Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
The Interaction Equivalency Theorem: Research Potential and Application in Teaching<br />Terumi Miyazoe, PhD<br />Tokyo De...
Outline<br />Review of the Interaction Equivalency Theorem  <br />History of interaction in distance learning<br />The Mod...
2010 Publications<br />The Interaction Equivalency Theorem<br />Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(2), 94- 104, ava...
Interaction<br />Adefinition: <br />“reciprocal events that require at least two objects and two actions. Interactions occ...
Three Types of Interaction (Moore, 1989)<br />The first systematic clarification of interaction in distance education havi...
The Modes of Interaction by Anderson and Garrison (1998)<br />6<br />The CoI model<br />(Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 200...
Comparison<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />7<br />Multi-agents’ view points, i...
The Interaction Equivalency Theorem by Anderson (2003)<br />Thesis 1. Deep and meaningful formal learning is supported as ...
Thesis 1 Visualization<br />Quality<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />9<br />
Thesis 2 Visualization<br />Quantity<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />10<br />
Closed vs. Open Systems<br />Thesis 1: Closed system<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin...
Closed vs. Open Systems<br />Thesis 2: Open system<br />A guest lecturer <br />Student forum discussions<br />Online resou...
Bernard et al. <br />Bernard, M. R., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E...
Meta-analysis<br />A definition: Used to “summarize, integrate, and interpret selected sets of scholarly works in the vari...
Meta-analysis<br /><ul><li>Empirical research
Quantitative findings
Comparability
Coding
Comparison groups
Effect size</li></ul>Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />15<br />
Bernard et al. (2009)<br />Distance education courses<br />1985 - 2006 <br />6,000->77 studies <br />Interaction Treatment...
Bernard’s Main Findings <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />17<br />
Bernard’s Summary<br />SS and SC>STfor both achievement and attitude <br />Combinations of SS+SC and ST+SCincrease achieve...
Doctoral Studies<br />Rhode (2008 January): Capella University<br />Self-paced online course for adult learners<br />ST + ...
The Theorem<br />Equivalency Theorem (Anderson, 2003)<br />Interaction Equivalency (Rhode, 2008)<br />Interaction Equivale...
Miyazoe and Anderson (2010)<br />N = 236 (four universities: 11 classes: four instructors)<br />Survey research<br />Perce...
Six Patterns of Priority Order of Interaction Equivalency Theorem<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madis...
Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />23<br /><ul><li>Learning modes
Subject orientations</li></li></ul><li>Research Hypotheses<br />If Anderson’s theses are valid,  <br />respondents will va...
     Learning Modes <br />25<br />*TSC: Teacher-Student-Content<br />Important<br />Unimportant<br />CST<br />Face-to-face...
Subject Orientations <br />26<br />Important<br />Unimportant<br />Skill-oriented<br />Knowledge-oriented<br />Distance Te...
Terumi and Terry’s Findings<br />Students could name one interaction that was valued greater than the others.<br />Student...
Presentation Summary<br />As regards to Anderson’s Interaction Equivalency Theorem, this presentation:  <br />clarified it...
Discussions <br />Learning design<br />Exploration of different interaction designs in accordance with specific teaching a...
Further Research<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />30<br />Further topics<br />E...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

The Interaction Equivalency Theorem_20110805

1,316

Published on

Published in: Design, Education
0 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,316
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "The Interaction Equivalency Theorem_20110805"

  1. 1. The Interaction Equivalency Theorem: Research Potential and Application in Teaching<br />Terumi Miyazoe, PhD<br />Tokyo Denki University<br />The Open University of Japan<br />Terry Anderson, PhD<br />Athabasca University<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />1<br />
  2. 2. Outline<br />Review of the Interaction Equivalency Theorem  <br />History of interaction in distance learning<br />The Modes of Interaction by Anderson and Garrison (1998) <br />The Interaction Equivalency Theorem by Anderson (2003) <br /> <br />Research on the Interaction Equivalency Theorem  <br />Meta-analysis by Bernard et al. (2010) <br />Empirical application by Miyazoe and Anderson (2010) <br />Discussions<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />2<br />
  3. 3. 2010 Publications<br />The Interaction Equivalency Theorem<br />Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(2), 94- 104, available at http://www.ncolr.org/<br />Empirical Research on Learners’ Perceptions: Interaction Equivalency Theorem in Blended Learning<br />European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, available at http://www.eurodl.org/<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />3<br />
  4. 4. Interaction<br />Adefinition: <br />“reciprocal events that require at least two objects and two actions. Interactions occur when these objects and events mutually influence each other” (Wagner, 1994, p.8)<br />(At least) two agents<br />Reciprocity, mutuality <br />Human and nonhuman<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />4<br />
  5. 5. Three Types of Interaction (Moore, 1989)<br />The first systematic clarification of interaction in distance education having three essential components of: <br />learner–content, <br />learner–instructor, and<br />learner–learner interaction<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />5<br />
  6. 6. The Modes of Interaction by Anderson and Garrison (1998)<br />6<br />The CoI model<br />(Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000)<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />
  7. 7. Comparison<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />7<br />Multi-agents’ view points, including nonhuman agents<br />Others:<br />Learner-Interface (Hillman et al, 1994)<br />Learner-Environment<br />(Burnham and Walden, 1997)<br />Vicarious Interaction<br />(Sutton, 2000)<br />Learner’s view point<br />
  8. 8. The Interaction Equivalency Theorem by Anderson (2003)<br />Thesis 1. Deep and meaningful formal learning is supported as long as one of the three forms of interaction (student–teacher; student–student; student–content) is at a high level. The other two may be offered at minimal levels, or even eliminated, without degrading the educational experience.<br />Thesis 2. High levels of more than one of these three modes will likely provide a more satisfying educational experience, although these experiences may not be as cost- or time effective as less interactive learning sequences.<br />      <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />8<br />
  9. 9. Thesis 1 Visualization<br />Quality<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />9<br />
  10. 10. Thesis 2 Visualization<br />Quantity<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />10<br />
  11. 11. Closed vs. Open Systems<br />Thesis 1: Closed system<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />11<br />
  12. 12. Closed vs. Open Systems<br />Thesis 2: Open system<br />A guest lecturer <br />Student forum discussions<br />Online resources<br />+<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />12<br />
  13. 13. Bernard et al. <br />Bernard, M. R., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243-1289. <br />Bernard, M. R., Abrami, P. C., Lou, Y., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Wozney, L., et al. (2004). How does distance education compare with classroom instruction? A meta-analysis of the empirical literature. Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 379-439. <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />13<br />
  14. 14. Meta-analysis<br />A definition: Used to “summarize, integrate, and interpret selected sets of scholarly works in the various disciplines” (Lipsey & Wilson, 2001, p.2)<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />14<br />
  15. 15. Meta-analysis<br /><ul><li>Empirical research
  16. 16. Quantitative findings
  17. 17. Comparability
  18. 18. Coding
  19. 19. Comparison groups
  20. 20. Effect size</li></ul>Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />15<br />
  21. 21. Bernard et al. (2009)<br />Distance education courses<br />1985 - 2006 <br />6,000->77 studies <br />Interaction Treatment (IT) ≒Interaction dyad<br />Student-Student (SS)<br />Student-Content (SC)<br />Student-Teacher (ST)<br />Thesis 1 (Value/Importance) ≒Quality<br />Thesis 2 (Strength/Magnitude) ≒Quantity<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />16<br />
  22. 22. Bernard’s Main Findings <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />17<br />
  23. 23. Bernard’s Summary<br />SS and SC>STfor both achievement and attitude <br />Combinations of SS+SC and ST+SCincrease achievement<br />Combination of SS+STand attitude items does not increase effectiveness. <br />-> Both Theses 1 and 2 are supported. <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />18<br />
  24. 24. Doctoral Studies<br />Rhode (2008 January): Capella University<br />Self-paced online course for adult learners<br />ST + SC combination was the most valued<br />Equal value for ST and SC, but not SS interaction<br /> -> Consistent to Bernard’s study<br />Byers (2010 November): Virginia Polytechnic Institute and University<br />Self-paced online teacher professional development course<br />-> Support Thesis 1 (content is valued the most)<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />19<br />
  25. 25. The Theorem<br />Equivalency Theorem (Anderson, 2003)<br />Interaction Equivalency (Rhode, 2008)<br />Interaction Equivalency Theorem (Miyazoe and Anderson, 2010)<br />Equivalency of Interaction Theorem (Byers, 2010)<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />20<br />
  26. 26. Miyazoe and Anderson (2010)<br />N = 236 (four universities: 11 classes: four instructors)<br />Survey research<br />Perceptions about quality learning assurance interaction element <br />Quality learning ≒ Deep and meaningful learning experience<br />Experienced blended learning<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />21<br />
  27. 27. Six Patterns of Priority Order of Interaction Equivalency Theorem<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />22<br />
  28. 28. Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />23<br /><ul><li>Learning modes
  29. 29. Subject orientations</li></li></ul><li>Research Hypotheses<br />If Anderson’s theses are valid, <br />respondents will value one type of interaction over the others<br />they could rank the three interaction elements, having one to be the most valued than the other two and the second to be more valued than the third. <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />24<br />
  30. 30. Learning Modes <br />25<br />*TSC: Teacher-Student-Content<br />Important<br />Unimportant<br />CST<br />Face-to-face<br />Blended<br />Online<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />
  31. 31. Subject Orientations <br />26<br />Important<br />Unimportant<br />Skill-oriented<br />Knowledge-oriented<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />
  32. 32. Terumi and Terry’s Findings<br />Students could name one interaction that was valued greater than the others.<br />Students could rank the order of priority for the three interactions. <br />-> Both Theses 1 and 2 are supported. <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />27<br />
  33. 33. Presentation Summary<br />As regards to Anderson’s Interaction Equivalency Theorem, this presentation: <br />clarified its historical position<br />articulated its two core theses<br />supported its validity. <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />28<br />
  34. 34. Discussions <br />Learning design<br />Exploration of different interaction designs in accordance with specific teaching and learning contexts<br />Different disciplinary knowledge may demand different interaction designs for highest effectiveness and efficiency<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />29<br />
  35. 35. Further Research<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />30<br />Further topics<br />Examination of cost and time issues<br />Determination of essential parameters<br />Meta-analysis since 2006<br />
  36. 36. Equivalency Theorem Website<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />31<br />URL: equivalencytheorem.info<br />
  37. 37. Thank you for your attention!<br />Your Comments/Questions Welcomed<br />t.miyazoe@mail.dendai.ac.jp<br />terrya@athabascau.ca<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />32<br />
  38. 38. Works Cited<br />Anderson, T. (2003). Modes of interaction in distance education: Recent developments and research questions. In M. G. Moore, & W. G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 129-144). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. <br />Anderson, T., & Garrison, R. (1998). Learning in a networked world: New roles and responsibilities. In C. Gibson (Ed.), Distance learners in higher education (pp. 97-112). Madison, WI: Atwood Publishing. <br />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), from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/149/230. <br />Bernard, M. R., Abrami, P. C., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R. M., Surkes, M. A., & Bethel, E. C. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79(3), 1243-1289. <br />Burnham, B. R., and Walden, B. (1997). Interactions in Distance Education: A report from the other side. Paper presented at the 1997 Adult Education Research Conference. Stillwater, Oklahoma. Retrieved May 30, 2004, from: http://www.edst.educ.ubc.ca/aerc/1997/97burnham.html<br />Byers, A. S. (2010). Examining learner-content interaction importance and efficacy in online, self-directed electronic professional development in science for elementary educators in grades three – six. (Doctoral Dissertation). The Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Virginia, US. <br />Hillman, D., D. Willis, and C. N. Gunawardena. 1994. Learner-interface interaction in distance education: An extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American Journal of Distance Education 8 (2): 30-42.<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />33<br />
  39. 39. Works Cited (Cont’d)<br />Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta- analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. <br />Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010a). The interaction equivalency theorem. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(2), 94-104, available at http://www.ncolr.org/<br />Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010b). Empirical research on learners’ perceptions: Interaction Equivalency Theorem in blended learning<br />European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, available at http://www.eurodl.org/<br />Moore, M. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7. <br />Rhode, J. F. (2008). Interaction equivalency in self-paced online learning environments: An exploration of learner preferences. (Doctoral Dissertation; AAT 3291462). Capella University. <br />Rhode, J. F. (2009). Interaction equivalency in self-paced online learning environments: An exploration of learner preferences. Interactional Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 10(1), from http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/603/1178 <br />Sutton, L. (2000). Vicarious interaction: A learning theory for computer-mediated communications. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (New Orleans, LA, April 24-28, 2000). ERIC Document No. 441 817<br />Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-26.<br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />34<br />
  40. 40. Further Research Topic<br />Perspective shifting<br />Thesis 3: Deep and meaningful formal teaching is supported as long as one of the three forms of interaction (teacher–student; teacher–content; teacher–teacher) is at a high level. The other two may be offered at minimal levels, or even eliminated, without degrading the educational experience.<br />Thesis 4: Deep and meaningful formal teaching and learning are supported as long as one of the three forms of interaction (content–student; content–teacher; content–content) is at a high level. The other two may be offered at minimal levels, or even eliminated, without degrading the educational experience. <br />Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin <br />35<br />

×