Refers to e-moderating, part 2, chapter 6: "Summarizing and Weaving."
The difference between "Weaving" and "Summarizing" in e-moderation:
Summarizing:
When a topic has been sufficiently discussed or when time is running out.
Looks back and brings discussions to a close, capturing the key-points into a single message that late comers can use for revision.
Reproducing the material in a shorrtened form, picking out the main points. The original meanings are not removed.
Seek to be inclusive of all main themes that have arisen.
Seek opportunity to add value to participants' contributions.
Summarising signals the close of a discussion. The summary can act as a spark for a new direction.
Quote and acknowledge relevant material, draw out teaching points, correct any misconceptions, links to corse materials and concepts.
Give your summary message a very clear title, that will stand out, archiving the original messages if appropriate.
Summarizing - how to:
Collect up all contributions into one message, or cut and paste them into a word processor.
Read through quickly and colour code key themes
Creat a list in the file for each of these with a title
Identify the unifying themes
Identify the points of disagreement
Summarize by a sentence or a bullet point or two for each of the themes, identifying points of agreement and disagreement, perhaps by giving examples attributed to the originator.
Add your postive and reinforcing feedback
Add your criticism and point out omissions.
Add your congratulations
Add your meta (overall) comments or teaching points
If you wish to move on the discussion, ask specific but open-ended questions
Delete all the original data and create simple formatiing for ease of reading
Post in the conference with a clear title, invite further comment
Weaving:
When a topic has not been exhausted or requires further elaboration.
Looks forward by using these gaps in the discussion to generate more exchanges focused on filling those gaps.
Creative task that selects themes and rearranges them into a new statement, making connections that may not have been intended or seen by the writers.
Be alert to possible themes arising from two or three messages where the e-moderator can draw out or highlight implications that may otherwise escape attention in the welter of messages.
Seek opportunity to add value to participants contributions.
Don't weave just for the sake of it when the discussion is going well - only do so if you can add significant value.
Use quotes early (model the way participants acknowledge each others contributions) and acknowledge relevant material, draw out a teaching point and invite a response from participants by means of an open question.
Give your weave message a very clear title that will stand out.
______________________________________________________________________________
Example of a woven message
Weaving is about adding value to discussions – taking sometimes what seem to be disparate contributions, sifting them and pulling the threads together insightfully to find new meaning and move the discussion up a level. It’s helping participants to make sense of the flux of messages and is something we do on the run as e-moderators. Sometimes the messages flow so thick and fast that potentially important points get missed or passed over in the anxiety of participants to give us the benefits of their thoughts. So as e-moderators we can use weaving to pull together and highlight such ‘missed’ contributions and use them as an opportunity to pause for breath to give direction to the discussion, to develop new insights and move the discussion on.
Here is just one example of what a weave might look like. Note the way in which the e-moderator pulls out key phrases, highlights them and then makes suggestions/probes further and attempts to add value. And note the open invitation to participants to respond – there’s no attempt to close the discussion down at this point.
The subject of discussion is the following e-tivity:
This week’s discussion (E-tivity 3.1): To what extent does our face-to-face experience help our work with online groups?
Purpose: to explore how our face-to-face experience of working with groups informs our online work – or does it get in the way?
During the discussion, the following messages were posted:
Yeeees…all very well…but I still can’t get my head around not being able to see the participants. It’s a bit of a tall order getting to know people just through text on screen. If I think of the group I’ve just been working with, I know them all – their strengths and weaknesses, even which ones I can joke with to lighten the atmosphere when the going gets a bit heavy – and what’s more I can see who hasn’t even turned up to receive my pearls of wisdom! I’d find it difficult to teach if I couldn’t see a puzzled or questioning look – or indeed the sudden light in someone’s eyes when they’ve just gained an insight they’d love to share. And I can’t get over the time lag in asynchronous working…
Dave
Well put, Dave. Not being able to see the group is an aspect of online working that causes me real concern. I’m particularly worried that some of my lot might just drift away if it was online instead of face to face
Lee
Sorry, everyone, but I’m not going to be with you for the next couple of days. I’m away from my desk and have had great difficulty in getting even this message to you all. I’ve been trying to use a very clunky internet cafĂ©!
Emm
Sorry to add another negative, but like Dave, I can’t see online as replacing face to face. For me, it’s just all too structured. I love the edginess of face to face groups – you never know quite where it’s going and what nuggets of gold may come out of it quite unexpectedly. I saw this vividly illustrated yesterday when one of my students suggested we ought to look at … and we ended up setting ourselves the task of coming up with tentative solutions for the next meeting. That for me is what learning is all about.
Kim
That’s really interesting, Kim. Please let me have a note about the outcomes of your next meeting. I’m sure my students would be interested.
Annie
OK, OK, everyone, Dave and Kim have a point but isn’t this getting a bit negative? I’d like to redress the balance a little. For instance, I’d actually welcome the time lag. It would give me a chance to think in response to a searching question rather than respond on the hoof – I’d get time to think it through and possibly come up with chapter and verse and some references. I’m a bit pushed for time now, but I’ll come back later on the face to face issue.
Ella
Ella’s pushed for time. Well, I find that online working is in itself pretty time consuming…
Lee
The e-moderator now intervenes to pull some threads together to try to refocus the discussion and at the same time move it up a level to consider the implications of changing from one environment (face to face) to a new one (online) - and so move beyond a discussion which is in danger of becoming bogged down in the negatives. The e-moderator’s intervention is below. On the left is a commentary.
[Note the positive stance on the discussion leads into what will become an attempt to move the discussion in a new direction – or rather to move it back to the focus of the etivity!]
Thanks, everyone. It’s going well! But let’s just take a little time out to consider some implications before the discussion moves on. There’s some further value we can add, I’m sure
[The e-moderator’s tone is one of empathy in attempting to move the discussion to a new level - and there’s a joky quotation to lighten the atmosphere! The e-moderator next highlights selected, direct and relevant quotes to anchor the points that will be made.]
It seems to me that we’re in danger of missing the point of the e-tivity which is the extent to which face to face experience can help our work with online groups. So I suggest we need to look at how we can somehow convert the strengths (and address any drawbacks!) of face to face into the online world rather than see face to face as a barrier to change. Change is always (and understandably) a potential threat to established ways of working and no-one likes change for change’s sake – we need to see some advantages for ourselves! (Who was it who said, ‘All change is bad and change for the better is worse!’?)
Dave said: I still can’t get my head around not being able to see the participants. Kim said: I love the edginess of face to face groups – you never know quite where it’s going and what nuggets of gold may come out of it quite unexpectedly.
Ella said: I welcome the time lag. It gives me a chance to think…
[The e-moderator opens up possibilities for participants to think about, rather than closing down debate.]
Three seemingly different contributions, but perhaps really aspects of a deeper question – how do we cope with the changes that arise from adopting a new medium? To put it another way, how do we turn the strengths of face to face into opportunities online and overcome any potential drawbacks?
[The e-moderator now passes the initiative back to participants, having given them a steer and having set the scene as to how they might approach the implications of moving from face to face to online.]
So far we have noted some drawbacks to online working in comparison to face to face and also a very positive strength or opportunity – the advantage of asynchronicity. Not only does the time lag offer an opportunity to provide a thought-out contribution (something that benefits those who are shy, quiet or more reflective thinkers), but there’s also the possibility of having several simultaneous discussions. - and that can’t be done face to face! So let’s confront the implications of change. How for instance might we overcome the lack of visual cues in a positive way; how we might turn the structured online environment to advantage; and so on? So let’s have your thoughts, please, everyone.
Gisella
Do you now see what the technique of weaving tries to achieve? Although it may look new to you at first sight, think of weaving as akin to a face to face technique regularly used in plenary roundups of small group work. When a larger group has been split into smaller discussion groups tasked with reporting back to a plenary session, the group leader usually draws on the content of the report-backs to pull out key points to write up as a flipchart summary as input to further discussion. Weaving is rather like that but in an online environment.
When you return to the weaving e-tivity, bear this weaving example in mind – but remember that it’s only one example of the use of an important, flexible tool at the disposal of the emoderator. If you still have questions or observations to make, you will be able to explore them further in the e-tivity itself.
© 2012 David Shepherd & Gilly Salmon
_____________________________________________________________________
The difference between "Weaving" and "Summarizing" in e-moderation:
Summarizing:
When a topic has been sufficiently discussed or when time is running out.
Looks back and brings discussions to a close, capturing the key-points into a single message that late comers can use for revision.
Reproducing the material in a shorrtened form, picking out the main points. The original meanings are not removed.
Seek to be inclusive of all main themes that have arisen.
Seek opportunity to add value to participants' contributions.
Summarising signals the close of a discussion. The summary can act as a spark for a new direction.
Quote and acknowledge relevant material, draw out teaching points, correct any misconceptions, links to corse materials and concepts.
Give your summary message a very clear title, that will stand out, archiving the original messages if appropriate.
Summarizing - how to:
Collect up all contributions into one message, or cut and paste them into a word processor.
Read through quickly and colour code key themes
Creat a list in the file for each of these with a title
Identify the unifying themes
Identify the points of disagreement
Summarize by a sentence or a bullet point or two for each of the themes, identifying points of agreement and disagreement, perhaps by giving examples attributed to the originator.
Add your postive and reinforcing feedback
Add your criticism and point out omissions.
Add your congratulations
Add your meta (overall) comments or teaching points
If you wish to move on the discussion, ask specific but open-ended questions
Delete all the original data and create simple formatiing for ease of reading
Post in the conference with a clear title, invite further comment
Weaving:
When a topic has not been exhausted or requires further elaboration.
Looks forward by using these gaps in the discussion to generate more exchanges focused on filling those gaps.
Creative task that selects themes and rearranges them into a new statement, making connections that may not have been intended or seen by the writers.
Be alert to possible themes arising from two or three messages where the e-moderator can draw out or highlight implications that may otherwise escape attention in the welter of messages.
Seek opportunity to add value to participants contributions.
Don't weave just for the sake of it when the discussion is going well - only do so if you can add significant value.
Use quotes early (model the way participants acknowledge each others contributions) and acknowledge relevant material, draw out a teaching point and invite a response from participants by means of an open question.
Give your weave message a very clear title that will stand out.
______________________________________________________________________________
Example of a woven message
Weaving is about adding value to discussions – taking sometimes what seem to be disparate contributions, sifting them and pulling the threads together insightfully to find new meaning and move the discussion up a level. It’s helping participants to make sense of the flux of messages and is something we do on the run as e-moderators. Sometimes the messages flow so thick and fast that potentially important points get missed or passed over in the anxiety of participants to give us the benefits of their thoughts. So as e-moderators we can use weaving to pull together and highlight such ‘missed’ contributions and use them as an opportunity to pause for breath to give direction to the discussion, to develop new insights and move the discussion on.
Here is just one example of what a weave might look like. Note the way in which the e-moderator pulls out key phrases, highlights them and then makes suggestions/probes further and attempts to add value. And note the open invitation to participants to respond – there’s no attempt to close the discussion down at this point.
The subject of discussion is the following e-tivity:
This week’s discussion (E-tivity 3.1): To what extent does our face-to-face experience help our work with online groups?
Purpose: to explore how our face-to-face experience of working with groups informs our online work – or does it get in the way?
During the discussion, the following messages were posted:
Yeeees…all very well…but I still can’t get my head around not being able to see the participants. It’s a bit of a tall order getting to know people just through text on screen. If I think of the group I’ve just been working with, I know them all – their strengths and weaknesses, even which ones I can joke with to lighten the atmosphere when the going gets a bit heavy – and what’s more I can see who hasn’t even turned up to receive my pearls of wisdom! I’d find it difficult to teach if I couldn’t see a puzzled or questioning look – or indeed the sudden light in someone’s eyes when they’ve just gained an insight they’d love to share. And I can’t get over the time lag in asynchronous working…
Dave
Well put, Dave. Not being able to see the group is an aspect of online working that causes me real concern. I’m particularly worried that some of my lot might just drift away if it was online instead of face to face
Lee
Sorry, everyone, but I’m not going to be with you for the next couple of days. I’m away from my desk and have had great difficulty in getting even this message to you all. I’ve been trying to use a very clunky internet cafĂ©!
Emm
Sorry to add another negative, but like Dave, I can’t see online as replacing face to face. For me, it’s just all too structured. I love the edginess of face to face groups – you never know quite where it’s going and what nuggets of gold may come out of it quite unexpectedly. I saw this vividly illustrated yesterday when one of my students suggested we ought to look at … and we ended up setting ourselves the task of coming up with tentative solutions for the next meeting. That for me is what learning is all about.
Kim
That’s really interesting, Kim. Please let me have a note about the outcomes of your next meeting. I’m sure my students would be interested.
Annie
OK, OK, everyone, Dave and Kim have a point but isn’t this getting a bit negative? I’d like to redress the balance a little. For instance, I’d actually welcome the time lag. It would give me a chance to think in response to a searching question rather than respond on the hoof – I’d get time to think it through and possibly come up with chapter and verse and some references. I’m a bit pushed for time now, but I’ll come back later on the face to face issue.
Ella
Ella’s pushed for time. Well, I find that online working is in itself pretty time consuming…
Lee
The e-moderator now intervenes to pull some threads together to try to refocus the discussion and at the same time move it up a level to consider the implications of changing from one environment (face to face) to a new one (online) - and so move beyond a discussion which is in danger of becoming bogged down in the negatives. The e-moderator’s intervention is below. On the left is a commentary.
[Note the positive stance on the discussion leads into what will become an attempt to move the discussion in a new direction – or rather to move it back to the focus of the etivity!]
Thanks, everyone. It’s going well! But let’s just take a little time out to consider some implications before the discussion moves on. There’s some further value we can add, I’m sure
[The e-moderator’s tone is one of empathy in attempting to move the discussion to a new level - and there’s a joky quotation to lighten the atmosphere! The e-moderator next highlights selected, direct and relevant quotes to anchor the points that will be made.]
It seems to me that we’re in danger of missing the point of the e-tivity which is the extent to which face to face experience can help our work with online groups. So I suggest we need to look at how we can somehow convert the strengths (and address any drawbacks!) of face to face into the online world rather than see face to face as a barrier to change. Change is always (and understandably) a potential threat to established ways of working and no-one likes change for change’s sake – we need to see some advantages for ourselves! (Who was it who said, ‘All change is bad and change for the better is worse!’?)
Dave said: I still can’t get my head around not being able to see the participants. Kim said: I love the edginess of face to face groups – you never know quite where it’s going and what nuggets of gold may come out of it quite unexpectedly.
Ella said: I welcome the time lag. It gives me a chance to think…
[The e-moderator opens up possibilities for participants to think about, rather than closing down debate.]
Three seemingly different contributions, but perhaps really aspects of a deeper question – how do we cope with the changes that arise from adopting a new medium? To put it another way, how do we turn the strengths of face to face into opportunities online and overcome any potential drawbacks?
[The e-moderator now passes the initiative back to participants, having given them a steer and having set the scene as to how they might approach the implications of moving from face to face to online.]
So far we have noted some drawbacks to online working in comparison to face to face and also a very positive strength or opportunity – the advantage of asynchronicity. Not only does the time lag offer an opportunity to provide a thought-out contribution (something that benefits those who are shy, quiet or more reflective thinkers), but there’s also the possibility of having several simultaneous discussions. - and that can’t be done face to face! So let’s confront the implications of change. How for instance might we overcome the lack of visual cues in a positive way; how we might turn the structured online environment to advantage; and so on? So let’s have your thoughts, please, everyone.
Gisella
Do you now see what the technique of weaving tries to achieve? Although it may look new to you at first sight, think of weaving as akin to a face to face technique regularly used in plenary roundups of small group work. When a larger group has been split into smaller discussion groups tasked with reporting back to a plenary session, the group leader usually draws on the content of the report-backs to pull out key points to write up as a flipchart summary as input to further discussion. Weaving is rather like that but in an online environment.
When you return to the weaving e-tivity, bear this weaving example in mind – but remember that it’s only one example of the use of an important, flexible tool at the disposal of the emoderator. If you still have questions or observations to make, you will be able to explore them further in the e-tivity itself.
© 2012 David Shepherd & Gilly Salmon
_____________________________________________________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment