Self-Perceptions
Self-consciousness, confidence, visibility, benchmarking, equity, management
As in any arena designed for public discussion, it is important to be aware of the sensibilities of individual contributors. Participants may feel uneasy about their status in the group. They may lack, or lose, confidence in their ability to usefully contribute, or motivation to try. Here we look at some of the ways in which CMC might promote self-consciousness, to the detriment of participation and, perhaps, of learning development.
Confidence
One very straightforward source of self-consciousness arises from the demand to master a new tool, in an unfamiliar environment. It is dangerous to assume that computer-based actions are now second nature for all. An apparent reticence may arise from a simple lack of confidence about getting started. This problem can be solved by a comprehensive (and relevant to context) programme for introducing newcomers and supporting their 'enculturation' in a sympathetic manner. You might find that setting up a 'familiarisation' session which presents the available resources through meaningful but manageable tasks to draw out and demonstrate their use, is a help for such students. It could well be that 'those who can' have something to learn as well - and if not, they can companion 'those who can't, yet'.
Visibility
In this as in other 'issues to manage' a key property of the medium that can prove troublesome is the visibility of contributions in the conference archive. Learners can feel uncomfortable if someone else has posted a message making the point(s) that they themselves wished to make. The fixed and accessible record seems to deny the possibility of contributing a personal version, leaving agreement as the only option for contribution. This might be dealt with by example, with you and relevant others contributing texts emphasising and developing points, or providing confirmatory (or contradictory!) input.
Benchmarking
More difficult to cope with in the CMC environment is 'benchmarking'. The conference contributions of others are taken as a standard which individuals feel unable - or unwilling - to reach. Intimidating benchmarks can be set by contributions that are, for example, excessively scholarly, long, literate or humorous. Such text may leave some participants feeling inadequate, whilst others not so affected may still react by deciding conferencing is not an attractive forum for them. Solutions here might lie in your establishment of a sense of value for all kinds of contribution, whether acknowledging and appreciating, or questioning and commenting in ways that might set further challenges for group learning enhancement.
Equity
Students may also feel self-conscious if responses to their own contribution are challenging or otherwise critical. Whilst this can be, critically, important and indeed touches on what learning through CMC is all about, it needs careful orchestration. Importantly, if a tutor or moderator is the one seen to be adopting a tough tone, the sense of intimidation might be quite strong. You might like to brief your learners on what is hoped for, and expected from them. Something of the theoretical frameworks underpinning the provision of collaborative e-learning resources should be available to them, for discussion and review from their own perspectives.
The lack of those social cues that conversation normally supplies means that conferencing respondents may act clumsily in their critical reactions. Of course, the conditions that promote more reckless responses are also available to the author who is being challenged in this way. Therefore, they too may feel it easy to defend themselves in a similarly vigorous style. Some models for conduct are discussed in the article How to fight fair online
You might find it worthwhile to wait for your learning group to settle, giving them time to evolve, with your input, their own 'codes of conduct'. The needs of each learning cohort will be different - although some people may indeed feel exposed within a lively style of exchange, there are others who feel liberated by this. Indeed, research indicates that some who are reticent in face-to-face tutorials might well be very active within the CMC environment.
Management
Perhaps a useful conclusion is that conferencing may require more early investment in moderation or monitoring, so that reasonable boundaries are not violated. In a face-to-face discussion, you may be satisfied simply to have all individuals in the room at a set tutorial time. Attendance at a text conference is harder to assess. Lack of verbal contribution is now more likely to be the (stricter) measure of non-attendance, in which case you may feel obliged to contact 'silent' members and inquire about possible predicaments. Fortunately, the relation between conferencing applications and email is very close, providing you with a useful means to achieve background negotiation and support.
Voices of Experience
A selection of 'Voices of Experience' - comments from learners and teachers - relating to this area are recorded in text format here (opens in a new window).
You can also access the sections for Self-Perceptions within each subject area case study, which include similar commentary, from the links below:
3: Applied Psychology and Computing
4: Psychology and Information Technologies
Alternatively you can access each subject area case study in its entirety from the list on the left-hand navigation bar.
