755ResearchSynthesis

Topic: Fostering Interactions in the Online Environment

 * Summary**: It is no secret that interactions enhance learning. The combination of student-content, student-student, and student-instructor interactions are necessary to engage learners. The research below examines how instructors can be aware of and work to foster further interactions. A common theme from the research below is that there are ways to classify learners' comments in discussion boards. Learners generally make two kinds of comments: content related and social. Both have value in the classroom and the sense that there should be a community of learners. Content related posts can further be broken up into sub-categories that have different implications for interactions. If instructors know what kinds of comments to expect at different stages of the online course and know how to foster those interactions that encourage higher level thinking and meaning making, then students will have an enhanced experience in the online classroom.

Overall, learners value interaction. One of the interesting things that I learned from investigating this topic is that by virtue of the online environment itself, learners are seeking to interact in a digital medium. While this interaction can stop at student-content, it usually doesn't. Learners crave meaningful interactions between themselves and fellow students, as well as instructors. Therefore, instructors should not only offer the opportunity for students to interact, they should also vary the type of assignment that requires interaction and the modality in which the interactions occur. They should also find ways to interact with learners, the most important of which being offering timely and appropriate feedback.

Social interaction is grounded in a constructivist approach to learning in which students collaborate to build or create new things to make sense of prior learning in real-world contexts. Inherent in this theory is the issue of interaction. If instructors know what kinds of interaction signals to look for and how to encourage variations among student interaction, they can help learners become critical thinkers and active participants in the online environment.

1) Anderson, T., Poellhuber, B., & McKerlich, R. (2010). Self Paced Learners Meet Social Software: An Exploration of Learners’ Attitudes, Expectations and Experience. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 13(3). Retrieved from Education Full Text database
 * This article highlights various forms of social tools that can be used in online courses to encourage interaction. Additionally, the study examined whether students perceived these tools as valuable for learning and whether they were interested in using them for interactions. Based on the results of a survey, the study supported the assumptions that men and younger students have more experience with most interactive software tools. Respondents reported that they value working at their own pace but that they also value communication and feedback from others. Therefore, the value of these tools is that they allow learners both of those elements in their online experience. Not surprisingly, the study shows that people who have more experience with social tools are more willing to use and value them in the online environment. Because of the wide ability ranges of students concerning these social tools, the study implies that instructors should not assume that all learners are proficient and offer learner support for the use of these tools as part of the instructional design.

2) Bassani, Patrícia B. Scherer. Interpersonal exchanges in discussion forums: A study of learning communities in distance learning settings. Computers & Education, Volume 56, Number 4 (May 2011), pp. 931-938, []
 * This study begins by providing a comprehensive overview of the study of community and interaction in online learning. The study then focuses on Henri’s model (1992) of interaction in which the student responses are classified as three kinds of statements: implicit, explicit, or independent statements. If instructors know how to classify the kinds of statements students make in discussion forums, they can encourage interaction when and where it is needed; therefore, the objective is to “analyze conversational characteristics which power the processes that involve the creation and maintenance of VLC [virtual learning communities] in formal online learning settings.” The study analyzes these characteristics according to a Piagetian perspective of “cooperative interpersonal exchanges.” This online environment requires a new kind of support for social interaction; knowing how to support positive exchanges, or “conversations,” among students that help lead learners toward meaning is the goal of understanding these relationships. To analyze these relationships, the researchers studied the discussion forums of three classes and analyzed the content of the messages, mapped interactions, and then analyzed the relationships between form of the message and the structure of the interactions. Four kinds of interactions were identified: epistemological (thinking about the content), technological (management of the environment), social (construction of community), and affective (expressing emotions). Not surprisingly, most interactions were epistemological. Subsequent interactions followed different patterns. The interaction mapping revealed that strictly epistemological messages did not foster further interactions, while the combination of epistemological-social or social-affective comments stimulated more engagement. Overall the study indicates that there may be a connection between the type of message and interaction between learners and delineates four indicators that work to further this engagement: quoting another person or person’s ideas in a forum, describing personal or work experiences, posting questions, or posting encouraging messages to others. Therefore, the job of the instructor is to encourage these types of behaviors, and thus foster interaction.

3) Bower, M. and John G. Hedberg . A quantitative multimodal discourse analysis of teaching and learning in a web-conferencing environment – The efficacy of student-centred learning designs. Computers & Education, Volume 54, Number 2 (February 2010), pp. 462-478, []
 * This study investigates how course design influences online collaboration and interaction. The web-based conferencing course that is the focus of this study utilized Activity Theory and multimodal discourse as its approaches to design. This Activity Theory focuses on the relationships among learners in a course. Multimodal discourse technique analyzes the types of interactions among students to make meaning (interpersonal - interaction, ideational - perception, and textual – text creation). Additionally, meaning making can occur through various modalities. Three aspects of the learning design were studied: technology, activity, and task. Students in the study interacted with the content at the beginning of each lesson and then took part in two-hour web-conferences to clarify and investigate the course material further. Not surprisingly, the study showed that the teacher’s primary comments concerned activity, and therefore the teacher played a more directive role in the course. When the teacher’s comments dominated the class less, student interaction increased. The most interactions occurred during student-centered activity design. Overall, the implications of this study are that instructors must incorporate “student-led strategies” if they want to foster more interaction.

4) Chen, F., & Wang, T. (2009). Social conversation and effective discussion in online group learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(5), 587-612. doi: 10.1007/s11423-009-9121-1
 * This study examines both on-task and off-task talk in a high school online course and analyzes its influence on community and learning. In order to determine effectiveness, this study assumes that judges for effectiveness must include both instructors and learners. The researchers suggest that it is not enough for a discussion forum for learners to be provided; scaffolding for effective online communication must be offered as well. In the study, learners were given the option of labeling posts “IP” for “important post” and therefore the thread was labeled “IT” for “important thread.” These labeling techniques offer focusing strategies for learners. Learners also had the ability to re-evaluate the posts they authored, which enhanced students’ meta-cognitive abilities. Overall, the study found that online social talk has value in both the messages that instructors see and those that they may miss. For more reticent participants, social talk provides a way for learners to gain a sense of comfort in online interactions and lead them into more meaningful content-driven interactions.

5) Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating Effective Student Engagement in Online Courses: What Do Students Find Engaging?. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10(2), 1-13. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
 * This article argues that online learning can be as effective as face-to-face learning as long as there is a strong instructor presence and there is a high level of interactivity among learners. The study seeks to determine which kinds of interaction students find the most engaging. The study was conducted at two Midwestern universities and included 186 students taking part in course surveys. The study first focused on active and passive activities to see if there was a difference between student engagement. There was no noticeable difference. Active assignments, however, were valued more when students were asked to interact with the content as well as with other students. Additionally, the study suggests that it is not enough for instructors to create opportunity; they must require interactions. The study also showed that instructors themselves need to find ways to interact with the students in order to establish a strong and effective social presence. Overall, this study indicates that interaction is not so much about the type but the multiple opportunities.

6) Drouin, M., & Vartanian, L. (2010). Students' feelings of and desire for sense of community in face-to-face and online courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(3), 147-59. Retrieved from Education Full Text database
 * This study discusses the concept of “sense of community” (SOC) in online education and focuses on students’ sense of desire for SOC. Previous research concerns students’ perceived SOC, the relationship between SOC and achievement, and characteristics of learners that might determine perceptions of SOC, but very little research examines students’ actual desire for a sense of community. Because so many educators and researchers recommend that interactions be a large part of the online classroom, the researchers felt a need to study two issues: the number of students who desire SOC and what factors contribute to perceptions and desire for more SOC. Several sections of both online classes and face-to-face classes were given an end of course survey to measure learning and connectedness. Overall, the study confirms previous research: Online and FTF students have very different characteristics that contribute to perceptions and desire for a sense of community. Online learners are generally older, more mature, and work a greater number of hours outside school. Online learners feel less of a sense of connectedness but report similar levels of learning. FTF learners desired more SOC than online learners, which makes sense in a course setting that by definition is more social. The study reported some new findings: Few students, both online and FTF, report a desire for SOC (30% and 47%, respectively). Based on previous research, this number is surprisingly low; however, based on the growth of distance education, the results that fewer students desire SOC are not unexpected. The major implication of this study is the idea that instructors need to be cognizant of these different levels of desire: not all students desire a sense of community. Creating instruction with both kinds of student in mind seems the best approach. The study also found that the number of credit hours, hours worked outside school, and more opportunities to communicate with students and the instructor were all factors that contributed to students’ desire for more SOC. It is surprising that the more hours one works, the more desire for SOC one has in the classroom. The limitations of this study include being limited to one subject and one type of learner. Overall, the study here found that few online and FTF psychology students desired a sense of community which is counterintuitive to most previous research.

7) Ferguson, R. R. (2010). Peer interaction: The experience of distance students at university level. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(6), 574-584. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00386.x
 * As the title states, this study examines the experience of interaction in the online environment and examines whether “computer-mediated” two-way asynchronous interaction is the best method for learning course material. More specifically, the affective domain was investigated concerning interaction. Levels of interaction were classified as low to high. Participants in the study were from business and education courses and were interviewed asynchronously about their perceptions of interaction in the courses using 10 questions. While the syllabi from both courses specified the reasons and intentions for computer-mediated interactions, the students specified reasons for communicating that went beyond the intentions of the programs. Education students noted using interaction for avoiding isolation, to make comparisons and connections, and to ask for help. Business students noted reasons including establishing more social relationships with others in the course, as well as building a good academic support network within the course. Negative associations with interactions were reported concerning real-time interactions with peers that learners considered “stranger” and with the idea of comparing one’s progress to other in the course. An interesting implication of the results is that interaction as a means to build a community (sometimes social rather than academic) is a value that instructors often overlook but that is a necessary kind of interaction for some students. Similarly, the study showed a potential for both positive and negative consequences for each kind of interaction. Overall, the study shows that students themselves play a role in creating their own interactions and community based on those interactions in the online environment. Educators must be aware of the positive and negative consequences and perceptions in order to foster effective communication and learning.

8) Fish, W., & Wickersham, L. (2009). Best practices for online instructors: Reminders. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 10(3), 279-284, 319-320. Retrieved from Education Full Text database
 * As its title states, this article reminds online instructors about best practices for the learning environment. The article reminds the instructor to assume the role of facilitator rather than expert and structure the online space as learning-centered, rather than content-centered. When instructors use meaningful interaction opportunities, learners will think more critically about course content. The article also reminds instructors to carefully plan instruction to involve a variety of activities with multiple options for interaction. The article also states that effective learner-instructor interaction will help students feel connected to the course, enhance their comfort in the online environment, and give them an overall sense of satisfaction.

9) Jain, P., Jain, S., & Jain, S. (2011). Interactions among online learners: a quantitative interdisciplinary study. Education (Chula Vista, Calif.), 131(3), 538-44. Retrieved from Education Full Text database
 * This study found that interactions depend on the discipline of an online course. 39 online graduate courses were analyzed from the colleges of business, education, arts and sciences, and health sciences at a university to determine the number of learner-learner interactions. The results show that the health sciences posted the greatest number of learner-learner interaction, followed by education, arts and sciences, and finally business. The implications here are that the discipline of a class determines the number of learner-learner interaction, but further study needs to be conducted to explain those interactions.

10) Maurino, P. S. (Winter 2006). Participation and interaction: F2F vs. online. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 10, 4. p.257(6). Retrieved June 21, 2011, from Expanded Academic ASAP via Gale: []
 * This study compared the face-to-face classroom with the online learning environment and compared student-student interaction levels. It raises the question about whether the online environment can promote effective interaction. The study focused on how interactions compared in these two environments and whether students were satisfied with those interactions. The study was conducted with four business professors at Farmingdale University who taught both face-to-face and online classes. Researchers collected information through class observations, interviews, course evaluations, and online transcripts of discussions. The study supported previous research that states that participation in face-to-face college classes is generally low. Each professor felt that there was more interaction in the online environment and that each student participated, whereas in the face-to-face environment reticent learners could “participate” by coming to class with homework. More students participate more often in the online environment. The advantage to the online environment is that students have time to prepare responses before posting them. The study did show that students were not satisfied with asynchronous interaction and that they requested more opportunities for synchronous and visual interaction. A conclusion from the study is that the typical online learner desires interaction. The implications of this study are that instructors need to seek multiple opportunities for interactions rather than depending solely on discussion threads. Similarly, as part of the learning community, instructors should be willing to interact frequently with students, as these students indicated a desire for more learner-instructor interactions.

11) Murphrey, T. (2010). A case study of eelearning: Using Technology to Create and Facilitate Experiential Learning. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 11(4), 211-221. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
 * This study focused on how interactive technologies enhance the online learning environment. The study focused on three tools: Centra, Camtasia, and SnagIt. Students were required to use these tools to participate in class. Based on survey results, the case study found that using these tools engaged the students with the content. Use of these technologies helped students feel more connected, particularly the use of Centra for synchronous class meetings. Using these highly-interactive technologies is essential for online courses because they allow students to own their ideas and communicate their ideas to others (both instructor and fellow students) clearly. The implications of this case study are that teachers should provide interactive technologies to support the instruction, but also train students to use those technologies – never assume students walk in knowing how to use them.

12) Nuriddin, H. (2011). Building the Right INTERACTION. T+D, 65(3), 32-35. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
 * This article focuses on Moore’s three categories of interaction: learner-content, learner-learner, and learner-instructor and explains what each interaction does and the most appropriate times to utilize each type. Learner-content interaction influences understanding, perspective, and cognitive structures and should be used when learners must be able to perform a skill later by themselves in the real world and/or when learners must first understand content and then act on it/discuss it in a social setting. Learner-learner interaction reinforces understanding of concepts and helps learners construct new meaning from listening to others and should be used when the task is suited to a group environment in which new knowledge will stem from collaboration. Learner-instructor interaction supports and encourages learners and provides learners with formative feedback and should be used when learning requires in-depth discussion and when learners need help developing critical/analytical thinking. Knowing what each interaction does and when it is best to use it helps instructors design instruction more effectively.

13) Petrakou, Alexandra. Interacting through avatars: Virtual worlds as a context for online education. Computers & Education, Volume 54, Number 4 (May 2010), pp. 1020-1027, []
 * This study analyzes interaction through the use of a virtual classroom and instructor avatars. In the virtual environment, three elements are essential: introduction and course launch, interaction in the virtual sessions, and synchronous participation in the virtual world. The use of technologies like Second Life literally provide a new “dimension” to online learning. The advantage to this type of interaction is that there is an actual spatial, visual dimension for learners to interact which enhances those interactions. However, the “world” of Second Life was so new that a lot of student-student collaboration centered on discussions about how to navigate the software. An important finding here concerning interaction in any online environment is that students need time to adjust to the environment before any substantial interaction about the content can occur. Overall, the study showed that the virtual classroom was not adequate by itself and that there was a need for additional informational space. A balance between asynchronous and synchronous communication is important, as relying on only one method is not enough to support learning and interaction on its own.

14) Smyth, R. (2011). Enhancing learner-learner interaction using video communications in higher education: Implications from theorising about a new model. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(1), 113-27. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00990.x
 * This article proposes a model for interaction with three core elements: learners, knowledge, and connectivity. Learners are the focus of the model, and teachers will have to be able to analyze learners to design outcomes that promote understanding of concepts. Knowledge applies to the content to be learned and can be gained through various interactions: learner-content, learner-learner, learner-instructor. Connectivity is the use of technology to support learning (not to define it). Interactions occur at intersections of these elements. The intersection of content and connectivity is the platform where the learning occurs using two-way asychonous instruction. Knowledge is constructed through activities, but learners can either interact or be a spectator. Interaction is supported by technology in this space. At the learner-content intersection, the interaction is only between the learner and content but can be supported by other kinds of interactions. Interaction is affected by the design of instruction since learners are interacting mainly with lessons or modules. In this space, learners interact with the learning environment, and this interaction can also be supported by technology. At the learner-connectivity intersection, the focus is on synchronous interactions between learners and other people or learners and the content. In this model, these intersections overlay each other and the convergence occurs at the “knowledge creation space” where there is the most potential for learning. In this space, learners have the ability to choose their type of interaction and amount of engagement. The more opportunities for learners to engage, interact, and be in control, the more likely it is that they will interact. At this convergence, video communications have the potential to make this online learning more like the face-to-face environment, and according to the authors, more “authentic.” The idea of interaction needs to be embedded in pedagogy in the online environment.

15) Song, L., & McNary, S. (2011). Understanding Students' Online Interaction: Analysis of Discussion Board Postings. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 10(1), p. 1-14. Retrieved from Education Full Text database
 * This study examined the patterns of interactions among students in online classes and the correlations to student performance in the class. The researchers argue that “understanding interaction is important because interaction influences the quality of learning. Additionally, many students judge the effectiveness of online courses by the quality of interactions, and these interactions also impact motivation. For this study, the authors used Soller’s (2001) Collaborative Learning Conversation Skill Taxonomy (CLCST), which classifies comments into three categories: creative conflict, active learning, and conversation. These broad categories are further broken down into subsets of conversational behaviors. Soller’s taxonomy suggests that online discussion is most successful when conversations are “mediated by specific exchanges of conversational acts.” The study involved an online graduate course in which students were required to complete seven modules and post reflections about each. The study found a correlation between the course design and the type of post. The most frequent posts were in the categories of “Inform-Suggest” and “Explain-Clarify.” Additonally, the posts seem to evolve over time. Students began with more conversation and active learning and evolved into creative conflict. Overall, students followed the guidelines of the course, which shows the importance of stating expectations for posts and clarifying the task requirements. The study overall proved that Soller’s method of categorizing conversations was useful, and that being aware of the types of conversations can help instructors code student responses.

16) Strang, Kenneth David. Asynchronous Knowledge Sharing and Conversation Interaction Impact on Grade in an Online Business Course. The Journal of Education for Business, Volume 86, Number 4 (2011), pp. 223-233, []
 * This study coded student conversations/comments and then predicted that students who used varying types of coded comments would have a better course grade. Students participated in four discussion forums: general discussion, research, case studies, and a team project. The researchers hypothesized that the more students participated in both knowledge sharing and conversation within each of these forums the better their grades would be for the course. The study was conducted with 53 students from an online business course; all discussions were asynchronous. Interactions within each forum were analyzed and labeled as “learning utterances” (comments, questions, citations, or reflections), while social “chatter” was ignored. Overall, the hypothesis of the study was supported: comments that include knowledge sharing and conversation theory enhanced academic performance. Particular forums yielded different interaction results with the case study forum totaling the most interaction, followed by research and general discussion. The combination of participation in these three forums worked to predict a higher course grade. Encouraging participation among different forum tasks is a model that can be used to foster interaction.

17) Tremblay, R. (2006). "Best Practices" and Collaborative Software in Online Teaching. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 7(1), 1-5. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
 * This article addresses the fact that though there are many technologies available to instructors to foster online interactions and social construction, there is little training and few published best practices for the use of this social software. This article claims that there are best practices available for the online environment that educators can pair with face-to-face pedagogical practices to enhance online instruction and encourage meaningful interactions. These very basic guidelines apply to asynchronous interaction tools and include encouraging student-instructor interaction, “developing reciprocity” rather than competition among students, “encouraging active learning,” “giving prompt feedback,” “emphasizing time on task” behaviors, “communicating high expectations,” and respecting diversity. The most effective thing that educators can do is to take advantage of the tools available though the online learning systems. Overall, the article calls for further investigation into best practices for creating an effective online environment.

18) van Tryon, P., & Bishop, M. (2009). Theoretical foundations for enhancing social connectedness in online learning environments. Distance Education, 30(3), 291-315. doi: 10.1080/01587910903236312
 * As the title states, this study proposes theoretical frameworks that support interactions. The study begins with an exhaustive review of social cognitive theory and the many models and frameworks that stem from this theory. The study emphasizes the importance of aiding with status assessments of interaction in the absence of body language and communication signals, providing structure to the environment, and offering role differentiation in order for learners to feel comfortable and make the most of their experience to retain information. The study recommends three strategies for enhancing online connectedness, including increasing the number of interactions, offering comprehensive technical support, and offering feedback, follow-up, and pacing by the instructor. Because the online environment is mediated by the computer, these findings indicate that instructors and designers must incorporate more social interactions in this environment opposed to the face-to-face environment if community is to develop.

19) Wang, L. (2010). Integrating Communities of Practice in E-Portfolio Assessment: Effects and Experiences of Mutual Assessment in an Online Course. Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 267-271. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
 * Based on Lave and Wenger’s communities of practice, this study focused on the use of peer assessment and e-portfolios in the online environment. Instead of limiting interaction to the learner and the instructor, this study enabled students to view other students’ portfolios and seek feedback from each other. Compared to a regular e-portfolio class with only learner-instructor interaction, the communities of practice e-portfolio class submitted more revisions to their portfolios, due in part to the requirement that students seek and give feedback. Three themes emerged from this study. First, the use of “communities of practice” enhanced independent learning. Second, responding to others enabled learners to gain meaningful learning experiences. Third, the use of self and peer assessment promoted understanding of the material. Overall the combined practice of using e-portfolios and wedding this to the idea of communities of practice led to better final grades.

20) Yang, Y., Yeh, H., & Wong, W. (2010). The influence of social interaction on meaning construction in a virtual community. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(2), 287-306. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00934.x
 * This study focused on the different roles students can assume in the online learning community to foster meaningful interaction. Students were asked to interact with each other in various roles (writers, editors, and commentators) to help construct and revise various texts. The study examined whether playing different roles fostered more meaningful interactions in the online environment. 46 students in an English as a foreign language class in Taiwan participated in the study. Texts were produced in cycles of writing, editing, evaluating, and rewriting, and students played different roles with each other within those cycles. Interestingly, the study found that social interaction occurred when students were given the freedom to choose the roles that they could assume and found that they were more actively revising drafts when given the opportunity to evaluate feedback and choose to include or ignore it. Therefore “everybody was somebody else’s scaffold” for learning. These active roles strengthened the community. As students received real and sincere feedback from their peers, they were more likely to return real and sincere feedback to others, and as a result, the final products of all students showed a greater proficiency with the language. Allowing students to assume different roles both empowered learners and created a stronger sense of community in the class.