The Reality of Web-Based Interaction in a Distance Education Course A Case Study from Egypt Alaa M. Sadik Ph.D., University of Hull, UK Lecturer in Educational Technology Faculty of Education, South Valley University, Qena 11183, Egypt E-mail: AlaaSadik@hotmail.com http://www.freewebs.com/alaasadik

Background The importance of interaction in distance education Types of interaction Asynchronous interaction Synchronous interaction Web-based interaction Wires Calss: A Web-based learning environment

Background

The importance of interaction in distance education

Types of interaction

Asynchronous interaction

Synchronous interaction

Web-based interaction

Wires Calss: A Web-based learning environment

Wired Calss A Web based learning environment

Wired Calss A Web based learning environment

Background Participants Egyptian first-grade secondary school students (language schools, 15-16 years). n = 32 students

Background

Participants

Egyptian first-grade secondary school students (language schools, 15-16 years).

n = 32 students

Background Instruction and teaching/learning approach The learning subject is mathematics. Constructivist theory seems to be the most suitable approach to design instruction for the Web ( active participation + social interaction ).

Background

Instruction and teaching/learning approach

The learning subject is mathematics.

Constructivist theory seems to be the most suitable approach to design instruction for the Web

( active participation + social interaction ).

Teaching/learning approach

Background Components of the learning environment * Tutorials and assessment elements * Instructional support utilities * Interaction tools * Management and monitoring tools * Help and support topics

Background

Components of the learning environment

* Tutorials and assessment elements

* Instructional support utilities

* Interaction tools

* Management and monitoring tools

* Help and support topics

Background Instruments and method * On-line questionnaires * Interviews * Students’ on-line logs and portfolios * Discussion content analysis

Background

Instruments and method

* On-line questionnaires

* Interviews

* Students’ on-line logs and portfolios

* Discussion content analysis

Discussion content analysis

Discussion content analysis

Results of quantitative analysis Ease of interaction with the tutor and peers * Students found e-mail a useful and quick method of interaction with the tutor. * Students didn’t find e-mail a useful and quick method of interaction with the classmates.

Results of quantitative analysis

Ease of interaction with the tutor and peers

* Students found e-mail a useful and quick method of interaction with the tutor.

* Students didn’t find e-mail a useful and quick method of interaction with the classmates.

Results of quantitative analysis Ease of interaction with the tutor and peers. * Students’ found discussion boards more suitable than e-mail to access and interact with peers. * Students preferred to read and reply to classmates’ messages via discussion boards that focus on well-selected and course-related topics .

Results of quantitative analysis

Ease of interaction with the tutor and peers.

* Students’ found discussion boards more suitable than e-mail to access and interact with peers.

* Students preferred to read and reply to classmates’ messages via discussion boards that focus on well-selected and course-related topics .

Results of quantitative analysis Ease of interaction with the tutor and peers * Asynchronous rather than synchronous activities would be more appropriate and suitable for students, particularly non-native speakers. * Chat is not easy to use in formal learning sessions since it requires prior arrangements using other channel, such as e-mail, logging-in to at a specific time, good typing skills...

Results of quantitative analysis

Ease of interaction with the tutor and peers

* Asynchronous rather than synchronous activities would be more appropriate and suitable for students, particularly non-native speakers.

* Chat is not easy to use in formal learning sessions since it requires prior arrangements using other channel, such as e-mail, logging-in to at a specific time, good typing skills...

Results of quantitative analysis The overall average number of messages sent by students * The average number of messages posted to discussion boards was less than anticipated. * Students’ believed that participation in discussions was not as important as achieving other conventional tasks.

Results of quantitative analysis

The overall average number of messages sent by students

* The average number of messages posted to discussion boards was less than anticipated.

* Students’ believed that participation in discussions was not as important as achieving other conventional tasks.

Results of quantitative analysis The average number of messages sent to every single discussion topic * The number of messages varied between 6 and 16 messages ( n =32) and the number of students who participated was, at most, only 50% of students.

Results of quantitative analysis

The average number of messages sent to every single discussion topic

* The number of messages varied between 6 and 16 messages ( n =32) and the number of students who participated was, at most, only 50% of students.

Results of quantitative analysis The difference in the level of participation in discussion boards between earlier and later lessons * The level of participation in discussions varied greatly from the first module to the second module and from the earlier lessons to the later lessons.

Results of quantitative analysis

The difference in the level of participation in discussion boards between earlier and later lessons

* The level of participation in discussions varied greatly from the first module to the second module and from the earlier lessons to the later lessons.

Results of quantitative analysis The relationship between students’ level of participation and tutor’s participation in discussions * The more participation from the tutor, the more messages were posted by students. * The non-appearance of the tutor was interpreted as a non-involvement, rather than giving them the chance to negotiate meaning themselves.

Results of quantitative analysis

The relationship between students’ level of participation and tutor’s participation in discussions

* The more participation from the tutor, the more messages were posted by students.

* The non-appearance of the tutor was interpreted as a non-involvement, rather than giving them the chance to negotiate meaning themselves.

Results of quantitative analysis Time of access * The majority of students (85%) respond to discussions in the last 10 minutes of the learning sessions. * About 50% of students responded in the last 1-3 minutes.

Results of quantitative analysis

Time of access

* The majority of students (85%) respond to discussions in the last 10 minutes of the learning sessions.

* About 50% of students responded in the last 1-3 minutes.

Results of qualitative analysis Students’ interactive responses Self-introduction 23.81% Statements that comment on another message 19.05% Repeating information in another message 35.71% Responding to the tutor’s views or advice 7.14% Accept/reject others’ views without explanation 2.38% Accept/reject others’ views with more explanation 11.90%

Results of qualitative analysis

Students’ interactive responses

Self-introduction 23.81%

Statements that comment on another message 19.05%

Repeating information in another message 35.71%

Responding to the tutor’s views or advice 7.14%

Accept/reject others’ views without explanation 2.38%

Accept/reject others’ views with more explanation 11.90%

Results of qualitative analysis Students’ cognitive and content-related responses Solution without explanation 71.35% Solution accompanied with explanation 12.36% Alternative solution .56% Question directly related to the discussion topic 1.12% Judging the relevance of solution 5.06% Conclusion 1.12%

Results of qualitative analysis

Students’ cognitive and content-related responses

Solution without explanation 71.35%

Solution accompanied with explanation 12.36%

Alternative solution .56%

Question directly related to the discussion topic 1.12%

Judging the relevance of solution 5.06%

Conclusion 1.12%

Results of qualitative analysis A large proportion of students quoted or adapted what others said in their messages, instead of using their own points of view or expressions. Students’ responded in brief statements without showing the cause and effect of the relationship when discussion topics presented easy and direct questions.

A large proportion of students quoted or adapted what others said in their messages, instead of using their own points of view or expressions.

Students’ responded in brief statements without showing the cause and effect of the relationship when discussion topics presented easy and direct questions.

Results of qualitative analysis Cognitive and content related statements accounted for more than 80% of the overall number of statements posted by students. Students did not use statements that were social in nature or try to build a sense of community through discussions.

Cognitive and content related statements accounted for more than 80% of the overall number of statements posted by students.

Students did not use statements that were social in nature or try to build a sense of community through discussions.

Results of qualitative analysis The majority of students did not understand the actual purpose of on-line discussions, and responded to discussion questions as they would respond to conventional textbook exercises. In high-level discussions which addressed more controversial problems requiring relatively high-level thinking and intellectual skills, students posted more alternative points of view and detailed responses with relatively more peer interaction.

The majority of students did not understand the actual purpose of on-line discussions, and responded to discussion questions as they would respond to conventional textbook exercises.

In high-level discussions which addressed more controversial problems requiring relatively high-level thinking and intellectual skills, students posted more alternative points of view and detailed responses with relatively more peer interaction.

Results of qualitative analysis Students did not refer to on-line course materials or exploit the Web resources provided within each lesson and discussion topic, to respond and enrich discussion content .

Students did not refer to on-line course materials or exploit the Web resources provided within each lesson and discussion topic, to respond and enrich discussion content .

Results of qualitative analysis Requirements for discussion and level of participation

Results of qualitative analysis There was no significant relationship between the students’ level of participation in discussions and cognitive demands of discussion topics . When discussion topics presented easy and direct questions requiring low-level intellectual skills, students responded in brief statements without showing the cause and effect of the relationship or explaining the reasons behind their arguments.

There was no significant relationship between the students’ level of participation in discussions and cognitive demands of discussion topics .

When discussion topics presented easy and direct questions requiring low-level intellectual skills, students responded in brief statements without showing the cause and effect of the relationship or explaining the reasons behind their arguments.

Discussion and Conclusion There is a a need to look for a reliable means of communication for individual interaction in on-line learning environments.

There is a a need to look for a reliable means of communication for individual interaction in on-line learning environments.

Discussion and Conclusion Students should be encouraged to participate more regularly in peer discussions and tutors may need to assign grade weight to the quantity and the quality of contributions and ask students to spend more time and effort in peer interaction.

Students should be encouraged to participate more regularly in peer discussions and tutors may need to assign grade weight to the quantity and the quality of contributions and ask students to spend more time and effort in peer interaction.

Discussion and Conclusion Discussions should be carried out within a tutor’s scaffolding approach at management level (tracking, encouraging, grading, etc.) and cognitive level (explaining, facilitating, suggesting, etc.), particularly for those at lower academic levels

Discussions should be carried out within a tutor’s scaffolding approach at management level (tracking, encouraging, grading, etc.) and cognitive level (explaining, facilitating, suggesting, etc.), particularly for those at lower academic levels

Discussion and Conclusion On-line tutors should pay more attention and address more concern to strategies to foster participation and interaction and build the sense of community in Web-based learning environments .

On-line tutors should pay more attention and address more concern to strategies to foster participation and interaction and build the sense of community in Web-based learning environments .

Thank you Alaa Sadik