E-moderation

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article or section needs to be revised. Details should be given on the talk page. Please help to improve it , and then remove this flag.

Under E-Moderation, and online moderation, or e-tutoring (see. Tele-Tutoring ) is generally understood the care and support of learners and learning-working groups on the network (or alternatively e-tutoring, Teletutoring, Collaborative Learning) . It is essential that the term e-moderation equally emphasizes methodological-didactic and technical aspects: The term moderation stands for the support of groups and individuals in order to enable them to learn with one another in a targeted, independent and socially competent manner to work. The E , on the other hand, indicates the technical support provided by electronic media and emphasizes a specific didactic scenario, namely the network-based discussion, exchange or cooperation. In essence, it is about helping the learners to achieve their learning goals in different communicative learning environments (synchronous, asynchronous, poin-to-point, multipoint) (Friedrich et al. 2004).

If one now looks at the specific activities of e-moderators on the Internet, it becomes clear that they - beyond their knowledge of planning, preparation and implementation of courses - must above all think about changed moderation and support strategies. This is especially true for e-learning scenarios that focus on discourse, exchange, collaboration and discussion. In e-learning scenarios that focus more on self-organized learning with multimedia-based content (e.g. WBT / CBT), moderation and support play a subordinate role. This goes so far that moderation or supervision by a human tutor is not provided, but instead is implemented in the learning program. This means that e-moderation is only used if virtual communication and / or cooperation is provided.

Role models of the e-moderators

In the current research on the subject of e-moderation, there are various approaches and models that attempt to describe the range of typical tasks and functions of an e-moderator. Zane Berge, for example, defined typical roles and functions of e-moderation as early as 1995, which were used by a number of other authors (e.g. Teles et al., 2001; Liu et al., 2005; Morris et al., 2005, Hinze & Blakowski, 2002; Bett & Gaiser, 2004, Friedrich et al., 2004) were taken up and further developed. Zane Berge assumes that an e-moderator has four roles: Pedagogical, Social, Mangerial and Technical Role . In the following, two role models based on Zane Berge will be examined in more detail, namely the example of Hinze & Balkowski (2002) and Bett & Gaiser (2004):

Role model 1

In the German-speaking area, Hinze & Blakowski (2002) applied this role model and operationalized the four roles as follows in a qualitative study (content analysis of forum contributions in a virtual seminar):

(1) Organization: exams, exams, dates, responsibilities, study operations, praise for the supervision, criticism of the course of study, criticism of the supervision, forum operation and information between the students.

(2) Social: Introduction, contact, small talk, praise for the cooperation between the students, criticism of the cooperation between the students, feedback.

(3) Technology: General, computer problems, access problems, comprehension problems, (supposed) technical errors, information between students.

(4) Pedagogy: general praise, module-specific praise, general criticism, task-specific criticism, module-specific criticism, (alleged) errors, suggestions for improvement, general requests for help, task-specific requests for help, notes between students .

Role model 2

Bett & Gaiser (2004) pursued a different breakdown in their online article, they also assume four roles, but subdivide them differently than Berge (1995) and Hinze & Blakowski (2002). They describe their four roles based on Hron, Hesse & Friedrich (2003) through the following activities:

(1) Organizational-administrative role: setting an agenda, goals and schedules, forming learning and working groups, letting all participants "have their say", planning forms of meta-communication, creating regular status reports, posting FAQs, general information.

(2) Motivational-emotional role: strengthening social aspects, e.g. B. by introducing rounds, posting photos, encouraging participants to actively participate, encouraging the participants to take responsibility for the learning process, paying attention to the choice of words and mood in the group, e.g. B. Do not allow flaming.

(3) Role in terms of content: Ensure that course materials and content meet the learning objectives and the learning group, keep the course materials up-to-date, initiate content-related discussion of the topic, introduce or provoke different views, write mediating comments, post summaries on a regular basis.

(4) Didactic-mediating role: structuring the subject area in a meaningful way, according to the learning objectives that open the discussion, e.g. B. ask questions, formulate hypotheses, ask questions of understanding, formulate learning tasks, give learning aids, use methods (e.g. brainstorming).

Bett & Gaiser (2004) also state that these roles can be weighted differently depending on the teaching scenario, the progress of the course or the requirements of the learner. For example, the organizational role is more important at the beginning of a course than at the end of a course. In addition, it can be assumed that the range of support and moderation tasks for e-moderators can be very extensive. Therefore, Bett & Gaiser (2004) also suggest Kerres et al. (2005) suggest that the various roles can be assigned to a moderation team, e.g. B. on a group tutor, who especially has the social and motivational role, and a specialist tutor, who primarily gives feedback on content.

Phase model of e-moderation

Gilly Salmon offers another approach to the topic of e-moderation. In 2000 she presented a publication that was just as influential for e-moderation research as Zane Berge did in 1995. However, she pursues a different approach. It is not based on roles, but on five successive levels of e-moderation. So she developed a phase model and not a role model. Their approach is briefly presented below.

Five-step model of e-moderation according to Gilly Salmon (2000)

Salmon (2000) developed a five-step model of teaching and learning at the Open University as an orientation aid for the moderation process, whereby specific moderation tasks and technical support tasks have to be performed at each level. The designation of the five levels is representative of the fact that the learners go through different levels that build on one another in the learning process and acquire higher skills from level to level. The five levels are:

(1) Access and motivation : The first step for the e-moderator is to enable easy and quick access and to keep the possible (technical) entry hurdles as low as possible. Technical support is provided either by the e-moderator or by a support facility. On the content level, it is about "arriving" in the course, which should be combined with a simple task (e.g. the learners write a short "hello message"). This means that the first hurdle to express yourself online can be kept as low as possible.

(2) Online socialization: Stage two is about helping to create an online community. Online communication and cooperation processes are i. d. Usually not on its own, so the e-moderator is required to take on a mediating role in this phase and help to become an online community across cultural and social barriers and to develop common goals. At the technical level, it is important that the learners are able to deal with the learning environment. The central tasks of the e-moderator are thus to support the “socialization” of the participants in the virtual teaching situation, to establish the communicative exchange and to promote the technical skills of the learners in dealing with the learning environment.

(3) Information exchange : In phase three, Salmon assumes that a learning community has now been established and that the technical aspects take a back seat. The group members are also able to exchange relevant information with one another. The learners build a common understanding in the subject area, which forms the basis for the following phase four (knowledge construction). In this phase, however, it can usually be assumed that a flood of information will arise. Therefore, the primary task of the e-moderator is to provide assistance and structure.

(4) Knowledge construction: The three preceding phases are important for the fourth phase to be successful. When the participants have gained trust in one another and are able to deal with the learning environment well, in this phase they begin to exchange ideas intensively and interactively and to interact with one another independently. Appropriate tools must be made available to the learners to support joint activities (e.g. the creation of a joint document). The e-moderator can now slowly withdraw from the action, but still has an important role to play. In particular, the e-moderator should now ensure that the contributions are interwoven.

(5) Development (self-organization and personal development) : In phase 5, the learners are responsible for their joint learning process and are also asked to examine their own thinking and knowledge and to question what is given. At this stage, the e-moderator must support the learner's reflective abilities, encourage critical thinking and encourage mutual constructive criticism and contributions. In addition, this phase completes the entire process. The task of the e-moderation is to end the discussion and to give advice on how the topic can be further deepened by the learners if necessary.

From the description of the five levels it becomes clear that each level requires certain technical skills from the participants and, at the same time, specific strategies and functions from the e-moderator. Overall, Gilly Salmon (2000) also assumes that learning does not proceed evenly, but rather in jumps of different sizes.

From these different approaches to e-moderation, it becomes clear that e-moderators must have certain competencies and skills in order to be able to meet these requirements. An important keyword here is the media competence of lecturers on the Internet, which cannot and should not be discussed further here (articles on this topic can be found here: Bett, Wedekind & Zentel 2004).

literature

  • G. Bäuml-Westebbe, I. Buchem, M. Ebner, M. Egloffstein, C. Lehr, B. Peterson, S. Schön: Communication and moderation - Internet-based communication for learning support. In: M. Ebner, S. Schön (ed.): Textbook for learning and teaching with technology. Bad Reichenhall 2011. (online)
  • K. Bett, J. Wedekind, P. Zentel (Hrsg.): Media competence for university teaching . Waxmann, Münster et al. 2004.
  • HF Friedrich, E. Mayer-Picard, WF Hesse: Virtual seminars in general adult education: experiences from the netball project. In: DM Meister (ed.): Online learning and further education. VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden 2004, pp. 193–220.
  • U. Hinze, G. Blakowski: Requirements for supervision in online learning - results of a qualitative content analysis within the framework of the VFH. In: G. Bachmann, O. Haefeli, M. Kindt (eds.): Campus 2002: The virtual university in the consolidation phase. Waxmann, Münster et al. 2002, pp. 323–333.
  • A. Hron, FW Hesse, HF Friedrich: Cooperative learning in network-based scenarios. In: U. Scheffer, FW Hesse (Ed.): E-Learning - Using the Revolution of Learning Profitably. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2003, pp. 83-97.
  • M. Kerres, I. Nübel, W. Grabe: Design of online support for e-learning. In: D. Euler, S. Seufert (Hrsg.): E-learning in universities and training centers. Oldenbourg Verlag, Munich / Vienna 2005, pp. 335-349.
  • LV Morris, H. Xu, CL Finnegan: Roles of Faculty in Teaching Asynchronous Undergraduate Courses. In: JALN Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks. 9 (1), 2005.
  • F. Mündemann: E-moderation: The trainer as a learner possible. In: U. Bernath (Hrsg.): Online Tutorien - Contributions to the special conference "Distance Learning" of the AG-F in the context of LearnTec 2002. BIS, Oldenburg 2002, pp. 7-19.
  • G. Salmon: E-moderating: The key to teaching and learning online. Kogan Page, London 2000.
  • G. Salmon: E-moderating. The Key to Teaching and Learning Online. Taylor & Francis, 2004.
  • L. Teles, S. Ashton, T. Roberts, I. Tzoneva: The Role of the Instructor in E-Learning Collaborative Environments. In: TechKnowLogia. May / June 2001, pp. 46-50.
  • Josef W. Seifert, Bettina Kerschbaumer: Online moderation. 2011, ISBN 978-3-86936-196-3 .

Web links