Oxford Centre for Staff and Learning Development

Week 4 reading: models of good practice in online tutoring

George Roberts

In face-to-face teaching interactions there are hundreds if not thousands of years of tradition on which to draw to facilitate the establishment of a channel of communication: bells ring, the lecturer clears her throat or shouts, "Oy, you! in the back. Yes, you! Are we quite ready? Thank you!" The chairs in the room are oriented in a certain way to reinforce certain channels and damp others: theatre style, open U, boardroom table. There may be communication aids: black or white boards, OHPs or data projectors. Similarly, the establishment of relationships is facilitated by years of tradition and mediated by the channels of communication; none the less, if "old garlic breath is going to drone on about golf again, I'm out of here". We draw on a deep tradition of knowledge: what Neal Mercer (2000) might call "interthinking" or Gavriel Salomon (1993) might call "distributed cognition", most of which is tacit. This tacit knowledge of face to face learning interactions is not available to us in the online world. As Robin Mason (2001) said, often the first time we question the meaning and form of teaching at all is when we try to adopt new learning technologies.

Seven principles of effective teaching

Graham et al (2001) provide seven principles of effective teaching. Effective teaching:

• encourages student-tutor contact,
• encourages student-student co-operation,
• encourages active learning,
• gives prompt feedback,
• emphasises time on task
• has and communicates high expectations,
• respects diverse talents and ways of learning.

Reciprocity, authenticity and credibility

From Brookfield (2001) and Jones (1999) we can derive the maxims that:

• good learning relationships are based on reciprocity, authenticity and credibility

And, that in order to develop deep understanding, high quality learning and teaching:

• sets ground rules
• provides alternative modes of participation
• exemplifies models of engagement
• gives access to the experience of the instructor.

Designing an (urban) environment

Good design practice is not, of course, particular to any one field. The design field itself offers particularly useful inventories. We can readily translate from urban design manuals (e.g. Bentley et al. 1985) the principles that environments, including learning environments, should provide:

• permeability (multiple pathways)
• variety (multiple learning and teaching styles and preferences)
• legibility (multiple literacies, modes and systems of meaning)
• robustness (fault tolerance and redundancy)
• visual appropriateness
• richness (complexity and depth of coverage)
• personalisation.

Pedagogical pragmatism

The learning designer's practice is situated (Scollon, 2001) in all prior experience, discourse, sites of engagement: real & virtual, mediational means, domains of knowledge, and artifacts of learning technology. Design for learning is as interpersonal and interdiscursive as any act. Here are three dimensions to the practice of design for learning: stance, face and posture which will need to be addressed. Stance has been discussed earlier. You might want to consider the other two dimensions, which are set out in the Roberts & Huggins (2004) paper here .

• Stance: attend to the channel, then the relationship and only finally address the topic
• Face: is your orientation basically positivist, social perspective, tacit communitarian or new critical?
• Posture: Do you lean towards the recipient (ideal learner) or the referee (other stakeholders)?

References

Bentley, I., Alcock, A., Murrain, P., McGlynn, S., & Smith, G. (1985). Responsive Environments: a Manual For Designers. London, Architectural Press.

Brookfield, S. (2001). "Through the lens of learning: how the visceral experience of learning reframes teaching", in Paechter, Carrie, Richard Edwards, Roger Harrison and Peter Twining, editors (2001), Learning, Space and Identity. London: Paul Chapman, SAGE Publications in association with the Open University, pp. 67-78.

Graham, C., Cagiltay, K., Lim, B-R., Craner, J. & Duffy, T. M. (2001). "Seven Principles of Effective Teaching: A Practical Lens for Evaluating Online Courses." The Technology Source, March/April 2001. Available online at http://technologysource.org/article/seven_principles_of_effective_teaching/

Jones, C. (1999). "From the sage on the stage to what exactly?", ALT-J, 7(2), 27-36

Kember, D. & Murphy D. (1994). 53 Interesting Activities for Open Learning Courses. Bristol: Technical and Educational Services

Mason, R. (2001). "E-learning: what have we learnt?". Improving Student Learning Using Learning Technology, edited by C. Rust: proceedings of the 2001 ninth International Improving Student Learning Symposium, Herriot-Watt University. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff & Learning Development, pp 27-34

Mercer, N. (2000). Words and Minds. London: Routledge

Salomon, G. (1993). Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Scollon, R. (1998). Mediated Discourse as Social Interaction: a Study of News Discourse. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.