Presented to ALT-C conference

UMIST Manchester 11-13^th September 2000

Dr. Gilly Salmon

Centre for Information & Innovation

Open University Business School

Walton Hall

Milton Keynes MK7 6AA

UK

Tel: + 44 (0) 1908 654705

Fax: + 44 (0) 1908 655898

This paper, its associate power point slides and others can be found at:

This presentation reports on a model of understanding of typical learners’ and trainees’ behaviours in online environments. The model offers a route to fuller and more effective participation in activities for learning. It challenges the perceived notion of 30:30:30 (i.e. that only one third of participants take full part in conferencing, with another third "lurking").

Individual access and the ability of participants to use Computer Mediated Conferencing (CMC) are essential prerequisites for conference participation (stage one, at the base of the flights of steps). Stage two involves individual participants establishing their online identities and then finding others with whom to interact. At stage three, participants give information relevant to the course to each other. Up to and including stage three, a form of co-operation occurs, i.e. support for each person’s goals. At stage four, course-related group discussions occur and the interaction becomes more collaborative. The communication depends on the establishment of common understandings. At stage five, participants look for more benefits from the system to help them achieve personal goals, explore how to integrate CMC into other forms of learning and reflect on the learning processes

Each stage requires participants to master certain technical skills (shown in the bottom left of each step). Each stage calls for different e-moderating skills (shown on the right top of each step). The "interactivity bar" running along the right of the flight of steps suggests the intensity of interactivity that you can expect between the participants at each stage. At first, at stage one, they interact only with one or two others. After stage two, the numbers of others with whom they interact, and the frequency, gradually increases, although stage five often results in a return to more individual pursuits. From stage two onwards, it is important to provide online activities that encourage participants to engage in active learning and with each other in meaningful and authentic learning tasks.

Given appropriate technical support, e-moderation and a purpose for taking part in CMC, nearly all participants will progress through these stages of use in CMC. There will however be very different responses to how much time they need at each stage before progressing. The model applies to all CMC software but if experienced participants are introduced to new- to-them CMC software, they will tend to linger for a while at stages one or two, but then move on quite rapidly up the steps again.

The chief benefit of using the model to design a course with CMC is that you know how participants are likely to exploit the system at each stage and you can avoid common pitfalls.

In addition, in providing learning activities these can be pitched at an appropriate stage, making it more likely that learners will take part, engage increasingly with each other and progress through the modelled process. The results should be higher participation rates and increased student satisfaction. E-moderators who understand the model and apply it should enjoy CMC and find that their work runs smoothly.

In order to get students "moving up" the branches of the trees, we need to both engage and mobilise them.

I use the concept of mobilisation to describe the ways in which e-moderators attempt to generate and maintain attention and participation online. The concept draws on work by Hammersley (1976), albeit in the very different setting of compulsory schooling. Hammersley regards the teaching techniques (which he calls 'teaching technologies') employed by the teachers he observed as

'collectively produced and sustained rather than idiosyncratic. Furthermore, they are also adapted, in one way or another, and to one degree or another, to the constraints operating on schools and teachers.' p. 104

My concern in this paper is with the techniques and strategies by which e-moderators achieve the generation and mobilisation of attention and participation of adults within the constraints of a very different setting from that of schools - online computer-mediated conferencing.

Another useful concept can be drawn from the literature on engagement theory. Engaged learning means that

" all student activities involve cognitive processes such as creating, problem-solving, reasoning, decision-making and evaluation. In addition, students are intrinsically motivated to learn due to the meaningful nature of the learning environment and activities" p. 20

Principles associated with engagement theory are:

• Group activities
• Project based
• Authenticity (i.e. focussed outside the immediate learning context)

I have recently coined the term "e-tivities" to bring together the practical aspects of mobilising, engaging and effectively e-moderating in technology mediated teaching and learning environments. My suggestion is that creating e-tivities with attention to both content, process and outcomes will enable students to progress up the 5-step model, and arrive at levels four and five in numbers and better shape for learning.

*

For design purposes each online activity can be considered as follows:

• Purpose
• Participant numbers
• Interaction structure
• Collaboration requirement
• Process and outcome
• E-lapsed time
• E-moderators time
• E-moderator action

P.S. have a strategy for dealing with non-engagement (i.e. "lurking, browsing or listening").