Machine Translated by Google

80:20 for E-Moderators

Gilly Salmon | University of Leicester | UK
[email protected]

Introduction spondents and visitors: “do you know

which 20% of our e-moderating work
Around the Millennium, I published my produce 80% of the results? What follows
book, E-Moderating [1]. Soon after, with a is a summary of many ideas based
colleague, David Shepherd, we started to on those years of feedback.
offer online courses for any teacher, tutor,
facilitator or group leader who wis hed to
experience and explore the skills About Theory to Practice in
needed in the virtual environment for E-Moderating
him or herself (see www.atimod.com).
Then I wrote about designing for online We try and place our work in theory
groupwork [2], aimed at a similar audience, approaches and produces conceptual
and we began a short online 'E-tivi ties models for testing and sharing. However,
course'. The 2nd edition of E-Moder although high flying theories of learning
ating [1] was then updated, as e-moderators or knowledge help us to understand what
everywhere tried out the ideas and happens in our e-learning processes,
let me know how it was going. they are not much direct help in saving
To my astonishment, by 2006 more our time and promoting motivation and
than one thousand people had taken part achievement in our learners. Instead, we
in online e-moderating courses and need to be able to interpret and apply
more than 20,000 have bought and ap them through simple and effective on-line
parently read and used the books. Many tasks.
people used the medium itself to give Take the debate about constructivism
Gilly Salmon is a Professor of e-learning feedback and comments to David and for example. Our practice falls within the
and Learning Technologies at the University me on how they've adapted and applied constructivist approaches to knowledge
of Leicester/ UK. She researches about e- the ideas on designing for participation and learning. The ideas around constructivism
learning scenarios for the future. She is known and intervening for learning in low cost, in teaching have arisen in the 21st
for her book 'E-Moderating. The key to online and asynchronous group environment Century, partly in response to the
teaching and learning online', where she and their special contexts. at every potential for more active, student-led
explores a five stage model to prepare teachers fore-learning conference, I found commentary learning in online environments and
online moderation and work: 1. Access and and exploration reported. away from passive teacher-led instruction.
motivation, 2. Online socialization, 3. On review and reflection from all the Constructivism explains knowledge
Information exchange, 4. Knowledge feedback, I realized that the 80:20 rule as created by individuals through their
applies to e-moderating. The 80:20 principal
construction, 5. Development. Based on this research own experiences and with the support of
she is developing a practical and inspiring suggests that there may be an inherent their cognitive framework. It sees learning
guide for online teachers. imbalance between cause and effect. is an active process in which learners
This article appears by courtesy of Gilly fect, effort and reward, inputs and out engage with and build new ideas or
Salmon and is taken from: Mac Labrahinn, puts and that imbalance tends to the ratio concepts based upon their current or past
i.; McDonald Legg, C.; Schneckenberg, D.; of 80:20. The 80:20 principle is a knowledge. Such knowledge may include
Wild, J.: The challenge of eCompetence in very simple approximation of the value of past experience, formal teaching, reading,
Academic Staff Development. Galway: work, but it seems to hold true pretty of ten sharing with peers and their own
CELT, 2006. www.ecompetence.info for us. So, I began to ask my run creative endeavors. The learner selects

cms-journal 29 / April 2007 39

Machine Translated by Google

transforms, integrates and makes choic structivism implies the need to promote each other (through simple e-tivities
is informed by their own mental models in discovery, dialogue, interaction, that depend on collaboration); • fill in
developing their understandings. contextualization and reflection, rather any gaps (weave and comment on their
There are various versions of these than delivery of content and information [4]. postings); • help to organize the knowledge
oretical underpinnings. One is an intro As e-moderators we approve of the idea so that it can be readily grasped by
perspective view of knowledge as as, of course! For example, such an simplifying, generating new propositions
personally constructed and built on an individual's
approach should enable individuals to and in creasing the manipulation of
earlier internal mental models in the “go beyond the information given” and information (summarise and structure).
light of his or her new experiences [3]. work with others. So, what do we do to
Another view is of knowledge as rather make this virtually real?
more external and the group learning The task of the e-moderator here is to:
and teaching experience helps the • gauge the students' readiness to learn
An E-Moderating 80:20 Plan
students to internalize it. Taking part in a (get them posting messages in response
group of learners with sympathetic and to a stimulus); • ask the students to Here is the 'state of the art' for the ab
supportive facilitation, e-moderation is explore their own way forward and get solute essentials for successful e-moder
critically important to the construction of the them engaged with ating, based on the minimum intervention.
knowledge. In practical terms, with

stage objective Design e-moderator action Typical problems Solutions

Stage 1: Access to the *Simple log on *Welcome, *Participants' inability to *Provide human support
Access and system for all *Clear intuitive *Congratulate, diagnose source of *Acknowledge accessfeelings
problems
Provide
really good
motivation participants within navigation *Encourage, joining instructions *Emotional responses
checked and *System thoroughly
to IT failures
a short period of *Clear instructions for *Reassure, independently tested before going live – 'right the first time!'
time help in case of difficulty *Direct to online or
telephone help
motivate each other *Provide an easy e-tivity *Acknowledge all *Worries about safety, *Reassure
participant to to ensure an early posting successes *Reluctance to *Scaffold all contributions so
contribute *Encourage participants contribute to strangers trust builds gradually and
(post a message *Avoid requesting lots to respond to each other effectively
rather than just of personal information &
read) photos
Motivate to visit *Make benefits of each *Ensure all participants Participants believe *Avoid lots of reading in first
and contribute task 100% clear have posted in the first taking part is too time couple of weeks
frequently *Keep tasks simple and few days and each has consuming *Insert tips on how to manage
achievable at one log in had responses to their time and use the software
*Keep to only 2 or 3 contributions effectively
tasks *Follow up 'no shows' *Chase noncontributors through e-
mail or telephone
Stage 2 Build effective Set up e-tivities that *Weave Domination of the Encourage all participants to post
socialization groups demonstrate the value *Summary conference by one or and respond to others
of working together *Feedback two individuals
*Admire, but not too
often
*Avoid overwhelming by
constant interventions

Set the stage for the Ensure each activity has Model supportive group Lurking due to feelings Encourage each person to write
learning a clear purpose and one processes of having less to from his or her own experience
straightforward task contribute than others

Stage 3 Set up practice in Provide e-tivities that *Encourage participants *Difficulties in organizing *Provide models of structured
information online cooperation need small groups of to do their own weaving & teams and working ways of working together
exchange around 6 persons to summarizing but be alert together such as unequal *Pay attention to the group
complete & willing to 'teach' and group size or late starts formation stage
comment where appropriate *Allow plenty of time but provide
deadlines for paced completion of
*Monitor group activity activities

Set up use of Use small 'sparks' of Provide direction Participants become Design each activity so it uses
Information for learning Interesting content that through the material if overwhelmed by the de content
livery
butofleads
'content'
to exploration
and/or of the
promotes dialogue asked but avoid constant topic constant emoderator in terventions and requests
between the group interventions

40 cms-journal 29 / April 2007

Machine Translated by Google

stage objective Design e-moderator action Typical problems Solutions

Stage 4 Enable *Provide structure with Provide information and *Intermittent log-ons *Encourage the group to self
Knowledge collaborative flexibility support where and when *Some groups missing manage, by provide pacing and
Construction working *Encourage roups to necessary deadlines
work or realistic leadlines *Use tracking in the software to
and paced outcomes see who is logging on when
Enable Knowledge Use more demanding Hand over weaving and Passivity or lurking Encourage participants to be
building activities that encourage summarizing process come 'authors' and Contributors
creative, practical and but also provide timely rather than receivers of information
critical thinking feedback on outcomes and encourage questioning
by all participants
Enable groups to *Provide very good Show that emoderator is *Time management Provide practice earlier in process
work more sparks available to support and *Uneven contributions to build confidence and remote
independently *Ask for Collaborative help and visits often but from individuals team working and models of
outcomes avoid the temptation to exchanging information
intervenes

Stage 5 Promote self and *Set up e-tivities that Offer personal feedback Ensuring a suitable Provide clear activities That
Develop group reflection invite reflection on if requested and approve ending indicate the ending of the group
mind whole process with an opportunity to 'sign-off'
*Encourage individuals and say goodbye
to consider personal
development
Promote Critical Provide e-tivities that Be willing to 'Surface' (as opposed to Encourage all participants to post
thinking give structure to review comment/offer deep) responses their intentions for actions with
process and outcomes constructive criticism commitments to action plans to
apply the learning & to engage in
further collaboration with other
participants, where appropriate

Enable application Provide e-tivities that Provide feedback Usual feelings of Encourage to apply individual
of learning offer opportunities for 'missing the group' learning and each participant to
indication of application, post what s/he will do next
use and develop ment
of learning

Figure 1: e-moderating essentials.

And another thing (or two)… Some participants will be quick at getting Techniques for supporting all partici
involved and postings, others slower, of pants are: 1. Summarizing more
ten reading before contributing. frequently, in
Keeping the pace.
Whatever pattern of logging in is abling faster catch up by participants
Experienced e-moderators know that exhibited, this can be disrupted by holi whenever they log on.
there is no simple cause-effect result in days, national holidays and local festivals 2. Encouraging slower and faster partici
leading online groups. There are, however, and personal 'events' in their lives, which pants, by private email, to reflect on
some patterns of typical behaviors of take them away from their normal the consequences for them of being a
online participants that can be managed activities. One woman gave birth and carried faster or slower participant.
better. on the next day. Another person's car 3. Encourage faster participants to look
In asynchronous group e-learning, broke down and it impacted her life so back on threads they have completed
participants will log online at times to much that she failed to log on. and provide responses for the slower
suit them, often fitting in their online As an e-moderator, even if you make participants.
time around other events taking place in every effort to start and finish cohorts on 4. Encourage revisiting e-tivities after
their lives. Some typical patterns are: the same day, and move them on several days for further reflection.
• Weekend only together as a group, you can expect the spread
• Weekdays only of work by participants to be over a Avoiding E-moderating barriers
• Only on certain days number of e-tivities. This results in your
• Some will miss logging for a whole hav ing to scan several online activities Sometimes what we do gets in the way of
week. to be sure that you are keeping pace with eachresponding appropriately to participants'
• Some log in three times a day. participant and with the group dynamics. needs. Here are some examples of
• No discernable pattern. e moderating behaviors reported that
'gets in the way'.
1. Gushing praise with little content.

cms-journal 29 / April 2007 41

Machine Translated by Google

Weaving and summarizing: the absolute

2.Not posting any messages for 3 days • To take the outcomes of an e-tivity to
without informing anyone or arranging key e-moderating job present or work offline.
for a stand-in. • To provide fresh starting points for
3. Responding to every message. With well designed e-tivities, the e-mod broadening and deepening discussion.
4. Responding with no learning points erator has a rich source of participants' • To remind students of the journey they
over a period. responses with which to work. Este have travelled.
5. Ignoring some participants. means that weaving, archiving and sum • To reinforce and 'imprint' new information
6. Only responding at a surface level. marising are key tasks for e-moderators and knowledge.
7. Only responding at a deep level. and add much value. (A great deal more • To provide a 'spark' for a new e-tivity.
8. Being manipulative. than ringing your hands about non- • To provide a 'footprint' as a spark for a
participation.) newgroup.
An online message that is cold, far too The purpose of Summarizing is:
long, closes off discussion, excludes or • To acknowledge the variety of ideas and How to summarize:
demotes participants or ideas, or that contributions. 1. Collect all the relevant messages into
ignores significant parts of the messages of • To refocus discussion and activity when one document.
others communicates more than just the postings are too numerous. Summarize 2. Thank and praise the participants who
words on the screen. An e-moderator after each 20 messages, at a pre-agreed contributed.
who constantly says “yes well done” (per time or at regular intervals, eg every 3 3. Look for 3-4 key themes from the
haps through lack of time or options) is days. In a large or busy activity, this can contributions and specify them in a
soon spotted. Similarly, online, an e be done daily. sentence or three (maximum).
moderator who lurks but does not com • To refocus discussion and activity when 4. If you wish, highlight single pair
ment can be viewed with suspicion. postings have strayed from the topic. participant's contributions that add fresh
Instead it's better to focus on weaving • To refocus discussion and promote ideas or look at the topic in an interesting
and summarizing. activity when e-tivities are going well. way.
• To refocus discussion and revive activity 5. Add your teaching comments or
when postings are flagging. criticism, point out omissions, other per
• To signal closure of the e-tivity.

Fig. 1: Five stages of e-moderating.

42 cms-journal 29 / April 2007

Machine Translated by Google

perspectives or applications, and make need some e-facilitating skills within not just their outputs but how they
reference to further literature or ideas. their number. worked together.
6. Add a short, further example of your • Offer clarification about the task, the
own if necessary. timescale and the form of presentation,
7. Shorten the sentences, delete all un ifnecessary.
The 80: 20 E-Moderator
necessary material. • Leave them to get on with the task, only
8. End with congratulations, praise or a intervening if they fail to post their contribution So I hope you will try out these guide lines
positive note of some kind. to the plenary on time. and achieve more with less in your
9. Add a question or reflection for fur ther • Start a discussion on the results of the e-moderating practice. They are the be
consideration, if appropriate. plenary contributions, but do not dominate ginning, not the end of the story, so
10. Add further reading or follow up if it. Summarize the discussion or please share your discoveries of more
appropriate (preferably electronically ask an experienced participant to do ideas and good luck! Online can yet be a
sourced). Este. most happy and productive place for
11. Post message on the message forum learning and teaching.
with a really good, short title, on the There are some special characteristics
day you said you would. that will help groups to self-manage online:
references
The Purpose of Weaving is to: 1. Ask individuals to confirm when they
• Emphasize and extend a point from a have joined in. A simple joining activity in [1] Salmon, G.: E-Moderating: The Key to
participant's message - to show wider the thread will leave a trace to indicate that Teaching and Learning Online.
or more generic application. participants arrived. to cross London, Taylor & Francis, [2]
2000 & 2004
Salmon,
• Collect 3 or 4 snippets from different check against a list of participants will G.: E-tivities: the Key to Ac
messages together and represent in a reveal who is late. Designate a participant have online Learning. London, Taylor &
newlight. pant from each work team to follow up Francis , 2002.
• Highlight an issue or topic from one less visible contributors. [3] Stahl, G.: Group Cognition: Computer
discussion that links with others. 2. State the purpose of the task. The task Support for Collaborative
• Agree or disagree with reasons to reflect will motivate the participants. offer Knowledge Building. cambridge,
on the discussion. clarification, if necessary, but allow op MA, MIT Press, 2005.
• Highlight key issues to encourage two portunities for flexible interpretations. [4] Cooner, TS: Dialectical Constructivism:
or three final contributions before sum 3. Describe how groups will be formed. Reflections on Creating a
marising. [5] An element of self selection helps to Web-mediated Inquiry-based Learning
maintain interest, but ensure that the Environment. Social Work Education.
shifting the work method is simply described and incapable 2005, Vol 24 No. 4, S. 375-390.
of being misunderstood. [5] Jacques, D. and Salmon, G.: Learn
E-Moderating large groups can be time 4. Set up a thread for each group and let ing in Groups. London, Taylor & Francis,
consuming and participants benefit from the group know where to locate the in press [6] Lawless, N. and Salmon, G.:
becoming self-managing (Salmon and thread.
Lawless, 2005). The more effort you can 5. Encourage them to post in the right Management Education for the 21st
put into designing your e-tivities and the places and keep focused. Century. Hrsg.: Bonk, C. and Graham,
better structured the interaction between 6. Describe the form and type of content C. (eds): The Handbook of Blended
participants is, the more time you will that the group should produce and Learning: Global perspectives, local
have for giving feedback and offering where and when they should post it. designs. San Francisco, Pfeiffer, 2005
weaving and summaries. Make time and Aim to be prescriptive without being
create independent learners by sitting on too restrictive. Indicate the main is
your hands, if necessary, and not sues that must be addressed.
responding to every message yourself. 7. Set out the plenary process in the plenary
Instead, let the participants know when you thread. This can be part of you
will read their messages and give feed welcoming message. This publication is taken from:
back, meanwhile encouraging them all to 8. Ask the participants to review both MacLabrahinn, I.; McDonald Legg, C.;
selfmanage. content (their main focus) and the Schneckenberg, D.; Wild, J.: The challenge of
A basic framework to assist with self process. Include setting up the group, eCompetence in Academic Staff Development. Galway:
management is: the degree to which they found the CELT, 2006. Released under Creative Commons
• Invite larger groups into smaller student task motivating, how they collaborated, license. Attribution Non-Commercial 2.0. Some
teams. Give them adequate time to their approach to feeding back as rights reserved. www.ecompetence.info
complete an activity and then report part of the learning points – so it be
back to the larger group. They may comes 'natural and normal' to reflect

cms-journal 29 / April 2007 43