Community: Research has found that if teachers and students rely on asynchronous e-learning, students may feel isolated and not part of a community - which is ‘essential for collaboration and learning’ (Hrastinski, 2008). Synchronous e-learning does not suffer from these limitations. As synchronous e-learning more closely resembles face-to-face learning, students feel part of a learning community. Synchronous sessions help e-learners feel like participants rather than isolates:
‘Isolation can be overcome by more continued contact, particularly synchronously, and by becoming aware of themselves as members of a community rather than as isolated individuals communicating with the computer.’ (Hrastinski, 2008)
Supports other types of communication: There are three types of communication which are important for building and sustaining e-learning communities: content related, planning of tasks and social support (Haythornthwaite in Hrastinski, 2008). Both synchronous and asynchronous e-learning provide avenues for content related communication and planning of tasks though synchronous e-learning far surpasses asynchronous e-learning when it comes to social support. Social support is vitally important as it creates an atmosphere of collaborative learning and increases psychological arousal (more on this later).
The importance of social support was evident in an examination of synchronous interactions in military training sessions. Researchers found that the pattern of communication was similar to a corresponding face-to-face course: on task (55%), social (30%), or technology related (15%). ‘The researchers argued that clear patterns of collaborative interaction occurred in a synchronous problem solving context. They also contended that social interactions had a positive impact on the group problem-solving behaviours’ (Park, 2007).
It could be argued that an increase in social communication could have negatives impacts, with participants focusing on quantity rather than quality (outlined in a previous post). To overcome this, Bonk and Reynolds (1997) suggest assigning different roles to each student to keep them on task. Three examples include: a starter who begins the discussion, a wrapper who summarises the discussion, and a debater who offers the pros and cons about the given topic (Park, 1997).
Social support is clearly evident in the group Skype sessions for this subject, particularly at the beginning and end of the session. Questions are asked between participants that are not content related. The benefits of social support in these types of synchronous interactions are immense. One of the key benefits is that there is an increase in psychological arousal (motivation) amongst participants.
Psychological arousal: Th
e ability to communicate in real-time, get immediate responses and, in some cases, observe facial expressions and body language (through video conferencing) contributes to psychological arousal. In asynchronous interactions however, these elements are suppressed and can lead to disengagement and a decrease in psychological arousal (Hrastinski, 2008).Research has shed some light on the influence of the ‘psychological elements’ on e-learning students’ learning and motivation. Psychological arousal, as a result of social support, not only enhances the cognitive learning, but also creates a social climate which increases interactivity among participants (Park, 2007). The interactivity between participants is a key element of synchronous e-learning. Participants know they will get an immediate reposnse so they are more motivated to send and read messages. Learners respond quickly so as not to disrupt the conversation. Hrastinski argues that learners do this because they are more psychologically aroused.
In my last post I will summarise the main ideas of my side of the discussion.
Hi Micah and Stephen,
ReplyDeleteMany thanks, I have really enjoyed reading your blog, the posts have been rich, thoughtful and full of interesting observations. I have found myself coming back to re-read various segments and re-think my assumptions.
The idea of community is so central to the web 2.0 world, do you feel the notion of community has evolved or is still being re-defined for e-learning?
I'm interested in how much of these issues have converged in recent times with the idea of blended learning balancing the best aspects of sync and async. I'd be keen to hear your views on the use of a blended learning approach in learning design?
Jane -- thanks for your kind words and the contributions you have made to extend our own thinking and assumptions.
ReplyDeleteA brief response to your questions:
I think the notion of community is one that will always be dynamic, contested and particular. That is, notions of community will change, be challenged, and be culturally constructed and construed. So, I think that in the web 2.0 world and beyond, it will be defined, re-defined and re-defined.
The blended learning question is an interesting one. Of course, all I can really share is my embryonic and fallible reflections!
Learning styles (or MIs) have been a rather popular consideration amongst educators over the past 20-odd years. In our excitement to enhance the learning experience for all students, we have sought to design learning activities in, say, maths, which involved dance. I personally think this is, despite some genuinely positive outcomes, largely a waste of time. Instead, I think we need to see that maths is, by its very nature, going to develop students' ability in logical reasoning. I actually think students learn more effectively when we try to develop this "intelligence" well in the maths classroom and leave verbal-linguistic skills to the humanities.
What's this got to do with blended learning? Well, I think that students actually prefer - overall - to be able to focus on one type of learning/skill. Obviously there will be much debate about this. In a small research study into the value of blended learning, Parker and Martin (2010) found that 'Students in the fully online course rated the virtual classroom features and characteristics higher than students in the blended course.'
I heard Barry McGaw speak last year about a research study suggesting that even very competent and educated adults were largely unable to transfer what are really rather generic skills across disciplines.
I think that we should use face-to-face and online learning in our schools/tertiary institutions. I think we should use synchronous and asynchronous e-learning. BUT, I think that students prefer, and learn more effectively, when courses focus primarily on one of these things. So, just as the answer to mulitiple intelligence theory is to ensure that we teach subjects across the intelligences rather than try to cater for each intelligence in each class, I think we need to provide varied learning environments for different classes, rather than within the same class.