Brian - your summary is wonderful and very full. Thank you.
You didn't I think though include RobinG's comment that his role would
be mostly marking TMA's. We haven't focussed much on what his role is here,
could we have done this without him even if he doesn't appear on stage..this
is real question and I have no idea what the full answer would be..it seems
to matter..it also seems to be decidedly DIFFERENT.. At the very least
we should add "assessor"/"keeper-of-standards" to the list
We didn't ( it has only just occurred to me) take up the TMA issue at
all..it probably should have been part of this, perhaps this would have
been a logical extension of collaborative/coopertative not competitive
ideas. Why do we have to also do tma's which count for HOW MUCH of our
total grade...can we really be collective and individual at the same time
or should we be freed -to let go of our separatenenss to maximise the cooperative
experience. And having let go can we re-focuss our individuallity to deal
with the TMA next week.
I have this lurking suspicion that the next step might have been to
draw on our own expereince to demonstarte and describe what in this specific
instance of online learning was different or should have been different.
Reflecting on what THIS experince has taught me about the topic...is
just HOW LIMITED old models/metaphors are for dealing with new experience.
Brian may have started moderating with a F2F debate adjudicator model in
mind but his comment msg 321
"As a first time moderator it would be difficult to do on only logging
in three times a week, its been nearer three times a day, and then I've
often felt I've not done as much as I should have" makes it clear that
the task checked out differently.
I wonder how the debaters themselves found it. Did they have a F2F
model, did it match up.
I wonder too on the debate topic if we were asked NOW what question
about online tutoring would you like to debate? would we name the one we
started out on or as we got in deeper and started to see it from the inside
would we have phrased it differently.