John Matsutani

Because the Active Learning strategy is a student-focused one, giving the students the methods and means to explore their learning and solve problems allows them to think more critically about how they're approaching any given topic. By collaborating and sharing ideas with their peers, they begin to understand new perspectives, potentially some that challenge their own ideologies. By solving problems that lead to many correct answers through many correct pathways, it allows them to understand that there's never just one way of accomplishing something.

Being clear with directions and objectives, as well as keeping the content tied to "why" students are doing something promotes overall engagement, and therefore more success. On top of that, incorporating "low-risk" active learning strategies is a good method to ease a class into the teaching style as a whole.

There will be times in which an instructor faces pushback from students and/or other members of faculty for practicing Active Learning techniques. From the students' perspectives, they would have likely encountered an educational system in which they were strictly told what to learn and memorize, and active learning is a vastly different approach to that, causing potential confusion and frustrations. But it is up to the teacher to reassure and guide the student that their learning is in their own hands, and the instructor is merely a facilitator of the knowledge.

I feel as though this concept of active learning pairs well with Vygotsky's "Zone of Proximal Development" as the ZPD actualizes the ideal level of support, yet encourages self-sufficiency and exploration within students. Because I do believe there needs to be some catalyst that gives the students a reason to be curious and want to learn, the teacher, but still give them the freedom to navigate their learning and education on their own. And the collaboration with others also helps them gain new perspectives and ideas to add to their educational discoveries.

There needs to be a balance of encouragement and engagement with students, but not so much that the quality of the discussion lowers and effectively becomes students regurgitating the same answers, or agreement with minimal discourse. There is also an importance of clear criteria in the rubrics of online discussions and assignments so that students know and understand what their requirements are.

Understanding a student's abilities and competence levels are important for understanding how effectively they will be able to communicate in an online setting. Once a teacher understands this, then they can offer appropriate help and guidance to the students that require it, as well as more defined assistance if a student needs more specific help.

Well defined online communication guidelines and expectations set a good precedent for how both students and teachers communicate amongst each other. There should also be clear and consistent consequences for when those guidelines are broken. Above all, the teacher should be the one to uphold and demonstrate these guidelines strictly, as they are the role-model for these interactions.

It is important to choose the method of communication wisely, and determine not only the pros and cons of each method, but the circumstances that can make each method preferable. This can not only create convenience when communicating with students, but it can help them feel heard and lead to better classroom engagement overall.