About the author

Reviews

5 stage model

People

From ‘Resources for Practitioners’ 30: Running e-tivities plenaries
(p. 194-6)

Weaving, archiving and summarising are key tasks for e-moderators and add much value to e-tivities. Participants can also usefully acquire and contribute these skills. Or the role of summariser can usefully be taken by 2 or 3 people working collaboratively (however this takes up more time). Whoever undertakes the summary should always invite comment on the sufficiency and interpretation by the original contributors.

Weaving / Summarising / Archiving / E-tivities and cost / Your platform / Extracts
Web based references / E-ducation platforms

Here is an example of clever ‘weaving’ of contributions, using quotes from six different messages during an online discussion about the e-moderator’s role and dominant and lurking participants. The summariser and weaver is JS and his contributions are in italics.

D said “we need to be in the conference regularly as a lot of damage can be done if you weren’t there at the ‘bud-nipping’ stage”

I’d go along with that one but bearing in mind A’s point that

“There do have to be parameters otherwise those who can only spend minimum time feel disadvantaged by others who become addicts!”

and a moderator should not need to become an addict to do the job well.

“So, I think I'll be more assertive this time round” (A’s message)

Yes, be assertive (when appropriate !) even if?

“the flaming has broken out, not between the combatants, but against the poor old e-moderator when he or she has intervened to break it up!” (H’s message)

not looking forward to that one coming my way. Hopefully, however, we will generally be in a position to?

“let students get on with discussions if these seem productive” (P’s message)

and as C says:

“it actually sounds fun”

JS

The purpose of Summarising is:

• To weave and acknowledge the variety of ideas and contributions
• To refocus discussion and activity when postings are too numerous. Summarise after each 20 messages, at a pre-agreed time or at regular intervals, e.g. every 3 days. In a large or busy e-tivity, this can be done daily.
• To refocus discussion and activity when postings have strayed from the topic.
• To refocus discussion and promote activity when e-tivities are going well
• To refocus discussion and revive activity when postings are flagging.
• To signal closure of the e-tivity.
• To take the outcomes of an e-tivity to present or work on offline
• To provide fresh starting points for broadening and deepening discussion.
• To remind participants of the journey they have travelled
• To reinforce and ‘imprint’ new information and knowledge
• To provide a ‘spark’ for a new e-tivity
• To provide a ‘footprint’ as a spark for a new group
  

Archiving means removing messages to a different place in the online platform, preferably still easily retrievable by participants. Archives help enormously to prevent e-tivity message boards and conferences becoming overwhelming, particularly for newcomers and at Stages 1 and 2. The e-moderator should indicate to participants how to find and look at the archived discussions, if they wish to.

Archiving is excellent as a way of filing away sets of discussions for later use or as reference or research material, for others who want to revisit the discussions. When you archive, it’s ethical to make it clear how messages may later be used, and seek permission of the contributors.

Archive:

• To facilitate storage and retrieval.
• When postings are too numerous to effectively handle
• If there are many participants coming in, or some coming in late
• When the discussion activity is concluded and participants have a satisfactory summary
• To facilitate comparison between discussion themes.
  

Resources for Practitioners 33 (p201-2)

Once e-tivities are designed and built into a programme, the key cost issue is arranging appropriate e-moderator support. Therefore it is important to know as soon as how many participants are likely to arrive and when. Clearly the amount, availability and skill of non e-moderator support, such as technical help or online social hosts and mentors, will strongly impact on the efficiency of the e-moderators time.

Here are some ways of keeping down the costs of deploying e-tivities:

1. Make clear decisions about roles and numbers of e-moderators that you will need and the participant: e-moderator ratio.
2. Encourage e-moderators to work in small teams, covering for and supporting each other
3. Double the impact of trained and experienced e-moderators by encouraging them to e-moderate 2 or 3 groups of participants at any time.
4. Keep your e-moderator support to participants focussed and specify what you expect them to do and when – if necessary publish total number of hours per week or month available to participants.
5. Establish early on how much e-moderators should expect to do, and what are reasonable expectations on the part of participants
6. Ensure that e-moderators are trained in designing, developing and running efficient and effective e-tivities. Train e-moderators in advance of starting work with their participants.
7. Train e-moderators online, rather than face to face.
8. Train e-moderators using the online platform itself, thus creating confidence in the platform as well as creating an e-moderating skill base.
9. Ensure that e-moderators can up and download messages offline if they wish.
10. Train them how to use your software or platform software to best advantage to save time.
11. Set up good helpdesk and online support systems, preferably 24 hours, and encourage competent participants to support others, leaving more of your e-moderators’ online time for learning related e-moderating.
12. Use existing resources and knowledge constructed online as much as possible rather than develop materials and/or pay for expensive third party materials.
13. Develop systems for reuse, recycling and sharing of e-tivities instructions.
14. Build up economies of scale as rapidly as possible – choose only systems and approaches that can be expanded cheaply.

See Ash and Bacsich (2002) for more about costs of networked learning

Resources for Practitioners 34

Individuals very rarely make choices of technology platforms for teaching and learning. Usually complex highly politicised processes are involved and choices are part of wider strategic questions, implications and decisions. This Resource offers some key questions for teaching staff to ask. I hope this Resource will result in increased dialogue between stakeholders and more productive exploration of options and needs about learning technologies.

Online platforms are variously named Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs), Managed Learning Environments (MLEs) or Learning Management Systems (LMSs). Sometimes they are called Computer Mediated Conferencing (CMC) Environments, Asynchronous Learning Forums (ALFs) or Computer Supported Learning (CSL).

Online platforms all work a little differently, look a little different and offer different characteristics. Most environments offer the development and presentation of Web pages as well as bulletin boards and forums. Some offer most of the functions that you might want for all kinds of online learning, such synchronous and multi-media capabilities, or assessment tools, but some are more limited. Most include more functions that you really will need for designing and running e-tivities. The MLEs and the LMSs typically include a range of functions beyond teaching and learning, such as the registration of students, the recording of grading and assessments and the transactions associated with student and financial information. MLEs and LMSs also track and record the progress of the learners through their programmes.

Most organisations choose a commercially provided system, though some have ‘home-grown’ technology platforms. Off-the-shelf platforms rarely result in all stakeholders being satisfied with all of the functions and there are usually some problems with integration with other organisational systems. Bespoke online environments, such as those developed in-house, integrate more comfortably with existing practices and systems but are critically dependent on the continuing availability of the people who built them.

Most of the providers of platforms are quite small businesses and they frequently combine and regroup. Most of the technology platforms are still in their ‘infancy’. They lack the diversity and capabilities that come with the maturity of technologies. Currently there is no system or platform that has been adopted throughout all levels of education or countries. There is no one technology platform that suits every organisation, discipline or programme. However, after a platform has been chosen, considerable investment goes into setting up the hardware and software, recruiting and training technical staff and solving problems. Therefore platforms become ‘embedded’ in the way the teaching and learning organisation goes about its business and they are difficult and expensive to change.

What you should know, however, is that its possible to design and run e-tivities with the most sophisticated and the simplest programme. The e-tivity approach will work with all of them.

1. Operational Questions

If a platform is already in place, or chosen, here are questions for teaching and learning staff to ask in their role as e-moderators:

• Ask not, “What can the platform do for me?” but “What can I do with it?”
• Does this platform emphasise the delivery of learning resources, or interaction between participants? If both, what is the balance?
• What are its special affordances, characteristics and limitations?
• Can I learn to e-moderate online through the platform itself? (If not, why not?)
• How can I easily adapt the platform to suit my current and planned teaching and learning practices?
• How will this platform help me to create active and interactive learning?
• How will e-tivities work on this platform? Can I create and change them easily quickly and independently?
• What special features does this platform offer to help promote group participation, deal with the emotional aspects of learning in groups and save and manage time?
• What provision does the platform make for participants with disabilities?

2. Training within the Platform

Early adopters are usually happy to spend many hours engaging in exploration and experimentation with platforms for teaching. But, when attempts are made to scale up the introduction of technology, many more teaching staff need to be involved. Demonstrations are usually carried out by the IT professionals or by enthusiasts. Often, quite naturally, the technical features of the platform are emphasised. If ‘resistance’ from teaching staff is noticed, then additional ‘hands on’ sessions are usually offered. Regrettably, this well intentioned process has resulted in many thousands of teachers in many different contexts believing that teaching and learning online is about computing, and that it's difficult to grasp. Then a vicious circle then results: they think, ‘If I can’t easily see the benefits of working online, what chance do my participants stand?’

Even if teachers have an excellent record in conventional settings it is difficult to predict who will do well as e-moderators. Currently, few universities and colleges offer much in the way of training for e-moderating skills and the best methods are yet to be identified (Kearsley 2000). However, we do know that the acquisition of e-moderating skills cannot be achieved vicariously by, for example, lecturers observing other online teachers or by looking at exemplary Web sites.

Clearly, for staff development to be successful, training needs to be rooted in the peculiarities and requirements of the online environment itself. It needs to engage staff in the experience of working with others online and to be focused on the usefulness and relevance of online learning. In my view, by far the best way of introducing new technology is to ensure that teaching staff first experience the platform as participants and within their own communities of practice. Therefore, it is of the uttermost importance that the online platform should prove easy and successful in building a staff development programme within itself - one which engages and supports teachers on their journeys to becoming e-moderators.

Ask of your platform provider:

• Can you help me to train as an e-moderator or show me development programmes in the software itself? (If not, why not?) ?
• What special skills will I need?
• What investment of my time will be needed before I can successfully design, post and run e-tivities in this platform?
• How can I best prepare myself for the challenge of engaging with all participants equally on your platform? What special features does it offer to help me ensure equal opportunities?
• Who else has used e-tivities on your platform in my discipline and can you put me in touch with them?

3. Getting involved in choosing

There are some key functions that are important for the most successful design and development of e-tivities and for effective and efficient e-moderating. I offer these here for those who may be in positions of influence.

• Are the discussions between participants and e-moderators automatically (or easily) recorded? If the answer is no to this question, it will be harder for the e-moderator to explore the success of his or her e-tivities, and continuously to improve.
• In what form will the records be available to the e-moderators and how can they make sure that inappropriate others do not have access to them?
• Is it easy to capture a variety of views of interactions between the participants, e.g. what the group did on a particular day, what an individual has achieved over one month, what the pattern of communication between the e-moderator and the group is?
• The platform needs to make scaffold building easy for the 5-stage model. Therefore the process of making links between e-tivity processes (rather than published resources) should be obvious. Is this the case? How exactly will this work? Will e-moderators be able to set up these links for themselves?
• It is also best if stimulating ‘sparks’ and discussion are presented simply on the same Web page. Can the platform offer this?
• The platform can help by offering facilities that enable e-moderators to do what they need to do most of, more efficiently and effectively. These special features should include very easy summarising of participants’ messages, archiving and deleting. Ask for this to be demonstrated or built. If it not available, e-moderators will spend much more time e-moderating the e-tivities, but less effectively.
• Does the platform include a synchronous message function built? These can be useful for bridging activities between the stages of the model, or for small groups of participants to talk together.
• Will the platform be fast, whether through client or browser based access to the software, and accessible from low –specification machines both at work and at home and when travelling. Slow bulletin boards reduce interaction between participants.
• Will the platform enable e-moderators to see who is online at any one time, easily to determine frequency of their visits and what they did when they were there? Will the e-moderator be able to access this information for themselves, without relying on technical support?
• Does the platform have a way of submitting assignments and assessment electronically? Does it include effective ways of offering quizzes and self evaluation for individuals and groups?. Does it include structured ways of giving fast feedback?
• How exactly will equal opportunities be addressed? How will participants with a range of disabilities be able to take part? Are there reference sites for these? (If not, why not?)
• Will you provide features that we want and that are not currently available? What guarantees will you offer on these promises?
  

From Resources for Practitioners 20: Learning ‘Netspeak’ see p. 174.

Try investigating Derek Rowntree’s exploration of ‘Other voices are beginning to be heard’ in distance education. http://www-iet.open.ac.uk/pp/D.G.F.Rowntree/words_in_de.htm

I find the Internet fascinating, it's such a source of information isn't it? It can cover every aspect of our lives. You can find a range of jargon generators to really make you feel that your life is complete, for example there's the Educational Jargon Generator at www.sciencegeek.net/lingo.html or the Postmodernism Generator if you want a whole essay to impress someone (http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern)and then there's the press release generator when you want to really make a hit (http://www.nwfusion.com/buzz2000/pr.jsp) What other aspects of life can you find generators for? If you could invent an online phrase generator what would it do? JH

Belbin, R., M, 1981. Management Teams: Why they suceed or fail. http://www.belbin.com/belbin%20team-roles.htm, Butterworth Heinemann.

Carroll, J. and J. Appleton , 2001. Plagiarism: A Good Practice Guide. Oxford Brookes University on behalf of Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) http://www.jisc.ac.uk/pub01/brookes.pdf .

Jasinski, M., 2001. E-games:improvisionation through open platform design. Proceedings of A conference to explore the challenges for workplaces, colleges and universities, Southern Cross University, NSW, http://www.users.bigpond.com/mariejas/.

Mason, R. and M. Weller , 2000. Factors affecting students' satisfaction on a web course. Australian Journal of Educational Technology 2 (1) :pp. http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet16/mason.html.
.
Moon, J. , 2002. Reflection in Higher Education learning. http://www.ltsn.ac.uk/genericcentre/projects/pdp/working-papers PDP working paper 4 LTSN .

Pitt, M. J. , 2001. How do you cope with Cheating and Plagiarism? LTSN Engineering Seminar 21st November http://www.pble.ac.uk/group-workshop-2001-11-21/pble-ltsn-martin-pitt-Cheata.doc .

Rowntree, D.,2002. A new way with words in distance education. http://www-iet.open.ac.uk/pp/D.G.F.Rowntree/words_in_de.htm

Blackboard
http://www.blackboard.com/
The home page of this popular e-ducation platform

WebCT
http://www.webct.com/
The home page of this popular e-ducation platform

First Class
http://www.centrinity.com
The home page of FirstClass. Well built for conferencing