L4 4 1

=Student and staff use of communication channels is regularly monitored. =

Evidence
To improve e-learning outcomes it is important to learn from past mistakes, according to Ehrmann (2002), who argues that tracking progress is not only necessary to stay on course but also to identify solvable problems that can attract fresh resources (p. 55). The results of monitoring should be used to inform ongoing and new development, and to support resources and strategy. Information on performance can be used as a tool for improving quality, but only if the information is disseminated. Such validation of e-learning practices and resources is a significant stage in the full cycle of organisational learning that describes success in terms of ‘student performance, student satisfaction, staff experience, and cost effectiveness, as judged in relation to the original intentions’ (Salmon, 2000, p. 236). Salmon discusses validating as one of six activities in the iterative process of creating an effective learning organisation infrastructure that enables ‘the system to learn about itself’ (p. 237).

Wang (2008) explains four categories of facilitation in online interactions: intellectual, social, managerial, and technical. The managerial component is important for keeping discussions focussed, monitoring discussion processes and inviting missing members. Forum management also involves establishing netiquette, the norms and ground rules, expected participation, and the proper use of language. Facilitators should enter discussion forums frequently to check on participation. Wang’s results further demonstrate that summarizing discussions was perceived by students to be the top facilitation skill.

Boettcher (2006) advises against putting anything on a discussion forum that you wouldn’t want to see on the front page of a newspaper.

Seabrook (2001) identifies that flame (and other disruptive) messages are a persistent problem for discussion groups. Undesirable posts can have a significant effect on group membership and ongoing discussion. Communication tools need to be monitored and ground rules set in order to avoid this kind of disruption. As well as guidelines for moderators, filters may have some effect.

Lewis (2006) explains how the very fact of putting one’s opinions and comments into a public space may cause anxiety, fear of perceived criticism, or cultural concerns especially where English is not the student’s first language. Lewis’ study showed that some online facilitation styles are seen as problematic. In particular, domineering facilitation, the lecturer always having the last word, or being particularly critical of students’ comments were identified as damaging to the learning process.

There is an ongoing need to monitor the use of e-learning and ICTs for course delivery because there is as yet no consensus about what constitutes quality e-learning (Usoro & Abid 2008). These authors state that, ‘effective quality strategies, initiatives and tools are very important for convincing lecturers and other stakeholders to adopt e-learning’ (p. 80). Kidney et al. (2007) believe that, ‘a quality online course would be the direct result of a course creation process that included quality assurance strategies’ (p. 18).

Quality dimensions need to be validated and refined by primary research. For example, it is not yet known whether e-learning saves time or takes time off the lecturer. This needs to be established by assessment and feedback.

Roberts and McInnerney (2006, pg 6) note that ‘Although no one style of education is going to be successful for all students, it is important that educational bodies and academics appreciate that effective support may be given to distant online learners by the implementation of, and adherence to, appropriate communication protocols. Universities have to ensure that their educators do not become blasé and assume that everyone knows what they mean – clear and precise communication has to continue for the lifetime of the institution’s teaching and learning practice.’

Resources
Juan et al. (2009) describe the SAMOS information system for monitoring students’ and groups’ activities in an e-learning context. They have attempted to ensure that students reach a satisfactory level of involvement in the learning process and to avoid high drop-out rates caused by lack of adequate support and guidance in e-learning. Non-participating students and groups can be identified by these methods and timely intervention initiated.

Mazza & Botturi (2007) explain how course redesign and resourcing can be facilitated by monitoring the use of communication channels. We can monitor what was actually used by students, what was poorly used, is this because it was less integrated, or perhaps because it was pointless? Monitoring, e.g. through the use of software integrated with learning management systems, can identify resources that are only used at specific times, which could then perhaps be hidden to simplify the interface.

Mazza & Botturi (2007) explain how the use of monitoring software can help to answer questions such as ‘are students participating in discussions?’ They describe the GISMO software which allows teachers to identify students with low numbers of logins and a poor participation record. Additional assistance and encouragement could then be targeted.