• What were your original perceptions or assumptions about the role of an online facilitator?
• How has this course changed those perceptions, if at all?
• Are there aspects of what you have learned that will make you change your practice in the future, and help you become a better e-facilitator?

What were my original perceptions or assumptions about the role of an online facilitator?

I originally perceived this role as one in which my experience gained in f2f facilitation would simply be expanded on. I did assume the course would introduce me to good practice in online facilitation (as it did). I knew that to be any good at facilitation a facilitator needs to experience it and understand the various approaches to on line facilitation and methodology. I perceived that supporting the learner was needed but had no real pre-conceptions beyond what I used face to face.

I had an basic idea of what the  role and competencies of a online facilitator would be, that the facilitator still needed to create earning experiences using appropriate strategies and communication techniques, I just was not entirely sure how that was achieved.

How has this course changed those perceptions, if at all?

My initial perception though correct in context was somewhat lacking in any real substance. The role of the facilitator as defined by ‘Berge’ and the other models given to me, were really excellent in helping me understand the facilitator’s role in an online environment. What was especially interesting was appreciating that the facilitator worked to support learning activities, throughout the course, through good communication techniques, which support the learner, at the different stages in that learning. By comparing what I had done in f2f workshops I could see some of the similarities between f2f and online but I was able to see the difference also.

I think by comparing what made a successful learners helped me define how I could build on my own learning experiences while at the same time supporting those whom I teach.

The chat session was fun and I enjoyed this aspect a lot. It helped me understanding how challenging the whole facilitation aspects can be. It also helped me to identify what I need to improve on when I do this for real. The chat session also introduced me to a completely new methodology of teaching and that correct application and preparation are imperative when using this tool to facilitate learning.

The motoring tools available through online learning helped me identify different methods of supporting learners. I will be using the different monitoring and reporting tools to much better effect in the future. My initial exposure to these types of tools had been limited at best and by understanding these and using these tools to support learning was a real eye opener.

Though I had perceived the workload of the online facilitator to be normal when first approaching the subject/course, I was quickly shown that I did not fully understand all the aspects of the role. The number of issues associated with the online learning environment coupled with learning design issues made the role seem quite complex. This module of the course gave me a much better understanding of what I am facing in my role as an online facilitator. That without correct application of the knowledge gained on this course I will not be able to manage my workload.

The weaving skills were not something I had envisaged at all going into the course. The ability to give meaningful feedback without replying to every post and to give guidance without lecturing was something that was particularly difficult for me. The ability to feedback to students other than by formal report or informal verbal communication was not something I had done in the past. But by acknowledging the individual learner’s contribution I could see that I could increase their motivation. Assessment is integral in any course but to be able to acknowledge learners’ contributions and support them with deepening dialogue was a surprisingly effective method.

Are there aspects of what I have learned that will make me change my practice in the future, and help me become a better e-facilitator?

I felt my initial perception about online facilitation were correct however were very limited in depth. I certainly underestimated the complexities required to facilitate online while ensuring the learning environment supports the learners through the course I will without a doubt be adopting every aspect of this course into my new role and a lot into my old.

• summarising a discussion by finding threads of unity in the comments of participants and weaving them together into one piece of feedback to the group so that learner responses are connected
• relating learners’ contributions to concepts and theories from the course
• recognising the contributions made by learners
• prompting learners to elaborate in a direction that further supports the learning outcomes.

Your woven feedback message should be between 500 and 800 words.

Task 6 – Weaving feedback

Firstly let me say well done for getting through this task!  Through out your postings I can see some threads appearing which you highlighted well in your final email.

The point about the task itself being confusing and not relevant to the learning objectives was pointed out with some excellent links to discussions around re design of the task. In Maxine’s first posting she identified Sam’s issues, about the task itself being “too confusing and not obviously relevant enough to completing the learning outcomes”. I liked Theresa’s ideas about addressing this issued “ensure the task is sufficiently open ended for the students to be creative together, but also sufficiently simple for them to get their heads around it”.

I especially liked the idea around testing the new task on colleagues as this showed how preparation early on can assist in facilitation.

The idea that Dhiraj came up with of “perhaps each could be given a different role” expanded on this theme. It gave some good direction to Maki. It also allowed for some change within the learning environment that should get participants better engaged. Maxine reinforced this in her posting about “making people feel important and gives them practice in the real world”

Darshana did make a good point about over simplifying the task though“Surely this task of ‘posting your thoughts about the product element of the marketing mix’ is not only boring it’s also asking for trouble)” the point about the task being simple already and therefore not engaging was perhaps an issue here. His suggestion of “Perhaps you could have the students pretend they are working for a real marketing company and together they have to come up with a plan to market a new line of products” showed a good way of addressing this point.

I was wondering though how you might make the current task simpler being that this is already underway. Can our suggestions still be relevant in the current climate? What other options are available to Maki now that this task is already in progress? Is this task to complex or is it the instructions that are complex?

Another theme was around team work and roles. Thersa make s a good point “Anne is bullying and putting team members down – a sure way to discourage and lose participation”. Luta talked about ways of addressing this with there being a need for Maki to take back his role of facilitator. But Thersa also made some goods points around how to do that this included use of “some carefully crafted postings. She needs to do it subtly so that Anne doesn’t feel put down, but so that the other students come on board”. By using those encouraging and careful postings you can see how this will begin to address these issues. You identified that a number of carefully worded posting were required to address the teamwork and roles, what would you say to those participants? What sort of e-mail/communication example could you give to help Maki here? What would you say if it were you? I agree the re-design of the activity will help immensely also.

By outlining how teams work and role expectations will no doubt address these issues also and hopefully remove any confusion.  Do we need to help Maki define the roles? IWhat roles would you likely define?

The third theme was firstly addressed by Peter and was around the assessment being peer review and the associated problems that became apparent with this. His idea of “Maki should try to design the course so that the students help each other (maybe in pairs first) and then present their findings as a group” resulted in some great discussions around assessment design. The discussion Maxine added really got the thought process flowing and the resulting example by Dhiraji around “Why not let the students select what they think is their best posting” really begun to answer those questions. I like the idea of selecting postings and submitting those as evidence. This idea has good merit as it will entrench that learning and make the student reflect on what they have achieved.

With the idea of submitting postings as assessments comes the need to ensure that we measure those, but against what? What do you think Maki should but up as a measuring stick so to speak? What would you have as criteria for a posting, some direction here would surely help Maki?

You have all done really well here and judging by the e-mail you have sent to Maki, he will definitely have a better learning environment in no time. Well done, keep up the good work.

In my next blog posting I am turning to my own professional context and do the following:

• In one of the courses I am familiar with, I am to  identify a learning outcome as well as the corresponding online activity that you have facilitated or designed.
• Explain workload-related issues when facilitating this activity.
• Propose how I would change the activity in order to address the facilitator’s workload issues.
• Compare my approach with the approach taken by my team in Team task 4.
• Quote from at least one of my contributions to Team task 4. This contribution will demonstrate my knowledge of online facilitators’ workload issues.
• List three citations from the course material and/or the resources that I found the most interesting when considering workload issues in an online facilitation context.

Blog 5

To briefly put some context around this task: The course I’m going to use is a Leadership Course that has just finished developing. The Learning outcome is Analyse Leadership in an Action Orientated Environment. The online activity is a discussion forum organised around the development of a Job Description for a Team Leader.

Workload-related issues when facilitating this activity.

Firstly the constraints in human resources available to manage, develop, and facilitate the training falls onto the facilitation staff. The management team to this point have only been involved in managing f2f facilitation of training and therefore expect the management and development of online resources to fall to those whom have always done it, in this case the programme managers and facilitators.

As a lot of our facilitation staff is contracted the budget to have collaborative components is limited. The ability to facilitate outside of the f2f part of the course falls with the management team. Therefore there is always a push to limit the amount of work required outside the f2f environment and in doing so sometimes includes removing some of the collaborative learning components. Not a good idea when creating learning environments for adults.

As the course is quite new the facilitator is taking quite a central role and is expected to get involved in the discussions. (Possibly a hang up from the f2f courses) It is expected by not just management but by the students that they will answer postings from students during online discussions. Students see the facilitators as part of the discussion and expect them to read and reply to posts.

In a lot of cases this is the first time participants are required to participate in the discussion forum, this can sometimes lead to unnecessary discussion that is off track and does not reflect the outputs required of the learning objective. They often miss what would be considered key areas of the job description and don’t truly get to the depth expected of them.

Feedback to participants in most case is done to each participant and by the facilitator at the workshop. This requires the facilitators to basically go over the task again in an f2f environment. Additional evidence of achievement were required is then gathered should a participant not have provide enough on-line.

On a number of occasions participants have to be followed up or prompted to get involved, all adding to the facilitator’s workload.

Propose how I would change the activity in order to address the facilitator’s workload issues.

In order to address the first issue and to quote the reference material “Considering course design and course delivery separately is an essential breakdown in workload discussions. Designing an online course should be considered a project with its own budget and time schedule. But that doesn’t mean design and delivery are not closely linked” The design of the learning should fall to the training design team while the facilitation and management of learning should fall with the programme/facilitation team.

The second issue around removal of collaborative tools is addressed by the way in which the course is designed. A look at the overall course design may be needed to ensure collaborative experiences remain but the amount of time allocated is decreased.

By changing not only how the management team see the facilitators but also how they are defined to the students will assist in giving them more time and allow them to support the activities rather than be part of it.

The design of the discussion forum needs to be reviewed so that there is a clearer definition of not just roles but the goals and expectations of the learning objective. It may mean that the task will need to be re-designed so that the participants can take over. This will require a greater structure around the activity.  Alternatively, process-oriented collaboration focuses on the learning that can be gained from structured group exchange (Clark & Mayer, 2003). By giving better guidelines and examples of what is expected could assist in the task. Groups do not find it easy to work virtually so without careful structuring, it is unlikely that discussion will move beyond, at best, sharing of information, support and encouragement. (Salmon, 2002, p. 98)

By designing the activity in such a way that feedback can be given at the completion of the task will address the issue around the feedback spilling over into the f2f workshop. This will also help entrench the learning and support the learners. Feedback should weave in important course-related information for each team. This does not mean an individual posting for each student. Weaving involves pulling together the participants’ contributions by collecting statements and relating them to concepts and theories from the course (Salmon, 2002).

By making the participants individual inputs to the task part of the assessment evidence could also help ensure additional evidence of competence was not required latter due to poor participation and negate the facilitator’s inability to grade at completion of the activity. This could be achieved by (from reference marital)

• Ask learners to include at least two quotes from their own postings in the team task

• Ask learners to include two quotes from their peers’ postings in the team task.

By getting the learner involved early on in the course would help answer the last issue. The facilitator may want to put forward an approach to capture the participant’s attention. Time spent early on would pay for itself later on in the activity.

Other ideas generic to the online environment that help reduce work load include (from reference marital :

Automatic formative assessments – quizzes with smart feedback, Adding a list of frequently asked questions (FAQs) and a glossary will help reduce the number of FAQs cluttering the forums and taking up the tutor’s time.

All of these ideas will help the facilitator concentrate on the role of providing guidance where it is more appropriate and arguably of greater need.

In saying all this, the way the activity is designed around a tangible output is good and should not change to a discussion for discussions sake. Too often, online course designers fail to define this end – the output of the collaborative effort (Dark & Janssens-Bevernage, 2007).

Compare my approach with the approach taken by my team in Team task 4.

When comparing my approach with that of the team, I felt I took a more holistic view of the course and associated workload. Facilitation of student posts is important the other roles associated with facilitation must be included in the overall workload. If you look at my first post I tried to outline all the different roles and responsibilities of the facilitator. Forums   / ► Foodies – The facilitator’s workload   The facilitators workload by Carl – Monday, 12 October 2009, 10:42 AM In particular …. from the reference material we know that “Most of an online facilitator’s workload is defined by interventions during learning activities”. The outputs here are not very defined so I would gather there is a considerable amount of work just in managing the discussion. “Too often, online course designers fail to define this end – the output of the collaborative effort (Dark & Janssens-Bevernage, 2007)”. Therefore an element of the workload will need to be measured against interventions and not just roles/task requirements… (Added in full below due to size)

It was at this point that I also made mention around course design and its influence on facilitator’s workload and this concept was brought over to the teams answer to Part 2. In my approach, this I felt was essential in not overloading the facilitator with design and management roles. By assigning appropriate role to appropriate staff we can ensure that the facilitator is left to facilitate. These I believe were the biggest difference between my approach and the teams.

The Full Quote from my first contribution to Team task 4: Forums   / ► Foodies – The facilitator’s workload   The facilitators workload by Carl – Monday, 12 October 2009, 10:42 AM

I think in order to get things started we need to outline what the critical roles are:

Here we can define the tasks by Berge’s classification of the role of an online tutor, which outlines four key conditions and associated performance indicators. These roles include Pedagogical, Social, Managerial and Technical. And then assign a time to those. “The Role of the Online Instructor/Facilitator by Zane L. Berge (2006)”.

Alternatively from the reference material we know that “Most of an online facilitator’s workload is defined by interventions during learning activities”. The outputs here are not very defined so I would gather there is a considerable amount of work just in managing the discussion. “Too often, online course designers fail to define this end – the output of the collaborative effort (Dark & Janssens-Bevernage, 2007)”. Therefore an element of the workload will need to be measured against interventions and not just roles/task requirements.

When we look at Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. (2004). Theory and practice of online learning. We see three critical components to creating the online community, vital as we know to any online learning and a task that will take time here to facilitate also. “Garrison, Anderson, and Archer (2000) that views the creation of an effective online educational community as involving three critical components: cognitive presence, social presence, and teaching presence”.

If we also look at the three critical roles we can better define what the facilitator’s task/workload is. These critical roles being: design and organising, devising and implementing and the third being when the teacher adds subject matter expertise. “Anderson, Rourke, Archer, and Garrison (2001)”

As we begin to break these tasks down and place timeframes against them we cannot forget to include the guiding and supporting of the learning that is being conduct at the same time and will take up a considerable amount of time also. “However, within this flexibility, the need to stimulate, guide, and support learning remains. These tasks include the design of a series of learning activities that encourage independent study and community building, that deeply explore content knowledge, that provide frequent and diverse forms of formative assessment, and that respond to common and unique student needs and aspirations Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. (2004)”.

Though the online facilitator needs to complete these tasks they are also creating that sense of community through disclosure, another task that needs to be added to the workload. To do this the facilitator must create a sense of trust and safety within the learning community, a time consuming task in itself. The second component of teacher presence is the critical task of facilitating discourse. In fulfilment of this component of teaching presence, the teacher regularly reads and responds to student contributions and concerns, constantly searching for ways to support understanding in the individual student and the development of the learning community as a whole. Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. (2004).

The last point/task that I think worth of mention early on and needs to be considered here is assessment. A task that is very time consuming but no less important to the learning. We know, from research on assessment,  that timely, detailed feedback provided as near in time as possible to the performance of the assessed behaviour is most effective in providing motivation and in shaping behaviour and mental constructs. Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. (2004).

The tool I selected was the participant’s link in the people block. This is where I can track an individual learner’s activity. When I select the name of a participant, and then select activity reports, I can check which resources and activities have been accessed, at what time/date. This enables meet to follow an individual learner’s progress through the course or module they are working on. This would allow me to make sure that each resource available to the learner had been used. If a particular part has been missed then a reminder or prompt to view that resource could help get them back on track. Additionally if a question arose that was dealt with in a resource I could check to see if that individual had accessed the appropriate material or resource. This type of resource also gives a good overview of where the participant is at and allows me to see just how they are going overall. Based on that information I can assist if there appears to be a problem or let them continue on if things seem to be going well. Therefore I’m not always seen to be lecturing to students but more guiding the learning process.

One of the report types I can run, explaining how I think this would help to support learners if I were facilitating an online course.

The reporting tool allows me a number of options depending on the information I want/need. The type of report I can get would depend on what I was doing. For this example I’ll use; creating a report based on who accessed a particular resource. This type of report could help me support the learners in a number of ways. Firstly it could give me details about how relevant that resource is to the context of the module or course. Should the resource not be used but participants still achieved the outputs to a desired level then perhaps that resource could be removed so as not to overwhelm the participants with unnecessary information.

Alternatively if a student was not achieving or was struggling with an aspect of the module/course you could see if they had accessed the appropriate resource. Also by seeing how long they had spent using that resource, this information could possibly help me ascertain how much they had taken in. (depending on the resource this could be very subjective, as they may have downloaded the resource).

If a report about a resource like a discussion forum was produced, this may tell me which students are fully engaged and which students are not. It may also allow me to see which teams are not fully engaging in the discussion and who may need a prompt to get started or a question to get them better engaged in the learning process.

For Team task 3 you needed to facilitate a synchronous chat session. We would like you to capture this experience in a second blog posting.

This is what we would like to see in this blog posting:

1. Copy a recording of the 10–15 minute chat session you facilitated into your blog posting.
2. Self-critique the way you facilitated the chat session and describe what you found most challenging. Pick two things you did well and two things you would improve on next time you run a chat session (around 300 words).

Self-critique of my chat session

Challenges I faced:

The chat session I choose to facilitate was one based on our individual responses to the participants of the team task. It was used as a brainstorming session. Strategies for using chat as a communication tool (Illinois Online Network, 2007) Brainstorming Sessions: Students brainstorm as warm up activities for writing assignments. This can function as a pre-writing phase for the rough draft of a paper.

As this was my first time facilitating an on-line chat I was at first slightly apprentice. The most challenging aspect was the unfamiliarity of the environment. By creating an opportunity to practise before the actual session enabled not just me but the other participants an opportunity to become familiar with the tool. The other main challenge was that this was a typing environment. Though I can type I am not that fast and when rushed can tend to make a lot of mistakes. This made me apprehensive but lead to one of the things I did well and that was to be prepared.

Two things done well:

By ensuring that the session was prepared well in advance I was able to make sure I was well adequately prepared for the session and could fully support the other participants through the session. This included pre-typed questions and short comments that I could quickly cut and paste into the chat from an open word document. I also reviewed all related discussion threads so far and marked them so that these could be easily retrieved if that topic had comes up.

The second thing that worked well was, posting the questions in advance. This helped not only ensure I was prepared but it also helped prep the other participants and helped limit any gaps as people went off to research the context of the conversation (as happened in another session) This method of facilitation also meant that I could prepare the majority of my comments negating any unnecessary last minute typing. Questions about clarification or along the lines of what do you think… worked well but deeper questions would have engaged the participants better.

Two things done not so well:

Next time I would take a step back, take a more guided approach and not get so involved in the actual discussion. I think due to the nature of the chat session and that as it was part of an ongoing discussion I became a little too involved in content and should have been more focused on the facilitation of the discussion.

This leads on to my other point of having additional questions ready in order to create a more deeper discussion to go beyond what was obvious. If I had of created additional questions that could help create deeper discussion, I could have possibly entrenched the learning more.

Part 1

Team task 2 was an essential task to help you to build your e-facilitation skills.

In your blog entry, you need to reflect on your learning as you undertook this task.

You should be guided by the following questions:

* What did you find most challenging when writing the messages to the course participants in the scenario?

* Did you identify different approaches to e-facilitation among you and your team members? If so, how would you describe and analyse these differences?

Reflecting on the building my e-facilitation skills.

The task at initial glance did not seem that difficult, my background has seen me facilitate learning for over 20 years and many of the issues underlining the participants or the course itself I recognised from my past. My ability to identify the underlining problems quickly helped give direction to the context of the questions or posts that would follow.  Re: Getting started by Carl – Monday, 7 September 2009, 09:56 AM.

I think by being able to identify some underlining issues initially helped define what was within our scope and what was not. The way in which some one facilitates play a huge part in any course, especially on-line where physical cues are missing.

Re: Getting started by Carl – Monday, 7 September 2009, 09:56 AM Firstly I think there is an underlining issue here and this is about the way this course is being facilitated and its overall design. I firstly think this course needs to go back to creating a sense of community. The facilitator needs to encourage and support the learning community. Without the purposeful formation of an online learning community in online learning, we are doing nothing new and different.(Palloff & Pratt, 2007, p. 231)

He needs to provide purpose to the learning and publicly acknowledge individual and group efforts throughout the course to date. The focus initially should be on re establishing a cooperative and collaborative learning environment, Building Community in an Online Learning Environment: Communication, Cooperation and Collaboration by Misanchuk and Anderson (n.d.)

The facilitator here needs to reinforce the steps outlined by Palloff and Pratt (1999)

Once the team begun work on the context of our replies did some of the challenges come to the surface. How do I conceptualise and put in writing what I would normally just stand up and say. Alternately if someone is having a problem we could break and spend one on one time with them or alternatively just talk during a break to different individuals.

Some of the issues that we identified were unfamiliar to me especially the literacy issues. However by using the resources available I was able to identify how to better deal with this particular participants issues and in doing so better assist them achieve their learning goals (I believe anyway)

Re: Getting started by Carl – Monday, 7 September 2009, 09:56 AM Due to the culturally sensitivity around Lins issues, We need to recognising that instructional design and facilitation cannot be culturally neutral is a first step in the process of becoming culturally competent (Palloff & Pratt, 2003, p. 41). In responding to Lins specific cultural needs we may want to seek out materials that represent more than one cultural viewpoint. Chapter 6 of the OTIS Online Tutoring Book (Labour, Juwah, White & Tolley, 2000) gives a good overview of potential language issues. To support non-native speakers the authors suggest that tutors do the following;

The use of jargon or colloquialisms may be a source of misunderstanding and confusion for some non-native speakers. Therefore, it is very important for tutors to use ‘plain language’ and have excellent “communication skills (clear, brief, entertaining)” (Kulp). Online tutors need to show patience in supporting these learners.

The facilitator here also should ensure he appeals to all learning styles. But an online course that uses different types of assignments and approaches to learning can accomplish the same objective without using more complex technologies, such as audio or video. For example, in addition to asking students to read and engage in discussion online, if instructors use simulations, case studies, internet research, and collaborative group experiences they help broaden the learning experience and accommodate various learning styles. (Palloff and Pratt, 2001, p. 112)

Another challenge was around some of the second guessing I did when other facilitators added there ideas about the problem that particular participant was facing. At one point I thought was I getting the issue all wrong and that I had misread the situation, how could I be sure what I was seeing was really happening. When Sandra said “I don’t read Sophie as argumentative, more fed up and wanting to get ahead. Brian is not completing his task as presenter of her team. Will this detract from the team marks? Her post is not very tactful. I suggest passing Brian’s presenter task to her once it is established that Brian is no longer able to do the role. Ensure her team gets another post confirming her role so everyone is clear, and then monitor her progress”

This to me was not at all how I had read the situation. I had seen her as augmentative and trying to influence the group to her way of doing work. Even though this may have not been the case I would have never given in to one participant despite another. The resentment that could occur as a result could have a real; adverse effect on the group.  By identify g the different facilitation styles I could see how direct some of the others would be.

The different techniques of facilitation between Sandra and I showed how a situation, (though identified by both), the responses was very different. This showed me that we need to slow down when addressing issues to ensure we have all the facts before presenting a solution to a problem. In the end we decided to approach all parties with more tentative steps to truly identify what the underlying factors were.

One challenge initially very apparent was in how to create a sense of acknowledgement. Usually I would just say well done. But the method of facilitation that I found extremely interesting and one in which I will definitely use in the future is providing approving statements in discussion forums. By doing this I will be able to acknowledgement the quality contributions, but not just to one individual. By acknowledging the contributions from every learner, I will be able to also create a better community and then each individual can see that their input is valued and observed. By providing these in a group reply I can also help ensure all participants either continue the good work or lift their input to meet what is expected of them. Re: Getting started by Carl – Monday, 7 September 2009, 09:56 AM This public feedback needs to focus on the general contribution /collaboration in teamwork assignments. Although it is important to acknowledge students by name to engage them, I think this public response should be addressed to all students, covering the issues raised by the students below. I have added my thoughts.

Read the interview about Alison’s online learning experience (The Story of an Online Learner) and write an essay of about 700 words in your blog. In this essay you need to consider:

1. how the facilitator worked to support the learning activities before the start of the course, at the beginning of the course, during the course and at the end of the course
2. how this might be different from or similar to a classroom teacher’s role
3. how Alison fits into the typical profile of a successful online learner.

The facilitator in Alison’s case worked throughout the course to support Alison learning. This can be seen by the way she not only set up different learning environments but also the way she engaged the learners through different tools and methods of instruction.

If we look at the course as a whole we can see that the facilitator as Alison put it “the use of a magical touch here and there” provided energetic and helpful reminders this meant she was able to influence the learning in a positive way. This enabled her to come across as a person who cared about the subject matter, the individual learners and the learning process.

This facilitator also created the environment where Alison felt connected with her fellow classmates and by doing this created a positive and safe learning environment.

The beginning of the course

The facilitator supported Alison right from the beginning of the course, which in this case was weeks in advance. By contacting Alison and introducing herself she was able to engage Alison and humanise herself prior to the classes beginning. By providing information about how to introduce themselves and how to begin to get to know other member s of the class she was able to bring the class together.

This also provided the opportunity for the participants to begin to become familiar with the technology and the environment they would be working in. The facilitator also provided reference for those unfamiliar to this type of learning. At this point the facilitator was able to outlined expectations and aims of the forums which resulted in Alison feeling more comfortable with the environment.

During the course

Throughout the actual course we see the facilitator contact Alison when absence is noticed. Alison knew that not only was her performance being watched but that her attendance was important to the course and learning.

The Ice breaker exercise that the facilitator set up enabled Alison to use and come to grips with the tools available to also see that this learning environment was enjoyable and would reach her on a personal and academic level. It showed how critical thinking would be achieved.

By supporting her through this she was able to provide Alison learning resources that were easily available and relevant to her learning needs.

By providing opportunities to fulfil all the roles, Alison was given the opportunity to take a more active role in the group learning. By monitoring these conversations she kept the environment safe for the learners, and that should they need assistance then they could get it. This did not mean that Alison felt left to her own devices, the facilitator regularly added values to the learning by providing feedback and direction where and when required.

By ensuring the participants kept to the outcomes the course the facilitator ensured the objectives of the learning where being achieved. Participants were made to think by providing questions on topic.

By posting at different times of the day, Allison was shown that the facilitator was just like her, facing the same aspects of life as her.

The tasks that the facilitator set reflected reality and could be directly linked to Alison’s real life, they engaged her and obviously made her reflect on the subjects being discussed.

By providing quizzes the facilitator allows Allison to formatively assess herself and through valued feedback engage in the subject at deeper levels.  This also enabled the facilitator to review aspects that had not been fully picked up by participants.

By providing regular and relevant feedback Alison felt that her contribution meant something to the facilitator that she was not being overlooked. Group tasks were also given feedback which engaged and supported the type of learning the group had been involved in and through this reinforced individual efforts. It also helped Alison reflect on what she had done and therefore create that deeper learning.

This was all timed well and helped direct the groups forward with their learning progress.

End

At the end of the course the summative assessments were based on the overall course outputs and therefore again created this reflection and self worth in what had been achieved, creating a deeper learning and showing where individual weaknesses were for future improvement.

The evaluation at the end of the course also helped by reflecting on the advantages of the course and to act as a finalisation of the learning environment.

What’s different about facilitators?

The critical difference I’ve noticed between on-line and off-line facilitators is that due to the lack of physical cues the on-line facilitators needs to pay more attention to the subtleties of the environment. They need to ensure that each aspect of their role is fully prepared.

Much of online interactions are asynchronous. The delay between interactions can create differences in response. This is reflected in Online and Offline Facilitation: Different yet Alike? By Nancy White, last edited 3/2000. Because of this type of environment the facilitator needs to take a step back and not get to involved, to let this thinking and reflection take place.

Many online interactions are explicitly or implicitly anonymous and because of this the facilitator needs to take a more active role in creating a less anonymous environment.

Because the medium of communication is text the facilitator need to be able to relay their message through good sound writing skills. Where facilitation in an f2f environment this can be done through any number of medium. (Depending on subject)

Because on-line learning is 24/7 the student does not have downtime where they can’t be engaged in learning. This means that a facilitator needs to be available also outside of what might be considered the normal working hours.

What are the similarities?

There are similarities also that should be mentioned. Facilitators are still required to impart new information, mark assignments, answer questions,   interact with students, critique work or thinking, moderate and/or enable discussion introducing or enabling transactions and arbitrating or mediating disputes Online Facilitation web page (Cowley et al., 2002, October 21)

Is Alison a typical online learner, adapted from What makes a successful online student? by the Illinois Online Network (2007).

She seemed initially a little hesitant but I think overall she was open-minded about sharing life, work, and educational experiences as part of the learning process. She seemed to enjoy engaging with her fellow students. She seemed open and friendly based of the text.

She also seemed to be self-motivated and self-disciplined, though initially she did not get involved due to being on holiday, she did seem to get involved in the process and followed the course through to the end without any obvious problems. She seemed to enjoy the fact that she could structure her learning around her life and other commitments.

She was willing to “speak up” when she had a problem arise. At one point early on in the course she had issues with uploading files but must have sort help as the facilitator assisted her.

She also accepted the idea of critical thinking and decision making as part of the learning process. She enjoyed reflecting on the learning, and she use resources to assist in filling in knowledge gaps.

She obviously had access to a computer and a modem.

I think by the end of the course Alison had also seen that high quality learning can take place without going to a traditional classroom. I think to enrol in this sort of learning a person probably already believes to some point that this is not a waste of time, by continuing to the end, providing good feedback and achieving results this shows a commitment to and belief in the learning environment.

This is not to say that Alison does not fit within the other areas but without actually knowing more it’s hard to determine if she did in fact have these traits. I would think through her finishing the programme that these were probably all achieved in some way or another and include:

1. Be able to think ideas through before responding.
2. Be able to communicate through writing.
3. Be willing and able to commit to 4 to 15 hours per week per course.
4. Be able to meet the minimum requirements for the program.

Berge’s classification of the role of an online tutor outlines four key conditions and associated performance indicators. These roles include Pedagogical, Social, Managerial and Technical. As I searched through the posts by the facilitators the posts below give an example of the different types of roles with in this course.

From the Pedagogical role comes this post where Julie uses questions and probes for student responses:

Re: Hi Food Fantasy team mates by Julie Watson – Friday, 31 July 2009, 01:58 PM

Hi Sandra,
some good questions to get things going for your team.
As you move through the course and learn more about the nature of facilitating eLearning groups, you are likely to develop your ideas about the similarities/differences between traditional and online facilitation- have you thought about capturing this in your blog?
Regarding your point about the facilitator and eLearning content, can you and your group think of a situation in which it may be appropriate for a facilitator to also guide group content in some way?
Keep the thoughts coming!
Cheers,
Julie

From the Social role comes this post which helps create the learning environment:

Re: Some thoughts to get us started by Julie Watson – Friday, 31 July 2009, 02:25 PM

Frank and Joy,
you’ve made a great start for your team, well done.
Frank, it’s good that you are able to draw out some of the key points from the course readings that are relevant to this task. Joy, your comment about drawing on your own experiences to complement course material is a great idea.
Now that you have some starting material, you could group some JD elements or use the main headings and create separate discussion threads for them. This may enable your group to have more in-depth discussions about aspects of the role.
I’m sure you’ll come up with some great ideas over the next week or so – especially when Sarn & Tracey add their perspectives to the mix.
Keep those ideas flowing Soup Slurpers!
Julie

From the Managerial role comes this post that outlines the agenda and timeframes:

Your task 1 presenter by Julie Watson – Monday, 27 July 2009, 01:02 PM

For this task, your I have nominated Chris as your presenter.

As outlined in the task description, the presenter helps to facilitate the outputs from the work of your team. Their responsibilities include:

• writing the job description items that have been agreed by all team members
• posting a draft of the job description in the wiki (or in another file format) at least 2 days before the deadline, to ensure that team members agree that the presenter’s proposed description reflects what the team settled on
• moderating discussions, if necessary
• ensuring team members stick to the task.

A presenter of a team that works well does not have a lot of extra work, so please support each other and Chris as much as you can.

Julie

From the Technical role comes this post where Julie helps cut through the technology behind the learning (though this post does also fall into the managerial role):

Team spaces – eFacilitator role description by Julie Watson – Monday, 27 July 2009, 12:54 PM

Your team spaces are now set up, ready for you to begin team task 1- developing a role description for an eFacilitator. (If you’d like to change your team name, just let me know and I can update your team resources.)

A quick overview of how to get started:

• Have a look at the template (in your wiki) to help you structure your job description (you can change this if you like)
• Use your team forum to discuss your ideas and your comments on the readings and your own experiences.

When you start to agree on some key points, your team presenter for this task can start to capture these ideas in your team wiki

Remember, your job description (in the form of your wiki) should be less than 1000 words. This team task is due on August 12, and the earlier your team starts the more your discussions and ideas can develop.

If your team has any questions or difficulties, please let me know.

Julie

I feel that these four roles define the roles of an e-facilitators well. (Comments below adapted directly from The Role of the Online Instructor/Facilitator by Zane L. Berge (2006))

By fulfilling the role of Pedagogical the facilitator fulfils the part of an educational facilitator; they moderate the learning by questioning and probing students in order to illicit responses. They insure the interaction is focused toward the content and that discussions concentrate on the critical concepts in the context of the learning.

The Social role creates an environment that encapsulates learning it ensures interaction is occurring between students and between students and facilitators. The group dynamics are developed on to create a better cohesion of the group. This enables the students the ability to work together toward the objectives of the learning.

The Managerial role insures that the learning is structured and objectives outlined, performance indicators are established that ensure students meet time tables and procedural rules. This ensures participants understand what is expected of them. This role I see will really test the leadership and directional abilities of the facilitator.

The Technical role ensures that the facilitator can help participants through the use of the technology; by providing this the facilitator can ensure that the focus is on the learning context rather than the technology being used to create this environment.

Would I add an extra role I think not, what I would do is to expand on the roles. Within the role off Pedagogical I would encapsulate more the process of Imparting new material. This is not to say that they lecture but they know where to find something that the students needs. This may take the form of explaining or through directing participants where to find that knowledge. They also as part of this role provide the feedback required as part of the assessment process and critique the participants work or thinking. They provide answers to questions. And they introduce and summarise the learning/objectives. The Online Facilitation webpage (Cowley et al., 2002, October 21).

I would also expand on the social role to encapsulate the facilitators personality Palloff and Pratt (2001, p. 21) The facilitators need to establish themselves as a presence on line. I think that personality will play a part in the ability to create this environment. Though this may not be always true, so long as the facilitator has the ability to create that learning environment the type of personality may not come into play. But is worth a mention anyway. By also ensuring that the ability of facilitators to progress the conversations beyond the trivial level discussions and social exchanges into more deeper learning is a role that would also need adding to the list. Ref Effective Networked Learning in Higher Education: Notes and Guidelines (Goodyear, 2001, January 31)

This is not to say that other models don’t make for a good bases for example Online Facilitation webpage (Cowley et al., 2002, October 21) makes for a good model also by breaking down the role into: what is facilitation, purpose of facilitation, means of facilitation, tools available and facilitation techniques. Especially the way they have broken down the Purpose of facilitation into the key 9 areas. It is here we can see a crossover of skills and roles between these roles and that of Berge’s.

By encapsulating these additional areas I think the four roles as outlined in Berge’s classification are excellent and make for a good method of defining the role.

The best contribution I added to the task was most certainly my first “Re: process posted by Carl – Tuesday, 4 August 2009, 10:32 AM” were I talked about the influence of the literature from The Role of the Online Instructor/Facilitator by Zane L. Berge (2006).  The way in which Berge outlined and defined the role of the online facilitator into four distinct categories this made sense to me. It reinforced the importance of the role and defined it into some distinct categories. By breaking the role down into these tasks this made the role seem more manageable. Though this was not the only resources I found of interest it became a large part of the focus for my initial posts. I will not go into too much detail here as I will expand more on Berge’s roles in my next post were we look at this further.

I also add some of what I believed was the Key Tasks of an e-facilitator that I adapted from Effective Networked Learning in Higher Education: Notes and Guidelines (Goodyear, 2001, January 31) and Online Facilitation webpage (Cowley et al., 2002, October 21). This was the post were I tried to distinguish what I believed were the key tasks an e-facilitator would be asked to perform and included:

• Consultant and guide of learning
• Presentation of multiple perspectives
• Sharing of learning environment
• Team member
• Sensitivity to students learning styles
• Impart new material
• Making assignments
• Answer questions
• Interact with students
• Critique work or thinking
• Moderate and/or enable discussion
• Introducing or enabling transactions
• Arbitrating or mediating disputes
• Summarization

These became what I saw as the critical tasks of the e-facilitator.

I also made mention of the need to structure the JD to include Key responsibilities professional and technical responsibilities and that it should included duties, experience and other “Re: process by Carl – Thursday, 6 August 2009, 05:06 PM” The duties here I had made mention earlier of in my first post and included some of what I believed to be the core competencies of a e-faclitator which I had adapted from the Australian Flexible Learning Quick Guide series (Back road Connections, 2002) and included;

• Engage the learner in the learning process
• Appropriate questioning techniques
• Appropriate listening and feedback skills
• Skilled at managing discussion
• Ability to build online teams
• Capacity for relationship building
• Motivational skills
• Promote effective interactions and dialogue
• Preparedness
• Good work ethic

With these competencies as a base on which to add the key tasks in order to fulfil the four key roles plus maybe one or two more skills, knowledge’s and attitudes, I thought we would have a great JD.

One other post I made”Re: process by Carl – Monday, 10 August 2009, 10:25 AM” was bout the process around defining a role and task and that there is a need to establish the performance needs within the role firstly before trying to break down the role further, unfortunately I think this concept was discussed to late in the group task to be of any real value as a lot of work had been done already. The idea here was to help define the JD and was where I made mention; that for the purpose of our JD the sub headings will need to be the bases of the definition subheading should make a definition of what goes below”.

Job Description for E-Learning Facilitator

The Flexible Polytechnic is a vibrant educational organisation offering twenty-first century education and training. A recognised leader in the field, our innovative approach to e-learning meets the needs of a wide range of adult learners.

We offer inspiring and engaging teaching and learning, with an emphasis on collaboration, based on real-life scenarios, to ensure deeper learning and counteract feelings of isolation. Ours is a different and unique flexibility, backed up by supportive facilitation.

We are seeking a specialist e-facilitator to fill a key position in our team.

Purpose of the role

The purpose of this role is to facilitate E-Learning to maximise student/teacher engagement ensuring effective learning and competency in the subject being studied.

Facilitation, in either classroom or online, enabling groups/people to work together to achieve goals/objectives.

The facilitator of learning, is to “guide, direct and equip students with the skills and abilities to provide for their own educational needs in the future” (Siemens, 2002)

References:

Effective online facilitation (Version 2.0). Australian Flexible Learning Framework Quick Guides series. Canberra, Australia: Australian National Training Authority. http://www.flexiblelearning.net.au/guides/facilitation.pdf )Cowley, J., et al. (2002, October 2001). Online facilitation. http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/onlinefacilitation.htm

Siemens, G. (2002). Lessons learned teaching online. Retrieved August 3, 2008, from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/lessonslearnedteaching.htm

Key roles and responsibilities

The role of the E-learning Facilitator is to engage, guide and motivate students to meet the objectives of the learner, the course and the institution. The E-learning Facilitator sets the environment to allow the learner to meet their own learning needs, and to enable groups of learners to work together to achieve their goals

The e-learning facilitator is required to manage the learners and the learning using a variety of online tools.

Responsibilities include;

• Empowering learners by placing them at the center of the learning experience…allowing them to personalize their learning.
• Develop meaningful activities and assessments to meet the learning objectives and support the development of critical thinking skills
• Helping students to organise and prepare for E-Learning
• Creating opportunities for student/teacher/peer involvement
• To guide students through the course in the most effective way
• Provide technical assistance and help students feel comfortable with technology

References:

The Role of the Online Instructor/Facilitator by Zane L. Berge (2006)

Person Specification

To be our successful candidate you will have wide, demonstrable experience in adult education, which will encompass e-learning, distance and face-to-face education. You will be skilled in harnessing the benefits of modern technology while focusing on the human aspects of learning and learner support; you will recognise the importance of strict quality assurance and adherence to good practice; and, above all, you will be passionate about what you do.

Current knowledge of area being taught – broad base of experience in the area

Trained and/or experienced in e-learning and facilitation

Recent teaching experience, specifically, but not necessarily exclusively, in adult education.

Desired: A qualification in or demonstrable, recent experience in instructional design and or course/content authoring

Demonstrated skills and experience

Teaching experience

Understanding of E-Learning principles

Excellent communication skills especially through electronic media

Proven facilitation skills including

‘Facilitation skills including:

• engaging the learner in the learning process, particularly at the beginning
• appropriate questioning, listening and feedback skills
  the ability to provide direction and support to learners
  skills in managing online discussion
• ability to build online teams
• a capacity for relationship building
• motivational skills. ‘

Experienced e-learning for self as a learner is desirable

An instructor who is open to giving up control of the learning process, using collaborative learning techniques and ideas, allowing for personal interaction, and bringing in real-life experiences and examples, and who builds reflective practice into teaching

References

(Palloff & Pratt, 2001, p. 22

The Online Facilitation webpage (Cowley et al., 2002, October 21).

Personal qualities

Flexible

Good ‘listener’ and communicator

A people person’ – outgoing, friendly, encouraging, supportive,

Ability to take decisions, and be firm but gentle.

Critical thinker, ability to work independently, customer focused, team player.

an introduce themselves, others and topics

Facilitates interactivity

Praise and models good discussant behaviour

Creator of ideas and strategies

Someone who is happy to let the student be the centre of attention

Someone who is willing to “let go’ of control and allow students to create their own experiences

It is also seen as important for teachers to have a positive attitude to online teaching and an ability to be innovative and experimental

Responsive to student needs, but with the discernment to know when to respond immediately, when to hold back a bit, and when (and how) to encourage other students to respond.