I've found the least effective discussions are those where all the students answer specific questions on the same topic.  They are then to comment on at least three of their peer's initial post on the same topic.   In technical writing, this often turns into micro-essays that say the same thing.  It is really challenging for the students to make substantive comments to each other without getting into the "I agree" answers.  They know they can't do this but are challenged to think up why they spend more time thinking up clever questions than discussing the topic.  I think it works… >>>

This module made me think more about multi-generational populations in my courses and how this can affect communications in the class.  I find it is challenging to determine the generation of a student, so I have to watch for the various traits as they come out and be prepared to work with them to improve skills or take advantage of the skills they have.

I gained additional insight into facets of communication standards.  We have practices built into our school's instructional practices that support the material in this course.  It is good to have some validation.  I'm curious what other's found to be their weakest area.  One area that usually challenges me is how much to interject into discussions the students have each week.  I have to be careful that I do not step in and take over the conversation and discourage the students from responding to each other.

I've learned that most of my students prefer to use asynchronous methods of communications.  They are adult learners with limited time and prefer to communicate when it is best for their schedule.  This sometimes means I must make schedule adjustments to accommodate the students.  Is this common to your experience?

Comment on Brian Simper's post: Brian - That sounds like a good practice.  It moves them beyond mere memorization.  I find that I also gain by asking them how they might, or have, apply the lab experience to future practices in their prospective field of work.