Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
limits for the completion of parts of the role-play.
However, some students may still not respond in
the designated times and thus hamper the comple-
tion of the role-play.
(or alternatively those who self-select) participate
in the actual role-play by jumping in and out of
the roles of social worker and service users. If
student numbers are large in a class then a number
of interactive fishbowls can operate at the same
time. A concurrent separate discussion board for
allows those students not in role to comment upon
the role-play. As in all the models outlined here
this discussion is informed by the readings on
reflexive practice discussed prior to the role-play
commencing. During the role-play students move
from a critiquing role in one discussion thread to
actively participating in the role-play in the other
thread. The teacher moderates the changing of
roles by students, and can email students who
require extra coaching in the theory or interven-
tions. The teacher can also, where appropriate,
jump into role herself to model “best practice”
in reflexive practice.
The advantage of this model is that many
students can actively participate in the role-play
scenario, and move between critique and action.
The modelling of “best practice” by the teacher
allows students to understand reflexive practice
in this area. A disadvantage of this model is
that it can be time intensive for the teacher who
moderates role changes, the discussion board, on
occasion jumps into role and also conducts private
coaching. This approach to the online role-play
is described in more detail later in this chapter
as a case study dealing with learning regarding
discipline area of mediation theory and practice,
which includes facilitation skills.
model 2: fishbowl: Demonstrated
role-play online
In this version of the online role-play two students
are selected to take the roles of social worker and
service user and the role-play is played out elec-
tronically, viewed by the rest of the class online.
The observing students have the opportunity, in
a separate threaded discussion, to suggest and
critique intervention choices made by the in role
social worker. As in the first model this role-play
experience is preceded by an online theory dis-
cussion. Students can contribute comments on
either a particular intervention, or on the general
approach being taken by the student in the role of
the social worker. In this discussion the teacher
can engage in Laurillard's (2002) discursive
framework through describing and re-describing
relevant theory to assist students in understanding
interventions that would promote reflexive prac-
tice. A disadvantage of this approach, in contrast
to model one, is that only a limited number of
students are actively engaged in the role-play.
There is however, some level of active engagement
for the rest of the class as students are engaged
in the concurrent, critiquing process. A recent
study by Roberts (2007) has found that it is not
the quantity of interaction online that is important
but the quality of interaction provided in a role-
play. Thus arguably observation may have merit
in promoting student learning where combined
with students offering critique of interventions
in a linked discussion board.
model 4: comparative
role-play online
In the comparative role-play online groups of
students are asked to take part in two different
versions of a online role-play that is demonstrated
to the rest of the class through the Blackboard
Learning Management System. Each role-play
starts with the same brief scenario and service
user details. The difference between the role-plays
model 3: interactive fishbowl
role-play online
The interactive fishbowl role-play is similar to the
demonstration role-play, except that all students
Search WWH ::
Custom Search