You are here:

Interaction Equivalency in Self-Paced Online Learning Environments: An Exploration of Learner Preferences
ARTICLE

, Northern Illinois University

IRRODL Volume 10, Number 1, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press

Full Text

Abstract

This mixed methods study explored the dynamics of interaction within a self-paced online learning environment. It used rich media and a mix of traditional and emerging asynchronous computer-mediated communication tools to determine what forms of interaction learners in a self-paced online course value most and what impact they perceive interaction to have on their overall learning experience. This study demonstrated that depending on the specific circumstance, not all forms of interaction may be either equally valued by learners or effective. Participants differentiated among the various learning interactions available and indicated that informal interactions were as important as formal interactions in determining the quality of the online learning experience. Participants also reported the activity of blogging as being equally valued and in some ways superior to instructor-directed asynchronous discussion via the discussion board in a learning management system.

Citation

Rhode, J. (2009). Interaction Equivalency in Self-Paced Online Learning Environments: An Exploration of Learner Preferences. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 10(1),. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved May 28, 2023 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Abdulla, A.G. (2006). Distance learning students' perceptions of the online instructor roles and competencies. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(07), 2409. (UMI No. 3137394)
  2. Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4 (2). Retrieved July 8, 2006, from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230
  3. Anderson, T., & Dron, J. (2007). Groups, networks and collectives in social software for elearning, 2007 European Conference on E-Learning. Copenhagen, Denmark.
  4. Beldarrain, Y. (2006). Distance education trends: Integrating new technologies to foster student interaction and collaboration. Distance Education, 27(2), 139-153.
  5. Berge, Z.L. (1999). Interaction in post-secondary web-based learning. Educational Technology, 39(1), 5-11.
  6. Bibeau, S. (2001). Social presence, isolation, and connectedness in online teaching and learning: From the literature to real life. Journal of Instructional Delivery Systems, 15(3), 35-39.
  7. Brown, M., & Long, P.D. (2006). Trends in learning space design. In D.G. Oblinger (Ed.), Learning spaces: Educause.
  8. Brown, R.E. (2001). The process of community-building in distance learning classes. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), 18-35.
  9. Brown, S.W., & King, F.B. (2000). Constructivist pedagogy and how we learn: Educational psychology meets international studies. International Studies Perspectives, 1(3), 245-255.
  10. Chen, W., & Bonk, C. (2008). The use of weblogs in learning and assessment in Chinese higher education: Possibilities and potential problems. International Journal on E-Learning, 7(1), 41-65.
  11. Clark, R.E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21-29.
  12. Dalsgaard, C. (2006). Social software: E-learning beyond learning management systems. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 2006 (2). Retrieved September 26,
  13. Dron, J. (2006). Social software and the emergence of control, The 6th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. Kerkrade, The Netherlands.
  14. Ellis, R.A., Jarkey, N., Mahony, M.J., Peat, M., & Sheely, S. (2007). Managing quality improvement of eLearning in a large, campus-based university. Quality Assurance in Education, 15(1), 9-23.
  15. Ellison, N., & Wu, Y. (2008). Blogging in the classroom: A preliminary exploration of student attitudes and impact on comprehension. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17(1), 99-122.
  16. Fink, A., & Kosecoff, J. (1998). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  17. Flottemesch, K. (2000). Building effective interaction in distance education: A review of the literature. Educational Technology, 40(3), 46-51.
  18. Gallien, T., & Early, J.O. (2008). Personalized versus collective instructor feedback in the online courseroom: Does type of feedback affect student satisfaction, academic performance and perceived connectedness with the instructor? International Journal on E-Learning, 7(3), 463-476.
  19. Garrison, D.R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: The role of reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. In J. Bourne & J.C. Moore (Eds.), Elements of quality online education: Practice and direction. Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium.
  20. Garrison, D.R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London: Routledge Falmer.
  21. Garrison, D.R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148.
  22. Greene, H.C. (2005). Creating connections: A pilot study of an online community of learners. Journal of Online Interactive Learning, 3 (3). Retrieved September 2, 2006, from
  23. Hodge, E., Bossé, M.J., Foulconer, J., & Fewell, M. (2006). Mimicking proximity: The role of distance education informing communities of learning. International Journal of Instructional Technology& Distance Learning, 3 (12). Retrieved January 14, 2007, from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Dec_06/article01.htm
  24. Howland, J.L., & Moore, J.L. (2002). Student perceptions as distance learners in internet-based courses. Distance Education, 23(2), 183-195.
  25. Jonassen, D.H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C.M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 115-140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  26. Jung, I., Choi, S., Lim, C., & Leem, J. (2002). Effects of different types of interaction on learning achievement, satisfaction and participation in web-based instruction. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 39(2), 153-162.
  27. Juwah, C. (2006). Introduction. In C. Juwah (Ed.), Interactions in online education: Implications for theory and practice (pp. 1-5). New York: Routledge.
  28. Kahn, B.H. (2007). Flexible learning in an information society. Hershey, PA: Information Science Publishing.
  29. Kays, E., & Sims, R. (2006). Reinventing and reinvigorating instructional design: A theory for emergent learning. In L. Markauskaite, P. Goodyear& P. Reimann (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd annual conference of the Australasian society for computers in learning in tertiary education: Who's Learning? Whose Technology? (pp. 409-412). Sydney: Sydney
  30. Kozma, R.B. (1994). A reply: Media and methods. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(3), 11-14.
  31. Lee, J., Carter-Wells, J., Glaeser, B., Ivers, K., & Street, C. (2006). Facilitating the development of a learning community in an online graduate program. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(1), 13-33.
  32. Lee, M.J.W., & McLoughlin, C. (2007). Teaching and learning in the Web 2.0 era: Empowering students through learner-generated content. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 4(10), 21-34.
  33. Mann, S.J. (2005). Alienation in the learning environment: A failure of community? Studies in Higher Education, 30(1), 43-55.
  34. Maor, D. (2003). The teacher's role in developing interaction and reflection in an online learning community. Educational Media International, 40(1/2), 127-138.
  35. Mayes, T. (2006). Theoretical perspectives on interactivity in e-learning. In C. Juwah (Ed.), Interactions in online education: Implications for theory and practice (pp. 9-26). New
  36. McMillan, J.H., & Schumacher, S. (2006). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry (6th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
  37. Mezirow, J. (1997). Cognitive processes: Contemporary paradigms of learning. In P. Sutherland (Ed.), Adult learning: A reader. Sterling, VA: Kogan Page.
  38. Namwar, Y., & Rastgoo, A. (2008). Weblog as a learning tool in higher education. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 9 (3). Retrieved December 29, 2008, from http://tojde.anadolu.edu.tr/tojde31/articles/article_15.htm
  39. Nicol, D.J., Minty, I., & Sinclair, C. (2003). The social dimensions of online learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 40(3), 270-281.
  40. Ouzts, K. (2006). Sense of community in online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(3), 285-296.
  41. Pawan, F., Paulus, T.M., Yalcin, S., & Chang, C. (2003). Online learning: Patterns of engagement and interactions among in-service teachers. Language Learning& Technology, 7(3), 119-140.
  42. Perry, B., & Edwards, M. (2005). Exemplary online educators: Creating a community of inquiry. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 6(2).
  43. Picciano, A.G. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 2140.
  44. Ravenscroft, A., & McAlister, S. (2006). Designing interaction as a dialogue game: Linking social and conceptual dimensions of the learning process. In C. Juwah (Ed.), Interactions in online education: Implications for theory and practice (pp. 75-90). New York:
  45. Rovai, A.P. (2002). Building a sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1).
  46. Rovai, A.P., & Barnum, K.T. (2003). On-line course effectiveness: An analysis of student interactions and perceptions of learning. Journal of Distance Education, 18 (1). Retrieved March 17, 2007, from http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol18.1/rovai.pdf
  47. Russo, T.C., & Benson, S. (2005). Learning with invisible others: Perceptions of online presence and their relationship to cognitive and affective learning. Educational Technology& Society, 8(1), 54-62.
  48. Sherry, L. (1996). Issues in distance learning. International Journal of Educational Telecomunications, 1 (4), 337-365. Retrieved July 3, 2007, from http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~lsherry/pubs/issues.html
  49. Smith, G.G., Torres-Ayala, A.T., & Heindel, A.J. (2008). Disciplinary differences in e-learning instructional design: The case of mathematics. Journal of Distance Education, 22 (3), 6388.
  50. Strachota, E.M. (2003). Student satisfaction in online courses: An analysis of the impact of learner-content, learner-instructor, learner-learner and learner-teacher interaction. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(08), 2746. (UMI No. 3100902)
  51. Su, B. (2006). Experiences of and preferences for interactive instructional activities in online learning environment. Dissertation Abstracts International, 67(04), (UMI No. 3215221)
  52. Swan, K. (2002). Building learning communities in online courses: The importance of interaction. Education, Communication& Leadership, 2(1), 23-49.
  53. Swan, K., & Shih, L.-F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115-136.
  54. Taylor, J.C. (2001, April). Fifth generation distance education. Keynote presentation at the 20th ICDE World Conference, Düsseldorf, Germany.
  55. Twigg, C.A. (2003). Improving Learning and reducing costs: New models for online learning. Educause Review, 38(5), 28-38.
  56. Wanstreet, C.E. (2006). Interaction in online learning environments. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(4), 399-411.
  57. Wiley, D. (2006). Scalability and sociability in online learning environments. In H.F.O'Neil& R.S. Perez (Eds.), Web-based learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 295-306).
  58. Yang, Y., & Cornelious, L.F. (2005). Preparing instructors for quality online instruction. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 8 (1). Retrieved October 13, 2005, from http://www.westga.edu/%7Edistance/ojdla/spring81/yang81.htm

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Links

Also Read

Related Collections