Conferencing with Skype

It was really lovely to be contacted by Karen (in Canada) who invited Jean (in NZ) and me (also in NZ) to conference with her using Skype. Thank you so much Karen and Jean, really enjoyed getting to know you better. Because of you I was able to feel smugly that I had achieved the homework for the week, whereas in fact you had done all the work for me and I only had to talk - how easy is that - thank you guys.

Pros:
It is that little bit more special to hear the voices of those with whom we are studying. As a faciliator I can definitely see an application for conferencing with a small group, perhaps to talk with them about an assignment or a group assignment, or to plan something with course participants. As faciliators of online courses we have some responsibility with the social aspects of being in a learning community so geographically widespread and skype conferencing has a role to play here. We didn't use video, and my peers on this occasion didn't have photos uploaded, and that's fine, just hearing their voices was lovely.

Cons:
We don't have the best of bandwidth 'down under' and I found that at times I lost too much of the sound to be able to follow the thread of the conversation. We then resorted to text chat to finish our conference, with which I am quite comfortable... being a touch typist, but I could imagine that for some this might slow the process to unsustainable.

So, it was fun and valuable and I would encourage my learners to be in contact with each other using skype (hmm - what precedent would I use to get them talking? - must think on this more). The paradox is however, that, because of limitations to infrasructure that still exist, (even in a supposedly Western country like NZ) it could not be a compulsory exercise, and this would have the potential to defeat the purpose.
Still, it's a great technology; another to add to one's suite of technologies to be pressed into pedagogical service.

Turn-taking:
What I noticed (and I have this problem also with the Elluminate sessions) is that I really don't know what I should be doing in terms of 'turn-taking protocols'. Without the visual cues that I use for assessing turn-taking in day-to-day interactions there's a tendancy for one to be 'unheard' (and I must confess to this being a problem in day-to-day interactions for me too, which is why I take to asynchronous options like blogs). It seems that only those not as concerned about turn-taking get to speak. In the context of this course I'm not bothered by this at all, but it has caused me to pause and reflect on what strategies I might use to help my learners understand expectations... containing overly enthusiastic contributors while encouraging 'not-so-vocal' participants.  (Elluminate has a button to indicate a raised hand; that's good and seems to work, but I don't put my hand up... I need to practice putting my hand up, and maybe I need to give my learners time to practice putting their hands up. Possibly too, I might include some pauses during the class for questions and feedback. Our facilitators and guests have done this, providing time to write on the whiteboard as a group (except someone wrote over the top of my text box!), a pause to draw pictures, and of course, we chat away in the chat window while the speaker is delivering content - it's a lot of fun).

A successful activity. Well done, Sarah, for setting it for us!

Those visual cues

Am really glad I was available on Saturday morning to take part in the Elluminate class faciliated by co-students Sharon and Carole who did a fabulous job, and guest Nancy directing us from her home in Seattle. I appreciated the way that the phone was ringing and the dog was barking in the house, all contributing to the sense that our facilitator is part of the real world.

There were a number of themes that emerged as the session progressed. Nancy indicated quite early on that she was deliberately underprepared; that she would go with the direction that her learners/participants led. I loved that, because we all wanted the opportunity to 'have a look at' the way the program works from a faciliator perspective without having to be a facilitator first in order to see how to use the program as a facilitator ... does that make sense?

We discussed the idea of 'failing safely'... am already aware of the need for safety within an online environment (any learning environment) but had never identified quite so concretely "safe from what?" In a f2f classroom, of course, the faciliator monitors carefully to make sure the participants are safe from mockery, from 'losing face' (I have a lot of students for whom this is a very real fear... a valid fear from their cultural perspectives), are safe from exclusion and from feeling abandoned and isolated... left behind. Of course we do that. The idea of 'failing safely' was not one that made it onto my list, but now it has...that 'failing' can be a strategy from which valuable learning can take place.

 

Now I want to know how... and of course loved the softly inclusive responsiveness of Nancy, Carole and Sharon's faciliation; will try to do the same. However, I have some questions.

1. Their 'negotiated curriculum' style was lovely, but not bounded at all by the requirements of a curriculum. So, have been thinking about how we might negotiate the expectatioin of one with the ideal of the other
2. Signals: in a f2f classroom we read the various cues of our learners, and we get quite sensitive to them. We know that if the students tell us that that they understand that does not necessarily mean that they do; we read body language, facial expressions, we concept check, we get students talking together in pairs or small groups and we monitor monitor monitor. So, an online class shouldn't be any different in principle, but a number of those cues are not there. Can we put the responsibility back onto the learners to let us know if they're not with us... (am not convinced that's a reasonable expectation). Nancy got us providing our perspectives on the whiteboard and working together, she had us drawing pictures, and reflecting on the learning that was taking place. (It is this that I mean when I say that f2f pedagogy and online pedagogy are not the same... or... they are in principle, but they're not when it comes to the practicalities and we faciliators must adjust to what is available to us in this new environment).
3. Play: my husband saw our doodles on Nancy's whiteboard and he said "You guys are just playing!", which was really cute, but we were and it was fun, and I learned so much! What a primal concept - playing to learn... all mammals do that!
4. Faciliator summaries and meaning making: How much, if at all? I like that the facilitator summarises, and provides a road map of the themes. There was concern expressed in the session that this might inhibit the meaning making for students who need to express their own meanings . Good point, but summarising is still a crucial in my mind... for capturing the essence of the content and as a strategy for helping students keep up. We need to summarise, but I might get the students to do it too, perhaps to invite them to contribute to my summary in some way. Maybe to make a resource from which study material can be gleaned for an assessment? Does anyone have ideas about this?

Social faciliation

Thanks to Terry Neal for her report on the significant effort and administration that went into the SLENZ project. What a commitment.
Two things that I picked up on, one of which I'd like to note here as of some interest (to me at least). Terry mentioned that one of the things they did in Second Life, (amongst others) was to have a social event... a party! Social disconnection within an online learning community is a factor I see discussed quite frequently. 
Good idea... and Terry noted that it was economical in so many ways (which made me chuckle quietly). I was wondering how you (would) manage the inevitable social needs of your learning communities... and to what extent do considerations of the social needs of your learners impact on your responsiveness to them individually, while maintaining the balance between your need for your professional and private space, and facilitating a sense of family and camaraderie amongst your participants.

Reflections on the idea of Online Communities

On Friday (30 July 2010) I attended a little in-house staff professional development... the topic: Online student interaction and communities.

We listened to phd candidate Elaine Khoo share her insights from research on online communities that contributed to her phd thesis. Would like to share a little of that here; found it so relevant, so logical, so serendipitous in timing, so synergistic with what other commentators are saying in this week's lesson...

Elaine's enquiry was how to go beyond the mechanics of the technology to enable learners to be comfortable to engage with each other, with the content, with the faciliator... to be comfortable to participate. Her leading question was "What kind of pedagogical strategies need to be put in place to encourage participation?"

She shared five principles of online faciliation:

1. Affordances and constraints: An elearning environment has limitations and constraints as well as offering benefits and affordances. There are things that can be achieved very well, and teaching practices that cannot easily be transferred. That's a fact of life - we should get used to it  I like to use metaphor, so hang in there with me: recent reflection at an mLearning day here how the stereotypical archtype that is the tertiary educator is dragged bouncing and sliding along the road compelled unwillingly  by the overwhelming powerful digital and information explosion toward change in methodology and pedagogy.  For many of you this may seem a no-brainer, and you're choosing to embrace it, but in reality there are many many teachers who can't or won't adjust or adapt, and each such teacher has good and valid reasons for resisting. They are right in many ways, there are definitely constraints. Let's be realistic.
2. Safety: A safe and inviting environment encourages participation. We need to be very aware of the need to foster trust and respect. (My question is what mechanisms and strategies might do this?)
3. Authenticity: there needs to be real-world contexts for the learning to be meaningful. (Again, I'd like to see ideas around this).
4. Goals: Different types of interaction are fostered by goals.
5. Learning communities: Students value the concept of learning communities. A faciliator is responsible to take on a number of roles for the growth of his or her learners... the faciliator needs to foster intellectual, social, and emotional development, have managerial and technical skills, as well as sound pedagogical underpinning. Not a trivial list!

Reference:
Khoo, E. G. L. (2010) Developing an Online Learning Community: A strategy for improving lecturer and student learning experiences. Available at: http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz//handle/10289/3961

Hunters or gatherers - or does it matter?

Last week I took part as a student in my first ever online class (via Illuminate). ..really good to experience an environment like that as a learner, before needing to manage it as a faciliator for oneself.

My reference in the title to a hunter or gatherer is about personalities. The online facilitator must maintain a number of balls in the air at once. Would this mean that this style of delivery might be more suited to personalities who are natural multi-taskers, and that a focused personality (a very useful skill to have indeed in certain situations) might not manage as adroitly as Sarah does? Keeping tabs with who is entering the classroom at various times, as well as maintaining the thread of the lesson, back-tracking to fill-in a late comer, technical trouble-shooting for participants finding their way around, delivering the content of the lesson, and keeping up with student input on the screen. Whew!

What are you?... a hunter or a gatherer, and how does that impact on the way you manage your synchronous e-classroom environment? 
What does this mean for teacher training? (Putting myself on the line here to suggest that teacher trainees need an apprenticeship with an experienced mentor to learn to teach online)

Tacit protocols... Turn-taking and timing: Was wondering about different ways that a faciliator might manage turn-taking. In such an environment it's easy to imagine that some participants might not get an equal opportunity to participate, especially if they come from a more circumspect culture where timing between utterances is longer than we might be comfortable with here, or think is reasonable considering the contraints of a timetable. Do these protocols need to be discussed openly in a class... how much direction as a facilitator do you employ to maintain even participation?
Ideas about this anybody?