Following the recent injection of funds into Western Australian (WA) schools there has been an explosion in the number of computers available for ‘cross curriculum’ student learning. That is, in 'general' subjects across all eight Learning Areas. Until relatively recently, in the majority of secondary schools, only students studying "Computing" subjects had day-to-day access to computers. We now have the situation where there is an adequate number of computers in most schools. The challenge is to put them to good use.

Along with the injection of computer hardware has come the establishment of school-wide networking infrastructure commonly based on high-speed optical fibre ‘spines’ and rapid switching. Most secondary schools (and many primary schools) can now offer school-wide access to highly sophisticated networking features.

A further factor driving schools towards NetLessons is the widespread availability of Intranet and Internet access. School staff are currently engaged in the creation and publishing of school Web pages and Intranet content. The vast majority of schools already have all of the skills and structures needed to establish NetLessons and offer them to their students.

The final factor driving schools in WA towards NetLessons is the trend towards "Middle Schooling" which among other things tends to focus on a more flexible approach towards curriculum delivery and learning environments, both of which are ideally catered for through NetLessons. Associated with the desire to be more flexible in teaching approach is a growing trend towards "distributed" facilities where computers are often spread throughout the Middle School in small groups of up to ten, or so systems rather than in class sets, or computer laboratories. There is less opportunity for a teacher to take an entire class for a ‘computer’ lesson than in ‘conventional’ schools. If the teacher wants their students to be engaged in computer-based activities the class must be split up into smaller groups and sent to various locations throughout the school. This can present management problems for the teacher. Related to this issue is the situation where a small number of computers is installed in the 'normal' classroom. Teachers are in a quandary as to how to make best use the few computers "at the back of the room" while the rest of the class is engaged in a 'conventional' lesson.

As can be seen from the discussion above, schools have the computers needed to conduct NetLessons and they have the infrastructure required. Teachers have the skills needed to develop NetLessons and the desire to adopt the new pedagogies associated with Middle Schooling. When will schools begin to embrace the concept?

It has long been the view of the author that effective change in education (and life in general) is based on satisfying real needs. Too often change is initiated as a result of perceived need and change for the sake of change. Unless there is a demand for change on the part of those who must oversee the change (ie the classroom teacher) it’s success will be constrained. The author believes we are beginning to see the emergence of a demand for the NetLesson concept.

Recently the following call for assistance was posted on "echalk", an email ‘list’ for teachers conducted by the Educational Computing Association of Western Australia (ECAWA):

Here we have a school with a very generous inventory of computers searching for the best ways to make use of their investment in 'distributed' mode. This particular case results from a setup where five, or six computers are available in each room. Teachers are calling for ideas on incorporating the computers into the day-to-day learning environment. The other problem is that the teacher must ‘split’ their class into small groups and send them to other classsrooms if they are to all have access to computers at the same time. Since the teacher can be with only one group at a time there is a problem of supervision and keeping students on task. Equally significant is the lack of immediate intervention and support. Unless the teacher happens to be nearby when a student encounters a problem the student may have to either wait a significant period of time, or disrupt their learning activities by seeking out the teacher.

This school and many others like it are in an ideal situation to take advantage of the NetLesson approach.

Late in 1999 it was decided to develop a set of Internet tutorials which would form the core of a Web based Professional Development (WebPD) course for teachers on Introductory Electronics. One of the key features of the course was the provision for timely feedback by way of email to a supervisor, or "mentor". The course consists of a series of brief explanatory notes and diagrams followed by a short quiz. The subject completes a short-answer quiz and automatically sends the answers to their mentor via email. The mentor is able to assess the level of understanding by the answers and respond immediately.

The course can be viewed at: http://www.southwest.com.au/~jfuller/electronics/menu.htm

Early in the development stage of the WebPD course it was judged that while on-screen multiple choice tests do provide immediate feedback they do not have the required reliability and may actually add to the feeling of isolation on the part of the student. Unlike many existing "Web Lessons" the approach adopted in the WebPD concept establishes a direct link between the subject and a mentor.

Following positive feedback about the Electronics course it was decided to extend the concept and create a set of web-based tutorials for students on the topics of Introductory Chemistry and Liquids. The same structure as the Electronics course was used, consisting of a small set of discrete concepts followed by a brief quiz, the answers to which are immediately emailed to a mentor. In an attempt to extract as much feedback as possible the blank space left after each quiz question was increased to cater for at least three lines of text. Past experience has shown that where students are encouraged to write more in their answers there is a better chance of accurately assessing the level of understanding.

The Chemistry and Liquids NetLessons can be viewed at: http://www.southwest.com.au/~jfuller/chemistry/menu.htm and http://www.southwest.com.au/~jfuller/liquids/menu.htm

To date only two students have attempted the Chemistry NetLessons. No significant quantitative data is available, but the pattern emerging from just these two students is enlightening and of relevance to the future development of the concept.

Each student completed the NetLessons via the Internet. Neither subject is known to the author, nor has there been any direct contact between the author and the subject other than the usual feedback following a quiz and an early reminder to one subject not to divulge confidential information via email. The feedback from the quiz following the first NetLesson (called: "Atomic Structure") for both students is presented below in full. The first part of each item is the mentor ‘prompt’ to remind the marker of the correct answer. The student response follows the prompt in italics and begins after the equal ("=") sign.

Neither student completed the section at the bottom of the quiz labeled "Feedback".

Both students impressed in the way they provided extended answers to the questions. Many of the questions could have been answered with just a few words. It is possible that the strategy of providing several lines for the subjects to write each answer may have prompted them to write more.

Both students appear to have well developed literacy skills, although Subject#1 made no attempt to correct obvious typing and spelling errors such as "THe" and "neuttrons". Subject#2 only made one error by writing "nuleus" instead of "nucleus". It is possible that Subject#2 may have spent more time proof-reading their answers than did Subject#1.

In both cases, the answer to question number 4 is interesting. The question itself does not provide sufficient information for the subject to work out an answer. Both subjects realised this and explained why it could not be answered. If this had been a simple multiple-choice test we would not have the insight into the subjects’ level of understanding that this question provides.

Both subjects have a grasp of the concepts covered in the NetLessons. It is the author's view that they are not students experiencing difficulty in the subject who used this material for re-enforcement or extension. The author believes they both worked through the material out of some form of academic interest, possibly as a result of being informed about the scheme in their normal Chemistry, or Computing class. It is the author’s belief that both of the subjects are Upper school students. The content of the Chemistry NetLessons is targeted at around year 10.

Both students attend the same school, but there is no way of telling if the know each other. The author suspects that they are in the same class and that one of their teachers is a member of ECAWA, or subscribes to "echalk" where information about the course was posted..

Of greater significance is the next series of events. Subject#2 did not complete any more NetLessons. It is considered inappropriate to contact students directly so there is no information available as to why they stopped. Subject#1 went on to complete three more NetLessons. The succeeding three quiz results for Subject#1 are reproduced below:

The quality of these answers is far below the subject’s first attempt in the "Atomic Structure" quiz. Many of the answers provide minimal information and there are many grammatical and spelling mistakes. Some of the answers are incorrect. No URLs are provided for links to other Chemistry sites (question 8). Examination of the times the emails were sent reveals that the subject was working on a Saturday morning, presumably from home and completed all three quizes from 11.17 am to 11.51 am. Subject#1 did not attempt the final two NetLessons. What does all this tell us? Quite a lot actually.

To ensure success the subject must have a positive approach to completing NetLessons. If they rush to complete a lesson they make mistakes and probably don’t learn a great deal. The work must be completed under a structured programme of work in just the same way all learning is paced and structured. It could be argued that the reason Subject#1 stopped doing the NetLessons after submitting the answers to these quizes was that they received less than positive feedback about their attempts. There was no reason to continue so they simply stopped! It is the view of the author that the success of the NetLesson approach is dependent upon a close teacher/student relationship. NetLessons can’t replace the teacher, merely allow a change in the way learning takes place.

It is probably unrealistic to visualise a situation where students engage in this process without ever forming a relationship with the person co-ordinating the NetLesson process. This does not mean that the classroom teacher must necessarily be the person writing the NetLessons and receiving feedback, but they must be actively involved in the process while the student is actually engaged in the NetLesson. The student cannot be left to their own devices and expected to complete the work in a completely unstructured environment. In other words … to be successful, NetLessons must be incorporated into the normal structure of learning, not used to replace it.

The next section presents some suggestions for incorporating NetLessons into the learning programme.

Students learn at different rates. Students learn in different ways. Teachers teach in different ways. The key to a successful learning environment is "manageable flexibility". Easily said, but sometimes difficult to achieve.

Most teachers are unable to operate without structure. The aim of most educators is to provide sufficient flexibility to cater for different learning styles without creating such an uncontrollable environment that the teacher can’t manage. NetLessons offer a partial solution by allowing the teacher to divide their class into different groupings matched to different learning styles. Those students who are able to successfully engage in NetLessons may be sent off to a remote part of the school (or to computers within the room) while the teacher concentrates on those students who require more direct engagement.

It is assumed that an email structure exists in the school that allows those students completing NetLessons to send their feedback directly to their classroom teacher. In this way the teacher is managing a small group of students in their classroom and a dispersed group working on NetLessons.

Requirements for Developing and Using NetLessons

1. An identified need to change.
2. Appropriate Information Technology (IT) infrastructure.
3. Teaching staff with Web page authoring expertise.
4. Teaching staff with a willingness to be innovative.
5. Time to develop NetLessons (or funds to pay for their development).
6. Appropriate PD for teaching staff.
7. A supportive school administration.
8. Students with an interest in learning.

1. As outlined in the introductory paragraphs, unless change is driven by a real need it is unlikely to be successful. It is imperative prior to the introduction of new schemes such as NetLessons that all stakeholders (teachers and students) are involved and have adequate opportunity to become properly informed. Stakeholders must be given the opportunity to discuss how the proposed changes will impact on their own teaching and learning.

2. The availability of sufficient IT resources is no longer an issue. The WA Government’s current funding goal of 1 to 5 computers per student in secondary schools and 1 to 20 in primary schools provides more than enough computers for the task. Combined with the growing number of school-wide networks and an internal email system based on software such as NT4 and Microsoft Exchange Server the vast majority of schools have all of the required infrastructure to develop and conduct NetLessons.

3. The prevalence of school Internet Home Sites and Web pages testifies to the Web page creation skills of teachers. The availability of software such as Microsoft FrontPage98 simplifies the process considerably. There may be a need to provide teachers with an elementary knowledge of JavaScript to allow them to use HTML "forms" and user input, but for someone who is already familiar with basic Web page creation it would not be a steep learning curve. Several hours of PD would develop all of the required skills.

4. Any new project requires the total commitment of those involved. If the teachers do not genuinely see the need for change and are not committed to its success, it can’t succeed.

5. The school administration has two choices – pay for their own motivated teachers to have time away from normal teaching duties to develop the NetLesson materials, or pay a third party to develop them. There may be some debate about the pros and cons of each approach, but keep in mind that "ownership" is a powerful motivator. The material initially develop ‘in-house’ may not be the best possible, but it probably stands a better chance of being implemented than ‘outside’ material. It is probable that when teachers see the benefits of the scheme they will enthusiastically embrace material developed commercially.

6. Appropriate PD is the cornerstone of any new teaching strategy. Staff will need training in Web page creation, small group management and associated areas such as the effective management of email accounts. Initially the PD costs will be high. It seems reasonable to assume the demand for PD will drop off rapidly once the basics are covered.

7. A supportive school administration is essential. Just as change can’t be ‘driven’ without personal commitment it can’t proceed if obstructed from above. The NetLesson school will be a less controlled environment. Classes will be split into a number of small groups widely dispersed around the school. The classroom teacher will be directly supervising only one of these groups at a time. Teachers and students will be moving around the school throughout the school day. To the outsider the school may appear somewhat unruly, less disciplined in its adherence to the conventional constraints of set rooms and time tables. The school administration must be prepared to accept this increased level of student movement. In fact, it must be prepared to become actively involved in the process by ‘adopting’ small, unsupervised groups on an ad hoc basis throughout the school day.

8. "You can lead a horse to water …" The best of intentions are doomed to failure without the active engagement of students. Unless the NetLesson scheme is seen as a positive advance it is unlikely students will embrace it. In view of the reduced supervision of many students lack of acceptance on their part could spell disaster. It is to be hoped that the quality of the material and its appropriateness to the students, combined with the motivational power of computers for many students will alleviate many potential problems due to reduced supervision. Presumably those students who are unable, or unwilling to adopt the behavior required of this form of learning will be in the group that remains with the classroom teacher and follows a conventional learning programme.

Conclusions

The NetLesson concept is a partial solution to many of the issues facing schools. It is not a magic cure. As with all learning environments this approach demands considerable investment of time and personal effort. The key to its success, or failure will be the level of funding provided to develop quality NetLesson material. In the past, many schools have relied on the 'good will' of teachers. Hopefully the NetLesson concept will be treated differently.

Return to Home Page