about this training

The information presented here is based on: Critical Dialogue Online, p 53-62 by Barclay Hudson from Handbook of Online Learning, Innovations in Higher Education and Corporate Training, editor Kjell Erik Rudestam and Judith Schoeholtz-Read.

critical dialogue and self-protection

Engaging in critical dialogue online can be a challenge. The goal is to participate in lively discussions in which there is give-and-take and parties are mutually benefited. But attempts at online criticism can come across as harsh and hurt feelings can result. Online communication doesn't provide the physical cues that face-to-face communication does. There are no subtleties of body language, facial expressions, or tone of voice to provide physical cues.

So when participants initiate a dialogue, they are entering the unknown. When opportunities to engage in constructive criticism arise, there can be hesitation and polite exchanges. Or overly long discussions about shared assumptions, like ground rules, for example, will take place. Participants can feel the need to both delve deeply into a topic or debate. But at the same time, they want to attend to human needs and relationships. This internal conflict can lead to cautious postings and superficial discussions because participants want to avoid being hurt or inflicting harm. But hurt may be unavoidable. Participants may still experience the “sting” of criticism because of the nature of intentional or unintentional critical dialogue and trying to avoid it can result in losing out on a learning experience.

"To protect us from the intense discomfort of the unknown, people invent a structure of artifacts, drawn from culture and beliefs that correspond to a form of territoriality that needs to be defended against chaos when a threat arises to a key belief, the emotional consequences can be devastating." (Lambert, 1998, p 20)

please comment

"It's very tough to provide constructive feedback in this [online] forum because you have no idea how the person on the other end will receive the feedback. [But] when I think back about the feedback I've received...it's been when people pushed me a bit...that really adds value." (J. Shulkin, Fielding Graduate Institute forum posting, May 4, 1999)

Please relate an online experience, in a class or other forum, in which you received constructive feedback that pushed you a bit.

the 7 traditions of dialogue

Another reason that critical dialogue can be less than satisfying is that participants don’t have the background or experience in participating in constructive criticism.

The 7 traditions of dialogue (summarized in the sidebar) provide a theoretical framework in which to engage in critical dialogue online. Becoming familiar with these theories and their usage and then practicing when the opportunity presents itself, can result in more in-depth, satisfying discussions.

healthy, lively dialogue

As people become more familiar with each other, there’s a letting go of the shared assumptions and rules. Personal experiences are shared, people become bolder, more spontaneity, irony, pathos, exaggeration, speaking off the record, and all the normal conversational techniques come into play.

As the tone of the dialogue changes and personalities emerge, each group member feeds back into the group as a whole and the virtual teams undergo a “social construction of self” in this reciprocal process. Bonnevier (1999) This opens the door to group members feeling more comfortable enagaging in critical dialogue.

Additionally, assuming a persona or role playing intentionally or unintentionally can lead to alternative views can be expressed. Covenants or pacts, agreements on what will be discussed, creates a secure environment and the impression of control so participants feel more comfortable engaging. This can lead to depth and intimacy, "candlepower," in an online forum.

In all three of these cases, there is a departure from the typical way online dialogue is conducted and whether used separately or alone, creates an environment that encourages risk-taking.

the adult learner

Experienced in working in teams and with a background in dealing with a variety of people and personalities, the adult learner tends to adapt and navigate easily to this online environment. They are more likely, as demonstrated in our class, to create a respectful environment and observe the rules of netiquette without being reminded. Their reasons for being online is to engage openly and candidly with issues within a community of the like-minded and look at confrontations as a learning experience rather than as a “fight or flight” situation.

please comment

"Usually I am amazed at how well I can coordinate with teammates while separated by so much time and distance...(But) occasionally I am dismayed at how even well-intentioned communications can bring a chain of reaction and overreaction that seems to bring out the the worst in all involved and leave team members bewildered and hurt and work unattended". (Bonnevier, 1999, p 5)

Have you had this experience in this class or in another online environment? If so, what were the circumstances and how will you handle it in the future? If not, did you observe it happening in another situation?

summary

Being aware of the pitfalls and opportunities to engage in critical dialogue can lead to a more mindful approach when online. By giving and getting criticism instead of avoiding it, learning opportunities can be enriched. Reluctance gives way to discussions that rise above a superficial level as the "whole" person is revealed.

Strategies such as expressing humor or emotion, adopting a persona, being human, and practicing traditions of dialogue can enrich the online experience of all participants.

please comment

When the situation calls for it, do you find that you engage in critical dialogue online? If so, how? If not, why? Has your ability to provide constructive criticism improved during the course of this class or the program as a whole?