ADTED 531 Unit 8 - Reflections

In lieu of an informal "reflection" for this week, I'd actually like to expand on my review of the article I read for this week's Assignment. It was really fascinating, and I think it deserves a little more than 200 words. Also, I can reflect on it a little more informally as it pertains so well to this week's discussion topic.

Garrison, R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 133-148. Retrieved from: http://inquirygroup.edublogs.org/files/2007/10/cognitivepresence2005.pdf

This study evaluated the depth of the online learning taking place in four distance education courses, by using a questionnaire to measure “the shift in students’ approach to learning from the beginning to the end of the courses.” The idea was to measure how the students were approaching their online learning, so that the authors could suggest methods of training faculty that might make the learning more meaningful.

The researchers administered, via e-mail, a “Study Process Questionnaire” to 75 participants in an online course, both pre- and post- course instruction, so that the change in the data could be compared. The questions on the survey assessed whether the student took a surface, deep, or achievement approach toward their learning in the particular online course in which they were currently enrolled. There were 4 separate online courses in which the survey was administered, each that took a different approach to teaching.

The types of instruction were:

• · Analysis of readings in small groups with very little instructor involvement
• · Analysis of readings individually with very little instructor involvement
• · Analysis of readings in small groups with very active instructor involvement
• · Analysis of readings individually with very active instructor involvement

Thus, the 4 instructional “conditions” covered well the two variables of individual vs. group work, and level of instructor involvement. By comparing the pre- and post- course survey results in each of the 4 courses, the researchers could measure the learning effects achieved by each of 4 types of online instruction.

This article concludes by stating that “Structure and Leadership were found to be crucial for online learners to take a deep and meaningful approach to learning.” The results suggest that the quality of interaction must be a specific design goal of the course, and the level of interaction facilitated by the instructor must be specifically chosen and directed based on the course goals, in order to achieve deeper learning. The level of social presence by the instructor was directly associated with the magnitude of the interaction by students, and in general, the greater the interactions by students, the deeper the levels of learning that were achieved. But, this could also be achieved if the other students had a great level of interaction as well, so the ultimate result of the study can best be summarized by the statement, “Teaching presence must be available, either from the facilitator or the other students, to transition from social to cognitive presence.”

I reviewed this article because I felt that it might contain some clues about how I might add interventions on the Community of Practice in order to make the online learning more effective. The article’s goals of improving online Community learning is based on the premise that, “The purpose of an educational experience, whether it is online, face-to-face, or a blending of both, is to structure the educational experience to achieve defined learning outcomes.” The research is about making the interactions on an online learning experience more systematic and structured so that it can be more effective. Thus, this article doesn’t necessarily help me to assess how effective the learning is, but it will help in the latter part of my research in that it will help me to design interventions to make the online Community learning more systematic and structured, that might improve the learning outcomes.

It’s particularly interesting to me that the social presence required for higher learning was equally attributable to either the instructor OR the other students in the course, but the study notes that to achieve this from other students the course had to be highly structured to elicit that from them. I would agree with this from my experiences in online courses so far, and would also agree with the critical statement that, “without adequate mentoring or facilitation, interaction was mostly an exchange of personal experiences and did not support well-supported reasoning.” The researchers note that, “meaningful engagement does not simply correspond to sending lots of messages… it may mean that the student is engaged vicariously by following the discussion, reflecting on the discourse, and actively constructing meaning individually.” Thus, while the complex concepts of how to best accomplish the learning goals in a course is still a moving target, we can at least conclude that structure and leadership in an online course need to be tailored to the goals of the course in order to really be effective. I think this is an important lesson for all DE students and instructors, inclusive.