Towards Effective Online Facilitation

-- The Effect of Facilitator's Leadership Behaviors on Online Learning

Bodong Chen, OISE/University of TorontoQiong Wang, GSE/Peking University

Ed-Media 2010, TorontoJune 30, 2010

Background

• Online education is still booming!• Instructional interaction and support are vital for the success of

online education.• Instructional relationship and the role of instructor have evolved.

• Online education in China– Flourish quickly into a massive scale since 1998 (Wang & Zhang, 2005)– Practical problems and misunderstandings with pedagogies, administrations

and technologies (Zhang, 2005; Wang, 2007)– Overlook instructional support and interaction.

Context and our practice

"Educational Technology Ability Standards (trial

edition)"

Capacity Building on Educational Technology

for Primary & Secondary School

Teachers Across China (TETA): Teacher Training + Testing

Educational Technology Training Textbook (Beginner Level)

National Teacher’s (f2f) Training launched

Launched the OnlineTraining course of

Beginner Level developed by Peking

University

Educational Technology Training Textbook

(Middle Level)

Middle level training launched, with both

face-to-face and distance modes

National Test of Educational Technology

(NTET) for teachers launched

Finished developing Online Training course of Middle Level – with

new design and training model.

Launched the first online middle-level

training class in Shenzhen

The second class in Shandong province

Till the end of 2009, finished training of 8 classes with around

1500 teachers

Collected and analyzed evaluation data of the

first two classes

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Timeline and Background of National Teacher’s Educational Technology Ability Middle-level Distance Training

Development Training Course

Course designers, trainers and trainees are all contributors to

training.

Trainees’ discourse and assignment inputs are regarded as

an integral part of training.

Course content is dynamic and keeps developing during training.

Contribution of a class will be brought to other classes in latter

training.

Traditional Training Course

Curriculum is predefined, and materials are developed by

course designers.

Discussion and assignments are just for exercise and assessment.

Course content is static.

No explicit mechanism for knowledge accumulation.

Development Training Modelpresented on the 13th APEID International Conference by Qiong Wang, 2009

Authentic Issues

• How to build a facilitation team that could provide best support for this training?

• How to help facilitators get prepared?• How to improve online learning by improving

facilitators’ performance?

Facilitating online learning

• Change of the role of online instructors

Role Type Role of instructors Role of studentsTraditional role in F2F classrooms

Manager, expert, controller, information transmitter, goal maker, time handler.

Listener, receptor, novice, passive learner, learning depending on instructor’s evaluation.

Supportive role in online setting

Resources, participant, scaffold constructor, learner, host, facilitator, coach, monitor, mentor.

Problem solver, explorer, researcher, collaborator, goal maker, host, facilitator, scaffold builder, participant.

Figure adapted from Dabbagh, N., & Bannan-Ritland, B. (2005). Online learning: concepts, strategies,and application. Pearson Prentis Hall: New Jersey.

Some research about online facilitator

• Capacities and competencies– Thach and Murphy (1995): Competencies for distance education

professionals– Chen (2004): Capacities of tutors in distance education

• Facilitating process– Youngblood, et al. (2001): 4 themes and 12 facilitator tasks– Gilly Salmon (2000): 5 stage model of e-moderation

• Strategies and techniques– Collison, et al. (2000): Facilitating online learning: Effective strategies for

moderators– Hanna, et al. (2000): 147 practical tips for teaching online groups

• Are they effective?• A need for richer theory and models (Wise, Chang, Duffy,

& Valle, 2004).

• Ohio State Leadership Studies– Consideration: behavior indicative of friendship, mutual

trust, respect, and warmth in relationship between the leader and members of the group.

– Initiation of Structure: the leader’s behavior in delineating the relationship between himself and the members of his group, and in endeavoring to establish well-defined patterns of organization, channels of communication, and ways of getting the job done.

Behavioral leadership theory

Methods

• Participants– 157 learners and 7 facilitators in two teacher training classes

• Procedure– Literature study and integration: extract facilitating behaviors

from literatures, and integrate them into a behavior system based on the Ohio State Leadership Studies.

– Case study: online observation and document analysis to evaluate adaptivity, applicability and inclusiveness of established behaviour system, and revise system accordingly.

– Survey and quantitative analysis: examine the effectiveness and theoretical validity of revised facilitating behavior system.

Facilitating Behavior System

Initiation of Structure (F_IS)f1. Have the basic competencies of facilitators in online learningf2. Guide discussion and spur critical thinking with personal opinionsf3. Construct scaffolds for deep learning

f4. Help learners improve ideas

f5. Uncover key points of concepts and relationships between ideasf6. Send instructional reminders and keep learners in track

Consideration (F_C)f7. Cultivate a favorable learning environmentf8. Have a good impression

f9. Have good interpersonal skills and use multiple communication techniquesf10. Reward learners

SummaryFirst level 2

Second level 10Behaviors 66 (revised to 45 later)

What happened? A training case

50143 24

Adapt to online training

Shift of difficulties and concerns

Dropping out …

Server was attacked

Day 1 7

Recovered and finished smoothly

Did facilitating behaviors happen?

• Most behaviors happened– The behavior system was proven to be quite inclusive and

adaptive in the case study.– 80% of 45 behaviors was labelled as “Always”– Frequencies of behaviors reported by learners varied– Difference between Consideration and Initiation of Structure

Quantitative analysis model

Behavior systemFirst levelSecond levelBehaviors

Outcome variablesLearner satisfactionLearner participationTraining scoresModerating variables

Learning purpose

Learning expectation

Trust for facilitators

(1) Partial correlation

Are behaviors in the system possibly effective in promoting online learning?

(2) Factor analysis

Can behavior categories distinguish from each other?Is the Ohio State leadership theory applicable to online facilitation behaviors?

Is the leadership theory applicable to online facilitation?

• Factor analysis– Two factors can explain most (74%)

variance.– They can be significantly related to

Consideration and Initiation of Structure behaviors respectively.

Table 1 Total Variance Explained

Component Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings

Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

% Total

% of

Variance

Cumulative

%

1 6.291 62.907 62.907 4.610 46.102 46.102

2 1.153 11.530 74.437 2.833 28.335 74.437

Table 2 Rotated Factor Matrix

Component

1 2

f1 .785(**) .389

f2 .878(**) .290

f3 .833(**) .188

f4 .862(*) .271

f5 .824(*) .333

f6 .841(**) .384

f7 .491 .724(**) f8 .199 .894(*) f9 .239 .643(*) f10 .250 .702(*)

Are behaviors in the system effective in promoting online learning?

• Bivariate correlation analysis– Significantly correlated

with learner satisfaction– but not with learner

participation and training scores.

Table 3 Bivariate correlation

Behavior categories

Learner Satisfaction

Learner Participation

Training Scores

f1 .329(**) .172 .125

f2 .287(**) .165 .041

f3 .404(**) .091 .007

f4 .359(**) .043 .070

f5 .431(**) .049 .026

f6 .360(**) .039 .010

f7 .298(**) .043 -.001

f8 .339(**) .128 .131

f9 .263(**) .068 -.145

f10 .301(**) .076 -.037

F_IS .433(**) .091 .052

F_C .368(**) .086 -.056

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Table 4 Partial correlation between behavior categories and outcome variables

Control Variables

Behavior Categories

Learner Satisfaction

Learner Participation

Training Scores

p2 & p3 &

e2 & e3 &

trust1 &

trust2

f1 .207(*) .179 .014

f2 .216(*) .093 -.010

f3 .269(**) .023 -.111

f4 .233(*) .005 .045

f5 .324(**) -.005 -.065

f6 .235(**) -.007 -.087

f7 .088 .044 -.044

f8 .166 .181(*) .117

f9 .156 .066 -.140

f10 .095 .016 -.084

F_IS .317(**) .054 -.050

F_C .179 .087 -.101

Are behaviors in the system effective in promoting online learning?

• Partial correlation– With learners’

training purpose, expectation and trustfor facilitators controlled.

– Only Initiation of Structure is significantly correlated with learner satisfaction.

Conclusion

• The behavioral leadership theory is appropriate for the study of online facilitation.

• However, the facilitating behaviors mainly take effect on learning satisfaction, but have little influence on engagement and perceived learning.

• The partial correlation analysis yield a significant correlation between Initiation of Structure behaviors and satisfaction, while the correlation between Consideration behaviors and all outcome variables are not significant.

• Further experimental studies need to be done.

Bodong Chen

bodong.chen@utoronto.ca

Twitter: bodongchen (twitter.com)