A Penn State doctoral student recently conducted a study that found instructor-moderated chat rooms could be a new way for students to participate in discussions.
Last spring, Edward Glantz, a doctoral student in the School of Information Sciences and Technology (IST) and Michael McNeese, associate professor of IST, wanted to compare the interaction levels between online chat rooms and in-class review sessions in large classes.
In the 15-week study, Glantz held voluntary chat room review sessions for three exams in two sections of his MIS 204 (Introduction to Business Information Systems) classes.
Glantz said he has not been promoting the use of teacher-moderated chat rooms for review sessions to other colleges, but he has seen the College of Education taking advantage of the technology.
In a preliminary analysis of the study, which will be published this summer, Glantz said student feedback has been mixed. Most students said they liked how the question-and-answer format of online chat rooms created a sense of anonymity without putting students on the spot in front of their peers, he said.
"Students felt like the question was asked directly to them," he said.
However, despite many students who took advantage of the chat room review sessions, Glantz said students known as "lurkers" sat there in the chat room and did not participate.
The study was developed after noticing that "chat was deemed the least useful" by faculty members when the Angel course management system was introduced in spring 2002, Glantz said.
In the chat room review session, a student would begin with a question and the instructor would watch students discuss course material, only interrupting to rephrase questions when needed, he said.
Mary Curren (graduate student-curriculum and instruction) said she felt large lectures can cause a student to be more reserved.
"You feel more compelled in a small class because the professor knows your name and [there are] participation points," she said.
Erica Zerfoss (junior-bioengineering) said she contributes more in classes of 20 or fewer and sees herself neither quiet or outspoken in a class setting. "In class I wouldn't say I'm any extreme. I'm comfortable asking questions," she said. "In a large class I would most likely ask the person next to me," Zerfoss said.
Glantz said beside problems with student participation, he also finds teaching large classes to be a workout. He said he finds himself "jogging the whole time" to try to make it up the stairs to answer student questions.
Steven Keating teaches two lectures, BI SC 004 (Human Body: Form and Function) and MICRB 106 (Elementary Microbiology) and holds several review sessions. He prefers face-to-face interaction. "[For me] it's easier to speak than to type. I can speak faster and use the overhead," he said. "They don't have the imagery [in chat rooms]."
Keating said he typically sees 10 to 15 percent of his several hundred students who attend these informal and less intimidating review sessions.
Glantz said a teacher-moderated chat rooms allow professors to cancel in-class reviews due to bad weather and instead have students log online for the review.
Keating said it is better to hold more visually-oriented reviews in the classroom, but he does feel teacher-moderated review sessions in chat rooms would be beneficial for other large classes.
