The Interaction Equivalency Theorem_20110805

  • 1,108 views
Uploaded on

 

More in: Design , Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,108
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
3

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. The Interaction Equivalency Theorem: Research Potential and Application in Teaching
    Terumi Miyazoe, PhD
    Tokyo Denki University
    The Open University of Japan
    Terry Anderson, PhD
    Athabasca University
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    1
  • 2. Outline
    Review of the Interaction Equivalency Theorem  
    History of interaction in distance learning
    The Modes of Interaction by Anderson and Garrison (1998) 
    The Interaction Equivalency Theorem by Anderson (2003) 
     
    Research on the Interaction Equivalency Theorem  
    Meta-analysis by Bernard et al. (2010) 
    Empirical application by Miyazoe and Anderson (2010) 
    Discussions
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    2
  • 3. 2010 Publications
    The Interaction Equivalency Theorem
    Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(2), 94- 104, available at http://www.ncolr.org/
    Empirical Research on Learners’ Perceptions: Interaction Equivalency Theorem in Blended Learning
    European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, available at http://www.eurodl.org/
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    3
  • 4. Interaction
    Adefinition:
    “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)
    (At least) two agents
    Reciprocity, mutuality
    Human and nonhuman
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    4
  • 5. Three Types of Interaction (Moore, 1989)
    The first systematic clarification of interaction in distance education having three essential components of:
    learner–content,
    learner–instructor, and
    learner–learner interaction
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    5
  • 6. The Modes of Interaction by Anderson and Garrison (1998)
    6
    The CoI model
    (Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 2000)
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
  • 7. Comparison
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    7
    Multi-agents’ view points, including nonhuman agents
    Others:
    Learner-Interface (Hillman et al, 1994)
    Learner-Environment
    (Burnham and Walden, 1997)
    Vicarious Interaction
    (Sutton, 2000)
    Learner’s view point
  • 8. The Interaction Equivalency Theorem by Anderson (2003)
    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.
    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.
          
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    8
  • 9. Thesis 1 Visualization
    Quality
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    9
  • 10. Thesis 2 Visualization
    Quantity
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    10
  • 11. Closed vs. Open Systems
    Thesis 1: Closed system
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    11
  • 12. Closed vs. Open Systems
    Thesis 2: Open system
    A guest lecturer
    Student forum discussions
    Online resources
    +
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    12
  • 13. Bernard et al.
    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.
    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.
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    13
  • 14. Meta-analysis
    A definition: Used to “summarize, integrate, and interpret selected sets of scholarly works in the various disciplines” (Lipsey & Wilson, 2001, p.2)
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    14
  • 15. Meta-analysis
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    15
  • 21. Bernard et al. (2009)
    Distance education courses
    1985 - 2006
    6,000->77 studies
    Interaction Treatment (IT) ≒Interaction dyad
    Student-Student (SS)
    Student-Content (SC)
    Student-Teacher (ST)
    Thesis 1 (Value/Importance) ≒Quality
    Thesis 2 (Strength/Magnitude) ≒Quantity
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    16
  • 22. Bernard’s Main Findings
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    17
  • 23. Bernard’s Summary
    SS and SC>STfor both achievement and attitude
    Combinations of SS+SC and ST+SCincrease achievement
    Combination of SS+STand attitude items does not increase effectiveness.
    -> Both Theses 1 and 2 are supported.
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    18
  • 24. Doctoral Studies
    Rhode (2008 January): Capella University
    Self-paced online course for adult learners
    ST + SC combination was the most valued
    Equal value for ST and SC, but not SS interaction
    -> Consistent to Bernard’s study
    Byers (2010 November): Virginia Polytechnic Institute and University
    Self-paced online teacher professional development course
    -> Support Thesis 1 (content is valued the most)
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    19
  • 25. The Theorem
    Equivalency Theorem (Anderson, 2003)
    Interaction Equivalency (Rhode, 2008)
    Interaction Equivalency Theorem (Miyazoe and Anderson, 2010)
    Equivalency of Interaction Theorem (Byers, 2010)
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    20
  • 26. Miyazoe and Anderson (2010)
    N = 236 (four universities: 11 classes: four instructors)
    Survey research
    Perceptions about quality learning assurance interaction element
    Quality learning ≒ Deep and meaningful learning experience
    Experienced blended learning
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    21
  • 27. Six Patterns of Priority Order of Interaction Equivalency Theorem
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    22
  • 28. Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    23
    • Learning modes
    • 29. Subject orientations
  • Research Hypotheses
    If Anderson’s theses are valid,
    respondents will value one type of interaction over the others
    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.
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    24
  • 30. Learning Modes
    25
    *TSC: Teacher-Student-Content
    Important
    Unimportant
    CST
    Face-to-face
    Blended
    Online
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
  • 31. Subject Orientations
    26
    Important
    Unimportant
    Skill-oriented
    Knowledge-oriented
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
  • 32. Terumi and Terry’s Findings
    Students could name one interaction that was valued greater than the others.
    Students could rank the order of priority for the three interactions.
    -> Both Theses 1 and 2 are supported.
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    27
  • 33. Presentation Summary
    As regards to Anderson’s Interaction Equivalency Theorem, this presentation:
    clarified its historical position
    articulated its two core theses
    supported its validity.
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    28
  • 34. Discussions
    Learning design
    Exploration of different interaction designs in accordance with specific teaching and learning contexts
    Different disciplinary knowledge may demand different interaction designs for highest effectiveness and efficiency
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    29
  • 35. Further Research
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    30
    Further topics
    Examination of cost and time issues
    Determination of essential parameters
    Meta-analysis since 2006
  • 36. Equivalency Theorem Website
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    31
    URL: equivalencytheorem.info
  • 37. Thank you for your attention!
    Your Comments/Questions Welcomed
    t.miyazoe@mail.dendai.ac.jp
    terrya@athabascau.ca
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    32
  • 38. Works Cited
    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.
    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.
    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.
    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.
    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
    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.
    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.
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    33
  • 39. Works Cited (Cont’d)
    Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta- analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
    Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010a). The interaction equivalency theorem. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 9(2), 94-104, available at http://www.ncolr.org/
    Miyazoe, T., & Anderson, T. (2010b). Empirical research on learners’ perceptions: Interaction Equivalency Theorem in blended learning
    European Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, available at http://www.eurodl.org/
    Moore, M. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1-7.
    Rhode, J. F. (2008). Interaction equivalency in self-paced online learning environments: An exploration of learner preferences. (Doctoral Dissertation; AAT 3291462). Capella University.
    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
    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
    Wagner, E. D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6-26.
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    34
  • 40. Further Research Topic
    Perspective shifting
    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.
    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.
    Distance Teaching & Learning Conference 2011, Madison, Wisconsin
    35