Northwest eLearn 2016 Keynote

Revisiting Presence & Community in the Online Classroom

Patrick R. Lowenthal @plowenthal

slides @ patricklowenthal.com

A Bit about MeAssociate Professor @ Boise State

educatorresearcher designer developer

{ what are you working on these days? }

{ what are you most excited about? }

HISTORY OF SOCIAL PRESENCE

Social Presence Theory

• Communications Studies Group at the University College in London in the 1970s

• Short, J.A., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Social Presence TheorySocial presence is the degree of salience (i.e., quality or state of being there) between two communicators using a communication medium.

Less Social Presence More Social Presence

Focused on 1-on-1

1980’s & CMCCuelessness Theory developed by Rutter (1984, 1987)

Media Richness Theory developed by Daft & Lengel (1984, 1986; Daft, Lengel, & Trevino, 1987)

EVOLUTION OF SOCIAL PRESENCE

Timeline

1970 1976 1979 1984 1992 1995 1999

Social P

Short e

Cueless

Rutter Med

ia Rich

Daft &

Social In

formati

on Process

Walthe

rSocia

l Pres

Community of In

Garriso

n et a

Phase Period Key Figures Focus of Research1. 1970s Short et al. Focused on

Telecommunications2. 1980s to early

1990sRutterDaft & LengelKieslerWalther

Focused on CMC

3. Early 1990s to early 2000s

GunarwardenaGarrison et al.TuSwanRichardson

Focused on Online Learning

4. Mid 2000s to present

GarrisonSheaCleveland-InnesAkyolSwan Richardson

Focused on Online Learning & the CoI

Affective Communication• Expression of emotions• Use of humor• Self-disclosure

Cohesive Communication• Continuing a thread• Quoting from others’ messages• Referring explicitly to other’s messages• Asking questions• Complimenting, expressing

appreciation• Expressing agreement

Interactive Communication• Vocatives• Refers to group using inclusive

pronouns• Phatics, salutations

Focused on Many-to-Many

Problem“Researchers of social presence cannot agree upon a single definition of social presence (Biocca & Harms, 7 2002; Biocca, Harms, & Burgoon, 2003; Rettie, 2003; Lane, 2011; Tu, 2002)

Instead, researchers continue to redefine social presence (Lowenthal, 2010; Picciano, 2002)”

Examples• “the ability of learners to project

themselves socially and emotionally as well as their ability to perceive other learners as “real people””(Boston et al.)

• “the degree to which participants in computer-mediated communication feel affectively connected one to another… (Swan, Garrison, & Richardson, 2009).”

Definitions…1. “the degree to which a person is perceived as a

‘real person’ in mediated communication” (Gunawardena, 1995, p. 151)

2. the ability of learners to project themselves socially and affectively into a community of inquiry (Rourke et al., 1999)

3. “…the degree of feeling, perception, and reaction of being connected by CMC” (Tu & McIsaac, 2002)

4. “…a student’s sense of being in and belonging in a course and the ability to interact with other students and an instructor” (Picciano, 2002, p. 22)

Garrison“the ability of participants to identify with the community (e.g., course of study), communicate purposefully in a trusting environment, and develop inter-personal relationships by way of projecting their individual personalities” (Garrison, 2009, p. 352).

“the ability of participants in the Community of Inquiry to project their personal characteristics into the community, thereby presenting themselves to the other participants as ``real people.'’ (Garrison et al., 1999)

Emotional Nonemotional

Connection Nonconnection

Community Noncommunity

An Individual Real Person

Common Elements

BelongingReal There Connection

Social Presence

LearningCommunity=

Social Presence

LearningCommunity=

Building Community

Interaction Social Presence

Collaboration Community

IMPORTANCE OF COMMUNITY

Birth of an Idea?1991

“Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly”

Etienne Wenger

slides @ patricklowenthal.comEtienne Wenger

“Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly”

Obsessed with an Idea

Theoretical Support

Increased focus on importance of community in learning environments (Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 1999; Brown & Campione, 1994; Hill, 1985)

ONLINE LEARNING COMMUNITIES

What does a learning community

look like?

What does a learning community look like?

Or this?

What does an online learning community

look like?

What does an online learning community

look like? This?

CoI’s Perspective

Bounded Communities

Participation is required

Don’t choose classmates or instructor

Fixed length of time

Explicit effort to connect with others(Wilson et al., 2004)

Bounded Communities

BENEFITS OF ONLINE COMMUNITY

Popular Books

Benefits of Community

Provide a social context for the material

Bridge between school & work environments

Students feel more connected within a community

(Wilson et al., 2004)

Where to Begin???

Student-to-student Interaction & presence

Student-to-teacher Interaction & presence

Collaboration

Learners Are Diverse

Privilege Certain Types

{ When is there too much? }

Building Community

Interaction Social Presence

Collaboration Community

Quality Matters

{ When is there not enough? }

Good InstructionEffective instruction meets established learning goals and objectives;

Efficient instruction does so with minimal expenditure of resources, particularly time;

Appealing instruction draws the sustained attention and positive response of learners (Wilson, Parrish, & Veletsianos, 2008)

EngagementWhile appeal suggests merely the ability to draw learners to the experience (a unidirectional force), engagement suggests a reciprocating relationship that changes the nature of the experience. Rather than just being sufficiently attracted to pay attention, learners invest creative effort and emotional commitment—and a willingness to risk in anticipation of valued outcomes.

Good Instruction• Effective

• Efficient

• Engaging

(Wilson, Parrish, & Veletsianos, 2008)

Quality Matters

{ Obsession w/ Outcomes }

{ Not enough focus on engagement }

{ Be Better than QM }

@CONTACT ME

Patrick Lowenthalpatricklowenthal@boisestate.eduwww.patricklowenthal.com

Northwest eLearn 2016 Keynote

Education

Elearn 2013 parent meet

Memoria eLearn Center 2009

Elearn 20009 keynote Openness and the Taxonomy fo the Many

Northwest Symposium 2012 - Keynote Presentation

Memoria eLearn Center 2010

Elearn Foundation

Elearn 2014 Parent Meet

TAA eLearn Course - Session 8

ARK Elearn Congress_handouts

Northwest eLearn Webinar - 2013 - Lessons from the field: An analysis of online instructors’ “best practices”

Elearn 2012 Parent Meet

Elearn Member Access

CHAPTER 12 Hydrocarbons - eLearn

DOWNLOAD: eLearn autorun timed

Elearn Guiding Principles

Presentation Week 4 TAA eLearn

Learning management system - elearn series

ATLS-9e ELearn TraumaFlow.v1

Northwest Indiana SHRM Keynote

Northwest Elearning Community Conference Keynote