!"##$#% '()*+ ,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!

7

















Looking Back on Looking Forward

Denise Andersen
Vancouver Island University

OLTD 503
Kim Lemieux
February 19, 2014


























,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


2

Looking Back on Looking Forward

A personal philosophy of online facilitation and learning informs teaching practice with
the foundation necessary to achieve effective student outcomes and satisfaction with the
learning experience (Kanaka, 2008). Kanaka contends a personal philosophy acts as a guide for
choosing technologies and activities that best support student learning as well as allowing for
authenticity of teaching. Korthagens (2004) onion model describes the components of a
personal teaching philosophy however he cautions that a complete alignment of all levels of the
onion or true teacher presence may take a lifetime to attain if attained at all. He claims that a
process of self-understanding leads to more conscious choices in professional growth
opportunities as well as an overall satisfaction with teaching. Using Korthagens onion model
for reflective practice I arrived at two subjects for inquiry: my process of creating teacher
presence and effectively communicating my authentic self in online facilitation. I have chosen
Scharmers 2007 U-theory (Meijer, Korthagen, and Vasalos, 2009) as a guide for teacher
presence and my experience as a co-facilitator for OLTD 503 seminar 5 to illuminate online
effectiveness in communicating my authentic self.
Social constructivism (Garrison, Anderson & Archer, 2000) is a theory I have embraced
as the primary source of my teaching philosophy. I came to my career in teaching with minimal
understanding of educational philosophies; however upon reflection I realized I had
unknowingly adopted learning and teaching principles of social-constructivism, which is
surprising given my occupation as a Registered Nurse (RN). Nursing education in the recent
past was primarily driven by behaviorist theory and for generations nursing education included
only passive learning (Romyn, 2001). Today however with advanced medical technology even



,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


3
entry-level nursing programs such as Health Care Assistant (HCA) require active learning and a
mix of skill development and critical thinking (BC Ministry of Health, 2007). Behaviorist
learning theory assumes observable learning occurs as a result of an external stimuli (teacher)
and not whats going on in a learners head (Ally, 2008) whereas social constructivism theory
operates with the teacher primarily as facilitator and the student at the center of learning.
Current nursing instructional design uses social constructivism theory to encourage and support
critical thinking and behaviorism anchors the facts or skills (Chambers, Thiekotter & Chambers,
2013). It is keeping a balance of these two theories in my role as teacher that creates my
greatest challenge.
Garrison et al. (2000) community of inquiry framework (COI) is a conceptual model for
online learning that generates deep and meaningful learning when all three of its components
are sufficiently addressed. The three components include social presence, cognitive presence
and teaching presence. Teaching presence is further broken down into three elements, design
and organization, facilitation of activities and subject matter instruction (Anderson, Rourke,
Archer, and Garrison, 2001). To have teacher presence is to express ones personality, teaching
style and interests in student-teacher interactions and course design (Anderson, 2008, Knaack,
2011, Korthagen, 2004, & Meijer et al., 2009). Teacher presence is necessary in both online and
face- to -face (f2f) classes, as students need to know that somebody is participating or leading
their educational experience (Kelly, 2014). Lack of teacher presence leads to student
disengagement, drop out and unruly classroom behaviors (Korthagen, 2004). Knaack (2011)
writes that teaching presence or rapport with students is a connection or relationship between
student and teacher and it must begin at the first meeting. She further emphasizes that students
feel it is the ability of teachers to communicate and build relationships that influence learning



,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


4
(p.178). Korthagen (2004) suggests that effective communication and the ability to build
relationships come from confidence that rises out of self-knowledge or knowing oneself.
Taking the concepts from Knaack (2011) and Korthagen (2004) together with increased
knowledge of myself can only lead to better communication with, and learning for students.
Scharmers 2007 Theory U is a leadership model that aims to connect the personal and
professional aspects of teaching (Meijer et al., 2004) into a presence that can be used to
respond to the demands of any teaching situation. Moving through the U is to develop a
teaching presence that is intentional, authentic, innovative and grounded in connection (Meijer
et al., 2004). The U model is designed in successive stages that emphasize awareness of self on
the left, evolving down to the center (letting go of old self) and moving up to embodiment of
true self on the right (Theory U, 2009). Scharmer, (n.d.) chair of the Presencing Institute,
advises that the starting point (top left side of the U shape) commands an honest effort of
awareness and acknowledgement of the often-unconscious default or habitual behaviors in use.
The second step is to stop or suspend all default behaviors and beliefs so as to free up space to
truly see and listen to others. It is the act of precise listening and noting of differences as well as
empathic listening and listening for what is emerging for the future that will help focus
attention on the presence we want to create (Liang, 2007).




,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


5
I began the conscious process of creating an authentic teacher presence approximately
three months ago and I am steadily gaining an awareness of the significance and complexity of
this task. As a result of discussion and reflective practice I have discovered what I believe to be
two root causes of many of my default assumptions or habitual ways of responding in the
classroom. Firstly I have no formal training in education thus I conduct myself with a
patchwork foundation built on experiences, observations, articles, infrequent professional
development opportunities and innate understanding when developing classroom relationships.
I admit there have been many times I entered the classroom feeling cobbled together, out of my
comfort zone and a total imposter. Craven (2013) claims feelings of being an imposter are
irrational but could be found at any level of academic expertise and commonly stem from
feeling a lack of confidence. She goes onto say that for a Type A perfectionist it can be
especially serious but interacting and sharing with peers will help to ease the feelings. I teach in
a very small program and, like myself, my immediate peers are nurses therefore OLTD
colleagues and teachers play a significant supporting role in my process of creating an authentic
teaching self.
Secondly, my classroom presence has been suffering under the weight of an exaggerated
sense of responsibility for student success. There are a number of reasons for my first
responder predilection, most are not relevant to this exercise but I am increasingly thankful for
this nugget of self-awareness. I have come to understand that students at the post-secondary
level are self-directed in their studies and there is no need for me to rescue their process.
How do we relinquish our hold on the 'gold star'? As educators, many of us are very adept at
getting and keeping these. How do we learn to release the need to get the 'A'...? (Lemieux, K.,
personal communications, February 13, 2014). Being a facilitator of learning and someone from



,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


6
whom students gather information to better understand the content is a supposed goal yet I am
certain there may be moments when I will be tempted to push and drag them through. Old and
unhealthy habits are not so easily sloughed off and I am anticipating that I will be revisiting the
importance of building student-learning relationships each time I step into the classroom.
(Barnes & Kohler-Evans, 2013).
Unfortunately, my teaching self has not developed as it could and I have been guilty of
an inconsistent approach with students. Knaack (2011) writes that unintended outcomes of
inconsistency can include a perceived lack of approachability, weak connections with students
and a projection of arrogance. I am beginning to recognize when I need to be the content expert
and when I need to step aside and only guide student explorations as how a teacher teaches is at
least as important as the content (Kear, 2011). Barnes & Kohler-Evans (2013) have three
suggestions to assist with creating more equitable classroom dynamics: teachers need to
relinquish some of the learning power to students, build quality relationships with them as well
as engage them in reflection and discourse to deepen their learning.
Research has revealed that the top four characteristics for an effective online and f2f
teacher include respectfulness, responsiveness, knowledge, and approachability (Delaney,
Johnson, Johnson & Treslan, 2010). Past students report that I generally project as professional,
knowledgeable, enthusiastic, and humorous yet they were uncertain of how to engage with me.
I often feel inept at nurturing student relationships while balancing professionalism and class
management in large classes (in excess of 30 students) and perhaps this is what the students are
referring to. In smaller clinical groups (up to 11 students) I feel more adept at balancing my
responsibilities and my authentic self is more easily expressed.



,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


7
Kear (2011) writes that demystifying the instructor helps in removing barriers to
relationships and she suggests video introductions as an initial effort to help with student
engagement. Knack (2011) encourages icebreaker activities through out the course as another
way to create rapport or presence with students. Activities designed primarily to illuminate
student interests confers caring on the part of the teacher and that the teacher is interested in
them as persons (p.184). Kohler-Evans and Barnes (2013) perceive teacher presence as a form
of service to the education profession and the students. They speak of authenticity, an ability to
listen and being available as the cornerstones of relationship building. Kelly (2014) suggests
teachers show interest and participation by responding promptly to questions, emails and
discussion posts. When students know the teacher is actively participating students become
more conscious of their responsibility in engaging in the course.
Teacher presence is also created through a combination of course design and delivery
models (Schwier, 2009; Anderson, 2008; Kear, 2011). There are vast amounts of tools and
delivery models from which to choose but to inspire learner confidence a teacher has to exhibit
a comfort level with the chosen tools. Designing for presence also needs to include knowledge
of the students prior experience, course outcomes and institutional context (Kear, 2011). Prior
to OLTD my online skill set was sparse and included only email, web surfing, and Skype. Thus
far my adventure online has been nothing less than a fire hose experience. Schwier (2009)
reminds us that students are connecting through technology not with technology and if a learner
is concentrating primarily on the technology instead of making deep connections with the
material there is a chance the person may not succeed. Unfortunately I experienced this first
hand when I experienced a self-imposed learning curve with a new computer operating system
in OLTD 501. Managing my computer and the learning was an unanticipated and temporary



,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


8
barrier but a valuable lesson was learned. Schwier further contends that support technologies,
like tools and activities must allow for a balance between content and the learning community.
The introduction to online tools and technology began in earnest with OLTD 503 and I
quickly realized that online technology seems to have no bounds and that feelings of being
overwhelmed is a common response. My intent was to stay paced with the introduction of tools
and activities but before long I was just bookmarking apps and links for a more thorough
exploration at some undefined time. I eventually realized I was doing a disservice to myself as
well as the tools themselves so I stopped trying to cram all the learning in and decided to go
quiet and observe more. Kear, (2011) speaks to this common behavior of retreating when too
much information exists. I continued to engage but was probably less visible than others but as
Schwier (2009) says participation does not equal engagement for learners. I eventually found
a comfort level with asynchronous tools including discussion forums, blogs, D2L, Weebly,
Diigo, Zotero, and Facebook. Twitter and Google + continue to challenge me and it is a
pleasant surprise when I post successfully. Synchronous tools like Twitter chat and Collaborate
both as a participant and moderator continue to elude mastery.
Co-moderating seminar 5 was a collaborative effort with three others who also work at
Vancouver Island University (VIU). We chose to work together because of our VIU connection
and similar post-secondary experience. Working in close proximity allowed for us to meet f2f
and bypass the initial awkwardness of meeting solely online. A co-facilitator remarked that we
were kind of cheating by meeting but as it turned out we only discussed the larger ideas when
together and often one or another had time constraints so our meetings were short. We did the
bulk of the work for the seminar individually and shared via Google docs and email. Emails
proved to be cumbersome as the streams were confusing but Google doc allowed us to



,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


9
collaborate from a distance and is a brilliant tool for multiple users. Our final seminar plan was
to present the learning without demanding a great amount of student energies, as we were very
conscious of the psychological demands on the students at this point in the course.
Our seminar was the final of five and our assignment was to illuminate the four
necessary elements to consider when moving an f2f class online (Kear, 2011). The four
elements had been explored at least superficially in previous seminars so our seminar was
generally about compiling the components together online. We decided our primary task was to
elicit students experiences and entice them to begin thinking creatively about moving learning
and activities into an online environment (Salmon, 2003). It was a resounding success in that
both our asynchronous and synchronous activities employed uncomplicated activities yet
enjoyed impressive outcomes. I would suggest the emergent theme of our seminar was simple
but effective facilitation and learning.
I am not sure my participation in facilitating our online seminar was comprehensive
enough to definitively say I managed to communicate my authentic self. Regardless, it was an
event that took me beyond my usual boundaries and because I wasnt physically facing students
I felt less anxious and ready to speak at length. Thankfully I had been reminded by my co-
facilitators to not belabor any discussion if the students captured all of the salient points of the
exercise. In hindsight perhaps I had effectively communicated my authentic self throughout our
collaboration and my co-facilitators were helping me to subdue my usual inclinations.
Creating teacher presence was and continues to be a goal of my efforts in OLTD. My
teaching practice is slowly changing as I embrace activities that develop effective presence. I
am energized and excited as I realize I have already started the process to rescue myself from
unsatisfying, unnecessary and regretful teaching experiences. I am fully expecting my path to



,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


10
be littered with pieces of my ego, needless nursing dogma, and hopefully old habits. Regardless
of the challenges I am committed to making change in the landscape of my teaching.
























,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


11
References
Ally, M. (2008). Foundations of educational theory for online learning.
In T. Anderson (Ed.), Theory and Practice of Online Learning (2nd ed., pp. 15-44).
Retrieved from http://http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/pdf/TPOL_book.pdf

Anderson, T. (Ed.). (2008). Theory and practice of online learning (2
nd
Ed.). Athabasca
University Press.

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Archer, W., & Garrison, R. (2001). Assessing teaching presence in
computer conferencing transcripts. Journal of the Asynchronous Learning Network 5(2).
Available http://www.aln.org/alnweb/journal/jaln-vol5issue2v2.htm

BC Ministry of Health, (2007). Careaid competency project framework. Retrieved from:
http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/library/publications/year/2007/CareAideCompetencyProjectFrame
work.pdf

Chambers, D., Thiekotter, A., & Chambers, L. (2013). Preparing student nurses for
contemporary practice: The case for discovery learning. Journal of Nursing Education
and Practice, 3(9). Retrieved from www.sciedu.ca/jnep

Craven, J. (2013). Overcoming the imposter syndrome. The teaching Professor, 27(6),
Retrieved from http://www.magnapubs.com/newsletter/the-teaching-
professor/story/6580/

Delaney, J., Johnson, A., Johnson, T., & Treslan, D. (2010). Students' perception of effective
teaching in higher education. 26th annual conference on distance teaching and learning,
St. John's, NL. Retrieved from
http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference/Resource_library/handouts/28251_10H.pdf

Garrison, R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment:
Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3),
87-105. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Kanuka, H. (2008). Understanding e learning technologies-in-practice through philosophies-in-
practice. In T. Anderson (Ed.), Theory and practice of online learning (2 ed.). Retrieved
from http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/

Kear, K. (2011). Online and Social Networking Communities. New York, NY: Routledge.

Kelly, R. (2014). 10 ways to motivate and engage your online learners. Online Classroom:
Ideas for effective online instruction, 14(2), 1-3. Retrieved from
http://www.magnapubs.com/newsletter/online-classroom/story/6850/

Knaack, L. (2011). A practical handbook for educators; designing learning opportunities.
(p. 177-198). Whitby, ON: de Sitter Publications.



,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


12

Kohler-Evans, P., & Barnes, C. (2013). Relationships with students are what matter most. The
Teaching Professor, 27(7), Retrieved from
http://www.magnapubs.com/newsletter/theteaching-professor/story/6639/

Korthagen, F. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more
holistic approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 77- 97.

Liang, E. (Designer). (2007, Aug 11). Theory U: An introduction [Slide Share]. Retrieved from
http://www.slideshare.net/ericaliang/theory-u-intro

Meijer, P., Korthagen, F., & Vasalos, A. (2009). Supporting presence in teacher education: the
connection between the personal and professional aspects of teaching. Teaching and
Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies, 25(2), 297-308.

Romyn, D. (2001). Disavowal of the behaviorist paradigm in nursing education: What makes it
so difficult to unseat? Advances in Nursing Science, 23(3), 1-10.

Salmon, G. (2003). Five-stage model to teaching and learning online. (University of Leeds,
United Kingdom) Retrieved from w.sddu.leeds.ac.uk/sddu-salmon-five-stage-model-
alternative-version.html

Scharmer, O. (n.d.). Theory u. Retrieved from http://www.presencing.com/theoryu

Schwier, R.A. (June 2009). Pursuing the elusive metaphor of community in virtual learning
environments. Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2009, Association for the Advancement of
Computers in Education, Honolulu, Hawaii.

Theory U, 2009. Retrieved February 3, 2014 from EduTech Wiki.
http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Theory_U












,--./01 234. -0 ,--./01 5-!63!7


13