One person can positively or negatively affect the flow and
learning in a threaded online discussion. Students will feel it is risky to
fully participate if there is a suspicion that a learner's input or efforts
might be ridiculed. The risk is greater the younger the participants because
young people have a flawed sense that (1) no one can trace them if they don't
use their real names and (2) it is their right to say anything they want. This
approach is akin to the scribbled slur found in bathroom stalls. Written and
then left for all to see, the intent is maximum exposure and hurt with minimal connection.
The open Internet is an infinitely huge bathroom wall.
How often might this type of thing happen and what is the
solution? Certainly, we can offer as secure a site for threaded discussions as
technology allows. If it is an open discussion, the risk is higher as the site
and its content is harder to regulate. If the discussion is contained within a
classroom site, it is much easier to manage: ISP addresses are tracked,
additional home information is recorded in databases, and the teacher is
omnipresent should things veer off course, with block and removal tools.
Moderated postings are another way to maintain civility and insure positive
forward movement. It inhibits spontaneity but is a valid protection for all
participants. The interaction, growth, and learning potential in online
conversation is huge and early presentation of guidelines with close
monitoring will forge a positive experience for both teacher and students. Develop
the rules (netiquette), make sure they are visible, then always follow through.
No comments:
Post a Comment