By Roberto E. Maduro
In a constructivist, learner-centered approach, interaction is at the very heart of the instructional process. Only through interaction, can an active, collaborative mode of learning with emphasis on real-life whole tasks be implemented. Because of the key role of interaction in all learning formats and, particularly, in online environments, it is crucial to optimize the learning benefits of interactive strategies and to safeguard their integrity. The distance and separation characteristic of online education may promote behaviors that are not typical in face-to-face instruction. On the one hand, shy learners may be encouraged to participate more actively, especially in asynchronous discussions. On the other hand, certain forms of aggression may be favored by the lack of immediate controls and barriers that act as deterrents in brick-and-mortar settings.
My approach to defining ground rules for interaction starts with netiquette protocols and rubrics for discussion forums. To reinforce these policies, I strive to use models, which may come from my own interventions and from student participation. This approach underscores a very important principle: rules for interaction are, ultimately, principles for two-way communication between students and facilitators, aimed at ensuring the optimal functioning of a learning community.
As it can be seen, fairness is one of the guiding tenets of online interaction. Spear & Sax (n.d.), in their article Implementing Principles of Good Practice in Distance Learning, stresses the importance of defining response times for various types of communication and providing abundant and clear feedback. This is the instructors part in a fair relationship. As the instructor models adequate behaviors, establishes an overall tone for the interaction and shows a commitment to dialogic education, learners will be encouraged to follow this example through actions, which are always more powerful than words.
As I mentioned earlier, netiquette is one of the pillars of productive collaboration in a course. I embed these basic rules, which Badrul Khan calls a code of civility for online discussions, into the syllabus, as it can be seen in this example from a Humanities course. While presenting this code in writing is essential, reinforcing it through other means is no less crucial. I recommend including it in first week orientations. In some of my classes, such orientations are conducted synchronously to enhance the directness of the message and, in each session, I delineate the fundamental spirit of online discussions. Several authors, among which are Khan and Spear & Sax, stress the role of orientations as ideal opportunities to lay down ground rules, to which I add the value of synchronous communication for heightened impact.
That general spirit to which I alluded before is based on principles of civility and teamwork such as mutual respect, empathy, active listening, openness, honesty, and tolerance for diversity. I want to underscore the term spirit, because this is what it should be all about; we should not view netiquette as a bunch of mere rules of the game, but as the embodiment of overarching attitudes that permeate everything we do in an online course. Muilenburg and Berge (2001, cited in Khan, 2005), highlight the importance of welcoming a plurality of perspectives and fostering well reasoned interventions.
Critical as it is, a code of netiquette alone cannot ensure productive discussions, as a recent study shows (Buelens, Totté, et al, 2007). The authors of this study state that didactic guidelines should be combined with netiquette to set strong quality standards for class interaction. In my courses, I use widely adopted rubrics to articulate expectations for each discussion assignment. Along with these rubrics, I provide references to the basic netiquette protocols that were outlined during the orientation. Thus, the combination of general principles and attitudes modeled through specific actions and clearly articulated performance objectives and evaluation criteria is, in my view, the best way to establish the framework that will optimize the learning impact of interactive strategies and safeguard their integrity.
References
Buelens, H., Totté, N., Deketelaere, A., & Dierickx, K. (2007). Electronic discussion forums in medical ethics, education: the impact of didactic guidelines and netiquette. MEDICAL EDUCATION, 41. 711-717.
Khan, B. H. (2005). Managing e-learning strategies: Design, delivery, implementation, and evaluation. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
Spear, M. H., &, Sax, C. (n.d.) Implementing Principles of Good Practice in Distance Learning. PDF file.
