\documentclass[12pt]{article}

\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{breakcites}
\usepackage{lineno}
\usepackage{hyphenat}



\usepackage{times}


\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd\@combinedblfloats{\box\@outputbox}{\unvbox\@outputbox}{}{%
  \errmessage{\noexpand\@combinedblfloats could not be patched}%
}%
\makeatother


\usepackage{natbib}




\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}


\usepackage{authblk}


\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[english]{babel}










\begin{document}

\title{Designing for collaborative discourse in an online~class: An `unLMS'
approach}



\author[1]{Bodong Chen}%
\affil[1]{University of Minnesota}%


\vspace{-1em}



  
  \date{May 05, 2024}


\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup








\sloppy


\emph{\textbf{{[}Note: This version is dated after I incorporated many
useful comments from colleagues. The most recent version is on
\href{https://osf.io/ebjfp}{OSF Preprints}.{]}}}

\par\null

\textbf{Abstract}: In this design case, an instructor architected a
digital learning environment to facilitate collaborative discourse in an
online~graduate-level class. Given traditional Learning Management
Systems offer uninspiring support for dynamic social interactions, the
designed environment harnessed emerging technologies in open textbooks,
web~annotation and team communication to foster a collaborative learner
discourse that was dynamic, distributed, and coherent. The purpose of
this paper is to describe the designed digital environment, as well as
key design decisions leading to the designed environment.

\textbf{Keywords}: Learning environments. LMS. Collaborative discourse.
Collaborative learning. Design case.

\section*{Introduction}

{\label{203248}}

Educational technologists have come up with many metaphors for the
Learning Managements System (LMS), including a~``walled garden'' with
rich functionalities but closed to the external
world~\hyperref[csl:1]{(Mott \& Wiley, 2009)},~a ``minivan'' with utility features but
nothing very exciting~\hyperref[csl:2]{(Hill, 2015)}, or~a ``bus'' driven not by the
instructor or learners but someone else \hyperref[csl:3]{(Downes, 2015)}. Despite the
prevalence of LMSs in higher education, they are often criticized for
not doing certain things well, among which is to support learner
discussions~\hyperref[csl:4]{(Brown et al., 2015)}. While the LMS will remain broadly
relevant, they indeed only represent one genre of digital learning
environments, especially given the increasingly complex terrains of
digital learning (e.g.,~\hyperref[csl:5]{(Ito et al., 2013}; \hyperref[csl:6]{Siemens, 2011)}). Researchers and
practitioners are experimenting to~\emph{unLMS}---i.e., to defy
traditional dependence on the LMS with emerging solutions---in order to
better support particular learning experiences in classrooms.

The design case introduced in this paper represents one example of the
unLMS approach. In particular, when designing a new graduate-level
course, in order to promote collaborative learner discourse, the author
of this design case---also the designer and initial instructor of this
course---chose to architect a digital learning environment based on
recent technological innovations in open textbooks, web annotation, and
team communication. As defined by~\hyperref[csl:7]{(Boling, 2010)}, a~\emph{design
case} is ``a description of a real artifact or experience that has been
intentionally designed''(p. 2), and is then disseminated as a form of
designer knowledge, or~\emph{precedent}, to benefit other designers
(see~\hyperref[csl:8]{(Roxanne Russell \& Cuevas, 2014}; \hyperref[csl:9]{Langub \& Lokey-Vega, 2017)} for examples). In this paper, I introduce design
goals, rationales, the designed environment, and key design
considerations given in the design process.~

\section*{Design Context}

{\label{478075}}

The designer, also the author of this paper, was an instructor in
learning technologies at a large public university in the United States.
The designer held bachelor's and master's degrees in educational
technology and a Ph.D. degree in learning sciences. After joining the
university, he was charged with the development of new courses~in
learning analytics and was actively teaching online and face-to-face
classes at both undergraduate and graduate levels. He has participated
in a number of technology-related pilots at his university, which is a
member of the Unizin consortium and has an active agenda in exploring
learning technologies. During these pilots, he experimented with the
Canvas LMS, a Unizin dashboard tool, and a Unizin online reading
environment. Overall, the designer has been actively exploring various
digital learning environments in his teaching career.~

A newly proposed online course on ``Social Network Analysis in
Education'' served as the design context. Built by the designer from
scratch, this course was a graduate-level methodology course not
previously offered at the designer's college. The course attracted 15
enrollees from four departments in the college, as well as expressed
desires to participate from several faculty members.~

\section*{Design Goals: Collaborative~Discourse with a
Taste}

{\label{452115}}

\begin{quote}
``Digital pedagogy is important because it is willing to improvise, to
respond to a new environment, to experiment. The digital pedagogue is
not the same as an online teacher. The digital pedagogue looks at the
options, refuses the limitations of the LMS, invites her students to
participate in---indeed, create---networked learning.''
\hyperref[csl:10]{(Morris, 2013)}
\end{quote}

Positioning himself as a ``digital pedagogue,'' the designer-instructor
elected to adapt his teaching to nurture networked, collaborative
learning in this course. This intent was reflected in his ongoing
research on collaborative knowledge building~\hyperref[csl:11]{(Chen \& Hong, 2016)}, and was
also aligned with the course's focus on sociocultural aspects of
learning. Indeed, facilitating rich social, collaborative interactions
was no longer optional but imperative for this course.

\emph{Collaboration}, as defined by~\hyperref[csl:12]{(Roschelle \& Teasley, 1995)} in the context
of collaborative problem solving, is ``a coordinated, synchronous
activity that is the result of a continued attempt to construct and
maintain a shared conception of a problem'' (p. 70). In their context,
collaboration requires a~\emph{joint problem space} between students so
that they have a shared conception of~\emph{the} problem. In this design
case,~\emph{collaborative discourse} is rather broadly conceptualized as
a discourse practice where students engage constructively with each
other's ideas about their~joint or overlapping problem spaces, with
support from external meditational artifacts (e.g., discussion posts,
web annotations, electronic documents). Collaborative discourse involves
a social process in which individuals work together to tackle problems
of understanding through~a variety of discursive activities such
as~explanation building, argumentation, and~consensus
building~\hyperref[csl:13]{(Osborne, 2010}; \hyperref[csl:14]{Nussbaum, 2008)}. As such, even though learners may not
necessarily converge on a same joint problem, they share~adjacent,
overlapping problem spaces in collaborative discourse.

Typical LMSs---specifically threaded discussion forums packaged within
them---often fall short in supporting collaborative discourse. Prior
research has documented a myriad of pitfalls of discussion forums. For
instance,~\hyperref[csl:15]{(Hewitt, 2005)} documents premature abandonment of
discussion topics partly because of learners' ``single-pass discourse
practices;'' that is, as participants~of threaded discussions tend to
make single passes of unread posts, threads without recent notes are
likely to die, leaving potentially promising ideas
untapped.~\hyperref[csl:16]{(Thomas, 2002)}~argues the threading structure of
discussion forums leads to branching and increasingly fragmented
conversations, with repetition and duplication appearing in different
threads; as a result, many discussion themes remains underdeveloped,
with little idea exchanges taking place in their corresponding threads.
The rigid design of traditional threaded discussion environments
restrains ideas within threads, and consequently suppresses the flexible
movement of ideas across discursive~contexts, the creation of
higher-order organization of ideas, and the self-organization of
discourse participants around ideas~\hyperref[csl:17]{(Scardamalia \& Bereiter, 2003}; \hyperref[csl:18]{Scardamalia et al., 2011)}.

To counter these challenges, the designer focused on achieving the
following design goals in this design case:

\begin{enumerate}
\def\labelenumi{\arabic{enumi}.}
\tightlist
\item
  \emph{Many (if not any) web objects as objects of discourse}. While a
  traditional discussion forum is separated from the objects being
  discussed, a more powerful discourse environment is able to
  incorporate various web objects into discourse to maintain its
  contexts.
\item
  \emph{Connected ideas not trapped in individual discourse~spaces}.
  Ideas shared in a discourse space (e.g., a discussion thread) are
  portable and can be flexibly moved to another space to serve different
  discursive goals.
\item
  \emph{One discourse, multiple entry points}. Discourse contributions
  can be made at different digital spaces while still maintaining a
  sense of one coherent discourse. Contributions can be aggregated and
  coherently represented for higher-order organizations and knowledge
  operations.
\item
  \emph{Boundary-crossing between public and private discussions}. While
  classroom discourse is usually treated as a private space, discourse
  of varied publicity---private in a dyad, public in a private group,
  public to external communities---could have their unique strengths in
  fostering cognitive, social, and cultural aspects of discourse.
\end{enumerate}

In the next section, I describe the digital environment designed to
serve these four goals within the design context.

\section*{The Designed Environment}

{\label{826702}}

The designed learning environment included three main interconnected
components, each of which had varied levels of emphasis on collaborative
discourse and on~openness.

\subsection*{Open course portal}

{\label{315684}}

To replace an LMS' role in hosting course materials, the designer used a
tool, \emph{Bookdown}, for open textbook authoring and hosting. This
tool---based on R (an open-source statistical programming language) and
Markdown (a markup language)---enabled authoring and~quick~publishing of
course content. Similar to typical usage of an LMS for hosting course
content,~the~designer provided on the Bookdown site links to a course
textbook, links to other chosen web materials (e.g., journal articles),
weekly course videos made by the instructor, and description of weekly
learning activities (Goal 1;~see
Figure~{\ref{216900}}). By hosting it as an open
textbook, learners not formally enrolled could also follow this course,
enabling two different pathways of course participation (Goal 4), akin
to a ``dual-layer'' participation~approach in MOOC
design~\hyperref[csl:19]{(Ros{\'e} et al., 2015)}.\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/Screen-Shot-2017-05-23-at-22.19.32/bookdown}
\caption{{Open course portal hosted on bookdown.org.
{\label{216900}}%
}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsection*{Social annotation tool}

{\label{332596}}

To foster learner discourse grounded in conceptually relevant content,
the instructor chose~\emph{Hypothesis}, an emerging social annotation
tool designed to support interactivity virtually on any webpage.
Hypothesis functions through a browser plugin or a Javascript-based
bookmarklet. After activating Hypothesis in her browser, a learner can
annotate a piece of text on a webpage with her own ideas, to which other
learners could also respond (Goals 1 \& 2). Like other popular social
media websites, tags could be used to bring together~Hypothesis
annotations that are potentially scattered in different webpages (Goal
2). As such, Hypothesis enables~\emph{multiple entry points} of a same
discourse (Goal 3). Thanks to Hypothesis' adherence to the Open Web
principles and standards~\hyperref[csl:20]{(Haslhofer et al., 2011)}, annotations are uniquely
identifiable and retrievable for end-users, allowing portability of
posts not widely supported in threaded discussion forums (Goal 2). The
search feature on the Hypothesis website offers a means to aggregate
annotations under a tag (or a combination of tags) and to review the
annotation-based discourse. Participants were thus able to enter the
discourse not only from the specific webpage context (e.g., the
textbook), but also from a discourse review process on the search page
(Goal 3).

In addition, to negotiate the public--private boundary, the
designer-instructor allowed course registrants to annotate either
publicly or in a private Hypothesis group---both using a same course
hashtag (Goal 4). Using this social annotation tool, the class carried
on weekly discussions across various web spaces, including the Bookdown
course website, the course textbook (accessible via~the library's
website), open textbooks, journal articles, blog posts, and other web
materials shared by the instructor and students (Goal 1). In summary,
the social annotation tool enabled a discourse---public and/or
private---spread across multiple types of web objects relevant to the
course.~

\par\null\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/Screen-Shot-2017-05-31-at-14.14.41/Screen-Shot-2017-05-31-at-14.14.41}
\caption{{Annotating a book chapter using Hypothesis. Fifty-eight annotations have
been made on this page. On the left presents the textbook accessible
online through the university's library. To the right is the Hypothesis
sidebar presenting existing annotations anchored in specific text
snippets, which are highlighted to the left in the webpage.
{\label{488120}}%
}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsection*{Class communication tool}

{\label{432291}}

To facilitate class communication (e.g., course announcements, Q\&A) and
course logistics such as assignment submissions, the instructor created
a private Slack team.~\emph{Slack} is a team communication tool
initially popularized by tech startups and more recently adopted by
educators. Compared to a traditional threaded discussion format, Slack's
key strength for fostering learner discourse is its free-flow style of
communication. Specifically, instead of having students posting in a
thread each week, the class hosted several Slack channels for different
general purposes (e.g., discussion of course concepts, assignment
submission and feedback, general sharing of `cool stuff'). The linear
progression of discourse in each channel helps participants stay current
on the most recent posts while they could also easily revitalize an idea
posted weeks earlier (Goal 2), mitigating boundaries set by traditional
discussion threads. In addition, various social features in Slack, such
as mentioning a user and reacting to a post with emojis, could benefit
socio-emotional ties~in this online course.~

Slack is not merely an alternative to discussion forums. Its support for
file sharing and management enables students to contribute various types
of conceptual artifacts (e.g., an essay, a code snippet, a Google Doc)
flexibly to the whole class, a specific channel, or an individual (Goals
1 \& 4). In addition, Slack's open API brings about a wide range of
plugins that serves various purposes ranging from integrations with
external tools (e.g., Hypothesis, Twitter), chat bots, to GIF importers.
These possibilities, many of which were untapped in this design case,
offers interoperability and personalization capabilities unseen in most
LMS solutions~\hyperref[csl:4]{(Brown et al., 2015)}.

To support privacy and intimacy of formal course participants, the Slack
team was set to private and not accessible to open participants (Goal
4). Students submitted course assignments in a dedicated ``assignments''
channel and made their submissions visible to all Slack members. This
design decision was made based on the course context where assignments
were largely personalized based on each student's research interests,
access to datasets, and familiarity with different tools. So posting
assignments publicly in the private Slack space would less likely
jeopardize independent work. As a matter of fact, such openness in the
closed environment benefited the collaborative discourse, as students
quickly started to share project ideas and codes and commented on each
other's work actively. Even though they were working on distinctive
course projects, their overlapping problem spaces offered them
motivations and opportunities to collaborate in various manners,
including debugging understanding of key concepts,~sharing generic
codes, and critiquing each other's project findings. Moreover, the
class' Hypothesis activities were synced into a dedicated Slack channel
named ``Hypo Feed'' via the Hypothesis' API; as such, social annotations
containing the course hashtag (made by both formal or open participants)
were notified on Slack as well, and Slack participants could react to a
Hypothesis annotation by following a link provided in the notification
(Goals 2, 3 \& 4).~

Table 1 summarizes how these three components came together to achieve
the design goals, and Figure 3 illustrates course activities
collectively supported by these components. Overall, the Bookdown course
website served as a portal bringing various web objects into learner
discourse and enabled two pathways of participation. Hypothesis
supported interactions on various web objects (e.g., course textbook) in
the form of web annotations, allowed ideas posted in annotations to be
shared elsewhere, facilitated varied mechanisms to review and
participate in the discourse, and promoted two participation pathways as
well as boundary-crossing between them. Slack provided a replacement of
traditional threaded discussion forums but with stronger support for
participants to monitor discourse, revisit earlier ideas, and repurpose
ideas in the ever-evolving discourse process. Slack also provided entry
points to the discourse by integrating Hypothesis annotations and
further supports internal public-private boundary-crossing in the formal
pathway.~Beyond these three tools, a standalone gradebook was used to
keep track of student grades, a feature commonly found in an LMS.

\par\null\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\caption{{Summary of Tools and Design Goals}}
\label{table1}
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\hline
Goals                                                    & Bookdown & Hypothesis & Slack \\ \hline
1. Many web objects as objects of discourse              & x        & x          & x     \\
2. Connected ideas not trapped in discussion threads     &          & x          & x     \\
3. One discourse, multiple entry points                  &          & x          & x     \\
4. Boundary crossing between open and closed discussions & x        & x          & x     \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/Design/Design}
\caption{{System design diagram.
{\label{918910}}%
}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}

\par\null

\section*{Weaving things together: Instructor and learner
experiences}

{\label{987291}}

To describe experiences supported by the designed environment, below I
present two narratives, one by the instructor and the other from a
student perspective, to demonstrate use of the environment in a typical
week of the class.

The instructor narrative:

\begin{quote}
\emph{We are entering the sixth week of this course, when we will
explore concepts related to~centrality} \emph{and~centralization}
\emph{in social network analysis. In preparation for this week, I have
been finalizing learning goals and collecting online resources that
would compliment our course textbook. After exploring a wide range of
resources online, I decided to incorporate a slide deck from the
University of Washington and a video lecture from a Coursera MOOC in
this week's course materials. As I put this week's content together, I
started to write in Bookdown, adding my own thoughts to weave different
ideas and~materials together and explaining course activities for this
week.}

\emph{After having a good handle over next week's plan, I opened up the
textbook chapter students annotated last week. Dozens of Hypothesis
annotations made by students showed up. I spotted several interesting
questions and reactions shared by students since the last time I
checked, and decided to address them in this week's course video. When
pieces for this week were in place, I launched a free screencast
software on my computer and started to record this week's video and
uploaded it to my Youtube channel.}

\emph{After a quick proofread I uploaded the course website hosted on
Bookdown. I then sent out an announcement to the whole class on Slack,
with a link to this week's webpage. I mentioned everyone (by adding
``@everyone'') so they will all receive a notification email as well. I
also shared the link on Twitter and Facebook for open participants to
pick up. Last week when I checked Google Analytics, I spotted dozens of
visits to~\emph{the Bookdown site}~from the US and several other
countries, which was quite exciting.}

\emph{Within a few hours, a Hypothesis annotation was notified on Slack.
A student from the class, one of the ``early-birds,'' spotted a typo on
the course website and annotated it using Hypothesis. I temporarily left
Slack, where I was chatting with a few students about last week's
assignments, and went to correct the typo and re-publish the course
website, all in a matter of one minute.~}

\emph{As this week progressed, more annotations were popping up in the
Slack channel. Even though I monitored student discussions on both
Hypothesis and Slack, I usually let the conversations flow and gave
students ample space for sensemaking, sensegiving, and problem-solving
among themselves. For questions~that remained unanswered for a while on
Hypothesis, I decided to respond directly, in some cases pointing to
additional web resources or a related annotation shared by another
student.~}

\emph{As we move towards the end of this week, a few early-birds started
to post their assignments on Slack. This week's assignment involved
computing centrality measures using either igraph or Gephi (two popular
tools for social network analysis). In their posts, a few students
expressed challenges they faced with getting their data into the right
format. They spent hours to get the data work. Later on, one student
shared her R code, together with her interpretation of measures in her
course project. Students who expressed their struggles with this
assignment praised her work and refactored some of her code for their
own projects, with acknowledgments to the student's inspiration. Two
students who were especially struggling with R, self-organized to attend
a workshop offered by a group from another ~college of the university.
They reported back to Slack what they learned and shared a bunch of
resources with the class. There were a number of back and forth among
course participants. They created and shared a variety of artifacts,
such as Word documents, network graphs, code snippets, examples of
tidied datasets, and links to extra resources they found online. I did
not need to participate in many cases, as they are collaboratively
figuring things out, or in some cases `geeking out' over things I didn't
think about. So I decided to move ahead to author next week's
materials.}
\end{quote}

A narrative from the student perspective:

\begin{quote}
\emph{It's Monday again, the start date of a new week for the online
course. I still feel pumped by last week's course activities as I was
able to produce beautiful network visualizations from my project data. I
don't care how many times the professor says ``social network analysis
is much more than those graphs,'' because I simply like visuals of
networks, especially those made by myself. I admit this experience feels
quite empowering.}

\emph{When I opened my email, a Slack notification from the professor
appeared. He just posted an announcement about this week. I logged into
Slack and quickly read through his post. There is nothing particularly
new this week, except for the course content. After the past few weeks,
I now feel quite comfortable navigating digital tools used in this
course. Using Slack and Hypothesis---instead of Moodle that I've been
using for years---was initially challenging for my-non-tech-savvy-self,
but I was able to find my ways around after the first two weeks and
actually liked this approach to learning.}

\emph{I followed a link to this week's course webpage and started
watching the video posted by the professor. He provided a quick overview
of this week's key concepts, discussion activities, and assignments. I
started reading the book chapter in our textbook and made a bunch of
Hypothesis annotations along the way. Sometimes I also use Hypothesis as
a note-taking tool: I make private highlights (only visible to myself)
of key terms and interesting viewpoints in the textbook, and then when I
finish reading, I will review all the highlights and copy them into my
own notebook.~I am usually the first few students annotating the
textbook, so I would revisit the page later to check other students'
annotations. Another student, who is taking two other classes with me
this semester, mentioned to me she found my annotations helpful while
making the first pass through the readings. She said being able to see
each other' annotations made her feel less lonely and more intimate to
other classmates, even though she would still prefer reading on paper. I
surely agreed. Additional resources provided by the professor were
helpful for resolving some confusions left from reading the textbook. I
posted some general thoughts on Slack as well.~}

\emph{Compared to reading these course materials, working on the
assignment was much more challenging. I chose to do social network
analysis using R, even though I had zero experiences in coding. The
learning curve was steep and I spent a lot of time to code and debug my
code. This week turned out to be easier, as my project data has already
been cleaned and readily analyzable. I wrote a few lines of code and was
able to compute centrality measures. This is exciting and I shared my
results and code on the `assignments' channel on Slack.~}

\emph{As I thought I was done with this week, another student raised a
question about the centrality function I used. It turned out there are a
bunch of parameters we could manipulate to achieve different analytical
purposes. In the code she shared on Slack, I learned that we can
normalize the centrality measure within a network. I didn't know that!!
But wait, when should we normalize the measures then? Nobody seemed to
know yet. A few of us went on to discuss this problem, using both public
Slack channels and private messages. One student shared back a blog post
seemingly addressing this question. He annotated the answer using
Hypothesis so the whole class got notified as well. I kind of wished the
professor could chime in. After two days, I sent him a private message
on Slack, and he quickly pointed me to a journal article he found
useful.~}
\end{quote}

As reflected by summary statistics, the class collectively made a total
of 615 public Hypothesis annotations and sent 2.2K Slack messages. These
two narratives provide glimpses into their interactions and course
experiences. Overall, discourse taking place in this course was fluid,
dynamic, and collaborative. Through the discourse, students were engaged
in sensemaking, sensegiving, collaborative problem-solving, artifact
creation, and deepening discussion around knowledge artifacts. The
integrative system with multiple components was able to provide a
coherent discourse experience, regardless of its departure from a
traditional LMS.~

\section*{Future Directions}

{\label{165255}}

EDUCAUSE envisions a next generation digital learning environment that
would support interoperability; personalization; analytics, advising,
and learning assessment; collaboration; and accessibility and universal
design~\hyperref[csl:4]{(Brown et al., 2015)}. This design case illustrates an effort
towards such a vision. Development in educational technology in the past
years has been challenging the concept of "learning~\emph{management},"
catalyzing a shift from learning management systems towards
learning~\emph{environments} or~\emph{platforms} that foster
learning---learning of various kinds~\hyperref[csl:21]{(Feldstein, 2017)}. This paper
introduces an intended design that focuses on integration of existing
tools, developed for drastically different purposes, to synergically
support a specific genre of learning---learning through collaborative
discourse. This design case especially demonstrates possibilities in
supporting the functional domains of interoperability and collaboration
advocated in EDUCAUSE' vision. Below I discuss future directions of this
work.

First of all, a research effort is ongoing to examine student
perceptions of this designed environment and their nuanced collaborative
discourse across multiple web spaces. We collected data from several
sources including surveys and system logs. The ongoing research project
will tackle basic usability and usefulness questions, as well as deeper
questions regarding participation patterns, discourse qualities, and
learner achievements.~

Second, a gap in the current design is an analytic system that can
operate as an agent to support sensemaking and wayfinding in such an
integrative system~\hyperref[csl:6]{(Siemens, 2011)}. Specifically, using log data from
Hypothesis and Slack, I envision a suite of discourse analytics
\hyperref[csl:22]{(De Liddo et al., 2011)}~to assist the instructor and students in keeping
track of their collaborative discourse and making informed decisions on
when and how to contribute.~

Finally, as the course is to be offered again, I plan to maintain and
reuse these digital spaces to explore cross-community
interactions~\hyperref[csl:23]{(Zhang \& Bogouslavsky, 2017)}. This continued design effort will
attempt to challenge the imposed artificial timeframes, so as to
continually engage course alumni, nurture a sense of sustained
community, and foster boundary-crossing across cohorts of students. When
an LMS closes, learning could continue, so could connections formed in
or for learning.~

\section*{Acknowledgments}

{\label{606269}}

This paper is supported by an NSF Award (\#
\textless{}Blinded\textgreater{}). I thank learners who have made
thoughtful contributions to the course and \textless{}blinded for
review\textgreater{} for commenting on earlier drafts of this paper.~

\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\section*{References}\sloppy
\phantomsection
\label{csl:1}{Open for learning: The {CMS} and the open learning network}. (2009). \textit{In Education}, \textit{15}(2).

\phantomsection
\label{csl:2}{{LMS} Is The Minivan of Education (and other thoughts from {\#LILI15})}. (2015). In \textit{e-Literate}. \url{http://mfeldstein.com/lms-is-the-minivan-of-education-and-other-thoughts-from-lili15/}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:3}{Commentary on {'LMS} Is The Minivan of Education (and other thoughts from {\#LILI15)'}}. (2015). In \textit{{OLDaily}}. \url{http://www.downes.ca/post/63849}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:4}\textit{{The Next Generation Digital Learning Environment}}. (2015). EDUCAUSE.

\phantomsection
\label{csl:5}\textit{{Connected learning: an agenda for research and design}} (p. 99). (2013). (p. ). Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.

\phantomsection
\label{csl:6}\textit{{Orientation: Sensemaking and wayfinding in complex distributed online information environments}}. (2011). [PhD thesis]. ethos.bl.uk.

\phantomsection
\label{csl:7}{The need for design cases: Disseminating design knowledge}. (2010). \textit{International Journal of Designs for Learning}, \textit{1}(1).

\phantomsection
\label{csl:8}{Designing customizable reading modules for a high school literature classroom}. (2014). \textit{TechTrends}, \textit{58}(5), 70–79. \url{https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-014-0788-8}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:9}{Rethinking Instructional Technology to Improve Pedagogy for Digital Literacy: A Design Case in a Graduate Early Childhood Education Course}. (2017). \textit{TechTrends}, 1–9. \url{https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-017-0185-1}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:10}{Decoding Digital Pedagogy, pt. 1: Beyond the {LMS} - Hybrid Pedagogy}. (2013). \textit{Hybrid Pedagogy}.

\phantomsection
\label{csl:11}{Schools as knowledge-building organizations: Thirty years of design research}. (2016). \textit{Educational Psychologist}, \textit{51}(2), 266–288. \url{https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1175306}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:12}{The Construction of Shared Knowledge in Collaborative Problem Solving}. (1995). In \textit{Computer Supported Collaborative Learning} (pp. 69–97). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. \url{https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-85098-1\_5}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:13}{Arguing to learn in science: the role of collaborative, critical discourse}. (2010). \textit{Science}, \textit{328}(5977), 463–466. \url{https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1183944}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:14}{Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review}. (2008). \textit{Contemporary Educational Psychology}, \textit{33}(3), 345–359. \url{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.06.001}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:15}{Toward an understanding of how threads die in asynchronous computer conferences}. (2005). \textit{Journal of the Learning Sciences}, \textit{14}(4), 567–589. \url{https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1404\_4}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:16}{Learning within incoherent structures: the space of online discussion forums}. (2002). \textit{Journal of Computer Assisted Learning}, \textit{18}(3), 351–366. \url{https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.03800.x}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:17}DiStefano, A., Rudestam, K. E., \& Silverman, R. (Eds.). (2003). {Knowledge building environments: Extending the limits of the possible in education and knowledge work}. In \textit{Encyclopedia of distributed learning} (pp. 269–272). Sage Publications.

\phantomsection
\label{csl:18}\textit{{{Next-Generation} Knowledge Building Environments}}. (2011).

\phantomsection
\label{csl:19}{Challenges and opportunities of dual-layer {MOOCs}: Reflections from an edX deployment study}. (2015). \textit{{CSCL} 2015 Proceedings}, \textit{15}, 848–851.

\phantomsection
\label{csl:20}{The Open Annotation Collaboration ({OAC}) Model}. (2011). \textit{2011 Workshop on Multimedia on the Web}, 5–9. \url{https://doi.org/10.1109/MMWeb.2011.21}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:21}{A Flexible, Interoperable Digital Learning Platform: Are We There Yet?}. (2017). In \textit{e-Literate}. \url{http://mfeldstein.com/flexible-interoperable-digital-learning-platform-yet/}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:22}{Discourse-centric learning analytics}. (2011). \textit{Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge - {LAK} '11}, 23–33. \url{https://doi.org/10.1145/2090116.2090120}

\phantomsection
\label{csl:23}{{Cross-Community} Interaction for Knowledge Building in Two Grade 5/6 Classrooms}. (2017). \textit{Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning ({CSCL} 2017)}.

\end{document}

