Response to a writing prompt….

Upon first reading Kearsley’s article, I was tempted to put together an True/False quiz for readers. I found it an easy way to summarize the main differences between a classroom setting and an online classroom setting. It appears below:

TRUE/FALSE

1. Online facilitation requires more time than a traditional classroom setting.
2. You need a specific type of personality to teach in an online classroom setting.
3. Online instructors need to be willing to sit in front of a computer for a couple of hours; those who won’t or can’t are invalidated as online instructors.
4. Trouble-shooting and problem-solving the course management system (e.g. Moodle, Blackboard) are a natural part of being an online instructor.
5. To be an online instructor, you have to like writing since that is what you will be doing quite a bit.
6. Interactivity with students is key to an online course, more so than a traditional classroom course.
7. Online instructors should spend a lot of time learning online before being allowed to teach online.

Personality traits that Kearsley highlights–a desire to write, patience to trouble-shoot and sit in front of a computer, be more interactive, a willingness to learn online–present potentially controversial openings. Is it possible to have an outdoorsman, who loves to learn by rubbing his hands over the bark of a redwood tree, who can rely on others to trouble-shoot his technical problems going to make it as an online facilitator?

Of course, the real controversy of such a TRUE/FALSE quiz lies in the absoluteness of any one particular statement. Take, for example, the assertion that interactivity with students is key to an online course. This implies that a traditional classroom course is NOT as interactive as an online course. I would argue that interactivity depends on the teacher. While in a traditional classroom setting, interactivity can often be under-stated–teacher sits at their desk with little or no interaction with students. However, interactivity in an online environment involves front-loading interaction, embedding it in the discussion forum prompts, the articles and/or media chosen for discussion, and the pace at which activities are introduced.

The real key, though, to successful interactivity isn’t the teacher; it’s the wealth of students for who are available to enrich a discussion. In my own experience facilitating an online course, this comment from a principal embroiled in the conversation was illuminating to everyone:

For me, this really illustrates Kearsley’s point about students interacting with students. In fact, his words emphasize this:

And remind me of Marc Prensky (The Role of Technology) who discusses that the role of technology in schools today is about supporting a new paradigm. The new paradigm? Students teaching themselves. As a face to face teacher, facilitating students teaching students can be a bit contradictory. In traditional classroom, it is difficult to arrange the kind of scheduled asynchronous discussions–that involve reflection–that students can have with each other. And, in many cases, there is a desire for students to interact directly with the teacher rather than with each other. This is because we have, I suspect, given this model of education primacy, more value in our existing classroom setting. In online, as well as face to face, teachers have to care about students and build positive relationships with them. In online environments, though, student to student interactions are given more value than in face to face environments.

Consider the diagram below and the value assigned to student-to-student (learner-to-learner) interactions:

Source: Anderson

Anderson describes the differing values assigned to learning in this way:

As such, in a model where teacher-student interaction is limited, student-to-student interactions with content can still occur in an online environment. In a traditional face to face classroom setting, “behavior rules” may inhibit the levels of interactions students need to have with each other and/or content. Face to face teachers simply can’t be everywhere at once, even though it’s helpful to be, as evidenced by this study on the impact of positive relationships on student achievement. For most face to face teachers, they simply cannot interact with students at the level needed to build those relationships. In an online environment, the facilitator is relieved of that responsibility of serving as the SOLE arbiter of high quality student learning.

Subscribe to Around the Corner-MGuhlin.org

Everything posted on Miguel Guhlin’s blogs/wikis are his personal opinion and do not necessarily represent the views of his employer(s) or its clients. Read Full Disclosure