The document discusses participant engagement in an eTwinning learning event, illustrating how interaction evolved from dependency on a moderator to increased autonomy over time. It highlights the concept of 'lurkers,' who may benefit from passive participation, as well as the importance of critical thinking in development. Additionally, it provides strategies for encouraging critical thinking in online forums among educators.

1. Online Groups
Experience from an eTwinning Learning Event
March 2013
eTwinning conference, Lisbon
Brian Holmes, Lancaster University &
The Executive Agency for Education, Audiovisual and Culture
with the support of
Tiina Sarisalmi, Municipality of Orivesi, Finland
& European Schoolnet, Belgium

2. How active were the participants?
Plot showing participant messages over time
Frequency of
messages
related closely
to activities
and to the
messages
from the
moderator
Participants
less
dependent on
moderator
towards the
end
2
http://www.slideshare.net/holmebn

3. How active were the participants?
What the results suggest
• Participants were very much focused on the activities:
– They posted messages when needed to achieve the goal of a shared
activity
– Little interaction when the online activity was finished or when they were
busy with activities in their own teaching practice
• Participants’ initial interaction followed closely that of the moderator
– They responded to prompts from the moderator
– They responded to feedback
• Participants became more autonomous over time
– Less influenced by messages from the moderator towards the end
– They seemed to be more proactive, supporting one another towards the
end
3

4. Leading to autonomy
What about ‘lurkers’?
A ‘lurker’ is someone who passively participates in the online
discussion forums, perhaps reading the messages of others, but not
actively contributing themselves.
Is lurking necessarily a bad thing?
Let’s look at the example of Lantha ...
4

5. Leading to autonomy
The example of Lantha
• Lantha is a teacher from Greece
• In the Learning Event, she posted very few messages
• When interviewed about her experience she said:
‘I made a seminar with my partners here in Greece and I transferred
these tools to them, the main idea about them. It was very useful,
I said that everyday that I am really grateful that I learned so much
things.’
• This suggests that Lantha may have been a lurker, however she
was far from passive
• She was using what she was learning from the online discussions to
apply this with her colleagues in her school
5

6. Leading to autonomy
Legitimate Peripheral Participation
Lurking in an online group may be a good thing.
Lave and Wenger (1991) call this ‘legitimate peripheral participation’.
They argue that participants often start at the edge of a community and
gradual move to the centre as they become more confident and
experienced.
This may be the case for Lantha: in future Learning Events, she may be
more active in her participation.
The lurkers of today are the active participants of the future!
6

7. Leading to autonomy
Critical thinking and competence development
Critical thinking is about
‘reasonable reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe
or do’ (Ennis, 2002)
‘purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation,
analysis, evaluation … as well as explanation of the …
considerations upon which that judgment is based’ (Facione, 2013)
Critical thinking is important for competence development;
it and helps teachers to prepare for the ill-defined problems of the future.
7

8. Leading to autonomy
Critical thinking: a theoretical model
Linking private thoughts Constructing meaning,
to real world, as ideas moving between reflection
are explored: adding to and discourse: integrating
what has been said ideas from different sources
Cognition Critical
thinking
Direct or vicarious action as
Initial phase, issues and solutions are implemented and
problems emerge: assessed: evaluating results,
asking questions linking to wider context
(Garrison et al., 2001, p.99) 8

9. Leading to autonomy
Critical thinking: a theoretical model
Critical thinking
Analysis suggests critical thinking reached in later stages
of the Learning Event
Resolution
Integration
Cognitive
presence
Exploration
Cognition
Triggering
event
Other
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Messages
in
order
of
time
(first
to
last)
Example of Edita: illustrates the progression in cognition for a typical participant
9

10. Leading to autonomy
Reflective practitioners
As a participant …
ü Give examples of what happened to you in practice, why you think it
happened and what you would recommend to others.
ü Encourage your colleagues to go into more detail, to explain their
reasoning.
ü Make suggestions to help colleagues express themselves.
ü Be critical but supportive of others.
ü Be sociable and share your feelings.
ü Be creative; sharing is fun J.
10

11. Leading to autonomy
Encouraging critical thinking
As a moderator …
ü Ask participants to try things out in their teaching practice
ü Allow time for reflection and get them to share their experience with
others in the forums
ü Encourage expressions of feeling: joy, pride, fear, confidence, etc
ü Prompt others to build upon this experience with other examples
ü Get them to suggest alternatives and talk about what might happen
in different contexts
ü Encourage participants to draw conclusions
ü Use creative forms of expression such as images
11

12. Thank you
Brian.Holmes@skynet.be
http://holmesbrian.blogspot.com/
References
ENNIS, R. (2002). A Super-Streamlined Conception of Critical Thinking.
http://faculty.education.illinois.edu/rhennis/index.html
GARRISON, D. R., ANDERSON, T. & ARCHER, W. (2001) ‘Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer
conferencing in distance education’, American Journal of Distance Education, 15 (1), pp.7-23.
FACIONE, P.A. (2013) Critical Thinking: What It is and Why It Counts, p. 26,
http://www.insightassessment.com/content/download/1176/7580/file/What%26why2013.pdf
LAVE, J. & WENGER, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press.
12