Learning the Art of Online Facilitation: March 1-21, 2007

Still having a lovely holiday in the sun, but I printed out Web 2.0: About "Coming of Age: An introduction to the NEW worldwide web" , a collection of articles by teachers and specialists that was wide ranging and a fun read. Terry Freedman, the editor has a useful site http://www.terry-freedman.org.uk/db/web2/  and there are many others mentioned in the free downloadable book such as http://www.shambles.net/

I am looking forward to keeping up with all the links and good advice when I am back in the rain and cold of UK

Best wishes E.A.

Some time ago, I prepared a list of resources on moderation and communities of practice for an online workshop on weblogging. Maybe some of the material may be useful for you.

Main topics:

COMMUNITIES AND HOW THEY WORK
ENCOURAGING PARTICIPATION
GROUPS AND LEARNING
ACTIVITIES TO PROMOTE E-LEARNING
Being an effective MODERATOR

There is this as well:

Online Learning: Social Interaction and the Creation of a Sense of Community

 

 

Hi Sylvia,

I wanted to respond to the point you raised earlier (also Leigh Blackall's) about drawing a distinction between teaching and facilitating. I work in both domains and there are some differences between the role of a 'facilitative trainer' and that of the 'group facilitator'. The key distinctions for me lie in the areas of decision making and content neutrality.

As a trainer my primary role is the transferring of some kind of information or knowledge to individual participants. I also manage the group process while individual learning is taking place and am also involved in assessing individual performance in some way. As a teacher I can often be very facilitative, and this is great for learning. However, the primary role is individual learning within a particular sphere of knowledge. As the trainer I choose how and when students are involved in the decision making processes.

Group facilitation, on the other hand, is a process in which a person who is acceptable to all members of a group, is substantively neutral, and has no decision-making authority, intervenes to help a group improve the way it identifies and solves problems, and makes decisions, in order to increase the group’s effectiveness.

I'd really be interested in what others think or have grappeled with in this area.

Regards,
Stephen Thorpe

Some good resources that discuss content neutrality, decision making and the differences between the facilitator and trainer roles:

Chapter 2 of the 2007 edition of The Art of Facilitation by Dale Hunter.
For a useful diagram see page 28 of The Skilled Facilitator Fieldbook, also chapter 3 by Roger Schwarz discusses the differences between facilitator, consultant, coach, trainer and leader.
Chapter 30 of the IAF Handbook of Group Facilitation
Also a reprint of a classic by John (Sam) Keltner Facilitation: Catalyst for Group Problem Solving in the December 06 issue of the IAF Group Facilitation Journal

Wow! Thank you for all the resources Sylvia, E.A. and Robin! I sent for the pdf version of the Web 2.0 "Coming of Age" book tonight. If you don't see me in a tree or stuck in a wall in SL it's because I'm busy exploring all the sites.

Robin, I'm curious about using audio as well as text. What are the programs? Is it difficult to keep track of "input" from 2 mediums at once, or more importantly, can students follow the thread in a group setting? Do you record the conversations as well?

I especially liked the idea of not counting typos and sentence construction, that would certainly relieve a lot of stress and increase interaction.

Carol / Sunshine

From Re: Tips, Tricks and Advice and for Facilitators by robinyap on 04 March 2007 19:00:00:
About your question Carol on slow typers - whenever I start an online session I always indicate that typos are ignored and sentence construction not graded so people don't feel that they have to recheck their sentences and lose their trend of thought. I've even allowed for texting in messages just to get them started. My younger students seem to like this idea although frankly I have a hard time understanding all the shortcuts.

The online facilitation programs I've used have audio so I always point out that they could always use their mic's instead so they don't have to type. If this is unavailable and you're only way to communicate is through typing, then I know I have to wait and verbalize this to the group that I will count to 50 or something just to allow for the slow typers.

I know what you mean about the difficulty understanding shortcuts - I agree that I don't mind if the students use txt spk, though I aim to write correctly myself, as I think that it gives them a better model. In addition, it takes me longer to rmbr txt spk than it does to remember how to spell things properly!
The SL chat, and also MSN chat are handy, as you can tell if someone is writing - SL by seeing them type, MSN because it tells you. Both of those I find very useful. In WebCT chat, you have no clues - so if there are  no messages appearing, I have no idea if the students are all frantically typing, or if they've all fallen asleep. It makes me much more twitchy, and far more likely to jump into what I perceive to be a period of silence, rather than waiting for them to finish.

I'm never that sure about audio, to be honest. There are two main aspects to it as far as I can tell. Practical - e.g. all having working microphones / speakers, turn taking, bandwidth issues etc. Then there are the more individual based; is audio easier or harder to follow. What if you need to go over something someone said a few minutes ago? What's easier - talking or writing, listening or reading. It presents different opportunities I think. Catching up afterwards is also different. A text chat over 1 hour generally is much quicker to skim read, than a 1 hour audio recording to listen to again, as you can't "skim listen". On the other hand, compared to face to face discussions, it is possible to (easily) capture the audio.
I don't think that there is a "right" answer, nor a "wrong" choice. We have to use both, and make choices. The chances are that our choices will be good for some users, less good for others - in the same way that in a face to face class, some students enjoy discussion sessions, others hate them but like the anonymity of a darkened lecture theatre.