Month: September 2021

Kristin Beeby, Jean-Pierre Joubert, Sandra Norum, and myself have spent the last few weeks working on the development of a week-long learning module focusing on managing student conflict in an online learning environment.  Our most recent task was the development of a facilitation plan that would encourage our learners to engage with one another with a goal of deep and meaningful learning.  We’ve planned to use Adobe Spark as the hub for our learning module and have created a series of pages to direct our learners’ attention between web-based resources, a discussion forum conducted on Mattermost, and a synchronous session in Collaborate.

Learning Outcomes

Our resource has one main learning outcome with a series of sub-outcomes which include the following…

• • • • Describe and reflect on best practices for managing conflict in online learning environments.
        • • Identify strategies for preventing student-to-student conflict online.
          • Describe strategies to manage existing conflict
          • Recognize and foster healthy conflict

Community of Inquiry

In addition to the learning outcomes, our plan looks to encourage the development of the three presences in a Community of Inquiry in the following ways…

Social Presence

• • • • Introduction email to be sent to the group on the Sunday leading into the resource.
      • Introduction video to be presented to learners at the beginning of the module.
      • A discussion forum on Mattermost which will include an initial post and responses with a focus on acknowledgement, reinforcement, and challenges.
      • A synchronous discussion and debrief hosted on Collaborate.

Cognitive Presence

• • • • Accessing the content available in the provided resources.
      • Engaging in the perspectives of co-learners through initial posts and responding.
      • Reflection on the content through the week and revisiting case studies by applying new knowledge.

Teaching Presence

• • • • Introduction videos and team bios provide learners with an understanding of the personas of the facilitators
      • Providing course expectations and a behaviour policy provide structure and targets for learners.
      • Asynchronous discussion facilitation on Mattermost allow facilitators to engage with learners and support the discourse to direct learning toward the outcomes.
      • A synchronous session hosted on Collaborate provides facilitators an opportunity to engage with learners with a goal of encouraging the communication of reflection.

Facilitation Plan

Attached below is a draft plan for how we look to interact with learners throughout the week using a combination of tools including Adobe Spark, Mattermost, and Collaborate.  We look forward to continuing to develop our plan leading up to the launch of our facilitation week, beginning September 27.

Day	Goal	Facilitator Task	Learner Task
DAY 1 (Sept. 26)	Asynchronous	Introduction to module through email	Read the email and familiarize yourself with the resource and confirm access to Mattermost discussion forum.
DAY 2 (Sept. 27) All (Spark page Kristin)	Asynchronous	Land Acknowledgment Outline Expectations/ Plan Course navigation Introduction (recorded introduction, discussion) Present case studies Initiate Mattermost discussion	Adhere to expectations for discussion post on Mattermost View page/content on Spark Prompts: What was the nature of the conflict? How could it have been prevented? How could it be addressed?
DAY 3 (Sept. 28) Christopher	Asynchronous	Present Prevention Methods Respond and recognize Mattermost discussion	Complete initial discussion post, outlining how you would respond to one of the four case studies as an educator View page/content on Spark
DAY 4 (Sept. 29) Sandra	Asynchronous	Present types of Conflict and Causes (Video examples)Respond and recognize Mattermost discussionScaffolding prompt to reignite and redirect the discourse however necessaryRemind learners to prepare for the synchronous discussion	View page/content on Spark
DAY 5 (Sept. 30) Jean-Pierre	Asynchronous	Addressing conflicts Respond and recognize Mattermost discussion	View page/content on Spark Prepare to share learning in a synchronous session
DAY 6 (Oct. 1) All	Synchronous on Collaborate 5pm PT	Case study 1 (post) and reflections Respond and recognize Mattermost discussion	View page/content on Spark Complete response to a minimum of one of your classmates’ initial posts Participate in synchronous session
DAY 7 (Oct. 2) Kristin	Asynchronous	Provide follow-up resources and other activities Provide recap Offer gratitude for participation	View page/content on Spark Extend learning as desired

Synchronous Session Lesson Plan
(5pm Pacific Time, October 1)

In order to make the most of our learners’ time during our synchronous session on Collaborate, we plan to follow through with the lesson plan attached below.

Time	What	How	Details
5 minutes	Greetings / Check-in	Synchronous conversation with teacher presence	Greet students as they enter Collaborate room Ask for feedback of the week
2 min	Land acknowledgment	Stated	Anishinaabe, Haudenoshaunee, and Lenape peoples of Southwestern Ontario Katzie First Nation and the Kwantien First Nation of the Fraser Valley Wolastoqiylk (Maliseet) and Mi’kmaq peoples Syilx people of the Okanagan
2 min	Outline plan for the session	Stated/slide
1 min	Break / transition
5 min	Review key ideas	Slide / discussion	Share one or two highlights from each day/topic Ask for feedback on what was most valuable learning for students
30 min	Check for understanding	Discuss each case student. Offer best practices	Possible discussion questions: What was the nature of the conflict? Describe how you would change your initial approach… and if not, why? What lessons did you take away from your co-learners’ posts? What could we add to our “tips” and “resources”? (Call on learners who addressed the case study for Mattermost discussion) If limited for time: Ask learners which case study was the most challenging and discuss that one
5 min	Question period	Check for questions	Monitor video and chat in Collaborate

 

The Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework is a social constructivist theory introduced by Randy Garrison, Terry Anderson, and Walter Archer in 2000.  It has become influential in recent years as it was designed to be specifically applicable to both online and blended learning environments, especially relevant to educators currently responding to the COVID-19 pandemic.  In the interactive infographic above, and in what follows here, I look to explore some examples of the practical application of the three associated presences.

Cognitive Presence

Cognitive Presence is the foundational concept of a CoI that is most closely associated the direct learning of the participants.  It’s important for an educator to foster an environment in which deep and meaningful learning can occur.  The goal here is to encourage learners to be actively considering their own learning.  There are a number of activities to be employed to foster cognitive presence.  Please be sure to click on the icons listed under that heading in the infographic to learn more.

Social Presence

The concept of Social Presence in a CoI relates to the members’ ability to project an image of a real person in the community.  This presentation of what Kimmons and Veletsianos (2014) would have described as an Acceptable Identity Fragment provides learners with an opportunity to make genuine human connections in an online learning environment, which in turn foster effective discourse, leading to greater learning.  The educator’s responsibility then is to create an environment where the opportunity for this identity presentation is possible.

Teaching Presence

Teaching Presence is the foundation that supports both social and cognitive presence.  While anyone in the community can and should take responsibility for the development of teaching presence, this role primarily lies with the educator.  It’s the educator’s goal here to build the structure for the learning community and present themselves as a guide and a partner in learning, which acts as a catalyst for greater social and cognitive presence development.

Conclusion

In summary, much of the work to create the learning environment and the execution of the orientation to that environment lies with the educator.  However, once in place, and the foundation for community development has been laid, the educator’s role should shift into that of a facilitator or guide, allowing learners to take ownership of their learning.  It is in this environment, one based on a shared responsibility, does deep and meaningful learning take place.

References

Garrison, R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Kimmons, R., & Veletsianos, G. (2014). The fragmented educator 2.0: Social networking sites, acceptable identity fragments, and the identity constellation. Computers & Education, 72, 292–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.12.001