NSW LearnScope Blog & Podcast

 

[ image : mamamusings ]

The use of new and emergent online social authoring softwares provide educators with an opportunity to link their open-to-the-web spaces and places for teaching and learning purpose.

A search using key terms such as ‘free’, ‘open networked’, ‘e-learning’ and so on will provide a host of tools which on the surface appear compelling, assure privacy, control and reliability……..but best of all free and easy to set up.

The provision of ‘free’ authoring spaces also presents the primary user (the person who registers the space ) with an interesting range of options with respect to how they manage , moderate and run the online project-oriented environment. Many of these social networking tools include discussion threads, templating choices, ability to integrate other environments by links and automated feeds (RSS) and for others to make comment, trackback and to link to these discussions.

It is an emerging interest within many LearnScope and affilitated groups, of how to best manage, moderate and ensure usability of contributions to their project space whether it be a blog, discussion group, wiki, photoblogging or social bookmarking environment. A number of teams have reported a wealth of contributions from web-users who are not directly involved with their LearnScope project (public).
These contributions (comments, links and referrals) are often very enlightening and enhance the scope of the project as a whole.

It is evident however that an educator or project manager seeking to include or use these new and emergent communication technologies, which often complement other learning management tools, must inform themselves as best as possible of issues which may emerge from engaging with others in social online learning environments.

Of particular interest, in my opinion, is the issue of moderation. In this instance , I refer to it as beyond an issue, rather a critical element of using these new online spaces and places and ultimately each and every users responsibility.

I am referring to moderation in this circumstance as the active practice of formulating, employing and dynamically revising guidelines for the online conduct of that online project space - which I will refer to as the “rules ” of the community.

Many free online social softwares which may be known as web 2.0 tools, provide a range of options from total privacy, ie. no comments, no web visibility to other users, and limited authorship access to other community members. In essence, the need for rules, regulations and guidelines in a closed environment are enforced by nature of the policies governing that strict or tight interactive environment. Equally, they may be relaxed, negotiable and dynamic within the constraints of that community. Or they may be a mix of both but governed by the community administrators.

The option to provide comment fields with password or email address identification, syndication points and trackback facilities are often employed by those seeking a more “open” or networked environment, where information, content, and links to other environments are seen by anyone who has access or knowledge of that site address. This paradoxically allows others who are deemed ‘not welcome’ to contribute or link to this online environment with information which may cause angst and worry for those who oversee the moderation of content or contribution. Phew…..

Presenting issue. Will the community as a whole govern and moderate contributions or will someone be delegated to do so ? Or…….will the primary user (the owner ) seek assistance to form an alliance of others within the community to assist in this process ? Who makes the decisions to include content and under what circumstances are they permitted or approved to remove anything in the flow of the discussion ?

In many instances, teachers set up an account quickly, start using the online tool to see how it operates and what’s possible, and continue to refine authorship whilst discovering and problem solving issues as they arise. A little fire-fighting may occur but essentially it all flows smoothly.

With a little confidence, others strike off into setting up a collaborative space where others are invited in or request to join the flow of discussion. They continue a journey of either solely moderating content or inviting others to share in the task………as a group.

Increasingly, these groups are striking issues with innapropriate content, content deemed innapropriate by the site user/owner, turning up amongst other valuable contributions. When these collaborative spaces encounter such an issue, the moderation procedure is brought into play. The fire-fighting requires careful planning and consideration, not only for the community but alsofor dealing with the user who instigated the issue.

Accountability : Who is responsible and what procedures are appropriate for employees using open networked communication technologies ? What policies come into play, and who is ultimately responsible for what ends up in the site/s ? How does the community know who has received the information and how it is being used elsewhere ?

The role of moderator it would seem, is by no means someone else’s issue.

Many online users are needing to discover net-ettiquette as quickly as they are learning how best to communicate with others in their everyday life. I discover everyday what works best in my respective online interactions with others, within a whole range of online spaces and places, where roles and responsibilities shift according to the wishes of that community.

Have you encountered some online spaces and places which you consider to be classic / best practice examples of moderation ?

If so, please make a comment or perhaps you have your own blog or online authoring tool which we can link to.

Alex Hayes
A/ Project Officer
NSW Learnscope Team