Welcome to Week 7. Comparing models, finding them pretty similar, then jumping down yet another rabbit hole. Thanks for joining along!
Both the Community of Inquiry Framework (Col) and the Five-Stage Model of E-Moderating provide a framework for supporting and guiding learners that emphasizes a constructivist approach.
There are many similarities between the models. I see their differences being that if I were to picture them along a continuum from theoretical to practical, the Col would be more theoretical in nature focused on developing an understanding that guides our practice whereas the Five-Stage model leans more towards the practical providing specific actions on behalf of the e-Moderator.
Solomon (2006) highlights the importance (and hard work) of keeping pace in an asynchronous learning environment. I wanted to share a short excerpt from Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge – Seven Principles for Cultivating Communities of Practice that I feel really captures this sentiment:
Vibrant communities of practice also have a rhythm. At the heart of a community is a web of enduring relationships among members, but the tempo of their interactions is greatly influenced by the rhythm of community events. Regular meetings, teleconferences, Web site activity, and informal lunches ebb and flow along with the heartbeat of the community. When that beat is strong and rhythmic, the community has a sense of movement and liveliness. If the beat is too fast, the community feels breathless; people stop participating because they are overwhelmed. When the beat is too slow, the community feels sluggish.
I am a regular follower of Caitlin Tucker’s blog where I recently read a guest post by Rabbi Elchanan Poupko, a middle school teacher, that introduced the idea of assigning virtual partnerships and groupings to combat social isolation. He writes in the blog post “as teachers, when we see a kid sitting alone in the schoolyard, we know it is our responsibility to help them socialize. I feel we need to extend that to the online environment while students are attending school online and learning virtually.” I am finding that it is taking a tremendous amount of energy to keep a strong beat flowing through our learning community. I think the idea of planning for students connect socially outside of class time and outside of the class platform, is a strategy worth a try and might bring some liveliness and light into the class. I can let you know how it goes!
If you yourself have tried this or you work with someone who has, please share some thoughts 🙂
Garrison, D. (2007). Online community of inquiry review: social, cognitive, and teaching presence issues. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 11(1), 61-72. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ842688.pdf
Salmon, G. (2006). 80:20 for e-moderators. In The challenge of ecompetence in academic staff development. CELT, NUI Galway, Galway, Republic of Ireland, pp. 145-154. https://eprints.usq.edu.au/18862/2/Salmon_Ch16_2006_PV.pdf
The five stage model. (n.d.). Gilly Salmon. https://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html
Vaughn, N. (n.d.). Being a successful online teacher: An alternative framework: the five stage model of online teaching and learning. https://leocontent.acu.edu.au/file/ccbe60fc-4a3c-4a2c-a80e-286a4946a9f3/1/html/ote_1_30.html
Wright, P. (2015). Comparing e-tivities, e-moderation and the five stage model to the community of inquiry model for online learning design. The Online Journal of Distance Education and e-Learning, 3(2), 17-30.