|
| [ ASCILITE ]
[ 2004 Proceedings Contents ] |
The purpose of this study was to examine the online learning milieu to identify what capabilities are required of online tutors. To do this, it was necessary to determine what environmental factors affect online tutor capabilities and what the relationship was between the capabilities and the factors. This was accomplished by using an ethnographic approach of data collection to explore the perceptions of online tutors, students and unit coordinators in tertiary online learning environments.This study identified critical online tutors sub-capabilities as well as thirteen environmental factors which have a mediated affected upon these sub-capabilities. The unearthed environmental factors emerged from the analysis of the collected data which allowed the relationship between the capabilities and factors to be investigated.
One of the major implications stemming from this research was the formation of a model of the mediated relationships between online tutor capabilities and environmental factors which affect them. This included the creation of a framework of capabilities and sub-capabilities specifically for online tutors and the identification and organisation of environmental factors which affect online tutor capabilities, which this paper will focus upon.
There has been a worldwide movement to implement these online education technologies in Universities (Oliver, 2001). In Australia, use of these technologies has coincided with the development of pedagogies to improve the merging of distance education and asynchronous, anywhere / anytime learning (Cashion & Palmieri, 2002; Harper, Hedberg, Bennett, & Lockyer, 2000). This has included measures such as employing instructional designers to create online courses or units and then employing tutors to implement the learning programs. As with any educational program, its success is largely dependent on its implementation (Clarke, Butler, Schmidt-Hansen, & Somerville, 2004; De Cubber, 2001; Levy, 2003; Volery, 2001).
While it is clear that online learning is expanding rapidly (Goodyear, Salmon, Spector, Steeples, & Tickner, 2001) research into the capabilities of online tutors have not kept pace (Reeves, 2003). This study addressed this gap in the literature on the topic of the capabilities required by online tutors by addressing the question of is "What are the relationships between text based online learning environment factors in tertiary education and the required capabilities of tutors as perceived by the stakeholders?" The focus on the role of an online tutor was one of improving clarity of educational roles and definitions. This decision removed the unit development and control of content roles often associated with teachers but often not the responsibility of university tutors in online classes with large enrolments.
Competencies is a term used throughout the literature to describe many different descriptors of tutors and their actions. A less frequently used term that is closely related to competencies is capabilities. This is a term which is used almost interchangeably with competencies by organisations such as IBSTPI (2003). This paper will use the term capability rather than competency due to the similar nature of the definitions and because of the preconceived values associated with each term. In his teaching experience, the author felt that competencies seems to imply negative questions about competence while capabilities seems to focus on the positive abilities of the tutors and what they are capable of achieving. For the purpose of this study, the term capability will be defined as follows: those knowledge, skills, and judgements that enable a tutor to perform his/her role. Also, the framework schema used for the online tutors in this paper is the one presented in Reid (2003). This schema has five capabilities which are: Content Expertise, Course Management, Evaluation, Process Facilitation and Technical Knowledge.
| Phases | Online unit stakeholders | ||
| Unit coordinators | Students | Tutors | |
| 1 Pre-Unit | None collected | Pre-unit online survey to all students | Pre-unit online Survey to all tutors |
| 2 During Unit | Interview all, items based on data from the literature and analysis of data collected in phase 1 | Electronic observation | Electronic observation, Face to face observation |
| 3 Unit Wrap up | None collected | Post-unit online survey to all students | Post-unit online survey to all tutors |
| 4 Post-Unit | None collected | Interview sample of students, items based on analysis of data collected in phases 1, 2, and 3 | Interview all tutors, items based on analysis of data collected in phases 1, 2, and 3 |
Online tutors were the focus of this study so the decision was made to use the data gleaned from the online tutor interviews as the central emphasis of the analysis, with the unit coordinator and student interview data being considered secondary sources of information. Then the findings of the data analysis were successfully triangulated with the secondary sources of information collected in this study, as well as with the supplementary sources of data.
The most commented on themes in each of the six tutors' interviews were compiled together resulting in thirty nine total themes on a spreadsheet arranged according to the name of the tutor. The themes were then categorised independent of the tutors, across all the tutor interviews. Based on the content of each theme and the way the individual tutor presented their thoughts, eleven categories were evident in the themes. The categories were: Communication Issues - student / tutor; Community; Delivery; Design; Institutional issues; Pedagogy; Student Attributes; Student Responsibility; Technical Issues; Tutor Attributes; and Tutor Experience.
The standard definitions for the eleven categories was a necessary step for the organisation of the themes evident in the interviews as there were several interviews which had comments which were seemingly covered by a number of first review tutor themes. One tutor's first review had themes which differentiated between the tutor as guide and student motivator as well as content facilitator and content expert. The process of creating the definitions provided a structure for clarity of thought the researcher used to differentiate between similar concepts.
The collection and analysis of the definitions for the interview themes shows that the creation of the definitions was not a quick process, rather it was methodical and well thought out. Some of the categorisations in the interviews were very obvious after all the data was examined, such as Technical Issues and Communication - Student / Tutor. Other categorisations required much more thought as the tutors did not seem to have put as much thought into things like Design / Pedagogy and Student Expectations. Since the tutors in this study did not have any input to the design of the unit before they started tutoring and many of the tutors were not trained educators, it was understandable that the design of the unit was not foremost on their list of concerns to discuss. Also, since the tutors did not have any input into who was permitted to enrol in the unit, they had a many things to say about the students and their expectations.
The reworking of the categories which were identified as factors which affect online tutor capabilities resulted in a framework consisting of thirteen environmental factors to replace the original interview theme categories from the earlier reviews of the data. The themes were identified as factors which affect online tutor capabilities because there were several categories which had little to do with the online tutor and their abilities, such as Student Expectations and Student Responsibilities. After examining the factors in relation to the literature, there were a number of consistencies with the themes and the factors which affected online tutor capabilities according to the literature.
| Category | Definition |
| Community | How the learning community (or lack thereof) created by the design of the unit, the actions of the tutors and the actions of the students operates. |
| Content Milieu | How the educational material was presented, accessed, interacted with, and used in the unit. |
| Design / Pedagogy | How the pedagogy involved with the design and presentation of the unit affects the students and tutors. |
| Facilitation of Learning | How the tutor used their understanding of the learning process to assist students without direct instruction. |
| Institutional Milieu | How the unit is affected by the policies, procedures and beliefs of the offering institution. |
| Interaction student / tutor | How the tutor and student interact in all situations, at a distance, in person, individually and in a group, and facilitated by technology. |
| Management of Teaching Processes | How time management, marking, preparation time, and other non-instructional teaching processes affected the unit. |
| Student Expectations | How what students expected and believed affected the unit. |
| Student Responsibility | How what students were responsible for according to the tutor, the unit designer and the university affected the unit. |
| Subject Epistemology | How the tutor showed an expertise in the content subject area. |
| Technical Milieu | How learning to use technology, potential access problems, how to use technology in a proper pedagogic manner, and other facets of technology usage affected the unit. |
| Tutor Experience | How the experience (or lack thereof) the tutor had with tutoring online affected the unit. |
| Tutor Personality | How the tutor as a person dealing with emotions, behaviours and personality affected the unit. |
There is no simple statement which will encapsulate the relationships between the factors and the capabilities presented in this paper. Each factor affects the capabilities to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the situation. The situation in each unit demonstrated that the learning environment mediated the relationship between the factors and the capabilities. Each situation was very complex involving many factors therefore the mediation involved was complex also, especially between the strengths of the mediated relationships between each factor and each capability. This led to the creation of a model of the mediated relationships between online tutor capabilities and the environmental factors that affect them. This model is presented in Figure 1.
There were different strengths of mediated relationships between each factor and capability. Examples of this include the strong mediated relationship between the capability Technical Knowledge and the factor Technical Milieu. This was a strong relationship throughout all the interviews and observations. Another example is the much weaker mediated relationship between the capability Evaluation and the factor Technical Milieu. There was a relationship between the two but it did not have the consistent connection throughout the data sources.
Figure 1: The Reid / Newhouse model of the mediated relationships between
online tutor capabilities and the environmental factors which affect them
In the various units studied, environmental factors played a variety of roles. Some factors were prominent in particular units and negligible in others. Other factors affected the units in very different ways. For example, prominent factors in Unit B dealt with included community, interaction student/tutor and student expectations. The tutor in Unit A dealt with prominent factors including community, interaction student/tutor, design / pedagogy and student expectations. While they both dealt with similar factors, they needed vastly different capabilities because of the nature of their learning environments. The tutor in Unit B wanted more community creation and public interaction between students and tutors while the tutor in Unit A talked about being overwhelmed by the amount of public interaction her community entailed. These were two facets of the same factors. These examples are illustrative of the way each factor acted uniquely in each learning environment in the study. This uniqueness of performance caused the factors to have varying relationships with the capabilities as the nature of the factors was dependent upon the learning environment they acted within.
The clarity of the communication from the tutor was vital for the success of the unit. When students were able to easily understand what the tutor was trying to communicate, it reduced the workload, frustration and isolation in the unit. Timeliness of feedback was vital to engaging students in the online education process. If students do not engage with the process within the first two weeks, they were more likely to withdraw feeling a great deal of frustration.
Another aspect of successful communication was managing the implementation of strategies to clarify people's roles and responsibilities. One participant who made the comment, "Don't introduce uncertainty to the unit" stressed this. Especially important was the clear definition of student responsibilities compared to their expectations. Clarity included putting strategies in place to handle the routines and workings of the unit include giving scheduled times that email would be answered and planning for the future. Careful planning and being aware of what the students require reduces potential problems.
Students desire to have a person to communicate with throughout the semester so this person needs to keep the interaction with students as clear and open as possible. Students in this study wanted to feel as if the tutor cared for them as a person. This interpersonal caring moderated the negative comments made by students when they discussed problems in the units.
Good technical knowledge was not optional in online tutoring. Tutors were the first people contacted by students when technical problems arose. Tutors needed to be able to answer student questions as often as possible without making mistakes which needed to be corrected later.
Online tutors need to be aware that online students are not the same as face to face students, both demographically and expectation-wise. Given that the interactions in online education are more one to one than one to many, this empowers students compared to face to face education. Many units are designed based on constructivist principles of learning so these students are looking for guidance rather than a teacher. The expectations of these students were potentially very surprising if the tutor was not prepared for them.
Tutors also need to be prepared for the workload which accompanies online education which was described by one participant as "black hole of work." Not only is it much greater, it is quite different from face to face tutoring. Communicating with students requires a great deal of typing which takes many people longer than simply speaking. Also, the one to one relationships with students is much more time consuming than the one to many relationship in face to face tutoring.
Clarke, M., Butler, C., Schmidt-Hansen, P. & Somerville, M. (2004). Quality assurance for distance learning: A case study at Brunel University. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(1), 5-11.
De Cubber, G. (2001). The killer application: E-learning terminology, components, adverse factors, (r)e-volution. Business Quest, 2001.
Fraser, A. (1999). Colleges should tap the pedagogical potential of the world wide web. Chronicle of Higher Education, 48, 8.
Goodyear, P., Salmon, G., Spector, J. M., Steeples, C. & Tickner, S. (2001). Competencies for online teaching: A special report. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(1), 65-72.
Harper, B., Hedberg, J., Bennett, S. & Lockyer, L. (2000). The on-line experience: The state of Australian on-line education and training practices. Leabrook, South Australia: Australian National Training Authority. [verified 26 Oct 2004] http://www.ncver.edu.au/research/proj/nr9007.pdf
Howell, S., Williams, P., & Lindsay, N. (2003). Thirty-two trends affecting distance education: An informed foundation for strategic planning. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 6(3). http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/howell63.html
International Board of Standards for Training Performance and Instruction (2003). Instructor competencies. International Board of Standards for Training, Performance and Instruction.
Levy, S. (2003). Six factors to consider when planning online distance learning programs in higher education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 6(1). http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/spring61/levy61.htm
McDonald, J. & Postle, G. (1999). Teaching online: Challenge to a reinterpretation of traditional instructional models. Proceedings AusWeb99, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW. [verified 26 Oct 2004] http://ausweb.scu.edu.au/aw99/papers/mcdonald/paper.htm
Oliver, R. (2001). Assuring the quality of online learning in Australian higher education. In M. Wallace, A. Ellis & D. Newton (Eds), Proceedings of Moving Online II Conference (pp. 222-231). Lismore: Southern Cross University. [verified 26 Oct 2004, menu] http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/socialsciences/dds/?menu=95
Reeves, T. (2003). Storm clouds on the digital education horizon. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 15(1), 3-26.
Reid, D. (2003). "Was she smiling as she typed that?": An exploratory study into online tutor competencies and the factors which affect those competencies. Interact, Integrate, Impact: Proceedings ASCILITE 2003, pp. 684-690, University of Adelaide, 7-10 December. http://www.adelaide.edu.au/ascilite2003/docs/pdf/684.pdf
Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M. & Zvacek, S. (2003). Teaching and learning at a distance: Foundations of distance education (2 ed.). Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Volery, T. (2001). Online education: An exploratory study into success factors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24(1), 77-92.
| Authors: Doug Reid, d.reid@ecu.edu.au C. Paul Newhouse, p.newhouse@ecu.edu.au Please cite as: Reid, D. & Newhouse, C.P. (2004). But that didn't happen last semester: Explanations of the mediated environmental factors that affect online tutor capabilities. In R. Atkinson, C. McBeath, D. Jonas-Dwyer & R. Phillips (Eds), Beyond the comfort zone: Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE Conference (pp. 791-797). Perth, 5-8 December. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/perth04/procs/reid.html |
© 2004 Doug Reid & C. Paul Newhouse
The authors assign to ASCILITE and educational non-profit institutions a non-exclusive licence to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this copyright statement is reproduced. The authors also grant a non-exclusive licence to ASCILITE to publish this document on the ASCILITE web site (including any mirror or archival sites that may be developed) and in printed form within the ASCILITE 2004 Conference Proceedings. Any other usage is prohibited without the express permission of the authors.