1

Laura Howard
OMDE 610 9040
3/20/2016
Assignment 3: Online Collaborative Learning Lesson
Description
Maryland Professional Educational Guidance Counselors for high school must complete
continuing education hours for continuance of professional licensure in the State of Maryland.
Online continuing education hours at an accredited institution are permitted for those who wish
to learn in an online asynchronous environment. This is one lesson for a six-week duration
(Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009) that is approved as part of a series of three lessons for
required continuing education hours. During this lesson, the instructor, who is a certified
Maryland Guidance Counselor Instructor with ten or more years in field experience, will present
relative, essential information, websites and resources in the course content for students to read
and use in research (Harasim, 2012c). Each group will then choose an appropriate online
collaborative tool (which the instructor will also have access to) to create a PowerPoint
presentation (Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009) as a group. The activity will be assigned
one of four generic potential situations in an educational environment to seek the most beneficial
solutions as possible, which is described as one of Murphys 1997 traits (as cited in Koohang,
Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009, p. 93) in constructivism and Kanukas (2008) Progressive ideas,
but could also be relevant to the OCL theory (Harasim, 2012c), that meet a Professional
Educational Guidance Counselors ethics and standards in the State of Maryland. The instructor
will facilitate and assist in the discussions to provide additional resources, new information,
insight and developments that Maryland Educational Guidance Counselors must be aware of and
incorporate into their practice (Harasim, 2012c). This lesson can be used for continuing

education professional development hours towards the third lesson series as required for
continuance of the professional licensure in the State of Maryland.
Objectives

Students will become aware of new Maryland standards and requirements, resources,
communities and professional organizations for educational guidance counselor
practice from the course content (Harasim, 2012c);

Students will learn how to find relevant and new educational guidance counselor
information from research, content resources, the instructor guidance and classmate
participants in an online discussion and collaborative manner for enhancing beneficial
and ethical practice (Harasim, 2012c);

Students will learn to work in an online group collaboration tool and environment
with other class participants and with instructor guidance and feedback to find new
ways and methods for situation resolution, application and other beneficial
information;

Students will learn how to evaluate each other and self in an online collaborative
environment and gain insight and information from being evaluated from the
instructor (based on quotes from students in Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009,
pp. 105-107 and information from Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009).

Outline

1. Class Content and Structure (Weeks 1-2) (based on instructor quote from Lewis & AbdulHamed, 2006, p. 94; Harasim, 2012c)
1. Resources, Communities/Professional Organizations and Suggested Information
for Reading and Viewing is Presented in the Course Content such as Documents,
Articles, Videos, etc.
2. Instructions for Group Activity Presented
3. Groups and Situations Assigned:

Situation 1 - A student is struggling to complete courses for graduation

due to a cognitive learning disability, what are some appropriate
procedures and standards (in compliance with ADA and Maryland school

policy standards) for this type of situation?

Situation 2 - A student experiences the loss of an immediate family
member and needs immediate counseling and intervention. What are some
appropriate strategies and methods that could be applicable to assist this

student?
Situation 3- What are some best approaches and resources to help
students choose their education and career goals?

Situation 4- What are some methods and ways you can establish and
control good and appropriate boundaries with students as an educational
guidance counselor?

2. Group Collaboration based on Harasims 2002 (as cited in Harasim, 2012c, p. 93)
and 2012 (Harasim, 2012c) Three Intellectual Phases of Collaborative Learning (as
cited in Harasim, 2012c, p. 93; Harasim, 2012c) (Week 3-4):
1. Groups Select an Online Collaborative Tool for Collaboration that can Create a
PowerPoint Presentation (Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009) on the
Potential Situation Resolution(s)
2. Compile Suggestions/Ideas/Experience (in compliance with educational
confidentiality)
3. Structure Ideas According to Relevance
4. Create Final Presentation that Illustrates Resolutions
3. Presentations Due to Discussion Forum by Posting Link (Due Beginning of Week 5)
1. Final Resolutions Presentation Web Link per Group Posted in Discussion Forum
(This was a technique that was used in a previous class I attended (OMDE 601
9041, I think) and the current OMDE 610 9040 class I am attending)
2. Class Reviews and Provides Feedback and Evaluation on Other Group
Presentations in Discussion Forum (based on quotes from students Koohang,
Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009, pp. 105-107; Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs,
2009)
4. Self-Evaluation on Group Activity and Information Learned Submitted in
Discussion Forum (Due End of Week 6) (based on quotes from students Koohang,
Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009, pp. 105-107; Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009)

5. Final Formal Feedback and Evaluation as a Group and Individually from

Instructor (To Be Posted After Week 6) (based on quotes from students Koohang,
Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009, pp. 105-107; Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009)
Lesson Technology
Using an asynchronous online collaborative such as Virtual-U that can support various
online discussion environments and other online capabilities, the students and instructor will
organize each discussion topic with its own forum as explained by Harasim in 1999 (as cited in
Harasim, 2012c, p. 99) and 2012 (Harasim, 2012c). Lesson content and information to be
accessed and reviewed first, will be provided by the instructor such as documents, articles and
videos, etc. All will be accessible in the online class environment. The instructor will assign
groups of four or five and the groups will each pick an online collaborative tool to create a
PowerPoint presentation (Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009) on their group work
together. The group collaboration presentation will then be presented as an accessible link for the
other students and instructor to view in each discussion forum topic place (This was a technique
that was used in a previous and the current OMDE 610 9040 class I am attending). The instructor
can provide links and resources to other information for research and further knowledge
development to be incorporated with the solution presentations (Harasim, 2012c). The instructor
and other students may make comments and feedback in each group topic forum (quotes from
students Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009, pp. 105-107; Koohang, Riley, Smith &
Schreurs, 2009; Harasim, 2012a; Harasim, 2012c).

Rubric

Group Work and

Excellent

Moderate

Fail

100-85 points

84-60 points

59-0 points

Group work

Group work

Group work

Group work

resources and

presented 2 or 3 very

presented 2 relevant

presented 1

research findings

relevant scholarly

scholarly resources

somewhat or no

into presentation

resources and

and research findings

relevant scholarly

research findings into

into presentation.

resources and

Individual Lesson
Assessment Rubric

20 points total
presentation.

research findings into

presentation.

PowerPoint
presentation display,
structure and
grammar

PowerPoint

PowerPoint

PowerPoint

Presentation was well

Presentation was

Presentation was not

displayed,

somewhat well

well-displayed,

understandable and

displayed,

understandable and

had very minor

understandable and

contained many

grammatical errors.

had moderate

grammatical errors.

20 points total
grammatical errors.
Group presentation

Group Presentation

Group Presentation

Group Presentation

resolutions

provided 2-3 very

provided 2 relevant

provided 1 or no

relevant and ethical

and ethical

relevant and ethical

resolutions in

resolutions in

resolutions in

20 points total

compliance with

compliance with

compliance with

Maryland Educator

Maryland Educator

Maryland Educator

Guidance Counselors

Guidance Counselors

Guidance Counselors

Standards.

Standards.

Standards.

Student individually

Student individually

Student did not

provided

participated and

participated and

participate and

comments/questions

engaged well in

engaged somewhat in

engage in providing

and/or evaluative

providing very

providing relevant

relevant

information to each

relevant

comments/questions

comments/questions

group after review of

comments/questions

and/or evaluative

and/or evaluative

and/or evaluative

information to each

information to each

information to each

group (at least 1 per

group or only replied

group (at least 1 per

group).

to 3 or less groups).

Provided a 2-3 page

Provided a 2-3 page

Provided a 1 page not

well-written, APA

moderately well-

well-written APA

standard paper on the

written APA standard

standard paper or did

learning achieved in

self-evaluation of

paper on the self-

not provide on the

assigned discussion

group work and

evaluation of group

self-evaluation of

learning achieved

work and learning

group work and

with only minor or

achieved with a

learning achieved.

no grammatical

moderate amount of

errors.

grammatical errors.

Student individually

each presentation.
20 points total

group).
Individually provide
a self-evaluation of
group work and

forum.
20 points total

TOTAL (100 points)

(This rubric is based on information, structure and content examples from University of
Maryland University College (2016a), University of Maryland University College (2016b),
Mertler (2001) and the Mid-South Community College Washington State University Rubric
examples (as cited in Peirce, 2006) and the information cited, referenced and described in this
Assignment 3 report.)
OCL Theory Influence in Lesson
The theory that is emphasized and illustrated in this lesson is the Online Collaborative
Learning (OCL) Theory. The OCL theory is incorporated into this lesson through many aspects
and components. As indicated in the description, the lesson will be using online collaborative
tools and an online collaborative environment, such as the idea of Virtual-U, described by
Harasim in 1999 (as cited in Harasim, 2012c, pp. 99) and 2012 (Harasim, 2012c). These are tools
that are encouraged to be used if presenting an OCL activity as indicated in Harasims writings
from 1999 (as cited in Harasim, 2012c, pp. 99) and 2012 (Harasim, 2012c, pp. 98-102). Using
these types of tools allows various discussions forums and other various types of interactive
communication to take place within the online collaborative environment and tool (Harasim,
2012c). This allows for the social learning aspect to help in developing knowledge to take place
such as in discussions, comments and questions from within the assigned groups, other
classmates and the instructor, which is essential to the OCL theory as indicated in Harasims
writings from 1999 (as cited in Harasim, 2012c, pp. 99) and 2012 (Harasim, 2012c).

The instructor will serve as a member of the Maryland Professional Guidance Counsel
Community to provide and administer essential resources, Professional Organizations and
Community information resources, new information, insight and developments that Maryland
Guidance Counselors that must be aware of and incorporate into their practice (Harasim, 2012c).
The instructor provides relevant content and resources (Harasim, 2012c), but the students are still
permitted to use any legimate and scholarly resources they can find on their own based on the
example from Elgort, Smith and Toland in 2008 (as cited in Lee & McLoughlin, 2010, p.76). The
students should gain new insight, ideas and new awareness of essential and required information
for Guidance Counselor practice between working in the groups, from other classmate discussion
and resources provided in the course and outside the course and the instructors, additional
assistance and evaluation (quotes from students in Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009, pp.
105-107; Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009), which are also concepts of the OCL theory
(Harasim, 2012a; 2012c).
This particular lesson encompasses work-related specific topics that should allow the
students to use their own knowledge and experience to contribute to others learning and vice
versa as described by Murphy in 1997 (as cited in Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009, p.
93), Siemens (2007) video, Kanuka (2008), Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs (2009), quotes
from students from Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs (2009, pp. 104-105) and Harasim (2012a;
2012b; 2012c). The group work will consist of the students using the Three Intellectual Phases
of Online Collaborative Learning explained in Harasims writings from in 2002 (as cited in
Harasim, 2012c, p. 93) and 2012 (Harasim, 2012c). Since the students will be working in groups,
along with the instructor, this will create the educational atmosphere for learning from
interactions in a social environment which is essentially, a component in the OCL theory

10

(Harasim, 2012a; Harasim, 2012c). During the group work activity to create the presentations,
the students will go through the steps of idea compilation, structuring and bringing their final
ideas and information together in a mutual agreement for what will be used in the presentation,
as explained in Harasims writings from in 2002 (as cited in Harasim, 2012c, p. 93) and 2012
(Harasim, 2012a; Harasim, 2012c). During the final phase of the presentation the student will
have developed and thought of new approaches and methods to practice as explained in
Harasims writings from in 2002 (as cited in Harasim, 2012c, p. 93) and 2012 (Harasim, 2012a;
Harasim, 2012c), as coinciding with the required Maryland standards and guidelines.
Students will be evaluated by the instructor and other classmates group work after each
presentation is displayed in the discussion forums (quotes from students in Koohang, Riley,
Smith & Schreurs, 2009, pp. 105-107; Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009; Harasim,
2012c). This is to allow continued learning and knowledge growth by the students and teacher
contributing more ideas, perspective and assistance on each presentation solution as described in
one of Murphys 1997 traits (as cited in Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs, 2009, p. 93) in
constructivism and Kanukas (2008) Progressive ideas, but could still also be relevant to the OCL
theory (Harasim, 2012c). Group work should be equally contributed to per member and will be
evaluated equally as a group (which was a collaborative project requirement I experienced in a
previous Sociology class). If someone is not contributing from the group, then one of the group
members is expected to notify the instructor, which is another technique based on the Lewis &
Abdul-Hamid (2006, p. 89) writing (and another requirement I experienced in my previous
Sociology class). Students will also be asked to complete a self-evaluation of two to three page
paper due during the final week, to help students interpret what they have learned for themselves,
students and the instructor, as technique used in the Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs (2009)

11

examples. The self-evaluation is graded, but comments and additional insight from other
classmates are not required, which is also based another idea from the Koohang, Riley, Smith &
Schreurs (2009) writing about receiving additional student course evaluative information after
the class has ended Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs (2009). Individual assessment from the
instructor be evaluated based on participation per student from the instructor, as based on an
example in Koohang, Riley, Smith & Schreurs (2009) writing. This completes one of the lessons
as part of the series to continue licensure as a Maryland Professional Educational Guidance
Counselor.

12

References
Elgort, I., Smith, A.G., & Toland, J. (2008). Is wiki an effective platform for group course work?
Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(2), 195-210.
Harasim, L. (1999). A framework for online learning: The Virtual-U. Computer 32(9), 44-49.
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/2.789750
Harasim, L. (2002). What makes the online learning communities successful? The role of
collaborative learning in social and intellectual development. In C. Vrasidas & G. V.
Glass (Eds.), Distance education and distributed learning (pp. 181-200). Charlotte, NC:
Information Age Publishers.
Harasim, L. (2012a). Introduction to learning theory and technology. Learning theory and online
technologies. (pp. 1-14). New York & United Kingdom: Routledge, Taylor & Francis
Group.
Harasim, L. (2012b). Constructivist theory. Learning theory and online technologies. (pp. 5978). New York & United Kingdom: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Harasim, L. (2012c). OCL theory. Learning theory and online technologies. (pp. 79-108). New
York & United Kingdom: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e-learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-inpractice. In T. Anderson (Ed.), The theory and practice of online learning (pp. 91-118).
Edmonton, AB T5J 3S8: AU Press. Retrieved from
http://www.aupress.ca/books/120146/ebook/99Z_Anderson_2008Theory_and_Practice_of_Online_Learning.pdf
Koohang, A., Riley, L., Smith, T., & Schreurs, J. (2009). E-learning and constructivism: From
theory to application. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects,
5(1), 91-109. Retrieved from https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/8496-022082-012138-GO2-9040/Module%2003/assets/elearning_and_constructivism_Koohang_Riley_Smith.pdf?

13

_&d2lSessionVal=HjuVEEStvEiZ8y34eoz9nPsTX&ou=7634&_&d2lSessionVal=2cIJ4Q
HbvQAYWm7yUuRZ1BWnA&ou=111461
Lewis, C. C., & Abdul-Hamid, H. (2006). Implementing effective online teaching practices:
Voices of exemplary faculty. Innovative Higher Education, 31(2), 83-98. doi:
10.1007/810755-006-9010-z. Retrieved from
https://learn.umuc.edu/content/enforced/8496-022082-01-2138-GO2-9040/Module
%2003/assets/Implementing_Effective_Online_Teaching_Practices.pdf?
_&d2lSessionVal=2cIJ4QHbvQAYWm7yUuRZ1BWnA&ou=111461
Lee, M. J. W., Eustace, K., Hay, L., & Fellows, G. (2005). Learning to collaborate
collaboratively: An online community building and knowledge construction approach to
teaching computer-supported collaborative work at an Australian university. In M.R.
Simonson & M. Crawford (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2005 AECT International
Convention (pp. 286-306). North Miami Beach, FL: Nova Southeastern University.
Lee, M. J. W., & McLoughlin, C. (2010). Beyond distance and time constraints: Applying social
networking tools and Web 2.0 approaches in distance education. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.),
Emerging technologies in distance education (pp. 61-87). Retrieved from
http://www.aupress.ca/books/120177/ebook/04_Veletsianos_2010Emerging_Technologies_in_Distance_Education.pdf
Mertler, C. A. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Practical Assessment,
Research, and Evaluation, 7(25). Available from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?
v=7&n=25
Mid-South Community College. (n.d.). Critical Thinking Rubric [Rubric measurement
instrument]. Retrieved from http://assessment.midsouthcc.edu/pdf/criticalthinking.pdf
Murphy, E. (1997). Constructivism: From philosophy to practice. Retrieved October 19, 2008
from http://www.cdli.ca/~elmurphy/emurphy/cle.html
Peacock, T., Fellows, G., & Eustace, K. (2007). The quality and trust of wiki content in a
learning community. In R. Atkinson & C. McBeath (Eds.), ICT: Providing Choices for

14

Learners and Learning. Proceedings of the 24th ASCILITE Conferences (pp. 822-832).
Singapore: Nanyang Technology University.
Peirce, W. (2006, January). Designing rubrics for assessing higher order thinking [Text version].
Workshop presented at the AFACCT Howard Community College, Columbia, MD.
Retrieved from
http://academic.pgcc.edu/~wpeirce/MCCCTR/Designingrubricsassessingthinking.html
University of Maryland University College. (2016a). Assignment 2 - Behaviorist or cognitivist
learning activity [Rubric]. Retrieved from
https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/124340/viewContent/5442323/View
University of Maryland University College. (2016b). Assignment 3 Constructivist or OCL
activity [Rubric]. Retrieved from
https://learn.umuc.edu/d2l/le/content/124340/viewContent/5442332/View