supporting virtual communities
Hopes, Fears and Expectations For This module
I have never had the opportunity to deliver online training nor have I been a student on an online programme. I have, however, designed and developed some resources as part of a National Digital Learning Repository (NDLR) project at ITB. This included video demonstrations and audio enhanced presentations (Adobe Presenter) as revision resources for Carpentry & Joinery apprentice students. These resources were to be made available via a dedicated website but this has not yet been completed.
Having studied learning theory previously, and completed the Instructional Design & eAuthoring module of the MSc programme, I am acutely aware of the importance of facilitating collaborative learning in an e-learning context. I would not consider myself to be particularly 'tech savvy' so I believe that I need to improve my skills and knowledge in this area.
On completion of the module, I hope to be significantly more familiar with technologies and methods for facilitating peer-to-tutor and peer-to-peer learning. I do feel that this module is taking me well out of my comfort zone. I expect that I will need to familiarise myself with social media applications and this makes me a little anxious as I have resisted the Facebook/Twitter revolution thus far.
Having studied learning theory previously, and completed the Instructional Design & eAuthoring module of the MSc programme, I am acutely aware of the importance of facilitating collaborative learning in an e-learning context. I would not consider myself to be particularly 'tech savvy' so I believe that I need to improve my skills and knowledge in this area.
On completion of the module, I hope to be significantly more familiar with technologies and methods for facilitating peer-to-tutor and peer-to-peer learning. I do feel that this module is taking me well out of my comfort zone. I expect that I will need to familiarise myself with social media applications and this makes me a little anxious as I have resisted the Facebook/Twitter revolution thus far.
Week 1
As a first time participant on an online programme, I was a little apprehensive. I found that the pre-module preparation session was very helpful as it provided an opportunity to familiarise myself with the Blackboard Collaborate before the first webinar and be reassured that it would work on my PC. The instructions provided in advance were clear and meant that I was able to prepare myself appropriately. At first, I felt a little resentful that a recap was necessary in Week 1 on the workings of the platform (for those that were not online for the pre-module preparation) but I actually found it useful to re-orientate myself with the technology.
It is obvious that forward planning and organisation is critical in online delivery. To a great extent, you are at the mercy of the technology and this can create some anxiety. I imagine that I would have to spend a lot of time in advance preparing learning objects and testing equipment if I was teaching online. I suppose that this is similar when approaching any delivery method for the first time but it does feel like there is more that can go wrong. It was helpful that there were features in Blackboard Collaborate which allowed some backup for failures, e.g. if microphone malfunctioned the chat facility allowed you to continue to interact.
I was particularly interested in this module as I would have reservations about a lack of ‘connectedness’ in online delivery. I found that the Week 1 webinar largely worked well for me though. In some ways the format appears to be an improvement over face-to-face as there seemed to be less incidents of people talking over each other. The tutor can also answer questions in order, either responding to a raised hand or dealing with the chat as it comes in.
One of my main concerns about online teaching is that I, or my students, will be unable to project personality or individuality in this environment, i.e. the perceived ‘added value’ that a real classroom offers. For me, the jury is still out on this one. I feel that my experience in Week 1 was a little skewed due to my familiarity with the tutors and some of the participants through the MSc programme (some participants are CPD entrants). As I had face-to-face classes with the two module tutors previously, I am not sure if I already had a perception of them and their personalities. Similarly, I definitely felt more of a connection with the MSc participants where there was already a relationship established. I am intrigued to see if this changes as we progress over the weeks of delivery, particularly with regard to how it affects group dynamic when we progress to the group work elements.
The two activities in Week 1 allowed for plenty of interaction with tutor's and fellow participants. The Videonotes and technology wishlists revealed a lot of similar thinking around the challenges and potential of teaching online. Time seemed to be the predominant topic, time to prepare and time to provide feedback. There appeared to be a consensus that an online programme can take 2-3 years of significant time investment to establish before demands tend to normalise in line with traditional delivery.
The level of tutor feedback was high in Week 1 with timely responses to posts and encouragement to explore further, either directing towards the posts of others or providing interesting links relevant to the topic. This was reassuring and I felt that the tutor's were present and there for me if I needed support.
As a first time participant on an online programme, I was a little apprehensive. I found that the pre-module preparation session was very helpful as it provided an opportunity to familiarise myself with the Blackboard Collaborate before the first webinar and be reassured that it would work on my PC. The instructions provided in advance were clear and meant that I was able to prepare myself appropriately. At first, I felt a little resentful that a recap was necessary in Week 1 on the workings of the platform (for those that were not online for the pre-module preparation) but I actually found it useful to re-orientate myself with the technology.
It is obvious that forward planning and organisation is critical in online delivery. To a great extent, you are at the mercy of the technology and this can create some anxiety. I imagine that I would have to spend a lot of time in advance preparing learning objects and testing equipment if I was teaching online. I suppose that this is similar when approaching any delivery method for the first time but it does feel like there is more that can go wrong. It was helpful that there were features in Blackboard Collaborate which allowed some backup for failures, e.g. if microphone malfunctioned the chat facility allowed you to continue to interact.
I was particularly interested in this module as I would have reservations about a lack of ‘connectedness’ in online delivery. I found that the Week 1 webinar largely worked well for me though. In some ways the format appears to be an improvement over face-to-face as there seemed to be less incidents of people talking over each other. The tutor can also answer questions in order, either responding to a raised hand or dealing with the chat as it comes in.
One of my main concerns about online teaching is that I, or my students, will be unable to project personality or individuality in this environment, i.e. the perceived ‘added value’ that a real classroom offers. For me, the jury is still out on this one. I feel that my experience in Week 1 was a little skewed due to my familiarity with the tutors and some of the participants through the MSc programme (some participants are CPD entrants). As I had face-to-face classes with the two module tutors previously, I am not sure if I already had a perception of them and their personalities. Similarly, I definitely felt more of a connection with the MSc participants where there was already a relationship established. I am intrigued to see if this changes as we progress over the weeks of delivery, particularly with regard to how it affects group dynamic when we progress to the group work elements.
The two activities in Week 1 allowed for plenty of interaction with tutor's and fellow participants. The Videonotes and technology wishlists revealed a lot of similar thinking around the challenges and potential of teaching online. Time seemed to be the predominant topic, time to prepare and time to provide feedback. There appeared to be a consensus that an online programme can take 2-3 years of significant time investment to establish before demands tend to normalise in line with traditional delivery.
The level of tutor feedback was high in Week 1 with timely responses to posts and encouragement to explore further, either directing towards the posts of others or providing interesting links relevant to the topic. This was reassuring and I felt that the tutor's were present and there for me if I needed support.
Week 2
In Week 2 the module workload ramped up significantly. It was as though the first week was merely a gentle introduction in comparison. Having two different activities with separate groups running concurrently was very challenging. It became increasingly difficult to keep up with the number of posts and navigating Webcourses was difficult initially. I found myself having to consciously consider time management and allocate time to separate activities and tasks in order to meet deadlines.
The engagement across the two group activities was affected initially by the mix of team members. For the group project, the team was comprised mainly of fellow MSc participants while the debate activity was in fact the opposite. This led to a slower start with the debate activity. I believe there were two reasons for this. Firstly, the majority of the team members were unfamiliar with Webcourses and were finding it difficult to navigate. The second issue centred on the need to nominate a chair to coordinate the activity.
I would assume that participants were a little lost earlier in the week and had not read the brief or they were reticent to come forward, perhaps a little unsure as the group had not had the opportunity for a ‘forming’ stage. This was overcome when one person took the lead and posted a proposal on Webcourses for moving forward. I think that the majority were relieved to now have a chair in place directing tasks. A Skype meeting the following Sunday morning was very useful as it allowed the group to ‘norm’ to some extent and roles and responsibilities were established.
I was the first to post on the discussion forum with my contribution to the opening statement against the motion of “online learning involves too much clicking and not enough learning”. The point that I raised was that online learning can offer learning opportunities outside of the prescribed learning outcomes for a programme. I was referring here to the possibilities for discovery learning and the opportunity for participants to enhance their digital literacy skills in an online environment. Other posts made some really strong arguments such as:
It became very apparent to me this week that the module offers two distinct insights; the experience of the online learner and the role of the e-moderator. For the successful design and implementation of e-learning, a strong knowledge and understanding of both these perspectives is surely essential.
References:
Conceição-Runlee, S., Daley, B. (1998). Constructivist learning theory to web-based course design: an instructional design approach. Midwest Research to Practice Conference Proceedings.
In Week 2 the module workload ramped up significantly. It was as though the first week was merely a gentle introduction in comparison. Having two different activities with separate groups running concurrently was very challenging. It became increasingly difficult to keep up with the number of posts and navigating Webcourses was difficult initially. I found myself having to consciously consider time management and allocate time to separate activities and tasks in order to meet deadlines.
The engagement across the two group activities was affected initially by the mix of team members. For the group project, the team was comprised mainly of fellow MSc participants while the debate activity was in fact the opposite. This led to a slower start with the debate activity. I believe there were two reasons for this. Firstly, the majority of the team members were unfamiliar with Webcourses and were finding it difficult to navigate. The second issue centred on the need to nominate a chair to coordinate the activity.
I would assume that participants were a little lost earlier in the week and had not read the brief or they were reticent to come forward, perhaps a little unsure as the group had not had the opportunity for a ‘forming’ stage. This was overcome when one person took the lead and posted a proposal on Webcourses for moving forward. I think that the majority were relieved to now have a chair in place directing tasks. A Skype meeting the following Sunday morning was very useful as it allowed the group to ‘norm’ to some extent and roles and responsibilities were established.
I was the first to post on the discussion forum with my contribution to the opening statement against the motion of “online learning involves too much clicking and not enough learning”. The point that I raised was that online learning can offer learning opportunities outside of the prescribed learning outcomes for a programme. I was referring here to the possibilities for discovery learning and the opportunity for participants to enhance their digital literacy skills in an online environment. Other posts made some really strong arguments such as:
- The importance of focussing on the pedagogy rather than the technology, reference here to the sentiments of Dr Mark Glynn from this week’s webinar.
- The importance of meeting students where they meet themselves, alluding to modern generations use of technology for communication
- The access that the internet and online learning provides to a seemingly limitless pool of information, enabling learners to “create new relationships with knowledge and new representations of knowledge” (Conceição-Runlee and Daley 1998, p. 41)
- How an online environment can provide intrinsic motivation for learners to develop communities of interest in areas of their choice
It became very apparent to me this week that the module offers two distinct insights; the experience of the online learner and the role of the e-moderator. For the successful design and implementation of e-learning, a strong knowledge and understanding of both these perspectives is surely essential.
References:
Conceição-Runlee, S., Daley, B. (1998). Constructivist learning theory to web-based course design: an instructional design approach. Midwest Research to Practice Conference Proceedings.