Page 279 - IJET_July2021_final

created for troubleshooting. No activity were posted as a Google Group
academic deliberations were allowed thread. Group A participants were
or encouraged on these WA groups, divided in 2 sub-groups viz. A1 and
ensuring use of selected ICT platforms A2, each having 19 participants. The
for participating in the activity. grouping was done on the basis of Pre-
test scores. The scores were sorted
The Group A was treated through
asynchronous mode for the selected initially and then means were matched.
topic and vice versa. Google Group Further 8 participants were selected
discussion was used for Group A where randomly from each sub-group based
activity was conducted in asynchronous on their pre-test score. This sub-group
mode. WizIQ Virtual classroom platform was termed as ‘Fishbowl group’. Care
was used for Group B to discuss in the was taken to maintain balance between
synchronous mode. high achievers, mid achievers, and
low achievers in the group. Thus, the
Fishbowl group contained two high
Implementing Fishbowl in
Asynchronous mode of online achievers, two low achievers and four
learning mid achievers selected randomly by chit
method. Details of grouping strategy
Two Google Groups were formed for are shown in Figure-2.
conducting the discussion on the topic.
Specific Google groups invites were sent
to participants for joining the respective
group. All the details regarding the

Figure-2: Grouping for ‘Asynchronous Fishbowl Strategy’

Fishbowl Group A1
(8 Participants)
Google
Group 1
Outer Group A1
(11 Participants)
Divided into two Group A1
parallel groups (19 Participants)
Group A Fishbowl Group A2
(38 Participants) (8 Participants)
Group A2 Google
(19 Participants) Group 2
Outer Group A2
(11 Participants)

Indian Journal of Educational Technology 269
Volume 3, Issue 2, July 2021