Ask Errol!

Thanks much for that opening sentence—it is yet another bit of info that tells me my suggestions are helpful! As to your question, before the Internet it used to be so much easier to determine what could or could not be used to help students as additional resources (and by this I mean resources beyond what are prestocked in a distance learning classroom). But the Internet makes it so easy to find resources, and just about anyone can toss up something that looks, smells, and tastes like a resource—but is it one that can legitimately be used in a classroom?

Here are some guidelines to keep in mind: (1) What your school allows. Each school is different, from leaving it up to the instructor to not allowing any outside resources (unless they come from the school’s library). Be sure you follow this— and when in doubt ask your supervisor; (2) The “usual suspects” to use as guidelines. Credibility can be determined by author or organization credentials and age of the resource (a good rule: if possible not older than 5 years); (3) Domain extensions. As you point out, .com and many .net are commercial, and thus are not credible (but there are exceptions—read through the resource carefully), but .gov, .edu, and .org are nearly always reliable. There are also .biz (for businesses), .mobi (if the resource is for use only on a mobile device), and .US, .UK, et cetera (for country designations)—these must be looked at individually to determine their validity; (4) Pay attention to the pop-up ads. Some websites may be perfectly fine, but there may be pop-up ads that accompany them that simply are not suitable for a classroom; (5) Specificity for the assignments, items, et cetera. When all the previous guidelines say “okay,” always be sure you are not posting a resource that is so general a student has to go through all of it to find helpful info: either be sure the resource is specific or let the students know exactly where to go in the resource to save the time and frustration!

You hit on one of the biggest frustrations of online educators, what I call “ghost students”: as you described, they appear on the roster, are not dropped from the course, and that’s it—no communication of any kind, no matter what is tried. I certainly have these in each of my classes, and I, too, have tried each of the communication methods you mention. There are three additional methods I came up with that have resulted in some limited success: (1) Using their advisors. When I have not been able to communicate with these students “no how, no way” I have reached out to their advisors for help. Sometimes, the advisors know things about the students that explains their silence (at least I have an answer!) or they have been able to contact the student, and then have the student contact me. (2) Sending audio files. This, of course, takes time to create, as a separate audio file must be created for each student. But when I do this I have had a bit of success in turning a “ghost student” into a live student—and “a bit of success” is certainly better than no success. And one of the keys to having this succeed is by using a funky subject line, such as “I’ve attached an audio file for you, Joseph, because you live in Colorado Springs!” (3) Sending an email with what seems like a weird subject line! For example, I might write, “Cathy, you live in Glendale, California, home of the Museum of Neon Art! Read this email for my reaction to it :)” Yes, it’s a rather long subject line, but it does what I want—offers a “hook” that I hope will result in the student reading the email, and eventually reaching out to me. Let me give you the caveat to these three suggestions: I’ve kept detailed records on the success I’ve had, and it stands at 17%! But the way I look at it that’s 17% more students engaged in the course than had I not tried these methods, so for me it’s a win.

I can easily identify with your conundrum, as I, too, easily fall into that last category you mention! It is quite easy to take over these conversations, and the information offered will be nearly always solid contributions, not “doughnut conversation” to simply take up space and give the impression one is interested—when the person really is not. There is a balance to be maintained—sometimes, it is simply better to hold off so a look at the chat box will not give the impression you are a “chat bully”! I divide my posts into three types: (1) Posts that offer substantive information. These are my longest posts, and when posted they receive the most response because they address the topic being discussed, usually offer something insightful, and don’t give the impression I am trying to turn the conversation around to my philosophy of teaching. (2) Posts that support others. It’s important to acknowledge posts from peers that give nice info, suggestions, et cetera. Not only is this the right thing to do but it also shows others you are a team player. (3) Posts that offer a bit of humor now and then. I do this about a half dozen times during one of these webinars because they humanize me and add a bit of levity to what is usually a serious conversation, and this break is appreciated. But like I said at the beginning, the key is balance, and sometimes it takes one’s attending a few of these presentations to find the right balance.

Remember: We can exercise on our own, and come away with good results—but sometimes the help of a personal trainer can turn “good” into “great”!