The Characteristics of an On-Line Learning Community and the Implications for Learning and Teaching On-Line
My thoughts and feelings about my learning:
Firstly as a learner. I found this to be a difficult task; in as much as committing myself to a set time every day (it sometimes proved to be beyond me) to check the discussions and stay on task. If I was unable to login on any given day, I did feel like I was letting the group down by not responding or not giving a decent go of someone's topic. It does take a considerable amount of time to keep up to date with the discussions, readings and answers.
The topics were stimulating and I did feel part of the community. The core group of students quickly 'formed' a cohesive unit by week two. There were some very vocal students that were deliberately teasing a response from the quiet ones.
Our facilitator was deliberately provoking and sometimes appeared brash and tactlessness. This was a ruse, he had alternative reasons for implementing this method. He was trying to elicit a response from the group to 'react and act'. This worked beautifully. There became the rescuer, comforter and stirrer in our group that other members affiliated with.
One of the essential ingredients of maintaining a community is to form a 'connection' between the other members of the group and the facilitator. According to Karen Swan "Cohesive verbal immediacy behaviors build and sustain a sense of group commitment to support the development of a discourse community". (p157) Karen Swan also mentions that bonding is formed by 'social sharing'.
We had our own socialisation areas in the discussion board. It started well but as we became more involved in the topics presented, we needed the extra socialisation less and less. This was evident as we were very engrossed in the topics. This proved we had formed enough of a group / community to sustain our relationships without needing to socialise.
My feelings about this community are that I felt there were some special members who would go an extra mile to share and help the group, whilst there were some members who 'lurked'. I would call these the free loaders.
The community called themselves 'Limb Jones'. I felt that sometimes it was a hornets nest. The facilitators were very diverse. There were two silent not too active facilitators. (More like the quiet observers) Then there was John. I found him provokingly brilliant. He had the nicest way of tazering you into action. He stood out and told everone what he expected from the start. This made some members of our group bristle. According to Sue Jones (1996) in her book Developing a Learning Culture, it is imperitive to build trust in a group quickly, build a health bond of communication then, slowly back off and let the groups personality emerge.
The discussion board was our main means of communicating. I did enjoy the virtual chat sessions but it was evident that not everyone could join in at the times set for this activity. There was a time factor - One member of our group was in another country and time zone. This immediately put some of us at a disadvantage. Upon reflection I would not use virtual chat unless all members in the group are in the same time zone. I had a problem with online chats - socialise and moove. This was unavailable at work due to the company policy about downloading software. I experienced a different problem at home, incompatable software with my old computer. This served a good lesson to me. When designing online courses, ensure there are clear software/hardware limitations posted. Or, keep the course content delivered without the extra virtual worlds.
To finally summarise: My learning experience on this course has been a steep learning curve. I have struggled with some virtual technologies and time management commitments but have gained an immense satisfaction out of facilitating a topic online and sharing ideas in the discussion board. I liked the concept about using a blog and have adopted this in my Information Systems class for their final examination. It would have been better to have been in a group of 3-4 for the blog as the sucess is dependant on participation. My partner did not participate after week 4.
References
Swan K. Learning and Teaching with Technology. Chapter 10 Developing a Social Presence. (2003) Kogan Page USA.
- Maryanne
Firstly as a learner. I found this to be a difficult task; in as much as committing myself to a set time every day (it sometimes proved to be beyond me) to check the discussions and stay on task. If I was unable to login on any given day, I did feel like I was letting the group down by not responding or not giving a decent go of someone's topic. It does take a considerable amount of time to keep up to date with the discussions, readings and answers.
The topics were stimulating and I did feel part of the community. The core group of students quickly 'formed' a cohesive unit by week two. There were some very vocal students that were deliberately teasing a response from the quiet ones.
Our facilitator was deliberately provoking and sometimes appeared brash and tactlessness. This was a ruse, he had alternative reasons for implementing this method. He was trying to elicit a response from the group to 'react and act'. This worked beautifully. There became the rescuer, comforter and stirrer in our group that other members affiliated with.
One of the essential ingredients of maintaining a community is to form a 'connection' between the other members of the group and the facilitator. According to Karen Swan "Cohesive verbal immediacy behaviors build and sustain a sense of group commitment to support the development of a discourse community". (p157) Karen Swan also mentions that bonding is formed by 'social sharing'.
We had our own socialisation areas in the discussion board. It started well but as we became more involved in the topics presented, we needed the extra socialisation less and less. This was evident as we were very engrossed in the topics. This proved we had formed enough of a group / community to sustain our relationships without needing to socialise.
My feelings about this community are that I felt there were some special members who would go an extra mile to share and help the group, whilst there were some members who 'lurked'. I would call these the free loaders.
The community called themselves 'Limb Jones'. I felt that sometimes it was a hornets nest. The facilitators were very diverse. There were two silent not too active facilitators. (More like the quiet observers) Then there was John. I found him provokingly brilliant. He had the nicest way of tazering you into action. He stood out and told everone what he expected from the start. This made some members of our group bristle. According to Sue Jones (1996) in her book Developing a Learning Culture, it is imperitive to build trust in a group quickly, build a health bond of communication then, slowly back off and let the groups personality emerge.
The discussion board was our main means of communicating. I did enjoy the virtual chat sessions but it was evident that not everyone could join in at the times set for this activity. There was a time factor - One member of our group was in another country and time zone. This immediately put some of us at a disadvantage. Upon reflection I would not use virtual chat unless all members in the group are in the same time zone. I had a problem with online chats - socialise and moove. This was unavailable at work due to the company policy about downloading software. I experienced a different problem at home, incompatable software with my old computer. This served a good lesson to me. When designing online courses, ensure there are clear software/hardware limitations posted. Or, keep the course content delivered without the extra virtual worlds.
To finally summarise: My learning experience on this course has been a steep learning curve. I have struggled with some virtual technologies and time management commitments but have gained an immense satisfaction out of facilitating a topic online and sharing ideas in the discussion board. I liked the concept about using a blog and have adopted this in my Information Systems class for their final examination. It would have been better to have been in a group of 3-4 for the blog as the sucess is dependant on participation. My partner did not participate after week 4.
References
Swan K. Learning and Teaching with Technology. Chapter 10 Developing a Social Presence. (2003) Kogan Page USA.
- Maryanne
posted by Dragon at
10:18 pm
1 Comments:
Maryanne,
I thought I was going to get overwhelmed with this course early on as my workload held me off for a bit, then I did go online and found 130 postings to read. Fortunately everything settled down into a manageable workload. It is a tough balance to get right and it was interesting that I felt more about not letting individuals down rather than the group. Jennifer and I have mentioned that there is a natural affinity with your blog partner, though in your case this may have been a bit more difficult. Also, there may have been individuals in the grop who you identified with more than others. I know this is true in my case.
I found myself staying happily detached from all the verbals that went on initially. It read the postings with interest, not seeing too much to get hot under the collar about as some others did. I thought we may be in for a rocky ride, but things settles down as ruffled feathers were smoothed. It was an education to watch and John was a master at work. Why did he do it? So we could learn. I got a lot out of it.
I agree that getting the group interacting is key. Was this enhanced by the fact that some perceived John to be picking on individuals? Protective instinct? Bonding?
Tazering!! - Love the imagery, great term!
I still am not sure of the value of the group persona. Has 'Limbs Jones' had an impact/ Did it make any difference to pigeonhole the group? Or was it just an early bonding exercise, to get us to find out about each other and working on a collaborative task?
And wasn't it great that Sandra could be a part of the group, while having a baby and living in Canada? Fantastic, this is what it is all about.
I read your blog posting and find myself agreeing that I think 3 is a good number. That way, if one is quiet, the others can still progress. It has been a valuable exercise and one I would definitely use.
Cheers,
Gordon
By
Dragon, at December 01, 2006 9:37 am
Post a Comment
<< Home