creative ideas. The results of a study by Lopez-Perez et al. (2013) on undergraduate students at the University of Granada, on the other hand, reflected that such activities (e.g. online discussions, forums, crossword puzzles, etc. on MOODLE) helped students develop reasoning, problem-solving, and decision-making skills, which eventually led to better student outcomes. Moreland (2009) argues that such critical thinking and decision-making skills, as interactive processes, are more


important in blended learning contexts than the products that students create (Moreland as cited by Jones et al. 2011). A considerable number of studies have also long indicated that “the most effective asynchronous tools for the promotion of critical thinking are threaded discussions and alternative assignments based on emergent technologies” like blogs, wikis, and podcasting (Mandernach 2006; 45). Based on a study by MacKnight (2000), online discussions “are seen as effective places for instructors to coach and develop deeper and more reflective learning because they put emphasis on the elements of argument and the exchange of ideas” (Arend 2009; 2) Garrison and Anderson (2003) explain that the text-based communication in online discussions allows for more reflective and less spontaneous discourse; whereas, Lea (2001) sees in the fact that students can always return to their permanent online posts an opportunity for continual reflection. Despite all these benefits, however, critical thinking and deep learning do not seem to be exhibited enough in online environments (Maurino 2007). This may be partly due to the unfamiliarity of some instructors with online teaching methods and techniques and their uncertainty about the best methods for promoting critical thinking (Arend 2009) or it could also be due to their uncertainty about how to capitalize the latter in an online environment. Furthermore, many studies found that whatever critical thinking that was being exhibited by students in online discussions was not necessarily at an in-depth level but merely at a surface level (Burt et al. 1994; Bullen 1998; Hew and Cheung 2003; Landsman and Gorski 2007). Hew and Cheung (2003) characterized surface level critical thinking as “students making conclusions or judgments without offering any justification; proposing solutions with little details or explanations; and stating that one shares conclusions or judgments made by others without taking these further “(cited by Lim et al. 2011); while in-depth critical thinking is the exact opposite. Bullen (1998) pointed out that one contributing factor to surface level critical thinking is the relatively passive role of the facilitating instructor. Paulsen (1995) had classified this role into three types: organizational, social, and intellectual and this role was further analyzed by other researchers, mainly Cheung and Hew (2005). The organizational type is known for regulating participation, encouraging responses, and keeping discussions on track; the social type is responsive to a high degree and reinforces good behaviors; whereas, the intellectual type asks questions to increase and deepen understanding, challenges ideas and opinions, makes appropriate contributions, and insists that opinions of participants be supported with data and logical reasoning (Cheung and Hew 2005). A study by Lim et al. (2011) found that discussion forums led by student facilitators who relied mainly on social and intellectual types of facilitation were richer in in-depth critical thinking levels than forums in which social and organizational types of facilitations were used. This indicated that what needs to be stressed on in online discussion activities are the intellectual types of facilitation, in particular “questioning, expressing agreements, and providing opinions or explanations to foster higher levels of critical thinking” (Lim et al. 2011; 62). Although this indication pertained to student facilitators, it may also apply in the case of teacher facilitators, for it is agreed upon that instructors foster critical thinking of students through intellectual techniques like skilled questioning, coaching, re-directing, and focusing (Lumney et al. 2008). For such online discussions and assignments to be meaningful and engaging, they need to be carefully designed and structured in specific ways that effectively facilitate higher-order thinking skills; they also need to be based on clear participation guidelines and should be followed by close monitoring and


feedback from the instructors (Hanna et al. 2000; Horton 2000; MacKnight 2000). The “social presence” of the instructors, as well as that of other student colleagues, in the online learning environment in which these activities take place is extremely important for encouraging students’ active participation and engagement in learning (Kop 2011). When compared to other tools and specifically to experiential learning simulations, for example, which are characterized by providing authentic, “real life” experiences to students, such online (web-based) activities may prove to be less useful in improving academic achievement and deeper learning, as argued by Beckem and Watkins (2012). Still, however, the two equally provide the tangible benefit of increased student engagement (Beckem and Watkins 2012) and with the challenge of not always finding simulations that match the content being covered, web-based activities using interactive online tools (e.g. discussion boards, blogs, wikis, etc.) prove to be extremely beneficial, especially when instructors make an effort to design authentic tasks that anchor learning activities within a social learning context.

3 Conceptual framework This study was conceptually based on the belief in active learning as a valuable strategy in education that helps reinforce understanding, promotes deep learning, and thus improves student outcomes, as was formulated by John Bigg’s (1987). It was also based on learning styles theories that assert that student learning increases when it is geared more towards their style of perceiving and processing information. Since students of today are digital natives, then it is only safe to assume- based on learning styles theoriesthat they may be taught skills, including those of the higher order thinking type, more easily and thoroughly through means that speak their same digital language. Digital and online tools that supplement traditional face-to-face activities and are based on constructivist or student-centered approaches, can provide students with opportunities for individualized, self-paced, and in-depth interactions with course material through means that suit their preferred learning style (Macknight 2000; Murchu and Muirhead 2005). Consequently, such tools have the advantage of promoting critical thinking and other similar higher order skills, which require for their development self-paced and individualized time necessary for the mastery of the learning process (Astleitner 2002). Based on social constructivist principles, such online activities, have a higher chance of successfully meeting the learning objectives originally intended, when meeting the necessary condition of “social presence”. Social presence does not only refer to the participation of students but also to the engagement of the instructor, whose role is to design authentic tasks that anchor learning activities within a learning context, facilitate activities, provide feedback and scaffold learning, enhance “community” forming, strengthen the sense of belongingness, build confidence, and stimulate active participation (Beckem and Watkins 2012; Kop 2011; Mandernach 2006).

4 Background of the study In a study by Abdul Razzak (2012) on first-year undergraduate college students in Bahrain, it was noted that most public high school graduates enter college with a great


competency to recite facts from memory and to solve problems and apply concepts, when they are modeled for them by their instructors. When asked to form relationships between concepts or to apply them in new or unfamiliar situations, however, students are usually unsuccessful and many of them get completely muddled. This constitutes a serious problem for the students, especially in coursework that requires the examination of critical content and the analysis of challenging and realistic case studies that require the forming of relationships and the application of different concepts, theories, and solutions. The students’ incompetence to transfer knowledge to new situations, analyze, criticize, form relationships, and evaluate became an area of concern for the researcher, simply because without such skills, it would be very difficult for the Bahraini students of today to respond as future adults to the unique challenges and demands of the 21st Century. Since, through such challenges and demands, the future adults of today will be “more and more required to make certain lifestyle changes, to accept multiculturalism and to tolerate and respect differences, to value speed and creativity in production, to make the right choices from among a bewildering array of goods and services, to keep up-to-date with the latest scientific and technology advancements, and to make the best use of an unprecedented access to information” (Abdul Razzak 2013; n.p.). It is therefore essential for postsecondary institutions in Bahrain to try and remedy the damage done in the K-12 schools and one way to do that is by trying to “prepare students to be critical thinkers and cautious consumers of information” (Mandernach 2006; 41). Because of this, the researcher conducted the study at hand, whose general purpose was to examine what K-12 schooling factors may be acting as an impediment to Bahraini students’ deep learning and critical thinking competencies and to draw implications regarding what needs to be done in K-12 classrooms in the future to help reduce or even eliminate such factors. This paper, in addition, theoretically proposes a specific strategy, which higher education faculty could at the present implement- as a measure to remedy the situation of the high school graduates they already have or who are reaching them- through the utilization of methods that help promote in them critical thinking and deep learning. It is no secret that the Bahraini society, like many other societies in the world, is highly exposed to technology and Bahraini youths, like their counterparts around the world, happen to be to a high degree fluent digital natives. Their usage of technology however, is mainly focused on: interacting through social media, communicating through a variety of mobile phone applications; engaging in digital and Internet games; sharing digital content for the purpose of entertainment like audio and video files; etc. Even when their technology use is aimed at learning purposes because of some school assignment they have to complete, the technology use and learning is often limited to the basic levels of thinking. For example, they are usually engaged in searching for information on the Internet, paraphrasing it if not copying it off completely, and using some word-processing application or a multimedia software to either add this information to a paper to be submitted, or a presentation to be delivered, to the teacher. Only in a few college contexts are web-based course management software or as they are called, learning management systems (LMS), like BlackBoard and MOODLE being activated by some faculty for more than posting course announcements, course documents, supporting reading materials, assignments, and grades. Many faculty members, in addition, are still uncomfortable with designing basic online activities to begin with and, therefore, expecting them to be familiar with online teaching methods that


capitalize on critical thinking skills is farfetched. Although, most if not all types of LMS used in Bahrain include advanced features (e.g. electronic discussion boards, electronic groups, access to an e-portfolio platform, etc.), which if invested in correctly, alongside other electronic websites and web applications, and used for engaging students actively in learning, as supplementary to traditional face-to-face instruction, can definitely develop students’ higher order thinking skills and promote their deep learning. Despite the fact that many studies have centered on the effectiveness of online tools and on the factors impacting their success (Tamim et al. 2011), very few studies have focused on how and why they are used in higher education in specific (LopezPerez et al. 2013; Lim and Morris 2009; Lei and Zhao 2007). In addition, most studies have focused mainly on students rather than on faculty and, therefore, there is a need to research more what instructors hope to achieve by using online tools and whether they are succeeding (Maurino 2007). The majority of the studies however have indicated a need for greater instructor involvement and effort (Maurino 2007). This paper therefore includes, in addition to the most prominent literature on the topic, suggested strategies through which faculty members can increase their involvement in online contexts, to ensure the effectiveness of such tools (certain LMS features as well as other websites and web applications) in promoting critical thinking and deep learning in college students in the Kingdom of Bahrain and elsewhere, which are needed for success in a 21st Century society.

5 Methodology The qualitative method of inquiry was used in this study and it relied on two main date collection tools, as described below: (1) Discussions of a focus group of 8 experienced Senior Teachers (ST) (or Department Heads) from the Bahraini public school system: The 8 ST were 3 males and 5 females and represented male and female schools at all levels (elementary, middle, and secondary). They took part in the focus group on a voluntary basis and only after all the necessary official institutional approvals were granted, and they belonged to a non-randomly selected sample of forty-two ST, who were enrolled in the Educational Leadership Program (ELP) at Bahrain Teachers’ College (BTC) in the second semester of 2012–2013. The discussions centered on their perceptions of the different curricula in their subject areas; and how much of deep learning and critical thinking skills these curricula promote in terms of their content, activities, and assessment. and how involved are classroom teachers in ensuring students’ successful implementation of such skills. (2) Analyses of direct observations conducted by the same 8 ST on K-12 public school teachers they supervise in their departments, to examine the extent to which they are involved through their teaching methods in ensuring students’ successful implementation of deep learning and critical thinking. These observations are conducted by the ST around the year as a part of their essential duties and responsibilities as middle managers and teacher leaders and they are what help form their perceptions of the performance and implementation of the teachers in class.


(3) Curriculum analysis reports of the non-random sample of forty-two ST (12 males and 30 females) described above: These reports were an assignment that the ST had completed for one of their training courses and which required from them to analyze and critique parts of the curricula they teach at different levels of schooling. In specific, the ST had to engage in the following 5 tasks: a) identify and evaluate the clarity of the aims and objectives of their curriculum; b) identify its rationale and check if its focus is balanced between subject matter, learner, and society; c) check for alignment between the objectives, instruction, activities, and assessment of their curriculum; d) evaluate how much their curriculum allows for building deep understanding, student engagement, and transfer of meaning beyond school; and finally e) determine what key factors affect the curriculum’s implementation. These 5 tasks were to be completed and presented in class in the form of a PowerPoint presentation and the slides of each presentation were to be printed out and submitted as a report to the course instructor- who happened to be also the primary investigator of this study- for further evaluation. Again, the ST’s consent was taken and the required institutional approvals were granted before the reports were analyzed for research purposes. To ensure credibility of the research findings, the researcher made sure to go back to the participants in the end of the study for verification of the data interpretations. All interpretations were recognized, confirmed, and agreed upon by the participating ST.

6 Results and discussion The sets of raw data collected from the focus group discussions, observation analyses, and the curriculum analysis reports were analyzed on the basis of a general inductive approach. In other words, the transcripts of the focus group discussions, as well as the observation reports and the curriculum reports’ content, were first repeatedly and rigorously read; then, they were coded; and finally some of their text segments that contained major meaning units or themes were identified and labeled as categories, under which other pertinent text segments were included. These categories that surfaced were derived from the research objectives and from the various readings of the raw data. The researcher has presented them below with their corresponding labels, descriptions, data or text, and discussion of the data. 6.1 Characteristics of the curriculum The focus here was mainly on the currency of the curriculum and the ST concentrated on when each of their curricula was last updated. They tended to classify the curricula as either: (1) the developed or improved curricula (called in Arabic Al-manahej Almutawarra) like math, science, and English or (2) the old curricula, which include almost every other curriculum. The latter include mainly: cognitive learning outcomes; content irrelevant to the interests and needs of learners of today; traditional-based


delivery of instruction; limited activities and mostly individually-oriented ones that focus on students’ engagement in rote learning or practice drills; and traditional penciland-paper assessment tasks. This is in addition to, as Fatima (one of the participants) expressed, “There is more emphasis on the theoretical knowledge rather than the practical application and some of the curricula being given to our children today are what we ourselves studied when we were their age.” While, the improved curricula include more up-to-date content that addresses the interests and needs of today’s learners; a variety of intended learning outcomes (e.g., cognitive, social, emotional, physical, etc.); technology-based and hands-on instruction; a variety of activities, many of which require peer or group work; and performancebased and authentic assessment tasks in addition to the traditional pencil-paper ones. What this indicates therefore is that the improved curricula are more in line with international best practices and with what is expected nationally, in order to prepare students for life and success in the 21st Century; while, the old curricula are more in need of enrichment from the instructor inside the classroom, if not in need of complete modification and innovation. 6.2 Curriculum components The emphasis here was on whether the focus of the rationale of each curriculum is balanced between subject matter, learner, and society and whether there is sufficient alignment between intended learning outcomes, instruction, activities, and assessment tasks. The ST reported that, in general, the rationales of all the curricula are balanced and only in one or two cases the scale is a bit higher on the side of the subject matter. As the participant Ebrahim explained, “Sometimes the rationale focuses on the importance of the curriculum in terms of what information and knowledge it provides the learner with more than on its importance in terms of what the learner will be able to do or demonstrate as a result of it”. With respect to alignment, the ST agreed that in all the improved curricula it is high but lower- especially between the activities, assessment, and the learning outcomes- in the old curricula. Maryam clarified, for example, that in the old curricula, “Many times some of the learning outcomes are at the higher levels in Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy or focus on emotional or social aspects but the activities and assessments included require only the demonstration of lower-level cognitive skills or have nothing to do with the exercise of emotional or social skills”. What this calls for, therefore, is a greater involvement from the side of the instructor in the development of alternative activities and assessment tasks that are more in line with the intended learning outcomes. 6.3 Degree of catering to deep learning and critical thinking The focus here is on how much deep learning, critical thinking skills, and transfer of meaning the curricula promote in terms of their content, activities, and assessment. The ST argued during the focus group discussions that part of the reason why students from Bahraini public schools graduate with poor problem-solving, critical thinking, creative thinking, and application skills probably goes back to the nature of the majority of the K-12 curricula they have been taught throughout the years. With respect to the old curricula, almost all the curriculum analysis reports of the ST indicated a deficiency in


objectives, activities, and assessment strategies tailored for the development and exercise of higher order thinking skills described in Lorin Anderson’s revised version of Bloom’s Cognitive Taxonomy, mainly analysis, evaluation, and creativity and, in some severe cases, even a deficiency in the lower-order skill of application. This is in contrast to the improved curricula, which do not bear such a deficiency. One would assume therefore that the improved curricula are designed in such a way that would guarantee students’ development of deep learning and critical thinking. Nevertheless, as Amani argues, “This is not necessarily the case, since it all depends on what is being done with these curricula in the classroom.” Mohammad adds, “The implementation of such curricula is what matters; since even though they may be designed to promote such skills, they sometimes fail to do so because of lack of proper application.” Such comments thus point to the crucial role to be played by the teachers who implement the curricula and to their being a determining factor in their success or failure to promote higher-order thinking skills. As regards the old curricula, their enrichment in this respect is required, if not their complete modification and innovation. 6.4 Classroom teacher as a determining factor The emphasis here is on how involved are classroom teachers in ensuring students’ successful implementation of such deep learning and critical thinking. As implied by the comments above, the teacher has a crucial role in affecting the curriculum’s implementation. All ST reported through the focus group discussions and the observation analysis reports that when it comes to implementing the new curricula that are rich with content, activities, and assessment tasks that address deep learning and critical thinking, the teachers’ implementation is lacking because of several factors. The ST mentioned lack of time to prepare and cover activities that address higher order thinking skills, lack of know-how and expertise on how to implement such activities and so some teachers prefer to skip them, pressure to cover content in terms of quantity at the expense of quality, big classroom sizes, not enough time with the students, etc. Some comments made by the participants were: & &

&

Zahra: “We, as teachers, don’t see our students enough to do with them all we want to do; we don’t even have time to finish the material required for their national exams to have time to work on developing their higher order thinking skills.” Abdullah: “Some activities in the new curricula are too complicated for some of our teachers to understand and what makes the situation worse is that not all of them received sufficient training on these new curricula, if any. So they just prefer to focus on implementing the easy and simple activities.” Sayed: “Our classrooms have too many students in them, about 35–40 in some cases. The teachers therefore often have to struggle with classroom management issues and so tend to just focus on covering the content of the lesson and doing a few practice exercises with their students that they are comfortable with. They dare not venture in unfamiliar territory and risk struggling with more challenges in such big classes.” These reports and comments by the participants are consistent with several previous research results (Arend 2009; Cheong and Cheung 2008; Mandernach 2006). They also point to the conclusion that if teachers are faced with all these


challenges in implementing the new curricula, which are already equipped with the components necessary for the development of deep learning and critical thinking, it is only logical to assume that more challenges are faced when teachers attempt to enrich the old curricula, which lack such components. This whole situation therefore constitutes a serious obstacle for the successful implementation of curricula in ways that promote deep learning and critical thinking in students. It also therefore impedes the success of the national educational reform initiatives in Bahrain.

7 Implications The findings from the focus group discussions and the curriculum and observation analysis reports indicated a need for the following: (1) modification and innovation of the old K-12 curricula in the public schools of Bahrain and if not, then at least their enrichment by the classroom instructor; (2) greater involvement from the side of the instructor in the development of alternative activities and assessment tasks that are more in line with the intended learning outcomes, to ensure more curriculum alignment; (3) activation of the crucial role of the instructor in the implementation of curricula in ways that promote deep learning and critical thinking; (4) elimination of the main factors discouraging instructors from implementing strategies and activities that address higher order thinking skills; and (5) training teachers more efficiently on the new curricula, on innovative ways to make use of classroom time, and on finding alternative ways of promoting deep learning and critical thinking. The need for all of these things indicates a gap created in the Bahraini K-12 traditional school systems and explains the incompetence of high school graduates who are pumped into higher education, when it comes to thinking critically, developing deep understanding, applying concepts and theories in the analysis of complex cases, transferring knowledge to new situations, and evaluating contexts. This gap between schooling and college is not unique to Bahrain but actually exists in other countries around the world. An international research survey conducted by the Cambridge International Examinations on more than 1,000 teachers from across the globe revealed that 85% of the participating teachers reported that students lacked critical thinking when they began their post-16 courses at school (Stewart 2014). In the USA, in specific and based on the 2011 research report of the BlackBoard Institute, there’s in the U.S.A “a significant disconnect between skills being taught in high school and skills necessary for success in college…” (p.5). Students continue to be “unprepared for college-level core subjects, and lack supplemental skills, like technology and critical thinking, required for success in college and the workforce” (p. 4) and “higher education institutions, especially community colleges, have to deal with the expensive and time consuming process of remediation…” (p.6). Since this skills gap is not unique to Bahrain, it follows that the fulfillment of the needs identified above (i.e. need for enrichment of K-12 curricula; alignment of higher-order thinking learning outcomes with activities and assessments in curricula; infusion of higher-order thinking activities in classroom instruction and elimination of factors that hinder such a process; and training teachers on alternative ways of promoting higher-order thinking skills) could also prove to be beneficial to other contexts internationally, especially ones that share similar circumstances and challenges.


One argument made in the research literature is this: one of the strategies for closing the gap between high school and college is that of incorporating technology into the learning process and maximizing its use in K-12 classrooms (BlackBoard Institute 2011). Since “incorporating technology into an effective learning environment requires hard work and planning” (BlackBoard Institute 2011, p. 12) and this takes time, it is important- especially when there are big numbers of high school graduates entering college continually and some who are already registered freshmen- to not wait. Rather, what is needed is to try to shed some light on what higher education institutions receiving or holding these numbers, whether in Bahrain or elsewhere, should start doing to remedy the situation created by the perceived gap. Like in K-12 classrooms, emphasis on instructor involvement in colleges and universities is a must and what is needed is finding the right medium or context for developing critical thinking and deep learning for the students of today.

8 Effective faculty involvement through the design and use of focused activities in online contexts The researcher of this study believes that one such medium, as explained in the conceptual framework of this study, is that of online contexts in which specific activities and tools provide students with opportunities for individualized, self-paced, and in-depth interactions with course material in ways that promote their critical thinking and other higher-order skills, while in the social presence and guidance of their course instructor. The sections below describe for higher education instructors how they could possibly increase their involvement in online activities and tools (mainly LMS features and blogs) to promote critical thinking and deep learning in college students in the Kingdom of Bahrain and elsewhere, which are needed for success in a 21st Century society. 8.1 Guidelines For instructors to effectively be involved in the design and implementation of online activities that promote critical thinking and deep learning, they first need to take into account the following guidelines, which have been derived from previous research studies: 1. Be aware that critical thinking is best achieved in conjunction with domain content, i.e. when incorporated within a course whether face-to-face or online (Lumney et al. 2008). 2. Identify the specific critical thinking concepts that are relevant to the course material to be covered (e.g. cognitive skills like analyzing, predicting, drawing inferences, evaluating, etc. and habits of mind like flexibility, intellectual integrity, reflection, etc.) (Lumney et al. 2008). 3. Communicate to students in advance the framework for evaluating critical thinking and deep learning that will be used, so that they will be clear on what is expected of them in the activity.


4. Clearly establish and communicate what are the socially accepted behaviors within the online environment. 5. Acknowledge and appreciate the importance of faculty involvement in the online activity. 6. Exhibit behaviors that foster a climate conducive to the development and enhancement of thinking skills in general, like the ones suggested by Thacker (1991) (e.g. modeling thinking skills, being flexible, accepting individual differences, showing respect for each student, exhibiting a positive attitude, providing nonthreatening activities, etc.) 7. Take cultural factors into account when facilitating activities in an online context, especially when challenging others’ viewpoints or using aggressive questioning techniques; for what may work in a certain culture may not work with students in another culture (Lim et al. 2011).

8.2 Suggested activities The activities proposed here are organized into three different categories as follows, and in all of them students and instructors will be required to regularly comment and respond to what is posted: a) Discussion board/forum &

&

&

Questioning: The idea is to create threads in a discussion board that include questions that require from students the exercise of higher levels of ability. Arthur Costa’s Book and Brain and Brain Only types of questions (Costa 2001) apply here, in comparison to the Book Only type. For the answers to Book Only questions can be found in the text (either directly or indirectly) and these questions ask for the recall of information as it was heard or read. These types of questions do not stimulate students’ to think critically, in contrast to the Book and Brain and Brain Only questions, which instructors need to focus on in their discussion board activities. For, the answers to the Book and Brain questions are inferred from the text and usually combine information in a new way; whereas, the answers to the Brain Only type go beyond the text and require students to make judgments from the information or to give their opinions about issues and to justify them. Weighted Decision-Making (Pros Vs Cons): The idea here is for instructors to create two discussion threads in which they post a controversial issue relevant to the material they are covering in class: one thread should require from students to post their opinions about the pros surrounding this issue and the second thread should require the cons. Having two threads created in this way will help students more easily evaluate the issue and see what type of weighted decision to make about it in the end. Stand by Your Quote: The instructor here will create a number of discussion threads, each posting a quote (or possibly a poem or a religious verse or a solution to a problem etc., depending on the nature of the course). Each student will then be required to first read all of these posts, then select the post that they particularly like or believe in, and finally explain and justify in writing in the relevant thread what they like about that particular post.


&

Moral Dilemmas: Here the instructor will need to identify a moral issue related to a course topic being discussed in class. This moral issue should be posted in a new thread and students will need to consider the arguments for and against it and to develop and defend a position on the issue that could serve as a guide for others in similar situations.

b) EduBlog &

&

&

&

Write Around (Generating Questions): The idea here is to provide students with an opportunity to practice thinking of higher-order questions themselves, which is no easy task and requires reflective time and space. The online context is therefore ideal for such an activity. The instructor is required to create an educational blog (EduBlog) for their class in which they will post a picture or a videoclip or an audiofile related to their course. Each student will then get a turn to write what they think is a higher-order thinking question about what is posted and why they consider it to be so. Other students will be required to give their opinion about the quality of the questions generated by their peers. Weekly Reflection: Here students will be required to share and discuss through the EduBlog on a weekly basis the most important things they learnt, how they feel about them, what learning connections they formed, and how they plan to make use of all of this learning in the future. Idea Web: The instructor here should have one student write in their EduBlog something meaningful about a particular topic they studied and then other students should start one-by-one adding something different, until the end result is more like a web of meaningful ideas. Evaluating the Reliability of Sources: The instructor here should provide their class with a list of research topics related to their course. They should then require students to begin researching topics of their choice. As students are doing their research, they will be required to also write in their EduBlog an evaluation of the sources (websites, books, journals articles, etc.) they are screening. Other students will be welcome to comment or add to these evaluations. The accumulated evaluations of the students in the end will result in a bibliography of trusted resources for the whole class. Of course, for such an activity to succeed, the instructor will need to provide the students with a list of evaluation criteria from the start.

c) LMS course group feature &

&

Peer Reviews: The idea here is to create small groups of three on MOODLE or BlackBoard (or any other similar course management system) and to have every two members of the group peer review the main answer or solution of the third member before they post it as their final response to a particular thread. Socratic Circles: The instructor here will have to create two large groups on the LMS, with each group representing half of the class. Members of the first group (inner circle) will be given some time to formulate their opinions and arguments on an open-ended question posted by the instructor about a certain issue or text read about and well-studied in class and then to post their views on the LMS group blog, which the instructor would have made accessible to the public, i.e. to the rest of the


&

class. After that, members of the second group (outer circle) will be given the same opportunity to publish their feedback in response. Once the feedback is posted, the cycle repeats itself with the first group posting their feedback on the feedback presented and so on and so forth until the topic is exhausted. De Bono’s Six Hats: The instructor here will have to create six groups on the LMS and will name each group by one of the colors of De Bono’s hats (white, red, black, yellow, green, and blue). Then a number of students will have to be enrolled in each group and will have to work according to the color and thinking direction of their “hat”, to tackle an issue or problem specified for the whole class by the instructor. Each group will be given a certain timeframe to post its ideas into the LMS group blog, which the instructor would have made accessible to the public, i.e. to the rest of the class. Once, for example, the white group posts its ideas, a couple of days will be given to the rest of the students to provide feedback and comments on the work of this group. After this, another group- for example the red one- would have to post its ideas into the group blog and a couple of days will be given for feedback and comments and so on and so forth, until all the groups get a turn to post their work.

9 Conclusion Online activities, such as the ones suggested in this paper, provide students with an opportunity to reflect, analyze, and think critically about what they learn. What makes such activities unique is the fact that the role of the instructors in them is not limited to facilitation but rather is characterized by a high degree of intellectual involvement prior to their social presence online. This involvement is mainly in the form of planning, designing, and effortful focusing of tasks that stimulate cognitive skills and habits of mind conducive to in-depth critical thinking and deep learning. These are specifically the types of activities and instructor involvement required, not only at the university level but also in K-12, for ensuring effectiveness of online tools in promoting skills for success in the 21st Century.

References Abdul Razzak, N. (2012). Problem-based learning in the educational psychology classroom: Bahraini teacher candidates’ experience. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 24(2), 134–143. Abdul Razzak, N. (2013). Challenges facing school leadership in promoting ICT integration in instruction in the public schools of Bahrain. Education and Information Technologies. doi:10.1007/s10639-013-9283-7. Annerstedt, C., Garza, D., Huang-DeVoss, C., Lindh, J., & Rydmark, M. (2010). Research-able through problem-based learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 107–127. Arend, B. (2009). Encouraging critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), 1–23. Astleitner, H. (2002). Teaching critical thinking online. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 29(2), 53–77. Beckem, J. M., II, & Watkins, M. (2012). Bringing life to learning: immersive experiential learning simulations for online and blended course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 16(5), 61–71.

Author's personal copy Educ Inf Technol Bhattacharya, M. (2004). Conducting problem-based learning on-line. international conference on computers in education 2004. Retrieved March 31st, 2014 from http://plum.yuntech.edu.tw/icce2004/Theme3?063_ Bhattacharya.pdf Biggs, J. (1987). Student approaches to learning and studying. Hawthorn, Victoria: Australian council for educational research. BlackBoard Institute (2011). Closing the gap between high school and college: a research report. [Online] Available from- www.blackboardinstitute.com. [Accessed 13 September 2014]. Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. MA: Harvard University Press. Bullen, M. (1998). Participation and critical thinking in online university distance education. Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), 1–32. Burt, M. T., Grady, M., & McMann, G. (1994). Interaction analysis of an inter-university computer conference. Paper presented a the distance learning research conference. Texas: College Station. Chang, Y. S. (2012). Student technological creativity using online problem-solving activities. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23, 803–816. Cheong, C. M., & Cheung, W. S. (2008). Online discussion and critical thinking skills: a case study in a Singapore secondary school. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(5), 556–573. Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2005). Factors affecting learners’ satisfaction on the use of asynchronous online discussion in a hypermedia design environment. Journal of Southeast Asian Education, 5(1&2), 56–70. Costa, A. L. (2001). Developing minds: a resource book for teaching thinking (3rd ed.). Virginia: Association. Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer. Hanna, D. E., Glowacki-Dudka, M., & Conceicao-Runlee, S. (2000). 147 practical tips for teaching online groups: essentials of web-based education. Madison: Atwood Publishing. Harvey, A., & Kamvounias, P. (2008). Bridging the implementation gap: a teacher-as-learner approach to teaching and learning policy. Higher Education Research and Development, 27(1), 31–41. doi:10.1080/ 07294360701658716. Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2003). Evaluating the participation and quality of thinking of pre-service teachers in an asynchronous online discussion environment: Part II. International Journal of Instructional Media, 30(4), 355–366. Horton, S. (2000). Web teaching guide: a practical approach to creating course web sites. New Haven: Yale University Press. Jang, S. J. (2009). Exploration of secondary students” creativity by integrating web-based technology into an innovative science curriculum. Computers and Education, 52, 247–255. Jones, A., Buntting, C., & de Vries, M. J. (2011). The developing field of technology education: a review to look forward. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 23, 191–212. Kop, R. (2011). The challenges to connectivist learning on open line networks: learning experiences during a massive open line course. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(3), 19– 37. Landsman, J., & Gorski, P. (2007). Countering standardization. Educational Leadership, 64(8), 40–41. Lea, M. (2001). Computer conferencing and assessment: new ways of writing in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), 163–182. Lei, J., & Zhao, Y. (2007). Technology uses and student achievement: a longitudinal study. Computers and Education, 49(2), 284–296. Lim, D. H., & Morris, M. L. (2009). Learner and instructional factors influencing learning outcomes within a blended learning environment. Journal of Educational Technology and Society, 12(4), 282–293. Lim, S. C. R., Cheung, W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2011). Critical thinking in asynchronous online discussion: an investigation of student facilitation techniques. New Horizons in Education, 59(1), 52–65. Lopez-Perez, M. V., Perez-Lopez, M., Rodriguez-Ariza, L., & Argente-Linares, E. (2013). The influence of the use of technology on student outcomes in a blended learning context. Educational Technology Research and Development Journal, 61, 625–638. Lumney, M., Frederickson, K., Spark, A., & McDuffie, G. (2008). Facilitating critical thinking through online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12(3–4), 85–97. MacKnight, C. B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions. Educause Quarterly, 4, 38– 41. Mandernach, B. J. (2006). Thinking critically about critical thinking: integrating online tools to promote critical thinking. Insight: A Collection of Faculty Scholarship, 1, 41–50. Maurino, P. S. (2007). Looking for critical thinking in online threaded discussions. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 35(3), 241–260.

Author's personal copy Educ Inf Technol Moreland, J. (2009). Assessment: focusing on the learner and the subject. In A. T. Jones & M. J. de Vries (Eds.), International handbook of research and development in technology education (pp. 445–447). Rotterdam: Sense. Murchu, D. & Muirhead, B. (2005). Insights into promoting critical thinking in online classes. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(6). Accessed on March 31st, 2014 from http://itdl.org/Journal/Jun_05/article01.htm. Paulsen, M.F. (1995). Moderating educational computer conferences. In Z. L. Berge and M.P. Collins (Eds.), Computer mediated communication and the online classroom: Vol.3. Distance Learning (pp.81-89). Cresskill, NJ Hampton Press, Inc. Stewart, W. (2014). School leavers lack the critical thinking skills needed for university, exam board warns [Online] 25 January 2014. Available from- http://news.tes.co.uk/b/news/2014/01/24/students-lackcritical-skills.aspx. [Accessed: 14 September 2014]. Tamim, R. M., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Abrami, P. C., & Schmid, R. F. (2011). What forty years of research says about the impact of technology on learning: a second-order meta-analysis and validation study. Review of Educational Research, 81(1), 4–28. Thacker, J. (1991). Critical and creative thinking in the classroom. In D. Gough & National Association of Elementary School Principals, A. A. (Eds.), Thinking about thinking. Research Roundup.