In this final blog post the focus is reflections on the past weeks in the ONL181 course and PBL group 4 – in particular this post will highlight facilitation in collaborative learning in an online context (situated facilitation). Situated (Lave and Wenger 1991), because facilitation is viewed as situated, that is, it is important to acknowledge the context, and that different factors or series of conditions play a role in how facilitation is shaped and re-shaped (Kolmos et al. 2008). In this case online learning is the context.
A reason for focusing on facilitation is the limited time we (PBL group 4) spent on reflecting on the role of the facilitator. In topic four we wanted to combine scenario one and two (to discuss the role of facilitator in online blended course design). But since we ended up focusing on the Gilly Salmon’s five-stage model we did not spend very much time discussing facilitation. Yet in PBL facilitation is central. It is by combining the practices of suggesting, probing, encouraging or asking questions (and sensing when to combine or utilize these different practices) the group will together with the facilitator go back and forth – and by doing this move forward through ‘the problem’ (Kolmos 2008). That means, in a collaborative approach participants engage in learning activities together in dialogue and search for a shared understanding (Koloms 2008). In this case we in PBL group 4 worked together in for example a Padlet presentation during the Zoom meeting (constructing the content and design together).
Now when looking back at the weeks and meetings I can see how facilitation is carried out by the facilitator and co-facilitator. Also during these weeks I have the experience of observing how facilitation is done and what happens in the process, as well as participating in the group work and being a part of how facilitation works. In PBL group 4 I think we have experienced all the practices of suggesting, probing, encouraging or asking questions. Besides, we have experienced challenges in the work process and here the role of facilitator has been important in moving the work forward by guiding the process but also in suggesting deadlines and making us aware that the group need to make decisions together. Sometimes when being asked questions the response from the group was a long pause/silence and I think this is really valuable.
Silence provides an opportunity to reflect in order to articulate what we want to say or express – before moving forward! I find it important since in the meetings there are sometimes many things going on at the same time (working together in a tool or in the fish-document) and there is lots of input from all participants – so a short reflective moment helps us to find our way in how to proceed. Especially I think this is important in an online setting as there are many things going on (and not just in the Zoom meeting or fish document – but there are distractions in the surroundings for example at your home department (things happen, a phone is ringing or some colleague just want to pop in and ask a question). Thus it is a great that facilitators (Esther and Malin) did leave it at silent and not move on directly. For example, when there were questions raised about the Gilly Salmon’s five-stage model, there was sometimes silence and that was good for being able to reflect individually and then to move forward together as we discuss the different concerns raised by participants. In addition, in this discussion Malin shared her experience of being a facilitator, and she shared with us how she approach the facilitator role (e.g. going back and forth between tutoring/pampering and encouraging and asking questions). This was interesting because her explaining this happened at the same time as we were experiencing how Malin did ask us questions and also how she went back to tutoring when explaining the fifth step of the model (development).
So the outcome on reflecting on the Gilly Salmon model was an extra meeting. That is, in PBL group 4 we agreed on an additional Zoom meeting for topic 4, and in this meeting it happened that the facilitators could not join. In this meeting we did rotate being the lead – we worked together and we did finalize the presentation. The process was productive and well organized, maybe because there was time pressure (deadline), maybe because it was easy since we knew what we needed to do (we had prepared for it on the Friday and during the weekend), or maybe because we felt relaxed and by now we know each other pretty well. Or it might be a combination. It was good fun and a great experience because it felt really productive, we had a shared understanding – a sense of what we wanted to do and we just went about doing the work. So I think in this meeting we did share the leadership, and this resembles the findings of Mabley, Ventura-Medina and Anderson (2018) on how groups can be productive when the leadership is shared. Furthermore, we did also – as Mabley, Ventura-Medina and Anderson (2018) find – carry this positive experience and happy atmosphere into topic five. Besides, it is important to mention that we did not just do work we did catch up, and we did talk about other things such as the winter arriving to south of Sweden (the chaos that happens when people ‘forget’ to change to winter tires in time for first frost and icy roads) and the summer in Durban (the sunshine!). Well this is how I remember it – the other participants may remember it somewhat differently ?Anyhow, from all this experience, I think now I can think of myself in the role of being a facilitator, and what is important in this role. I bring with me this experience to future work I will do in digitalization and education at my home department. I think this experience will go nicely together with the work we are currently doing on using technology in learning (e.g. Inspera and soon Canvas) and especially well with what we want to explore further in the future.
Taken together, I think that the ONL181 course have been a really good experience. I have learnt a lot. Except for insights into the role of facilitator, I have for example, learnt about blended learning in online course setting, and of course I have thought about and examined the Gilly Salmon model. Also learnt the concept “the learning pit” by Nottingham (this was introduced by Malin when we did our group reflection on topic 4 and the Gilly Salmon five-stage model). Besides I have gained a lot of new insights into tools introduced by group members – i.e. what tools can be of use when we want to work collaboratively (not just cooperate). But most valuable to me is that I have learnt more about collaborating in a group in online learning. Not just the challenge of collaborating with people I never met before, but also doing this in a setting that is online. I think that it takes more time to get to know people in this way (than in a face to face meeting). I have realised that in the beginning of the course I didn’t feel accountable in the same way as I did towards the end of the course. It would be super interesting if the group – after a couple of months – would get together again and approach similar tasks and see if we pick up where we left off – or if we would need time before we can jump back into working through the tasks/scenarios.
The PBL group 4 is fantastic – you have really made this journey so much better than I ever could have imagined. You are all amazing and will miss working with you!
References
Kolmos, A., Du, X., Holgaard, J. E., & Jensen, L. P. (2008). Facilitation in a PBL environment. Aalborg: UCPBL UNESCO Chair in Problem Based Learning.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mabley, S., Ventura-Medina, E., & Anderson, T. (2018). The student as facilitator – A qualitative exploration of monitoring strategies used by ‘dominant’ team members in PBL groups. In 46th SEFI Annual Conference 2018 (pp. 278-285). Brussels.