One of the things I've wanted to learn about in doing T156 is how much of what works for creating a good environment in workshops works in an on-line environment. It's not a trivial question, because Rick and I have developed a very strong set of practices now that I like to think deliver results in workshops. You can't please everyone all of the time and sometimes individuals bail out or cause trouble, but generally you can deliver a very good overall environment for learning that's constructive and fun. The result is that people can willingly venture out a little further from what they know already and enormous amounts of progress is possible in a very short time. So what's possible online?
Forums, I would say, are a challenge. They can easily be dominate by a few individuals with the time and inclination to post a lot. There are issues with tone, and my experience elsewhere is that they can become quite negative or stop functioning altogether quite quickly. Part of the trouble is the medium, with big lags compared to face-to-face work and far fewer opportunities for feedback. It's also harder to pick up on emotional tone. Think about it: if you're standing in front of someone who's expressing irritation, you can usually tell what they're after with that and perhaps deal with it skilfully. In writing, unless both they're very articulate and trying to help out with your understanding, it's often hard to tell if someone is irate, trying to reform things, teasing or just puzzled. It's very easy to get judgements about such things wrong.
Having said that, online environments have proven themselves a place to be social places too, and so we're experimenting to see what works. One of the ideas we're trying out in the T156 film-maker's forum is to have a hero of the week, along with several honourable mentions. The 'hero thing' is awarded to the person who in our judgement makes the most valuable contribution to the module during the week, and they get a small badge posted out to them. We're clear that it's totally subjective, but I'm also careful to demonstrate that there's something behind the award by pointing to things that they've done.
The idea gives a whole set of important opportunities. One is just to sum up what the week has been about and to point to some of the interesting things that happen. Another is to give feedback on important positive contributions - not just to named individuals, but to anyone who does similar things.
The starting point was recognising what you'll see on many courses - a group of students who will go to amazing lengths to help others, often from a profoundly skilful basis. We've got several very experienced film-makers studying with us and they're incredibly helpful in sorting out technical hassles. There's also a very good culture of encouragement - I suspect Henry V studied with the OU before his big speech at Agincourt.
We've just named our 3rd hero (of week 2, because there was a week zero too), and this is where the fun and sense of making it up as we go along comes in. We've jigged to the side and named a hero who asks good questions, along with a set of honourable mentions who have started good discussions. The point is that exposing what one doesn't know takes guts and is an essential part of making a forum work too. I'm optimistic that it won't put off the dedicated unsnaggers, and that it will help to pull the group together a little more. I can't wait to see what we do next week :)
