The Impact of Various Communication Tools on Interaction in Online Learning: A Comparitive Study Ray Pastore Mahnaz Moallem Florence Martin 1

1

The Impact of Various Communication Tools on Interaction in Online Learning:

A Comparitive Study

Ray Pastore

Mahnaz Moallem

Florence Martin

2

Introduction

• Research on online learning continues to support the importance of dialogue or interaction between the teacher and students and among students for advancing the learning process and for internalizing the learning

• The emergence of the newer web synchronous conferencing tools permits high level interaction

– Eluminate Live; Wimba Live, WebEx, Saba Centra, Adobe Connect, Cisco Telepresence

3

Introduction

• Two communication methods (i.e. synchronous and asynchronous) are being used– synchronous instruction brings teacher and students

together simultaneously in virtual spaces – Asynchronous instruction is delivered without any

specific timing and uses communication tools such as e-mail and discussion boards

4

Purpose of this Study

1. Analyze various communication tools & methods to find out how they influence the learning process, learning outcomes, learner motivation, self-regulation & satisfaction

2. Identify factors that compensate for the absence of live interaction in online asynchronous environment & vice versa

3. Identify factors that can be accounted for deeper and higher quality of learning

4. Assess the impact of various communication methods on problem-solving skills (deep learning process), collaborative learning, learner motivation & self-regulation

5

Framework

6

Social and Cognitive Presence

• Social presence is defined as the “degree of salience of the other person in the (mediated) interaction and the consequent salience of the interpersonal relationships” (Short, et. al., 1979, p. 65).

• Asynchronous Communication - Limited with regard to nonverbal & vocal communication

• Text-based discussion – inability to transmit vocal and non-verbal cues causes it to be less immediate, less intimate or colder and less personable experience

7

Immediacy and Intimacy

• Immediacy refers to physical & verbal behaviors that reduce psychological and physical distance (Mehrabian,1971)

• Intimacy is a function of eye contact, physical proximity, topic of conversation. Changes in one function will produce compensatory changes in the others (Short, Williams, & Christie, 1976).

• Interaction is likely to be unpleasant if behavior cannot be altered to allow an optimal degree of intimacy

8

Collaboration and Co-construction

• From a socio-cultural perspective, the core of meaningful interaction is the concept of collaboration & co-construction.

• In order to build a learning community, meanings are to be jointly constructed as learners modify, confirm or discard their original ideas through hearing others points of views and referring to others’ experiences (Bakhtin, 1981; Chinn, Anderson, & Waggoner, 2001; Golden, 1986).

9

Motivation and Self-Regulated Learning

• From a constructivist perspective, self-regulated learning is defined as

– “an active, constructive process whereby learners set goals for their own learning and then attempt to monitor, regulate, and control their cognition, motivation, and behavior, guided and constrained by their goals and the contextual features in the environment” (Perry & Smart, 2002, p. 741).

• Researchers argue that the asynchronous and virtual nature of online learning provide better learning environment for learners to be self-directed and to take responsibility for their learning (e.g., Garrison, 2003).

• Learner's self-motivation increases as a result of self-regulatory attributes and self-regulatory processes in online learning (Eom, Wen & Ashill, 2006).

10

Technology and Task Complexity

• Characteristics of the technology tools can improve or hinder efficient delivery of instruction (Alavi & Leidner, 2001)

• The impact of different technology characteristics to present information and for communication may depend on task complexity (Tan & Benbasat, 1990; Tractinsky & Meyer, 1999)

• Skehan and Foster (2001, p. 196) state that “task difficulty has to do with the amount of attention the task demands from the participants. Difficult tasks require more attention than easy tasks

11

Research Questions

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3

How & in what ways can synchronous or live interaction, asynchronous / online interaction & a combined method influence students’ learning process, learning outcomes, motivation, self-regulation and satisfaction?

What factors in various communication modes can be accounted for the effectiveness of interaction?

What factors will impact the quality of learning, problem-solving (deep learning process) and collaborative skills, learner motivation and self-regulation?

12

Design of the Study

Asynchronous Only (Week 2 & 3)

Synchronous Only (Week 4 & 5)

Mixed Methods (Week 6&7)

Assigned readingsLarge group & small

group discussion forumProblem-solving team

assignmentInstructor feedback on

problem-solving assignment

Complete end of module quiz (with automatic feedback)

Assigned readingsLive, synchronous class

meetingSmall group synchronous

discussionInstructor oral & written

feedback on problem-solving assignment

Complete end of module quiz (with automatic feedback)

Assigned readingsLive, synchronous class

meetingSmall group synchronous

discussionLarge group & small

group discussion forum-asynchronous

Instructor oral & written feedback on problem-solving assignments

Complete end of module (with automatic feedback)

13

Participants

• Three different graduate level courses (three units each) in the

Instructional Technology program

• Two courses in spring 2011 & one course in fall 2011

• A total of 24 graduate students participated in the study (18 students

(13 & 5) participated in the spring and 16 in fall 2011)

• For synchronous delivery modules while all students used Synchronous

Virtual Rooms to communicate with each other & the instructor during

live interaction, some were also physically present in the classroom &

had an opportunity to see each other face-to-face & distance students

through video feeds

14

Data Collection Method

• Qualitative Data Sources– Student profile & learning & thinking styles survey results.– Students’ communications during collaboration problem solving tasks– Students’ products of learning (solutions to the problem solving tasks) & results

of modules’ quizzes– Responses to reflective questions– Instructor’s logs & reflections

• Quantitative Data Sources– Student motivation and self-regulation skills (prior to and after the intervention)– Social presence, immediacy & intimacy & satisfaction surveys

15

Procedure - Asynchronous

1. Students were assigned to readings and other instructional materials (e.g., instructors’

lecture notes and multimedia materials) a week earlier.

2. Students used module’s problem-solving team assignment to collaborate in

completing the assignment.

3. A small group discussion area was created for each team as they worked on their

team assignments.

4. A large group discussion forum was created to provide opportunity for interaction

among all students and with the instructor.

5. Students were instructed not to meet synchronously & just use asynchronous tools to

communicate & to complete their team assignments even if they were in close

proximity with each other.

6. Student teams submitted & published their assignments to other groups to review and

comment.

7. The instructor also provided written feedback and comments on students’ team

products and collaboration process.

16

Procedure - Synchronous



2. During live/synchronous class meeting, students participated in large group discussion

&/or a demonstration with lecture facilitated by the instructor followed by breaking out

into small teams

3. Teams were assigned to collaborate in completing module’s problem-solving

assignment during live & synchronous team meeting

4. Students were offered to continue team discussion in their designated virtual rooms to

follow up on live or synchronous class & team discussion

5. Students were instructed not to meet asynchronously & just use synchronous tools to

communicate & to complete their team assignments

6. The instructor also reviewed students’ responses to collaborative team activity &

offered feedback during synchronous or live meeting

7. In addition to oral comments the instructor also provided written feedback on teams’

products & collaboration process.

17

Procedure: Mixed Methods



2. Student teams were instructed to begin discussing & collaborating with their team

members on module’s problem-solving assignment using a small group discussion in

the forum area.

3. A large group discussion forum was created to provide opportunity for interaction

among all students and with the instructor before live & synchronous class discussion.

4. During live and synchronous class meeting, students participate in large group

discussion and/or a demonstration with lecture facilitated by the instructor.

5. The large group discussion was followed by breaking out into teams to complete team

assignment a& present it for both peers’ and instructor’s review & comments.

6. The instructor also reviewed students’ responses & collaborative process and offered

feedback during synchronous or live meeting.

7. In addition to oral comments the instructor also provided written feedback on teams’

products & collaboration process.

Example Problem Solving Activity

Suppose that you notice that every day in June from 5:00 PM until 5:30 PM many of the fish in a pond that you own come to the surface of the water and leap into the air. You are afraid that something is wrong. There is very little such activity at other times of the day or other months of the year. Identify the system that you would analyze to find out why the fish behave as they do and to decide what, if anything, needs to be done about the situation. Briefly describe the components that you would include. Defend your decision in writing.

Sample Instructor’s Feedback

“Pay attention to your own argument. Something in the pond that the fish eat. If so, then some activities are happening in the pond.”“These are great questions, but don’t you have to use the systems view to first define the system, its components, subsystems and super system and then begin analyzing the system?“What is the system? Do we know what is the system before defining it? Did you think “fish” was the targeted system or “fish pond” was your targeted system?”

20

Analysis

• Constant comparison method were used to analyze different data sources for questions by cross-case grouping of answers

• Statistical analysis was conducted for survey data

• Data from various sources were triangulated & cross checked

21

ResultsFactors emerged impacting interaction, student learning & satisfaction

Theme ExceptsCommunication Difficulty

“I thought that it is very difficult to fully express my thoughts [in] writing without being able to actually speak to my group members.”“Schedules made it tougher b/c you had to "wait" for others to respond or they had to wait on you.” . . .not be able to talk with classmates immediately about the readings; having to write out thoughts in the discussion board without first discussing it in class. ““. . .having to wait for others slowed me down. In all, it was counter-productive.““I was forced to rely more on my own ideas and opinions as I didn't have the advantage of turning to my classmates. “

Immediate feedback

“. . .However, that was also a negative because we had to often "Wait" on each other to make the next move, thus delaying the process.”“I like immediate feedback . . ““The challenge was in doing the class activities and not to have all members responses at the same time.”

Style of learning

“over the past two weeks I realized that I rely on auditory information to aid me in fully understanding the material.”“I prefer to discuss ideas rather than contribute in a written thread. ““I like being able to bounce ideas/thoughts/questions off of others. It was difficult not having that class discussion. ““I get a lot out of the face-to-face meetings and discussion about the topic.” “The advantage was that I like to talk over topics in real-time and have an exchange of ideas.”

22


Theme ExceptsAccess to Various Tools

“. . .I am also quick to grab a cell phone to send a text or make a phone call, so this method forced me to use other means I am not as used to using.”“I am a visual and auditory learner who likes to tackle tasks quickly and efficiently. All of these elements were not available.” . . . I learned the basics but don't think I delved as deeply into the topics as I would have had we been in class. Again, the class discussions, the energy, and hands-on experience (white boarding, diagramming, etc.) makes it real for me .““I became a slave to the discussion forum and email, sometimes checking both 20-30 times a day. I would hit the refresh button more than I can count.”I didn't think it was any better than completely asynchronous. For example, if I was up at 5:00am and had an idea, I wanted to be able to send my team an e-mail, but couldn't.

Collaboration vs. Self-learning

“. . . found myself reading more independently and trying to comprehend the subject matter.”“improved self learning through focusing only on the readings and the discussions.““The challenge was in doing the class activities and not to have all members responses at the same time.”“. . . not having a lecture really forced me read the articles over and over.”“I feel I have grown more in this program through conversation with my peers. “

Relationship “I don't think you can ever replace the human element of learning and the energy of face-to-face or live interaction.”

23


Theme ExceptsAccess to Various Tools

“. . .I am also quick to grab a cell phone to send a text or make a phone call, so this method forced me to use other means I am not as used to using.”“I am a visual and auditory learner who likes to tackle tasks quickly and efficiently. All of these elements were not available.” . . . I learned the basics but don't think I delved as deeply into the topics as I would have had we been in class. Again, the class discussions, the energy, and hands-on experience (white boarding, diagramming, etc.) makes it real for me .““I became a slave to the discussion forum and email, sometimes checking both 20-30 times a day. I would hit the refresh button more than I can count.”I didn't think it was any better than completely asynchronous. For example, if I was up at 5:00am and had an idea, I wanted to be able to send my team an e-mail, but couldn't.

Collaboration vs. Self-learning

“. . . found myself reading more independently and trying to comprehend the subject matter.”“improved self learning through focusing only on the readings and the discussions.““The challenge was in doing the class activities and not to have all members responses at the same time.”“. . . not having a lecture really forced me read the articles over and over.”“I feel I have grown more in this program through conversation with my peers. “

Relationship

“I don't think you can ever replace the human element of learning and the energy of face-to-face or live interaction.”

24


Theme Excepts

Impact on Learning

“. . . I definitely feel like I have a better understanding of the material for the second two modules than I did of the first two modules..”“I thought I would love not worrying about keeping up with class discussion threads, yet I found myself wanting to know how everyone else was digesting the material. It was also challenging not being able to use email or a post to get in touch with Dr. . . when we had a quick question for her. ““The team work was easier in that we were VERY focused to complete the activity so it did not carry on and on thereby requiring additional meetings.”‘. . . but the end result was much better since we didn't have to wait for feedback. It seemed we got a lot done this way and things weren't so up in the air.”“The ability to ask questions in class and get immediate answers was a huge help but it was difficult when I had a question outside of class. ““the lectures & discussions in class really helped me understand the readings and cleared up any confusion. I feel like I am much better at expressing my confusion verbally.”I felt that I had a much better grasp on the course content with the synchronous course rather than the asynchronous course.”“I felt like more was accomplished because everyone needed to be prepared when discussing items related to our assignment. “


Theme Excepts

Impact on Learning

“. . ! No challenges really - any difficulties were resolved very quickly. Advantage = immediate feedback .”“The combination of modes helped optimize my performance. I did not feel limited in any capacity. ““. . . overall it was MUCH better to communicate in various formats instead of waiting on the others. ”“It is much easier to coordinate when it comes to team assignments. We can use the discussion space but also talk about it "live" which is the best of both worlds. There really weren't any challenges that I saw.”“I had no challenges with this module (in terms of synchronous/asynchronous. Advantages are being able to communicate synch. and asynch. with teammates on group activities. ““the lectures & discussions in class really helped me understand the readings and cleared up any confusion. I feel like I am much better at expressing my confusion verbally.”“I work best when I can collaborate and bounce ideas off of partners, and engage in chit-chat about topics. This really broadened how I approached problems/assignments.”“I need time to both reflect & discussion with others. Quiet discussion groups offered time to reflect and then I felt more comfortable speaking up. This way I knew if i was on track before coming to class. “

ResultsImpact of various communication tools & methods on Motivation & self Regulation

• Categories analyzed in survey: – Intrinsic, – Extrinsic, – Task Value, – Control of Learning – Beliefs, – Self-efficacy, – Self-regulation

• Likert Scale – 1-7• Overall, student motivation & self-regulation did not show

any significant difference across three different modes of communication.

Item Category Synchronous (N = 27)

Asynchronous (N = 36)

Mix Approach (N = 24)

Intrinsic 1.In a class like this, I prefer course material that really challenges me so I can learn new things

6.48 6.11 6.41

2.In a class like this, I prefer course material that arouses my curiosity, even if it is difficult to learn

6.48 6.42 6.5

3.The most satisfying thing for me in this course is trying to understand the content as thoroughly as possible

6.41 6.08 6.29

4.When I have the opportunity in this class, I choose course assignments that I can learn from even if they don’t guarantee a good grade

5.93 5.58 5.79

Item Category Synchronous Asynchronous Mix Approach

Task Value 9.I think I will be able to use what I learn in this course in other courses

6.81 6.72 6.71

10.It is important for me to learn the course material in this class 6.74 6.72 6.7111.I am very interested in the content area of this course 6.63 6.50 6.5012.I think the course material in this class is useful for me to learn 6.85 6.67 6.7913.I like the subject matter of this course 6.63 6.39 6.5414. Understanding the subject matter of this course is very important to me

6.77 6.56 6.54


Item Category Synchronous Asynchronous Mix Approach

Extrinsic 5. Getting a good grade in this class is the most satisfying thing for me right now.

4.89 5.16 5.25

6. The most important thing for me right now is improving my overall grade point average, so my main concern in this class is getting a good grade.

4.11 4.22 4.46

7. If I can, I want to get better grades in this class than most of the other students.

4.92 5.05 5.29

8.I want to do well in this class because it is important to show my ability to family, friends, employer, or others.

5.41 5.39 5.50


Item Category Synchronous

Asynchronous Mix Approach

Self-Regulation

27. During class time I often miss important points because I’m thinking of other things

3.81 3.53 3.71

28. When reading for this course, I make up questions to help focus my reading

4.77 4.39 5.00

29. When I become confused about something I'm reading for this class, I go back and try to figure it out

6.07 6.00 6.04

30. If course materials are difficult to understand, I change the way I read the material

5.3 5.22 5.71

31. Before I study for new course material thoroughly, I often skim it to see how its organized

5.78 5.77 5.96

32. I ask myself questions to make sure I understand the material I have been studying in this class

5.26 5.39 5.54

33. I try to change the way I study in order to fit the course requirements and the instructors teaching style

5.63 5.33 5.88

34. I often find that I have been reading for class but don’t know what it was all about

4.04 4.03 4.33

35. I try to think through a topic and decide what I am supposed to learn from it rather than just reading it over when studying

5.85 5.83 5.96

36. When studying for this course I try to determine which concepts I don’t understand well

5.93 6.00 5.92

37. When I study for this class, I set goals for myself in order to direct my activities in each study period.

5.74 5.42 5.92

38. If I get confused taking notes in this class, I make sure I sort it out afterward.

6.07 5.81 6.04


• Categories• Affective• Interactive• Cohesive

• Overall, students rated social presence for the mixed approach significantly higher compared with asynchronous and synchronous approach.

• Likert Scale – 1-5• The instructor’s presence was rated high in all

three communication modes.

ResultsImpact of various communication tools & methods on

Social Presence

Category Item Scale 1-5

Synchronous(N = 27)

AsynchronousN =29

Mixed (N= 23)

Affective 1. Messages in the unit were impersonal. 3.22 3.34 3.39Interactive 2. The communication used in this unit was an excellent medium for

social interaction.3.66 3.10 4.22

Affective 3. I felt comfortable conversing through this unit's medium 3.88 3.31 4.52Affective 4. I felt comfortable introducing myself in this unit 4.25 3.97 4.61Cohesive 5. The introductions in the unit enabled me to form a sense of online

community.3.53 3.55 4.39

Interactive 6. I felt comfortable participating in the discussions. 3.94 3.90 4.35Cohesive (teacher presence)

7. The instructor(s) created a feeling of a community. 4.06 4.03 4.30

Cohesive (teacher presence)

8. The instructor(s) facilitated discussions in the modules. 4.03 4.07 4.26

Interactive 9. Discussions using the classroom technology tend to be more impersonal than face-to-face discussions.

3.56 3.39 3.70

Affective 10. I felt comfortable interacting with other participants throughout the unit.

3.91 3.76 4.39

Affective 11.I felt that my point of view was acknowledged by other participants throughout the unit.

3.84 3.69 4.30

Interactive 12. I was able to form distinct individual impressions of some course participants

3.87 3.72 4.13

ResultsImpact of various communication tools & methods on

Social Presence

32

Discussion and Conclusion

• Trends in the data – Mixed->Synchronous->Asynchronous for self regulation, motivation, satisfaction, and social presence data

• Overall – mixed methods appears to bring out the advantages of each type while limited the disadvantages associated with them– PBL and instructors role in results

• Importance of social presence regardless of medium of delivery

• Importance of immediate feedback• Importance of the richness of the media in communication• Importance of using variety of tools and techniques

33

References

• Alavi, M., & Leidner, D. E. (2001). Research commentary: Technology-mediated

learning: A call for greater depth and breadth of research. Information Systems

Research, 12(1), 1-10.

• Bakhtin, M. M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, M. Holquist, ed., C.

Emerson and M. Holquist, Trans., University of Texas Press, Austin.

• Chinn, C. A., Anderson, R. C., & Waggoner, M. A. (2001). Patterns of discourse in two

kinds of literature discussion. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 378-411.

• Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T. & Archer, W. (2000). Critical theory in text-based

environment: Computer conferencing in higher education, The Internet and Higher

Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

• Golden, R. (1986). "Representing causal schemata in connectionist systems." In

Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society,

Amherst, MA. pp. 13-22.

• Mehrabian, A. (1971). Silent Messages. Wadsworth, Belmont, California.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/redirect?tag=ericberne-20&path=tg/detail/-/0534000592/qid=1111010364/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1?v=glance&s=books

34

References

• Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of

telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons.

• Skehan, P. & Foster, P. (2001). Cognition and tasks. In Robinson, P. (Ed.) Cognition

and second language instruction. (pp. 183-205) Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Tan, J .K. H., & Benbasat, I. (1990). Processing of graphical information: A

decomposition of taxonomy to match data extraction tasks and graphical

representations. Information Systems Research, 1(4), 416-439.

• Tractinsky, N., & Meyer, N. (1999). Chartjunk or goldgraph? Effects of presentation

objectives and content desirability on information presentation. MIS Quarterly, 23(3),

397-420.

35

Questions?

• Contact Information:

• Ray Pastore: [email protected]• Florence Martin: [email protected]

• Mahnaz Moallem: [email protected]

• Presentation can be found at:

• http://raypastore.com/wordpress/2011/11/aect-virtual-classrooms-presentation

mailto:[email protected]



Documents

The Impact of Various Communication Tools on Interaction in Online Learning: A Comparitive Study Ray Pastore Mahnaz Moallem Florence Martin 1