Distance Education in Transition - Master of Distance Education ...

Moderating a Virtual Seminar
administering the contributions of all participants, which can be a preparatory exercise
for the performance of the »knowledge management« so often referred to at present.
Who is able and ready to judge which of the two forms of participation in a scholarly
discourse is more sophisticated and demanding and brings about better learning: a
guided and spontaneous oral dialogue in a real seminar, or a thoroughly considered and
well-formulated literate dialogue, plus painstaking and never-ending work with a
growing collection of pertinent e-mails and the development of a network of information
and a structured personal database?
"Inactive" Students
In real seminars, it is generally understood and more or less accepted that not all
participants contribute to the discussions going on. In virtual seminars, however,
students who do not log on at all are considered problematic cases. Concern about their
learning is voiced. Why is this so?
In real seminars we can see those students and observe their body language, which
could indicate whether or not they are actively following the discussion. This is not
possible in virtual seminars. Here, students who do not send in e-mails carrying their
comments or arguments are simply not present. Neither the other students nor the
moderator learn anything about their learning behavior. The other students may be
interested in the opinions of the missing students and moderators may wish to ascertain
whether they are still participating in the course and proceeding in their learning. It is
interesting that in one of the virtual seminars several students suggested that each
participant should be forced by study regulations to post at least one or two comments
per module. This shows that there was a group feeling, which included the "inactive"
students as well. However, the majority of the students rejected this idea on the ground
that such a measure would be educationally problematic.
In the literature, inactive online students have quite often been called »lurkers« which
suggests that they are seen as hiding somewhere and waiting secretly because they
intend something bad. The choice of this expression shows that the refusal to participate
in online discussion was not approved.
Such disapproval is not justified. First of all, the so-called inactive students may be very
active in their ways. Secondly, autonomous students and even more so adult mid-career
students have a right to decide about their learning behavior themselves. The traditional
guardian functions and the authoritarian control of the teacher is no longer necessary
and may even be counterproductive. And finally, reading by itself may lead to the
acquisition of large amounts of knowledge. The assertion that active participation in
discussions is a pre-condition of successful learning cannot be supported. On the
contrary, it may well be that these students follow the discussion of the other
participants more carefully and meticulously than in real seminars and may learn even
more than those who take part actively by posting one comment after another. In fact,
some of them do quite well academically; several have even produced the best papers
for the final test.
For this reason it is better not to refer to them as "lurkers" but as »learning witnesses«
(cf. Fritsch, 1999, p. 357) or »invisible students« (cf. Beaudoin, 2001). These more
neutral designations mean that they can be engaged in the learning process simply by
121