Accountability and Commmunity in the Online Classroom

Fleckenstein, Kristie S. “Faceless students, virtual places: Emergence and communal accountability in online classrooms.” Computers and Composition 22.2 (2005):149-176. Web. 17 May 2010.

Summary:

Fleckenstein argues that online instructors should see the online classroom as an emergent identity in order to “address issues of affiliation within virtual words sites” (150). By looking at the virtual classroom as an emergent identity or emergent place, instructors can tackle issues of individual responsibility, community, and accountability. From here, Fleckenstein examines the challenges of creating community and accountability in the virtual classroom. She then looks at the complex systems theory to create a theory of virtual place. She continues by looking at the three elements that are apart of an emergent place: language, physical reality, and interpretant. She ends by posing that these elements need to be changed around and reorganized to create an emergent place for students.

In order to study these theories, Fleckenstein examines a fully online composition class. She examines their interactions or lack there of throughout the entire course in full class discussion and small group discussion, taking into account attendance and comments made within each environment. She also conducts exit-interviews with the students. What she presents through this study is that the virtual environment is a place that fosters poor community and accountability. In the face-to-face classroom these thing connected with physical presence and students ability to attach a face to one another. Cyberspace takes away the opportunity to build a community based on body and geography. The online classroom becomes an imaginary and non-literal place where words and actions have no really consequences because thing are not “real.” So students are not concerned about absences or dropping the ball on an assignment because it is not as bad as a real absence or a real missed assignment.

The answer to these issues is the complex systems approach to virtual space. This involves looking at things as being co-dependent. Fleckenstein presents the idea, “By perceiving some differences, and, thus, not perceiving others, people create not only their environments…Humans are created, self organized, by their own actions.” The key element that resides within complex systems theory is emergent identity: “When an array of activities and relationships reaches a critical point of complexity, it transforms itself into a new identity; one that relies on the performance of the entire system rather than on any one element of it (156). Emergent identity operates holistically. In an online environment place constitutes and emergent identity, so we have emergent place.

Fleckenstein continues by examine the students and the course in the areas of language, place, and interpretant. She points out that language is a lifeline in an online course and it can be used to marginalize students and as a weapon. Because of the lack of accountability and community, students will say things that they wouldn’t say face-to-face. The online environment often limits, controls, and set parameters on language and communication. In an online environment we must use language to incorporate so that it can be used to create community based on interests rather than shared physical space. She also calls for instructors and students to consider the physical in conjunction with the virtual space because student has outside things that influence their online presence. The two cannot be separated because in virtual classroom there is not control over where and when students learn and under what conditions, so their physical place is important for online pedagogy. There is also the issue of navigating the virtual place. Do students know when and where to post, what to discuss, and how. She proposes solutions of reorganizing language behaviors by increasing opportunities for students to interact over multiple environments. She next presents the need for linkage by having frequent and repeated feedback. Finally, she suggests “marking,” so students can create virtual faces for themselves. She also mentions acknowledging constraints on the virtual environment, encouraging students to take responsibility for their agency, having regular frequent meetings, creating routine, a set of social habits.


Review:

I think that this article is great for any instructor who is concerned with getting students more involved and responsible for their own activity and success in the course. I think it is especially important for those who teach writing at a distance because in online composition courses much of the course is focused on discussion, interaction, collaboration to deepen the understanding of ideas and concepts. The theories applied are a bit beyond the traditional used in composition and distance education research. I had to do extra research to look up information about a few of the theories. Even with all of that, I believe that this article sets up the necessary conversation about how to increase accountability and community online. There is not telling how many students is loss because they are marginalized in the virtual classroom or just cannot establish a virtual presence. If nothing else this article presents those ideas and forces the questions to be considered. I also think it speaks to the amount of control students have over their action and participation in the course. They have to be led to understand that they play a larger role in the online classroom than in face-to-face classroom. The author offered some good suggestions on how to address this issue, but they are easier said than done. I would like to see how the practical application of a few of the suggestions pan out. That is a different article.