Running Head: Project H 1

Project H

Cooperative Learning at Baker College Online

Breana Yaklin

EDUC512—Action Research

August 9, 2012

Teresa San-Martin

Southwestern College Professional Studies

Project H 2

Abstract

This paper outlines my ongoing action research plan to implement cooperative learning

strategies into an online course at Baker College Online. The purpose of this action research

plan is to achieve the College’s goals of helping students to achieve more and improve their skill

set for employment. This paper includes the research focus and reasoning, literature review,

purpose and research questions, data collection strategies, intervention plan, plan for increasing

validity, and the project results of implementation.

Project H 3

Research Focus

I have worked in Instructional Design at Baker College for over two years now, and since

the beginning I have heard that one of Baker’s primary goals is to incorporate 21st Century skills

into the classroom for students. These skills include collaboration, teamwork, and new

technologies. My Instructional Design team tries to keep these goals in mind when designing

curriculum, but they can often be pushed aside when it comes to the actual design process. The

main problem is that there is a lack of problem-based learning, teamwork, collaboration, and

technology use in the classrooms. When it comes to attaining jobs and internships for our

students, the issues that Career Services reports back most frequently are that our students are

lacking in these skills and important soft skills. If we want our students to be prepared for their

eventual careers then we need to make sure they are proficient in these skills. Incorporating

cooperative learning strategies into the curriculum could be the answer to this problem.

Although both technology use and collaboration are important topics for us to address, I

have decided to focus more on incorporating cooperative learning strategies into our curriculum.

There are several reasons for this. The first is that we can still work to incorporate some

technology use into the classroom through cooperative learning, especially in the online

environment. Students will use different technologies to complete their cooperative learning

activities, such as social networking sites, wikis, or online group discussions. The second reason

is that I see the lack of teamwork, collaboration, and problem-based learning skills as a bigger

problem than the lack of technology skills, and cooperative learning strategies will be able to

address this in a strong way. I personally think that it is very important that students develop

these collaboration skills because I can reflect back on my own experiences as a student in group

work settings and on my current experiences working in my Instructional Design team. I know

Project H 4

that it is essential for our students to develop strong cooperation and collaboration skills in order

to be successful, and a poorly developed group work setting will not help students to develop

these skills. Our students are already unique in that many of them are adult non-traditional

college students, and the average age of our online student is in the 30-35 age range. We need to

help them develop these skills so they can secure a good career after graduation.

The third reason is that there are some faculty and instructors who are already

implementing group work and making some efforts towards incorporating cooperative learning

into their classroom; however, it appears that some have an incomplete understanding of

cooperative learning and often fall into the problems traditionally associated with group work

(students have difficulties communicating and cooperating and do not distribute the work load

evenly). The fourth reason is that Baker College is currently in the midst of implementing a

more learner-centered focus in the classroom, and the idea is for instruction to be based more on

discovery learning and a constructivist approach. This learner-centered approach includes more

problem-based learning, and the principles of cooperative learning align very closely to the goals

of this learner-centered approach. For all of these reasons, I believe cooperative learning to be

the bigger and more important focus, and is aligns more closely to our values of collaboration,

problem-based learning, and learner-centered instruction.

The actions my team needs to take to address the problem are to work harder to

incorporate cooperative learning strategies into the classroom and incorporating these strategies

in such a way that the faculty feel comfortable with them. This will be difficult because we do

not engage with the faculty on a regular basis, but rather we work with them more sporadically

on a consultant-like basis. We do not always communicate with them on a day-to-day basis, and

once a project is complete the collaboration with our department does not usually continue.

Project H 5

Also, each course, program, and project we work on is a new and different situation; there are

different needs for different faculty and departments. Therefore, it would be difficult to address

the main problem in a consistent manner and reflect on the problem on a regular basis. The

solution to these difficulties will be for my Instructional Design team to share our plans for

developing strategies with each other, and reflect on the problem and solution together. While

we may not work with the faculty on a consistent basis, we do work with each other and we

should share our plans for incorporating cooperative learning strategies and reflect on our

successes and failures together. We need to collaborate on different levels to reflect on which

strategies the faculty found most useful with the students, and the strategies that my team finds

most useful when it comes to working with faculty. We need to be organized in our curriculum

design, and create a structure to these cooperative learning strategies that faculty will find easy to

use.

In sum, the focus of my area of research is the implementation of cooperative learning

strategies into the online curriculum because it closely aligns to our goal of incorporating 21st

Century skills and learner-centered instruction into the classroom and can address both the lack

of collaboration and technology in our courses. A potential concern is how receptive our older

non-traditional students are to these newer methods and technology. The goal is to successfully

communicate cooperative learning strategies to the faculty in such a way that they become more

successful in implementing cooperative learning strategies in their courses with students. The

plan of action is to collaborate with my Instructional Design team to develop a structured

approach to designing cooperative learning strategies that faculty can easily implement into the

course, and to also provide sufficient explanation and research on these strategies for the faculty.

To do so, my team will need to discuss and engage in collaborative and external reflection as

Project H 6

frequently as possible in order to develop the best methods of communicating with faculty. I am

confident that this plan of action will lead to success.

Literature Review

Search Criteria

To conduct research on cooperative learning and technology in the online classroom with

adult non-traditional students, I began by using Southwestern College’s Deets Library Databases.

I found the Education Research Complete database to be most useful, and found nearly all of my

resources there. I used keyword descriptors such as ‘cooperative learning,’ ‘online,’

‘technology,’ and ‘adult student’. I searched only for full-text and peer –reviewed articles. Not

surprisingly, my initial searches yielded many results, but a quick glance at the publication year

for recent articles and at the title helped me to focus that down. I selected the first round of

articles based on this criteria and reviewed their abstracts before moving forward, which helped

to narrow my selection even further to about 17 articles.

As I read through these articles, I actually began to narrow my focus even more; I found

that some of the articles were not as credible as I was looking for, or did not relate closely in

some way to my focus area. There are many different articles about cooperative learning and

online education, but I was looking for articles that could help me to narrow my focus on the use

of technology to support cooperative learning in an online environment for adult non-traditional

students. The articles I focused on pertained to cooperative learning online, cooperative learning

for non-traditional college students, technology and cooperative learning, and technology and

non-traditional college students. As I was reading through my first round of articles I found that

I actually had to cut some and look for different articles that related more closely to my focus

area. I conducted a second round search to find more articles that related more closely to my

Project H 7

focus areas and filled the remaining gaps in my research. For example, my initial selection did

not include any articles on the basics of cooperative learning for college students or the

relationship between cooperative learning and social media sites, so my second round search

focused on these areas. I also found it beneficial to scan the citations of the articles I found most

useful to help me further my research. My final list of resources consisted of 13 articles that

closely related to my focus area and one textbook from a previous course that actually sparked

my initial interest in this topic. I organized these resources by themes to create an outline for my

literature review, and I have attached this outline as Appendix A. Each of my resources helps to

support my topic in a different way, but none of my resources specifically addresses my

particular area of focus: using technology to support cooperative learning in the online

environment for adult non-traditional college students.

Literature Review

Cooperative Learning at Baker College

As mentioned above, part of our goal at Baker College is to focus on learner-centered

instruction and 21st Century skills for our students. We want to make sure they are prepared for

their future careers, and cooperation, collaboration, and professionalism are important skills that

they will need for any career. The learner-centered approach helps us to focus more on the

students’ needs and cater to different learning styles. This approach guides us towards more

hands-on education with real-world scenarios in which students can begin to construct their

knowledge. Cooperative learning can help us to reach those goals. By closely interacting in a

cooperative environment with their peers, students can become more motivated in terms of

achievement and effort (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 2007). Johnson et al. (2007) argued that the

cooperative learning environment involves positive interdependence, which will motivate

Project H 8

students to cooperate in the classroom and, eventually, in their professional lives and local

community. Gradel and Edson (2011) further supported this by pointing out the connection

between cooperative learning and 21st Century skills such as collaboration and critical thinking.

It seems then that cooperative learning is a viable option to consider in order to meet our goals of

addressing 21st Century skills and learner-centered instruction.

In considering this, it is important to note that several sources have found that

cooperative learning does not always have a large impact on student test scores in regards to

content; however, even in these cases, cooperative learning has been found to have a positive

impact on the affective domain and in motivating students towards achievement (Brewer &

Klein, 2006; Brewer, Klein, & Mann, 2003; Vrioni, 2011). While we are always looking to help

our students improve academically, our Career Services department has revealed that employers

sometimes find our students weak in the affective domain and this is certainly something that we

would be looking to address with cooperative learning. Vrioni (2011) found that working in

groups helped to improve cooperation and communication skills in students. Brewer, Klein, and

Mann (2003) supported this with their discovery that even adult re-entry students responded

positively to cooperative learning and found it beneficial to their learning and development. This

is an important factor to note when considering that many of Baker’s students are adult non-

traditional students and sometimes re-entry students.

Cooperative learning is not a new concept, and many educators have already begun

implementing cooperative learning methods and strategies with positive results. However, when

implementing cooperative learning it is important to be aware of the planning that goes into

cooperative learning and that cooperative learning is more than simple group work. Groups

should consist of about three-four students and should be heterogeneous in terms of student

Project H 9

achievement level and sex (Kagan & Kagan, 2009). Kagan and Kagan recommended highly

structured methods to developing student groups, establishing a sense of community with the

class and a sense of team within a group, and with implementing their cooperative learning

strategies in the classroom. Structure, planning, and organization are important features when

incorporating cooperative learning strategies (Kagan & Kagan). This structure helps to establish

the four founding principles that make cooperative learning successful and help to distinguish it

from traditional group work: positive interdependence, individual accountability, equality, and

simultaneous interaction (Kagan & Kagan). Shimazoe and Aldrich (2010) also found structure

and planning to be important features when incorporating cooperative learning, and they made

the point that this planning, design, and development are the keys that help cooperative learning

to be successful when group work is unsuccessful and unpopular with students. This pre-

planning and pre-development work can pay off in the end for instructors; while it means more

work to prepare the curriculum beforehand, it can result in a lighter grading load for the

instructor and less pressure to perform in front of the class when students are working together

on a unified project (Shimazoe & Aldrich).

Cooperative Learning Online

Research supports the use of cooperative learning at the college level and with adult non-

traditional students (Brewer & Klein, 2006; Brewer, Klein, & Mann, 2003; Vrioni, 2011).

Generally, instructors have found it beneficial in helping students to develop important

collaboration and teamwork skills. However, the question remains whether cooperative learning

can function successfully online with innovative technology for Baker College. At a very

general level, Kupczynski, Mundy, and Maxwell (2012) found that yes, cooperative learning

could function online, and that younger, less experienced faculty adapted very well to using it in

Project H 10

their online courses. In addition to being user-friendly to the faculty, it is important that

cooperative learning be beneficial to the students online, and Brewer and Klein (2006) argued

that the increased interaction between peers that accommodates cooperative learning is even

more important in the online environment because students are lacking the traditional forms of

interaction that accompany a face-to-face course.

Design

The highly structured design method that is necessary for on-ground cooperative learning

remains for online cooperative learning. Cooperative learning can be successful in the online

environment and can lead to more engaging learning activities and assessments, so long as the

instructor plans ahead, designs carefully, and thinks about unique ways to incorporate the

curriculum and technology into the online environment (Gradel & Edson, 2011). Gradel and

Edson advised curriculum designers and instructors to use it at appropriate intervals in the

course, and to think carefully about support tools to help make cooperative learning more

effective and successful. In their article, they included two versions (individual/traditional and

group/cooperative learning) of two different online assignments to help illustrate their points

about planning and using support tools in assignments; these assignments are general enough

that they could easily be adapted for any new instructors to try in their courses (Gradel & Edson).

To aid this planning and development process, Kirschner, Strijbos, Kreijns, and Beers (2004)

have also developed a six-stage model for designing an online course that should help the

designer to focus on creating a successful collaborative environment. The focus of this six-stage

model is on the learner: what the learner needs online, how the learner will use different features,

how the learner functions online, etc. (Kirschner, et al.). This six-stage model relates very

closely to Baker’s learner-centered approach and can serve as a guide for my Instructional

Project H 11

Design team to follow as we work to incorporate cooperative learning into our online courses

(Kirschner, et al.).

Blackboard

Given that Baker College Online uses Blackboard as the Learning Management System,

it would be logical to first check Blackboard for any resources that might be useful in supporting

cooperative learning online. The Discussion Board is one of the first tools that we should work

to incorporate into cooperative learning, and it will be important to divide students into small

groups on the Discussion Board and establish roles for students in these groups (Lynch, 2010).

Students can become overwhelmed by the number of threads and responses in a discussion if all

students in a class are participating together; participating in a discussion with a small group of

students on a separate Discussion Board can help them to stay focused on their conversation and

provide all students the opportunity to share without repeating each other (Lynch). Lynch

recommends trying the Fishbowl Technique with small groups set up on the Discussion Board.

In the Fishbowl Technique, students will be encouraged to observe and reflect on their peers’

group discussions without actually participating in the discussion. This Fishbowl Technique is a

way to engage all students in a small group discussion while still keeping the class interacting

together and open to other discussions (Lynch).

Wikis are a feature that appears in the newer versions of Blackboard, and these are

similar to the Discussion Board in that students would be working together in small groups to use

this tool (Campbell & Ellingson, 2010). However, with wikis, students would be doing more

than just discussing, they would be contributing to a group composition (Campbell & Ellingson).

Students could use the wiki to work together in small groups to write a research paper or

Project H 12

glossary for vocabulary words, with each student contributing a portion and editing different

sections (Campbell & Ellingson). The wiki tracks all student contributions and edits.

Both the Discussion Board and the wiki feature could help to ensure that cooperative

learning is successful online. They could support the students in their group work and

discussion, and support some of the necessary principles of cooperative learning. The nature of

this group work supports positive interdependence, equality, and simultaneous interaction

because students need to respond to each other and equally contribute in order for the Discussion

Board and wiki to function effectively (Kagan & Kagan, 2009). Both of these features can also

track student contributions, which supports the instructor in assessing for individual

accountability, more so than an instructor could do in a face-to-face class (Kagan & Kagan,).

Outside Resources

While Blackboard does have some excellent resources for conducting cooperative

learning online, there are also outside resources than an instructor could try to help incorporate

cooperative learning strategies. In a study that spanned eight European countries, Demirbilek

(2010) found that adult educators were taking advantage of mobile media, such as cell phones or

iPods, and electronic games to help motivate and instruct adult students. Their reasoning was

that these technologies helped to make the curriculum more engaging for students, which is one

of the goals of both cooperative learning and learner-centered instruction (Demirbilek).

Social media websites could also provide a valuable outlet to conduct cooperative

learning work, and there are a vast number to choose from. Facebook is easily the most popular

and ubiquitous, and the communal nature of the site lends itself to cooperative learning (Cerdà &

Planas, 2011). Facebook offers many features that would allow cooperative learning groups to

share and interact online: group functions, photo and video sharing, wall posting, and chat

Project H 13

functions (Cerdà & Planas). Cerdà and Planas argued that Facebook offers the sense of

community and sharing that helps to make online collaboration, or cooperative learning,

successful. The issue with using a site like Facebook is that many instructors or educational

institutions might blanch at the more social reputation and open environment, or the seemingly

lack of control. A site like Facebook is also updating and changing frequently; even in the year

since publication, Facebook has already updated to address some of the complaints that Cerdà

and Planas (2011) had originally voiced about the site as an online collaborative learning tool.

Instructors might find other social networking sites as equally useful in meeting their needs, such

as LinkedIn or Google Plus, and these sites do not have the same high profile and social

reputation that Facebook does.

Concerns

Naturally, when incorporating new and innovative technologies into the online classroom

there would be concerns about how well students and faculty will receive it. The concerns are

not necessarily with the incorporation of cooperative learning techniques into the online

environment, but the use of newer technologies to support these cooperative learning techniques.

Although Kupczynski et al. (2012) found that younger instructors responded positively to

cooperative learning in an online environment, some older instructors did not fully comprehend

how to incorporate cooperative learning into the online environment. As a member of our

Instructional Design team, I have concerns about how well our cooperative learning strategies

and techniques will be executed in the online classrooms if students and faculty are

uncomfortable with the technology.

In their article, Sivakumaran and Lux (2011) outlined a three-step process to help deter

anxiety in adult students about using computers and technology online. Their process involves

Project H 14

informing students of the purpose of the technology, creating a positive environment for the

students to practice that technology, and to provide support for students when necessary

(Sivakumaran & Lux). This process should help to make our students feel more comfortable

with new technology, as well as some of our faculty. Based on the research above, I think it

would also be important to add an additional step to this process: planning. I think the three-step

process will help to make our students more comfortable, but this additional step will help to

ensure that our faculty are more comfortable as well, and ensure that our curriculum is executed

as it was designed. This step should come into play for my Instructional Design team as we plan

out appropriate cooperative learning strategies for different assessments and learning activities,

and the accompanying technology for those strategies. We will have to plan and design

mindfully, following the various processes and guidelines outlined above. We will also have to

advise our faculty on planning as they teach the course; they will need to plan ahead when they

establish cooperative learning groups and set the parameters for assessments. This planning step

could be the key that helps us to make our cooperative learning goals successful.

Conclusion

The purpose of this literature review was to research support for incorporating

cooperative learning into our online courses at Baker College. As detailed above, there is

abundant support for the use of cooperative learning with college students and adult non-

traditional college students, as well as support for cooperative learning in the online

environment. It has become clear that different technological tools are part of the answer to

ensuring that cooperative learning is successful online. Structure and planning also have been

revealed to be extremely important in making cooperative learning successful, especially in the

online environment. Altogether, this research builds a base for me to move forward with my

Project H 15

Instructional Design team and begin designing cooperative learning strategies and techniques

into our online curriculum. We can follow the guidelines from Kagan and Kagan (2009) when

thinking about how to incorporate cooperative learning strategies and groups. Gradel and Edson

(2011) and Kirschner, et al. (2004) will guide us as we transition that cooperative learning

structure to the online environment. We can begin by using Blackboard to meet our online

cooperative learning needs, and then move outwards towards alternative resources to meet any

additional needs as necessary. Finally, we will need to be mindful of the three-step process, and

our additional planning step, as we work on sharing our new course designs with faculty

(Sivakumaran and Lux, 2011). We will need to follow this process to make sure faculty are

comfortable with the new technology, and advise faculty on the importance of planning and

implementing this process in their own classes as they encounter students who are

uncomfortable. Altogether, these resources provide support for our goal of incorporating

cooperative learning into our online curriculum and they help us to establish a plan to be

successful. It is up to us, and possibly me, now to combine our understanding of this research in

such a way that we can move forward into new territory and use innovative technology to

implement cooperative learning strategies online for our adult non-traditional students.

Therefore for the purpose of my own research proposal, I believe this research helps to support

my aforementioned goal of incorporating cooperative learning into our online environment for

our adult non-traditional students and our older faculty. My original goal of incorporating

cooperative learning into the online environment was inspired by Baker College’s current focus

on 21st Century skills and learner-centered instruction. We want to better instruct and better

prepare our students for their eventual careers, and we feel that cooperation, collaboration, and

technology skills are a way to meet those goals. The research has revealed that we have the

Project H 16

potential to better support our students with cooperative learning strategies, and that we can be

successful with these techniques in the online environment for all types of learners. The research

also revealed that although my concerns about the technological aspects were relevant, there are

ways to address these concerns and help our students and faculty to be comfortable. This

research provides guidelines and support for my team to develop a structured approach in

communicating cooperative learning strategies with online faculty, and therefore with helping

our faculty to become successful in implementing cooperative learning strategies online with the

students.

Purpose and Research Questions

The purpose of my study is to evaluate the impact that cooperative learning groups will

have on student achievement and development when implemented in our online courses. Our

goal is to improve students’ cooperation and collaboration skills, as well as their technological

skills; all of these skills fall under the umbrella of 21st Century skills that we want to see our

students develop. We want to help support our students so they are better prepared for their

careers after their degrees, and it is crucial that our students improve upon these skills.

Cooperative learning groups also fall in line with our current focus on learner-centered

instruction because they involve more discovery-based learning and are less focused on the

teacher, as compared to traditional instruction. My initial concern over conducting this research

was that our adult non-traditional students and our older faculty would not respond positively to

new teaching strategies and new technology; however, research from my Literature Review

supports the use of cooperative learning in the online environment and cooperative learning with

adult non-traditional students. Keeping in mind my original goal and my research, I have

developed these research questions:

Project H 17

Primary Research Question:

In what ways will the use of cooperative learning groups in the online environment impact

student achievement in their course?

Secondary Research Question:

How will cooperative learning groups impact the students’ development of 21st Century skills?

Participants

The participants in this study will consist of the students in our online undergraduate

business courses, online business faculty, a few members of my instructional design team, and

me. Our online students are typically in the 30-35 year age range, and could be located

anywhere in the world. In order to maintain more control over the study and keep it manageable,

the participants will only come from one course: the introductory course for our online

Marketing program (MKT111B). Marketing is a popular program at Baker College, and the

students in this introductory course serve as a good representative for the average online student.

Our business faculty teaching these online courses will also be participants because they

will be required to implement the cooperative learning strategies in their classroom. This might

require them to learn new teaching strategies and/or new technology. However, as instructors in

the field of business, they should fully understand the importance and value of developing 21st

Century skills, which in turn should lead them to be supportive of trying this new initiative.

They will be receiving instruction on the intervention plan in the Course Design Template (CDT)

and Learning Plan (LP), which will be developed by a few members of my Instructional Design

team and me. Faculty should already be familiar with these course materials because the

Marketing program has recently been updated to include these course materials. The faculty will

also be important in the process of gathering data because they will need to report back to me

Project H 18

with their observations. Some faculty will actually take on the role of a collaborator, which I

outline below in the intervention plan.

I will be working with two specific members of my instructional design team. Both of

these Instructional Designers are in charge of the program updates for the Marketing program,

and I will work with them to coordinate the best ways to incorporate the intervention plan into

our curriculum design. They will also help me to synthesize the data we gather on the

implementation of cooperative learning groups in the online environment. These Instructional

Designers will also work as collaborators.

Collaboration:

I will be collaborating with both the Instructional Designers and with the faculty. I will

begin by collaborating with the Instructional Designers to better define the cooperative learning

activities for the course. Using the current course material and their expertise on the curriculum

design, we will develop questions or activity prompts for each cooperative learning activity that

will drive it forward. We will collaborate on appropriate questions or prompts and check that

they align to the weekly Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) for the course. I will also work

with the Instructional Designers to develop appropriate rubrics. These rubrics will also be

aligned to the SLOs, and will need to be constructed in a way that accurately grades and

measures the cooperative learning activities. The questions/prompts and the rubrics will

establish structure for the cooperative learning activities and will provide the parameters in

which the faculty and students can comfortably function. Once this structure is established, we

will further discuss the technological requirements and how to best prepare students for their use.

Once I have completed my work with the Instructional Designers, I will then collaborate

with the faculty. The faculty will be key in helping this intervention plan become successful. I

Project H 19

will present the cooperative learning activities to them, including the questions, rubrics, and

technological requirements, and I will ask for any feedback or recommended changes. As a

group, we will discuss making any changes to the cooperative learning activities, and any

changes will be implemented across the board for all course sections; this will be important to

ensure that all faculty are conducting the same cooperative learning activities and that we are

gathering the same data from each course section. Once faculty have approved of the

cooperative learning activities, I will communicate with them to make sure they are all

completely comfortable with using the necessary technology. Finally, I will discuss with the

faculty about how they will gather their own observational data in each of their course sections.

The faculty will provide an important perspective on how the students appear to be responding to

the intervention plan and how to best make alterations in the intervention plan.

Intervention Plan

The intervention plan will involve incorporating structured cooperative learning activities

into each week’s activities in the online classes. Each course is six weeks long, and there will be

a cooperative learning activity built into each week. There will also be detailed rubrics provided

to both students and faculty that will clearly outline the requirements for each cooperative

learning activity.

Week One:

Faculty will be advised to divide students into heterogeneous groups of three-four

students by day three. Faculty will need to rely on the students’ initial introductions to decide

which students should be grouped together. At the end of Week One, students will participate in

a short and informal teambuilding exercise that will introduce them to any new technology in the

course for the cooperative learning activities. This teambuilding activity will help students to

Project H 20

understand the purpose of that technology and will establish a support system amongst their

peers that they can rely on when it comes to using that technology. By the end of this week, the

instructor should review the groups’ dynamics and make any necessary changes if any groups

appear to be conflicting heavily.

Week Two:

Students will be introduced to the new content for this week and introduced to a new

cooperative learning activity. This activity will be more involved than Week One’s activity and

will be longer and more formal. It will require each student to take on a role: leader, researcher

1, recorder 1, and depending on group size, researcher 2 or recorder 2. Depending on the course

content, the cooperative learning activity should require the group to answer a question that

involves a small amount of outside research, discuss as a group how it relates to the week’s

topic, write a brief paper on their reflections, and share their findings with the class as a whole.

Students will follow this cooperative learning group process for weeks 2-5, and the groups will

take turns being in the “fishbowl” (i.e. The rest of the class will be asked to monitor the group’s

progression through their cooperative learning activity. Students will discuss the group’s

dynamics in the main discussion board.) Students can conduct their group work in small group

discussion boards and wikis in Blackboard. The instructor should be encouraging students as a

whole on the main discussion board, possibly asking for an informal progress report mid-way

through the week. The instructor should also be monitoring each group’s discussion board and

wiki to ensure that students are staying on task. After groups have submitted their papers and

posted their findings, the instructor should use the provided rubric to grade each group and

provide constructive feedback.

Week Three:

Project H 21

Students will participate in another cooperative learning activity that resembles the

structure of the activity above; however, they should each rotate roles in the group. There should

also be a new group in the “fishbowl.” The instructor should continue to monitor the groups, and

use the rubric to grade groups upon conclusion of the activity. On the last day of Week Three,

the instructor should post a short, mandatory survey for students to complete. The survey will

gauge students’ responses to the cooperative learning activities thus far, and provide an

opportunity to check if the intervention plan should be altered in some way for the latter half of

the course. The survey will also ask students to reflect on how the cooperative learning activities

have impacted their learning and their skills in the areas of collaboration, cooperation, and

technology.

Week Four:

Provided the intervention plan does not need to be altered in any way, students will

participate in another cooperative learning activity, similar to the ones above that relates directly

to the week’s topics. Once again, students should rotate roles, and a new group will be in the

“fishbowl.” The instructor should continue to monitor groups and provide grades and feedback

using the rubric.

Week Five:

Students participate in a similar cooperative learning activity, rotating roles for the final

time. If most groups consist of four students, which is the ideal, then each student will have

participated in each role at least once. There are also usually around 15-16 students in each

course, so there should also be about four groups in each class, meaning that the last group will

be in the “fishbowl” this week. Instructors should continue to monitor this activity and grade it

similarly to the ones above.

Project H 22

Week Six:

This week involves a comprehensive cooperative learning activity, in which all group

members will be required to conduct individual research and contribute a section to a group

paper. All group members will be in the same role of researcher/recorder and they will be

required to work together to compose all sections of the paper into one cohesive paper. There

will be no “fishbowl” group this week. Once again, there will be a rubric provided to both

students and instructors that details the requirements for the assignment, and the instructor

should use this rubric to grade the groups and provide feedback. Students will also be required

to participate in a second final survey, which will ask students to provide feedback on whether

they liked/disliked the cooperative learning activities, and why. It will also prompt students to

reflect on their learning and whether their skills have grown since the last survey.

Data Collection Strategies

I plan to implement three different types of data collection strategies to test my research

questions, which I will discuss below.

Student-Generated Artifact

This action research plan will be implemented in the MKT111B online course, and I plan

to use the final marketing project presentations as a form of student-generated artifact. Students

will be working in cooperative learning groups throughout the course to work on a marketing

project, and they will create a presentation together to submit at the end of the course. We will

gather data on these final project presentations to see if student achievement has changed for the

positive or negative in any way, given the change in instructional method. I plan to use baseline

data here so that I can assess for a change in these final project presentations; the only difference

between the baseline data and the action research data will be the implementation of the

Project H 23

cooperative learning activities, so I can assume that any differences in the final project

presentations will be a result of the cooperative learning activities. If scores go up, then this will

lead to the conclusion that cooperative learning activities impacted student achievement in a

positive way; likewise, if scores go down, then this will lead to the conclusion that cooperative

learning activities impacted student achievement in a negative way. For a more detailed analysis

of the ways that cooperative learning activities might impact student achievement, I can examine

the different criteria in the assignment rubric (Appendix B). For example, we might find that

students score highly in the Cooperative Learning criteria of this rubric but they score lower in

the Body criteria of the rubric, which would suggest that students have improved their

cooperation skills but in doing so they lost focus in their project. I have witnessed groups that

have spent the majority of their online chat discussion going over the different roles of the group

members and establishing a time that everyone can chat synchronously online; by the end of the

project time period they have strong group dynamics, but have not had time to fully address the

main assignment. The results from this marketing project will help to illustrate the different

ways that cooperative learning groups in the online asynchronous environment might impact

student achievement both for the positive and the negative.

We have just begun to implement a Waypoint assignment link into Blackboard for our

Business courses, and this Waypoint assignment link gathers and tracks data on our students’

achievement; it also includes a specifically constructed rubric (Appendix B) that helps to assess

students’ achievement. I will use this Waypoint assignment link to gather baseline data and to

gather data after I have implemented my action research plan. The rubric in Appendix B

represents my plans for measuring student achievement via the final marketing project

Project H 24

presentation. This form of data collection functions as a summative form of data collection

because it only measures student achievement in one final project and it is not ongoing.

Observational Data

Although I will not be a teacher in these classes (because I work in Instructional Design),

I will collaborate with the faculty who will be teaching these classes about how to gather

observational data. These faculty will already be involved in the collaboration process of my

intervention plan and I will discuss with these faculty the type of data we are looking to gather

with their observations. I am implementing my intervention plan in online courses, so instructors

will never observe any live action between students; however, all interactions between students

in their groups will be documented in the discussion board and wikis, so instructors should have

an easy time of gathering the available data. Since the instructors will gather this observational

data each week it will function as the formative data collection method.

I will leave it to the discretion of the faculty to decide how they will gather their

observational data, so long as it can address the research questions; however, I will recommend

field notes and checklists as the best options to use for my intervention plan. We will use rubrics

to assess students’ work on the project segments each week, and these rubrics can also function

as a type of weekly checklist of student achievement. These rubrics are attached below as

Appendix C, and I have added a few questions and prompts into the “Instructor Comments” area

that should indicate to faculty what to provide for observational notes. This data will help to

explain more specifically the different ways that cooperative learning groups are impacting a

change in student achievement. Ideally, the observational notes that instructors submit should

include instances where the cooperative learning activities and discussion lead to more intense

discussion, higher-level thinking, and/or an increased accountability for group members, all of

Project H 25

which support an increase in student achievement. This observational data will also address the

question of how the cooperative learning groups and activities impact the development of

students’ 21st Century skills. Ideally, the observational notes will report that students are

communicating more frequently throughout the course, that they can communicate in a

professional and effective way, and that they are comfortable using new technology to meet their

needs. The questions and prompts included with the rubrics (Appendix C) address these topics,

which align to the research questions.

Inquiry Data

My final data collection strategy will be two student surveys implemented in Weeks

Three and Six in the course. These surveys will provide valuable inquiry data on how the

students perceived their experience in the cooperative learning groups and their perceptions on

how these groups might have impacted their achievement in the course. These two surveys are

attached below as Appendix D. These surveys include questions that will require the students to

reflect on their experiences in the cooperative learning groups and will ask the students if they

found these groups valuable. There are survey questions that ask students to reflect broadly on

their achievement overall, and if they found the cooperative learning groups beneficial to their

learning experience. This survey helps to address both research questions. The survey gives

students the opportunity to report their own impressions of their achievement, learning, and

development throughout the course through the use of Likert scale questions, and also includes

open-ended questions for students to report independently what they have found most beneficial

and how the cooperative learning groups impacted their learning. There are also more specific

questions that ask students about how the cooperative learning groups impacted their 21st

Century skills and if the students feel more comfortable with technology and collaboration.

Project H 26

Some of the open-ended questions should prompt students to discuss their skills development,

and one of the questions asks students about their thoughts on their own preparedness for

employment; these questions help to answer the question of how the students feel cooperative

learning groups impacted the development of their own 21st Century skills.

The Week Three survey will also provide the additional function of notifying the

instructors if a change needs to be implemented. If students are reporting very negatively in the

Week Three survey, then the instructor can alter the action research plan as needed to address the

students’ needs. The instructor will need to study the Week Three surveys to decide if a change

should be implemented and what that change might be. The change might be as small and

simple as rotating a few students in groups if someone is not contributing enough, or it might be

as large as stopping the cooperative learning groups altogether and reverting back to the

traditional format in which students work on the marketing project individually. If the instructor

does feel the need to implement any change in the course at all, not matter how big or small, then

he or she should report that in the observational notes.

This data collection strategy has both formative and summative elements, in that it

mainly is assessing student perceptions on the entire action research plan, but it also provides an

opportunity to implement change in the midst of the action research plan to improve overall

learning.

Plan for Increasing Validity

The values, goals, purposes, and audience for my study are actually very broad and

slightly complex. While I am writing this action research plan, I have no intentions of ever

implementing the plan as an instructor; rather, I would hope to collaborate with my Instructional

Design team and several faculty members in order to help our online instructors implement this

Project H 27

plan. I should share the same broad goals with my Instructional Design team members and with

the faculty (increasing cooperation, collaboration skills, and technological skills in our students),

but I also have to consider my more focused goals of communicating with the faculty to

implement the action research plan. One important aspect to also consider that I have not

explicitly addressed is that if we were to actually conduct this study at Baker College, then we

would certainly be sharing the results of that study with the rest of the college. We would want

to share it with administrators to report back on our work, and share it with other faculty,

especially other online faculty. Regardless of whether the results are positive or negative, we

would want to share this information with other faculty to maintain a level of consistency in our

instruction and to share our knowledge on what works or does not work in the online

environment. Based on the broader goals for the college and my own goals for this action

research plan, there are several different types of validity that are important to consider for my

study. The types of validity that are applicable to my study include: democratic validity, dialogic

validity, neutrality/confirmability, outcome validity, catalytic validity, process validity, and

truth-value validity (Hendricks, 2009). This list includes nearly all types of validity that

Hendricks lists, excluding applicability/transferability and consistency/dependability. The

reason that these types of validity are not included is because there are no foreseeable plans or

concerns with making sure this research study is applicable to different settings or different types

of students. It would be a very large project simply to implement this action research plan into

the different courses and programs for the diverse students of Baker College, and presently it is

not the goal of the college to serve as a model for implementing cooperative learning activities

into the asynchronous online environment. It would certainly be admirable for the College to

Project H 28

take on that role, and would add more validity and a strong element of generalizability to the

study, but currently that is not a main concern.

That being said, there are still many types of validity to contend with in order to

successfully implement this action research plan. Fortunately, several of these types of validity

are already met simply by the basic design of the action research plan. Democratic and dialogic

validity are similar in that they relate to the collaboration and communication of this action

research plan with others. Democratic validity is inherently necessary given the highly

collaborative nature of my action research study, and dialogic validity will be important when it

comes to sharing the results with other faculty members and administrators for the college. Both

collaboration and communication are huge components of this research study because I need to

collaborate with my Instructional Design team and with the faculty who will need to implement

the action research plan in their courses. This communication is a key component in the success

or failure of the action research plan, which means that both democratic and dialogic validity are

extremely important to establish. Peer debriefing is a useful strategy to achieve both democratic

and dialogic validity, and I can apply this strategy simply by working with my Instructional

Design team. Although not all members of my Instructional Design team will be working

closely on the curriculum design of this project, we still discuss our ideas together as a team to

give input and proofread work. This accomplishes the strategy of peer debriefing for both

democratic and dialogic validity because I will be discussing the design, implementation, and

results of the study with different members of my design team who are not working on this

project. I will also use member checks in the form of student surveys and a reflection discussion

with the faculty teaching the courses, and this also addresses both dialogic and democratic

validity. We will already have an audit trail in the form of all the design documents (Course

Project H 29

Design Template, rubrics, assignment descriptions, etc.) from the Instructional Design team, and

the data gathered from the students and the instructors in the form of electronic documents and

online discussions/wikis (this is one instance where online courses are extremely valuable; all

course interactions are automatically documented). Finally, if we were actually to conduct this

study in our online courses, then we would certainly include a presentation of the results in our

online faculty conference. This is an annual conference Baker College hosts every June for all

online faculty, and it serves as an opportunity for faculty to collaborate and participate in

professional development seminars. This action research study would be important material to

present at the faculty conference for all of our other faculty to critique and discuss.

Truth-value validity and process validity are important for the overall validity of the

action research plan; they will help to ensure that our study is accurate, truthful, and that the

correct conclusions are reached (Hendricks, 2009). These types of validity are fundamental to

any action research study because the results will have no bearing if they are not backed with

truth-validity and process validity. Also, if we want to use these results to support the use of

cooperative learning activities in future courses, then we will need to establish both truth-value

validity and process validity. As I have stated above, I already have plans for implementing

member checks and peer debriefing, which help to establish truth-validity and process validity.

My data collection strategies include three different data sources (student-generated artifacts,

faculty observations, and student surveys), which meet the triangulation strategy. Negative case

analysis is another useful strategy in establishing truth-value validity and process validity, but

this is something we would consider more after the study has been conducted; we would want to

keep in mind that any data outliers should be considered the negative case, and in this setting a

Project H 30

negative case could occur in one small group in one class or even for one whole course section

among the numerous sections.

The faculty implementing this action research study in the courses will also play a key

role in establishing truth-validity and process validity, and there will be several important points

to discuss with them in the design collaboration discussions. We would want to ensure accurate

data recording, and in this case we are already somewhat accomplishing it by conducting the

study online where all student interactions and assignment submissions will be recorded. Some

of the other important data that we will want to record will be the faculty observation reports,

and I would need to discuss this with the faculty when we discuss the design and implementation

of the research plan. Also in my collaboration discussions with the faculty I should discuss any

bias that the faculty might have for the study, and as a group we can record our biases and

discuss how to overcome those biases during the implementation and data interpretation.

Finally, I would want to impress upon the faculty the importance of their faculty observations,

and that they should try to maintain persistent and prolonged observations notes. We want

faculty to take detailed notes all throughout the course, and I could foresee the potential in

faculty dropping off in their note taking later in the course; this would be an issue we want to

avoid.

Neutrality/confirmability would be another type of validity that is important to this study

because the results of this study could impact whether we continue to implement cooperative

learning activities in other online courses with other Baker College faculty. We will want to

ensure that the results are not due to the biases of the Instructional Design team or the faculty

teaching the courses because otherwise new faculty implementing cooperative learning strategies

could have very different and negative results. All of the strategies for meeting this validity that

Project H 31

were listed by Hendricks (2009) have already been addressed in my goals for meeting

democratic validity, dialogic validity, process validity, and truth-value validity, and these

strategies include: peer debriefing, accurate data recording, member checks, triangulation, biases

made clear, and audit trail. There would not need to be any additional strategies to apply in order

to achieve neutrality/confirmability beyond the strategies that I will already be applying.

However, for this type of validity it will be especially important to strongly apply the biases

made clear strategy, and I will want to make sure to have a very clear discussion with faculty and

the Instructional Design team about any biases and how to overcome those biases.

Finally, outcome validity and catalytic validity will be important to consider upon

conclusion of the study. We would be implementing this study to impact change for our students

and help them to learn, grow, and develop stronger skill sets. We would be looking to improve

the educational practice for the college, and we would want to make sure that the results from

this study are used in a way to support Baker College’s educational practice. Outcome and

catalytic validity will help us think about how to use this data to move forward. One strategy for

achieving outcome and catalytic validity is already met: presentation of results. As I mentioned

above, if we actually implemented this action research plan, then we would present and discuss it

at the faculty conference. We would use the data to inform other faculty on the best practices for

using cooperative learning groups in online courses and how cooperative learning activities can

impact change for the students. A second strategy we would want to employ would be

continuous, ongoing reflective planning. This strategy is already a part of our natural design

process for the Instructional Design team. It has recently been established as our “Stage 4” of

the curriculum design process, and it involves us sitting down for a reflective and revision-

Project H 32

focused discussion with the faculty who participated in the initial design process and then taught

the courses using that curriculum. This strategy would be automatically applied.

Projected Results

I predict that cooperative learning groups will have a positive impact on student

achievement in the online MKT111B course, and that students will improve upon their 21st

Century skills. There is sound research to support the use of cooperative learning and that it is

beneficial to student achievement and to the development of 21st Century skills. The only doubt

I had in this occurring was due to the execution of this action research plan in our online

environment. However, I am confident that I have developed a strong intervention plan that is

basic enough to be executed successfully and strong enough to make an impact. While the actual

collaboration and design process would be very involved and very messy, I am confident that it

would result in strong material for the course and that it would adequately prepare our faculty to

use cooperative learning strategies in the classroom. My methods for training the faculty would

be based on a process developed from my research, and should yield positive results. Positive

results from the collaboration and faculty training sessions should then lead to successful and

enthusiastic implementation of cooperative learning strategies. If students are properly guided

through the cooperative learning strategies and feel a strong sense of support from their

instructor, then I am confident that the cooperative learning strategies will have a positive impact

for the students in achievement levels and in 21st Century skill development.

In relation to my data collection strategies, I anticipate that scores will increase on all

levels for the marketing project. If the cooperative learning strategies are implemented

effectively, then they should have a positive impact on the students’ overall achievement,

including their cooperation skills. This means that scores at all levels should increase from the

Project H 33

baseline data, and the new criteria related to cooperative learning criteria should also include

high scores.

Faculty should have received sufficient training from the collaboration discussions and

training sessions, which would mean that faculty should provide detailed observational notes on

student interactions. As stated above, if the faculty are successful and enthusiastic in their

implementation, then I am confident that this will yield positive results for the students. I believe

the faculty observations will support these positive results and will report in detail that students

in the cooperative learning groups are making a strong effort to participate in the group work and

that they are improving in the areas of collaboration, communication, and technology use. The

anticipated positive faculty reports would support the above data on student achievement, and

would provide more detailed data on improved 21st Century skill development.

Finally, I predict that the student surveys would further support these positive results

from the students. I anticipate that students would report that they enjoyed the cooperative

learning experience and that they found it beneficial to their learning. I also anticipate that

students would report that they had improved their 21st Century skills in the areas of technology

use and cooperation. I believe that students will have a positive learning experience and that

upon reflection they will see the value in this learning experience. This data source will provide

valuable insight to the students’ experiences and perceptions, and will serve as the third leg to

triangulate my study and make it more valid.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I believe it is possible for Baker College to improve student achievement

and 21st Century skill development through the use of cooperative learning strategies in our

online environment. It is apparent from my research that we will have to be meticulous in our

Project H 34

design process and make strong efforts to collaborate with and train faculty. The faculty will

play a pivotal role in the success or failure of this action research plan. If faculty are resistant or

do not fully understand the importance of their role, then this could yield unreliable data or

negative results in student achievement. This is a concern for the execution of this action

research plan, but I am confident in my research and my plan of action for training faculty and

involving them in the design process.

After the action research plan is executed and the data are gathered and analyzed, then

my next plan of action would be to prepare the material to present at our online faculty

conference. We would share the action research plan and data results with faculty at the

conference for peer review and critique to further establish validity. Hopefully the actual results

would mirror my anticipated results, and we could share data that supports the use of cooperative

learning in our online classroom. If so, then we would take steps to train other online faculty on

how to successfully implement cooperative learning strategies in their online courses. Overall, I

believe this action research plan will yield positive results in student achievement for Baker

College’s online students, and that we will improve our instructional processes to increase

student achievement and 21st Century skill development.

Project H 35

References

Brewer, S., Klein, J. (2006). Type of positive interdependence and affiliation motive in an

asynchronous, collaborative learning environment. Educational Technology Research &

Development, 54(4), 331-354. doi: 10.1007/s11423-006-9603-3.

Brewer, S., Klein, J., Mann, K. (2003). Using small group learning strategies with adult re-entry

students. College Student Journal, 37(2), 286-298.

Campbell, K., Ellingson, D. (2010). Cooperative learning at a distance: an experiment with

wikis. American Journal of Business Education, 3(4), 83-89.

Cerdà, F. L., Planas, N. C. (2011). Facebook’s potential for collaborative e-learning. RUSC:

Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento, 8(2), 197-210.

Demirbilek, M. (2010). Investigating attitudes of adult educators towards educational mobile

media and games in eight European countries. Journal of Information Technology

Education, 9, 235-247.

Gradel, K., Edson, A. (2011). Cooperative learning: smart pedagogy and tools for online and

hybrid courses. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 39(2), 193-212. doi:

10.2190/ET.39.2.i

Hendricks, C. (2009). Improving schools through action research: A comprehensive guide for

educators (2nd ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education Inc.

Johnson, D., Johnson, R., Smith, K. (2007). The state of cooperative learning in postsecondary

and professional settings. Educational Psychology Review, 19(1), 15-29. doi:

10.1007/s10648-006-9038-8.

Kagan, S., Kagan, M. (2009). Kagan Cooperative Learning. San Clemente, CA: Kagan

Publishing.

Project H 36

Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J., Kreijns, K., Beers, P. (2004). Designing electronic collaborative

learning environments. Educational Technology Research & Development, 52(3), 47-66.

Kupczynski, L., Mundy, M., Maxwell, G. (2012). Faculty perceptions of cooperative learning

and traditional discussion strategies in online courses. Turkish Online Journal of Distance

Education (TOJDE), 13(2), 84-95.

Lynch, D. (2010). Application of online discussion and cooperative learning strategies to online

and blended college courses. College Student Journal, 44(3), 777-784.

Shimazoe, J., Aldrich, H. (2010). Group work can be gratifying: understanding and overcoming

resistance to cooperative learning. College Teaching, 58(2), 52-57.

Sivakumaran, T., Lux, A. (2011). Overcoming computer anxiety: a three-step process for adult

learners. US-China Education Review B., 6b, 154-160.

Vrioni, R. (2011). Effects of group learning on the academic performance of university students.

Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 33, 111-117.

Project H 37

Appendix A- Outline Cooperative Learning (CL)

o Part of our goal at Baker College—21st Century Skills and Learner Centered Instruction (LCI)

Overall benefits of using CL Johnson, Johnson, & Smith

o CLo Postsecondary and Professional—Shaping college students

into adults Gradel & Edson—CL for College Students

o 21st Century Skills and CLo CL not always a huge impact on test scores in regards to content, but definitely an

improvement in affective domain—an area we are looking to improve based on Career Services reports on our students

Brewer & Klein Motivates Students

Vrioni Brewer, Klein, & Mann

Students still responded positively to CL, even adult re-entry students

o Important to set up CL properly—more than just group work 3-4 people, heterogeneous groups

Kagano Teambuildingo Community buildingo Highly structured, well-planned

Shimazoe & Aldricho Goals, social skills, development, etc.o Can reduce the grading load of instructors, take the

pressure off from being “on” and constantly in performance mode

o Can CL function online (OL), and if so, how? Yes- Kupczynski, Mundy, Maxwell

Faculty reported positive results when using CL OL Brewer & Klein

Actually, in the OL environment it is very important to have that increased interaction with peers since there is already less interaction

Gradel & Edson Great techniques for functioning OL, sample assignments

converted to CL versions. Important to plan ahead, design carefully, think about incorporating everything together (OL, technology, CL)

Kirschner, Strijbos, Kreijns, & Beers Follow the model when designing this OL environment—this

should help the designer to focus more on the learners (How the

Project H 38

learner uses functions, what the learner needs OL, what the learner wants OL, etc.—All LCI)

Using Blackboard Lynch-Discussion Board

o Establish roles in groups, use the discussion functions effectively, techniques.

Campbell & Ellingson-Wikis Using outside resources

Demirbilek—outside mobile media and games Llorens Cerda & Capdeferro Planas—Facebook

o Google Plus?o Concerns—Faculty and non-traditional adult students using technology in such a

new way Kupczynski, Mundy, Maxwell

Reported positively, but some faculty were confused about using OL/technology and using CL in OL

Sivakumaran & Lux Anxiety for students?—3-step process for overcoming anxiety for

adult learners using technology Essentially: Want to conduct highly structured CL in OL environment

Structured groups Careful design New and innovative technology

o BUT, curious/concerned about how well adult students and faculty will respond and implement

Structured groups and careful design should help to make CL more successful

3-step process and careful technological instruction should make technology more successful

Project H 39

Appendix BMKT111B Principles of Marketing

Marketing Project Presentation - RUBRIC(100 points possible)

5-Excellent 4-Good 3-Average 2-Fair 1-Poor

INTRODUCTION: COMMENTSGained attention and interest 5 4 3 2 1

Established credibility 5 4 3 2 1

Related to audience 5 4 3 2 1

BODY:Main points clear 5 4 3 2 1

Organization well planned 5 4 3 2 1

Language clear & appropriate 5 4 3 2 1

Visual aids effective 5 4 3 2 1

Creativity was apparent 5 4 3 2 1

CONCLUSION:Prepared audience for ending 5 4 3 2 1

Reinforced central idea 5 4 3 2 1

COOPERATIVE LEARNING:Each student contributed a section 5 4 3 2 1

Sections combine into a cohesivepresentation 5 4 3 2 1

Presentation reflects equal contributionand cooperative work 5 4 3 2 1

21ST CENTURY SKILLS:Communication skills evident in OL discussions and Wikis 5 4 3 2 1

Technology skills evident in presentation 5 4 3 2 1

Student: SCORE:

Additional Comments:

Project H 40

Appendix CMKT111B 100 PointsMarketing Project – Part 1, Week 2

Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 50-45 44-40 39-35 34-30 29-25Marketing Project – Part 1 Required Elements – must be about your chosen company (50 points for this section)

- Company description, history and overview is discussed in great detail-The core business/industry and trends were identified and explained in detail-Products/services the company provides were identified and the problems they solve were described in detail-Company mission is explored as well as the value of the mission statement to the employees in detail-Top competitor is identified and the industry is described in detail-The 4 Ps of the product/service of chosen company were identified and explained

Details of at least one of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least two-three of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least four of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least five of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 30-27 26-24 23-21 20-18 17-0Cooperative Learning Group and 21st Century skills (30 points for this section)

-Group assigns a leader, researcher, and recorder. All group members have a clearly defined role.-Group is able to create a cohesive project for Part 1.-Students cooperate well and are respectful in discussions. Students use good communication skills in discussions and wikis.-Students conduct their group discussion in a professional manner that would be acceptable for other students to read and view.-Groups use technology effectively to conduct discussion and complete Part 1.

Details of at least one of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least two-three of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least four of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least five of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Writing Mechanics (5 points for this section)sentence structure, run-ons, fragments,

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics, enhances the readability

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics with minor errors that do not detract from the readability

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics but with errors that detract from the readability

Difficulties with readability due to inappropriate use of writing mechanics

Lacks proper use of writing mechanics – lacks readability

Project H 41

agreement, punctuation, capitalization, spelling, etc.Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Writing Organization(5 points for this section)

Coherence: all writing fits together, makes sense, and flows in effective order – beginning, middle, end

Clarity: all writing is consistent and logical

Coherence: Well organized and purposeful writing; has beginning, middle, and end; strong and appropriate transitions

Clarity: Expresses ideas clearly and logically

Coherence: Adequate organization; beginning, middle, and end; appropriate transitions

Clarity: Expresses most ideas clearly; occasional lapse in logical order

Coherence: Sequence of information difficult to follow; lacks a clear beginning, middle, and end; few or inappropriate transitions

Clarity: Attempts to express ideas clearly; sometimes difficult to follow

Coherence: Unclear; lacks beginning, middle and end; fails to use transitions appropriately

Clarity: Disjointed connection of ideas; difficult to follow

Coherence: Lacks coherence; beginning, middle, and end, and transitions

Clarity: Lacks clarity and logic; does not connect ideas

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Citations(5 points for this section

Correctly uses in-text citations for all sources; properly formats paper and references page

Uses in-text citations with minor errors to identify sources; paper formatting and or references page displays minor errors

Minor errors or missing in-text citations; paper formatting and or references page displays minor errors

Frequently missing in-text citations; improperly formats paper and references page

Lacks in-text citations; lacks proper formatting of paper; missing or irrelevant references page

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Critical Thinking (5 points for this section)

Engages with the material; demonstrates insightful ideas from a thorough examination and understanding of the topic

Balance of source and original ideas shows consistent interaction with the sources and evidence of critical thinking

Balance of source and original ideas shows inconsistent interaction with the sources and a decrease in critical thinking

Ideas rely too heavily on sources rather than on critical thinking; shows minimal interaction between sources and original ideas

Lacks engagement with the material or lacks evidence of critical thinking

TOTAL:Instructor Comments:How did the student cooperate with group members? How did the groups function together to complete the project? List any instances where group members displayed a group mentality or an increased accountability for their group members.

Did students communicate effectively in their groups? Use technology effectively to conduct their discussion? Explain. List any instances of intense discussion or higher level thinking in discussions.

Project H 42

Did the OL discussion board and wiki help students in their collaboration, or did it appear to function as an obstacle for groups? Explain.

Did the group atmosphere appear to have a positive/negative impact on student contribution and the final project? Explain. MKT111B 100 PointsMarketing Project – Part 2, Week 3

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 50-45 44-40 39-35 34-30 29-25Marketing Project – Part 2 Required Elements – must use your chosen company (50 points for this section

-Explained how the following environments impacted the chosen company and its customers in detail:-economic environment-socio-cultural environment-technological environment-global environment-competitive environment-governmental regulations

Details of at least one of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least two-three of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least four of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least five of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 30-27 26-24 23-21 20-18 17-0Cooperative Learning Group and 21st Century skills (30 points for this section)

-Group assigns a leader, researcher, and recorder. All group members have a clearly defined role.-Group is able to create a cohesive project for Part 2.-Students cooperate well and are respectful in discussions. Students use good communication skills in discussions and wikis.-Students conduct their group discussion in a professional manner that would be acceptable for other students to read and view.-Groups use technology effectively to conduct discussion and complete Part 2.

Details of at least one of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least two-three of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least four of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least five of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Writing Mechanics (5 points for this section)sentence structure, run-ons, fragments, agreement, punctuation, capitalization, spelling, etc.

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics, enhances the readability

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics with minor errors that do not detract from the readability

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics but with errors that detract from the readability

Difficulties with readability due to inappropriate use of writing mechanics

Lacks proper use of writing mechanics – lacks readability

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Writing Organization(5 points for this

Coherence: Well organized and purposeful writing; has beginning, middle, and end;

Coherence: Adequate organization;

Coherence: Sequence of information

Coherence: Unclear; lacks beginning, middle

Coherence: Lacks coherence;

Project H 43

section)

Coherence: all writing fits together, makes sense, and flows in effective order – beginning, middle, end

Clarity: all writing is consistent and logical

strong and appropriate transitions

Clarity: Expresses ideas clearly and logically

beginning, middle, and end; appropriate transitions

Clarity: Expresses most ideas clearly; occasional lapse in logical order

difficult to follow; lacks a clear beginning, middle, and end; few or inappropriate transitions

Clarity: Attempts to express ideas clearly; sometimes difficult to follow

and end; fails to use transitions appropriately

Clarity: Disjointed connection of ideas; difficult to follow

beginning, middle, and end, and transitions

Clarity: Lacks clarity and logic; does not connect ideas

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Citations(5 points for this section

Correctly uses in-text citations for all sources; properly formats paper and references page

Uses in-text citations with minor errors to identify sources; paper formatting and or references page displays minor errors

Minor errors or missing in-text citations; paper formatting and or references page displays minor errors

Frequently missing in-text citations; improperly formats paper and references page

Lacks in-text citations; lacks proper formatting of paper; missing or irrelevant references page

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Critical Thinking (5 points for this section)

Engages with the material; demonstrates insightful ideas from a thorough examination and understanding of the topic

Balance of source and original ideas shows consistent interaction with the sources and evidence of critical thinking

Balance of source and original ideas shows inconsistent interaction with the sources and a decrease in critical thinking

Ideas rely too heavily on sources rather than on critical thinking; shows minimal interaction between sources and original ideas

Lacks engagement with the material or lacks evidence of critical thinking

TOTAL:Instructor Comments:How did the student cooperate with group members? How did the groups function together to complete the project? List any instances where group members displayed a group mentality or an increased accountability for their group members.

Did students communicate effectively in their groups? Use technology effectively to conduct their discussion? Explain. List any instances of intense discussion or higher level thinking in discussions.

Did the OL discussion board and wiki help students in their collaboration, or did it appear to function as an obstacle for groups? Explain.

Did the group atmosphere appear to have a positive/negative impact on student contribution and the final project? Explain.

Project H 44

MKT111B 100 PointsMarketing Project – Part 3, Week 4

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 50-45 44-40 39-35 34-30 29-25Marketing Project – Part 3 Required Elements – must use your chosen company (50 points for this section

-PDLC was effectively used to examine a product/service from the chosen company-SWOT analysis was effectively used to examine a product/service from the chosen company -Detailed explanation of how the PDLC impacts the marketing mix (4 Ps) was provided-Target market for product/service chosen was examined in detail-B2C and B2B opportunities for chosen company/product/service were described in detail -Demand side vs. supply side marketing strategies were explained, and example given for what this company is doing, and what impact there was to the 4 Ps

Details of at least one of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least two-three of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least four of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least five of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 30-27 26-24 23-21 20-18 17-0Cooperative Learning Group and 21st Century skills (30 points for this section)

-Group assigns a leader, researcher, and recorder. All group members have a clearly defined role.-Group is able to create a cohesive project for Part 3.-Students cooperate well and are respectful in discussions. Students use good communication skills in discussions and wikis.-Students conduct their group discussion in a professional manner that would be acceptable for other students to read and view.-Groups use technology effectively to conduct discussion and complete Part 3.

Details of at least one of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least two-three of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least four of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least five of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Writing Mechanics (5 points for this section)

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics, enhances the readability

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics with

Demonstrates knowledge and use of writing mechanics but

Difficulties with readability due to inappropriate use of writing

Lacks proper use of writing mechanics – lacks

Project H 45

sentence structure, run-ons, fragments, agreement, punctuation, capitalization, spelling, etc.

minor errors that do not detract from the readability

with errors that detract from the readability

mechanics readability

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Writing Organization(5 points for this section)

Coherence: all writing fits together, makes sense, and flows in effective order – beginning, middle, end

Clarity: all writing is consistent and logical

Coherence: Well organized and purposeful writing; has beginning, middle, and end; strong and appropriate transitions

Clarity: Expresses ideas clearly and logically

Coherence: Adequate organization; beginning, middle, and end; appropriate transitions

Clarity: Expresses most ideas clearly; occasional lapse in logical order

Coherence: Sequence of information difficult to follow; lacks a clear beginning, middle, and end; few or inappropriate transitions

Clarity: Attempts to express ideas clearly; sometimes difficult to follow

Coherence: Unclear; lacks beginning, middle and end; fails to use transitions appropriately

Clarity: Disjointed connection of ideas; difficult to follow

Coherence: Lacks coherence; beginning, middle, and end, and transitions

Clarity: Lacks clarity and logic; does not connect ideas

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Citations(5 points for this section

Correctly uses in-text citations for all sources; properly formats paper and references page

Uses in-text citations with minor errors to identify sources; paper formatting and or references page displays minor errors

Minor errors or missing in-text citations; paper formatting and or references page displays minor errors

Frequently missing in-text citations; improperly formats paper and references page

Lacks in-text citations; lacks proper formatting of paper; missing or irrelevant references page

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Critical Thinking (5 points for this section)

Engages with the material; demonstrates insightful ideas from a thorough examination and understanding of the topic

Balance of source and original ideas shows consistent interaction with the sources and evidence of critical thinking

Balance of source and original ideas shows inconsistent interaction with the sources and a decrease in critical thinking

Ideas rely too heavily on sources rather than on critical thinking; shows minimal interaction between sources and original ideas

Lacks engagement with the material or lacks evidence of critical thinking

TOTAL:Instructor Comments:How did the student cooperate with group members? How did the groups function together to complete the project? List any instances where group members displayed a group mentality or an increased accountability for their group members.

Did students communicate effectively in their groups? Use technology effectively to conduct their discussion? Explain. List any instances of intense discussion or higher level thinking in discussions.

Project H 46

Did the OL discussion board and wiki help students in their collaboration, or did it appear to function as an obstacle for groups? Explain.

Did the group atmosphere appear to have a positive/negative impact on student contribution and the final project? Explain.

MKT111B 100 PointsMarketing Project – Part 4, Week 5

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 50-45 44-40 39-35 34-30 29-25Marketing Project – Part 4 Required Elements – must use your chosen company (50 points for this section

-Various ethical issues involved in marketing to the consumer were identified-Ways to use CRM tools to provide customer service was discussed-Ways in which value affects the purchasing decision was discussed, used the chosen product/service as an example-Discussed how marketing impacts the buying decisions of customers, organizations, governments, and businesses-Discussed how the total customer experience impacts customer satisfaction-Explained “perception = reality” and looking at things through the customer’s lens-Reflection was well thought out and explained

Details of at least one of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least two-three of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least four of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Details of at least five of the required elements to the left are weakly presented or missing

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 30-27 26-24 23-21 20-18 17-0Cooperative Learning Group and 21st Century skills (30 points for this section)

-Group assigns a leader, researcher, and recorder. All group members have a clearly defined role.-Group is able to create a cohesive project for Part 4.-Students cooperate well and are respectful in discussions. Students use good communication skills in discussions and wikis.-Students conduct their group discussion in a professional manner that would be acceptable for other students to read and view.-Groups use technology effectively to conduct discussion and complete Part 4.

Details of at least one of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least two-three of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least four of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Details of at least five of the required elements to the left are weakly represented or missing

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Writing Demonstrates knowledge and Demonstrates Demonstrates Difficulties with Lacks proper

Project H 47

Mechanics (5 points for this section)sentence structure, run-ons, fragments, agreement, punctuation, capitalization, spelling, etc.

use of writing mechanics, enhances the readability

knowledge and use of writing mechanics with minor errors that do not detract from the readability

knowledge and use of writing mechanics but with errors that detract from the readability

readability due to inappropriate use of writing mechanics

use of writing mechanics – lacks readability

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Writing Organization(5 points for this section)

Coherence: all writing fits together, makes sense, and flows in effective order – beginning, middle, end

Clarity: all writing is consistent and logical

Coherence: Well organized and purposeful writing; has beginning, middle, and end; strong and appropriate transitions

Clarity: Expresses ideas clearly and logically

Coherence: Adequate organization; beginning, middle, and end; appropriate transitions

Clarity: Expresses most ideas clearly; occasional lapse in logical order

Coherence: Sequence of information difficult to follow; lacks a clear beginning, middle, and end; few or inappropriate transitions

Clarity: Attempts to express ideas clearly; sometimes difficult to follow

Coherence: Unclear; lacks beginning, middle and end; fails to use transitions appropriately

Clarity: Disjointed connection of ideas; difficult to follow

Coherence: Lacks coherence; beginning, middle, and end, and transitions

Clarity: Lacks clarity and logic; does not connect ideas

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Citations(5 points for this section

Correctly uses in-text citations for all sources; properly formats paper and references page

Uses in-text citations with minor errors to identify sources; paper formatting and or references page displays minor errors

Minor errors or missing in-text citations; paper formatting and or references page displays minor errors

Frequently missing in-text citations; improperly formats paper and references page

Lacks in-text citations; lacks proper formatting of paper; missing or irrelevant references page

Rating Excellent Good Acceptable Developing UnacceptablePoints 5 4 3 2 0Critical Thinking (5 points for this section)

Engages with the material; demonstrates insightful ideas from a thorough examination and understanding of the topic

Balance of source and original ideas shows consistent interaction with the sources and evidence of critical thinking

Balance of source and original ideas shows inconsistent interaction with the sources and a decrease in critical thinking

Ideas rely too heavily on sources rather than on critical thinking; shows minimal interaction between sources and original ideas

Lacks engagement with the material or lacks evidence of critical thinking

TOTAL:Instructor Comments:How did the student cooperate with group members? How did the groups function together to complete the project? List any instances where group members displayed a group mentality or an increased accountability for their group members.

Project H 48

Did students communicate effectively in their groups? Use technology effectively to conduct their discussion? Explain. List any instances of intense discussion or higher level thinking in discussions.

Did the OL discussion board and wiki help students in their collaboration, or did it appear to function as an obstacle for groups? Explain.

Did the group atmosphere appear to have a positive/negative impact on student contribution and the final project? Explain.

Appendix DStudent Surveys

*These surveys are a rough draft, and I would need to further refine them with the help of the Instructional Design team and the faculty teaching the courses.

Week Three Survey Strongly Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

I feel that I have achieved a lot as a student by working in my cooperative learning group.I found the use of cooperative learning groups beneficial to my learning experience.I feel that my cooperative learning group has helped me to improve my cooperation and collaboration skills.I feel that completing discussion and working with my cooperative learning group online has helped me to feel more comfortable with technology.I have enjoyed working in my cooperative learning group.I would have liked to also use an outside media source such as Facebook or Google Chat to conduct our group interactions.Would you like to continue using cooperative learning groups to complete your assignments for the remainder of the course? Why or why not?

How do you think cooperative learning groups have impacted your individual learning and skills development?

What did you find most beneficial with the use of cooperative learning groups? Least beneficial?

Do you think that your cooperative learning group has helped to better prepare you for employment? Why or why not?

Comments:

Project H 49

Week Six Survey Strongly Agree

Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

I feel that I have achieved a lot as a student by working in my cooperative learning group.I found the use of cooperative learning groups beneficial to my learning experience.I feel that my cooperative learning group has helped me to improve my cooperation and collaboration skills.I feel that completing discussion and working with my cooperative learning group online has helped me to feel more comfortable with technology.I feel that my cooperative learning group has helped to better prepare me for employment.I have enjoyed working in my cooperative learning group.I would have liked to also use an outside media source such as Facebook or Google Chat to conduct our group interactions.Would you like to continue using cooperative learning groups to complete your assignments in future courses? Why or why not?

How do you think cooperative learning groups have impacted your individual learning and skills development?

What did you find most beneficial with the cooperative learning groups? Least beneficial?

Do you think that your cooperative learning group has helped to better prepare you for employment? Why or why not?

Comments:

Project H 50

Appendix EConsent to Participate in a Research Study

Baker College Online

PRIMARY INVESTIGATOR: Breana Yaklin, Instructional Design, Baker CollegeTITLE OF STUDY: Cooperative Learning in Online Education

PURPOSE: You are being asked to participate in cooperative learning groups throughout this course. The purpose is to assess the value of cooperative learning groups and how they might impact student achievement and skill development in the online environment.

PROCEDURES: You will be completing the same assignments and projects as students in previous courses, but you will be grouped into cooperative learning groups to do so. You will need to participate in the group discussion and activities and cooperate with group members in order to successfully complete assignments.

TIME INVOLVED: We anticipate this study to take no additional time outside the standard course time. Students will be completing the same amount of work, just in a different type of learning environment. Participation in this study will begin on the first day of class for the Winter I quarter (Thursday, January 10, 2013) and will conclude on the last day of class for the Winter I quarter (Wednesday, February 20, 2013). Students will follow the standard course schedule to participate in this study.

RISKS: We do not anticipate any risk of serious physical or psychological harm to you as a result of your participation in this study.

BENEFITS: By participating in this study, you will have contributed to advancing our knowledge of the impact that cooperative learning can have on achievement and learning. In addition, all participants in the study will receive a debriefing, and overall results of the experiment will be made available to participants upon request. We anticipate that your participation will result in a more beneficial learning environment and will help with skill development for employment.

CONFIDENTIALITY: The identity of the participants will be known only to the researchers involved in the study, including your instructor. Because this consent form will be returned separately from your materials, your name and responses will never be linked. Your name and responses will be held in the strictest confidence to the full extent of the law. However, absolute confidentiality cannot be guaranteed, since research documents are subject to subpoena.

RIGHT TO REFUSE OR WITHDRAW: Your participation in this study is voluntary. You may refuse to participate at this point or change your mind about participating in this study at any point along the way. You will not be penalized in any way for your decision to withdraw from the study.

QUESTIONS: If you have any questions about this study, please ask your instructor or the experimenter, Breana Yaklin, breana.yaklin@baker.edu. If you have additional questions later, or if you want to receive a summary of the results of the study, you may contact Dr. Chris Schram, Baker College, Flint, MI,

Project H 51

chris.schram@baker.edu OR Dr. Mike Tyler, Baker College, Flint, MI, michael.tyler@baker.edu. This information will also be made available to you following the study.

Your signature below will indicate that you have decided to serve as a research participant and that you have read and understood the information provided above.

_____________________________________________ __________________(Signature of Participant) (Date)

_____________________________________________ __________________(Signature of participant’s parent or guardian if under 18) (Date)

Appendix FTimeline

May 21-June 3, 2012 Initial ReflectionJune 3-June 17, 2012 Review of literatureJuly 1-August 7, 2012 Development of research proposal, outline action research study parameters.August 10-31, 2012 Contact Institutional Review Board members for Baker College: Chris Schram

and Mike Tyler. Request permission to conduct action research study, present research proposal.

September 27-November 7, 2012

Gather baseline data from Fall I MKT111B course using Waypoint assignment links to assess final marketing presentations. Contact Cindy Gansen, Business System Director, and Aimee Losee, Online Business Dean to discuss plan to implement action research plan in MKT111B Online courses. Collaborate with two fellow Instructional Designers to re-develop MKT111B OL curriculum to follow a cooperative learning format.

November 8-November 30, 2012

Analyze baseline data. First collaboration meeting with Instructional Designers, Cindy Gansen, Aimee Losee, and OL Business faculty.

December 1-21, 2012 Second collaboration meeting with Instructional Designers, Cindy Gansen, Aimee Losee, and OL Business faculty. Contact students registered for MKT111B OL to disseminate information on action research plan for the course. Send out electronic informed consent forms, and collect electronic informed consent forms with an electronic signature. Separate any non-participating students into a separate course section. If necessary, schedule a third collaboration meeting with OL Business faculty.

January 10-January 16, 2013

Week One of MKT111B OL: Begin cooperative learning activities on day 1, faculty to divide students into cooperative learning groups by the end of the week. Faculty gather observational data.

January 17- January 23, 2013

Week Two of MKT111B OL: Begin Part 1 of Marketing Project in cooperative learning groups. Faculty gather observational data.

January 24-January 30, 2013

Week Three of MKT111B OL: Begin Part 2 of Marketing Project in cooperative learning groups. Faculty to disperse and gather Week Three student surveys to assess student interest and student perception of achievement. If student surveys reveal negative results, STOP action research plan or alter action research plan to meet student needs. Faculty gather observational data, and include explanations for any alterations to the action research plan.

January 31- February Week Four of MKT111B OL: If continuing with action research plan without

Project H 52

6, 2013 alterations, begin Part 3 of Marketing Project in cooperative learning groups. Faculty gather observational data.

February 7- February 13, 2013

Week Five of MKT111B OL: Begin Part 4 of Marketing Project in cooperative learning groups. Faculty gather observational data.

February 14- February 20, 2013

Week Six of MKT111B OL: Students complete final marketing presentation in cooperative learning groups. Data on final marketing presentation assignment gathered to support data analysis. Faculty to disperse and gather Week Six student surveys to assess student interest and student perception of achievement. Faculty gather observational data.

February 21- March 29, 2013

Data analysis: Observational notes from faculty, student surveys, Waypoint data on final marketing presentation assignment. Reflection discussion meetings with faculty to discuss instructional experiences and observational notes. Share data analysis with Instructional Design team for peer debriefing.

April 1- April 30, 2013

Writing results and putting the action research report together. Disseminating action research report draft to Instructional Design team, OL Business Faculty, Cindy Gansen, and Aimee Losee for review and critique.

May 1- May 15, 2013 Revisions of the report.May 16- May 31, 2013

Prepare report for presentation at Online Faculty Conference.

June 1-June 5, 2013 Present action research report to all Baker College OL faculty at Online Faculty Conference.