Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Conceptualizing Social Presence as a Motivational Component in E-Learning: a Case Study in Blended Teacher Education<br />...
Whatislearning?<br /><ul><li>Learning is a process of sense-making and meaning construction.
Learning is a social process: meaning is constructed and shared among participants in time and context.
Different kinds of help among peers are an important sources of educational influence   collaborative learning.</li></ul>...
Whatislearninglike in theblendedworld?<br /><ul><li> Blended courses are in a 30-79% online-offline balance (Allen & Seama...
 Since 2004 pilot study at UB with Moodle(GIDPE-GRINTIE), at Teacher Education.
 Nowadays, Moodleis the institutional platform of the UB at its virtual campus.</li></ul>CHALLENGES: <br /><ul><li> Turn t...
 Take advantage of the virtual environment: time and space distribution of participants should facilitate collaborative le...
Social presence (earlydefinitions)<br />“The degree with which a person is perceived as a ‘real person’ in mediated commun...
Social presence (earlydefinitions)<br />“The ability of learners to project themselves socially and affectively into a com...
Social presence (earlydefinitions)<br />“A measure of the feeling of community that a learner experiences in an online env...
Social presence (ourproposal)<br />Big group - debate<br />Small group – colaborativework<br />Social presence as the resu...
Motivation in collaborativelearning…<br />Motivation >>> SDT + sociocultural perspective<br />Threeassumptionsaboutmotivat...
Situated motivationiscontext- and activity-sensitive.
Evolvingchangingover time.</li></ul>Whichimplythreemethodologicalchallenges:<br /><ul><li>Focusonallindividuals’ discours...
Focusonthecontext.
Focusonthehistoricalprogress of theactivity.</li></li></ul><li>Thestudy<br />CONTEXT + PARTICIPANTS + TASK<br /><ul><li>Ed...
First & secondsemester of TeacherEducationGraduateProgram.
 17 students in 3-4 self-selected 4 smallgroups.
Assignment: argumentativeessaybasedonclassroomobservation.
Moodleplatform: asynchronouscomputermediatedcommunication (forumtool).
 Online workduring 6 weeks.
Teacheravailableforconsultation and feedback.</li></li></ul><li>Analysis<br /><ul><li>Multilevel model of content analysis...
 Basic unit of analysis:any posting fragment carrying any manifestation of social presence.
 Contextual unit of analysis: individual posting within a discussion thread in a forum space.
 All the individual postings of the participants were analysed:
Group I   74 postings
Group II  39 postings
 Group III  73 postings
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Conceptualizing Social Presence as a motivational component in e-learning

1,573 views

Published on

Remesal, A., Colomina, C., & Clarà, M. (2010). Conceptualizing Social Presence as a motivational component in e-learning: a case study in blended teacher education. Paper presented at 12th International Conference on Motivation, SIG. EARLI, Porto, Sept. 2nd-4th.

Published in: Education, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Conceptualizing Social Presence as a motivational component in e-learning

  1. 1. Conceptualizing Social Presence as a Motivational Component in E-Learning: a Case Study in Blended Teacher Education<br />Ana Remesal, Rosa Colomina, Marc Clarà<br />http://www.psyed.edu.es/grintie/?lang=en<br />12th ICM Porto, Sept. 2-4, 2010<br />
  2. 2. Whatislearning?<br /><ul><li>Learning is a process of sense-making and meaning construction.
  3. 3. Learning is a social process: meaning is constructed and shared among participants in time and context.
  4. 4. Different kinds of help among peers are an important sources of educational influence  collaborative learning.</li></ul>(Coll, 2004; Coll & Onrubia, 1997; Derry & alt. 2000;Kozulin, 1998; Mercer & Coll, 1994; Newman, Griffin & Cole, 1989; Tharp & alt., 2000; Vigotsky, 1979; Wertsch, 1985)<br />
  5. 5. Whatislearninglike in theblendedworld?<br /><ul><li> Blended courses are in a 30-79% online-offline balance (Allen & Seaman, 2006).
  6. 6. Since 2004 pilot study at UB with Moodle(GIDPE-GRINTIE), at Teacher Education.
  7. 7. Nowadays, Moodleis the institutional platform of the UB at its virtual campus.</li></ul>CHALLENGES: <br /><ul><li> Turn the virtual environment into something useful (and used) by the students to learn.
  8. 8. Take advantage of the virtual environment: time and space distribution of participants should facilitate collaborative learning.</li></li></ul><li>Here new draft. comments red.<br />Hi super A team!<br />Congrats everybody, we’re already half way through –almost there! <br />I send the new version, you’ll see comments inside. <br />tomorrow, same time same place? ;P <br />C.u.l8r alligator!!! Mary<br />
  9. 9. Social presence (earlydefinitions)<br />“The degree with which a person is perceived as a ‘real person’ in mediated communication”, Gunawardena & Zittle (1997).<br />
  10. 10. Social presence (earlydefinitions)<br />“The ability of learners to project themselves socially and affectively into a community of inquiry”, Rourke, Anderson, Garrison & Archer (1999).<br />
  11. 11. Social presence (earlydefinitions)<br />“A measure of the feeling of community that a learner experiences in an online environment” Tu & McIsaac (2002).<br />“The ability of participants to identify with the community (e.g. course of study), communicate purposefully in a trusting environment, and develop interpersonal relationships by way of projecting their individual personalities” (Garrison, 2009).<br />
  12. 12. Social presence (ourproposal)<br />Big group - debate<br />Small group – colaborativework<br />Social presence as the result of individuals’ actions that contribute to the creation of a community feeling or group identity in such a way that the learning process is motivationally and emotionally supported<br />(based on Rogers & Lea, 2005)<br />
  13. 13. Motivation in collaborativelearning…<br />Motivation >>> SDT + sociocultural perspective<br />Threeassumptionsaboutmotivation:<br /><ul><li>Co-constructed thesubjectcontributestohis/herownmotivationinteractingwithothers.
  14. 14. Situated motivationiscontext- and activity-sensitive.
  15. 15. Evolvingchangingover time.</li></ul>Whichimplythreemethodologicalchallenges:<br /><ul><li>Focusonallindividuals’ discoursiveactions(AsynchronousComputerMediatedCommunication -ACMC).
  16. 16. Focusonthecontext.
  17. 17. Focusonthehistoricalprogress of theactivity.</li></li></ul><li>Thestudy<br />CONTEXT + PARTICIPANTS + TASK<br /><ul><li>EducationalPsychologycourse.
  18. 18. First & secondsemester of TeacherEducationGraduateProgram.
  19. 19. 17 students in 3-4 self-selected 4 smallgroups.
  20. 20. Assignment: argumentativeessaybasedonclassroomobservation.
  21. 21. Moodleplatform: asynchronouscomputermediatedcommunication (forumtool).
  22. 22. Online workduring 6 weeks.
  23. 23. Teacheravailableforconsultation and feedback.</li></li></ul><li>Analysis<br /><ul><li>Multilevel model of content analysis combining individual and group-level perspectives (Arvajaet al. 2007; Gläser-Zikuda, & Järvelä, 2008; Järvelä, Volet, & Jävernoja, 2010; Murphy, & RdguezManzanares, 2006).
  24. 24. Basic unit of analysis:any posting fragment carrying any manifestation of social presence.
  25. 25. Contextual unit of analysis: individual posting within a discussion thread in a forum space.
  26. 26. All the individual postings of the participants were analysed:
  27. 27. Group I  74 postings
  28. 28. Group II  39 postings
  29. 29. Group III  73 postings
  30. 30. Group IV  85 postings</li></li></ul><li>Indicators<br /><ul><li>Discoursivecontentrelativetoparticipants’ motivation and emotionalimplicationwiththetask and thegroup(Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, & Archer, 1999; Järvelä, Järvenoja, & Veermans, 2008).
  31. 31. Epistolar genre of postings(Friesen, 2009).
  32. 32. Paralinguisticortographic and iconographicmarks, linguisticfillers(Yamada, 2009).
  33. 33. Figurativelanguage(Delfino, & Manca, 2007).
  34. 34. Social identitymarks(Rogers, & Lea, 2005).</li></li></ul><li>Proposal of dimensionstostudy SP<br />task-oriented<br />C1 > The individual (singular subject) feels competent and/or satisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of performance in front of a task which he/she evaluates as easy.<br />C2 > The individual (singular subject) feels competent and/or satisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of performance in front of a task which he/she evaluates as challenging.<br />C3 > The individual (singular subject) feels incompetent and/or unsatisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of performance in front of a task which he/she evaluates as difficult.<br />C7 > The group (plural subject) feels competent and satisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of performance in front of a task which is evaluated as easy.<br />C8 > The group (plural subject) feels competent and satisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of performance in front of a task which is evaluated as challenging.<br />C9 > The group (plural subject) feels incompetent and unsatisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of performance in front of a task which is evaluated as too difficult.<br />individual-oriented<br />group-oriented<br />C4 > The individual opens him/herself up to others and offers his/her support to carry out the task without request.<br />C5 > The individual offers his/her support after detecting some real or potential challenge.<br />C6 > The individual refuses to support others in the performance of the task.<br />C10 > The group members, jointly or individually, contribute to create and maintain a sense of group identity.<br />C11 > The group members, jointly or individually, contribute to create and maintain social interaction.<br />C12 > The group members, jointly or individually, express positive feelings of belonging to the group.<br />human-oriented<br />
  35. 35. Individual-taskorientation<br />C1 > The individual (singular subject) feels competent and/or satisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of good performance of the task.<br />“If you agree, I can start to compose the first part of the text, doesn’t seem difficult!!!!”<br />C2 > The individual (singular subject) feels competent and/or satisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of good performance in front of a task which he/she evaluates as challenging.<br />“I feel a little bit lost with this assignment, well, you probably noticed already. But I’ll do my best.”<br />C3 > The individual (singular subject) feels incompetent and/or unsatisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of low performance of the task.<br />“I have changed the paragraph of conditions a bit because it was somewhat messy, but I’m not sure it’s quite clearer now, though!!!”<br />
  36. 36. Individual-group mates orientation<br />C4 > The individual opens him/herself up to others and offers his/her support to carry out the task without request.<br />“I just finished work for today, now I can speed up to 200mph with the assignment!!! I attach a concept map which we could use for a start. I look forward for your comments!!!!”<br />C5 > The individual offers his/her support after detecting some real or potential challenge.<br />“Guys, tomorrow I won’t be at home, but don’t panic!! As soon as I get back to the net, I will catch up with your progress and make my comments. Kisses!”<br />C6 > The individual fails to support others in the performance of the task.<br />“aaaaahhhmmm – I’m afraid I can’t do the lit list. I’m sorry, my computer has broken down, I write from the computer lab and I don’t have the material here. Someone else jump in!”<br />
  37. 37. Group-taskorientation<br />C7 > The group (plural subject) feels competent and satisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of performance of the task.<br />“Perfect! Our text is getting brilliant, we do very well together!!”<br />C8 > The group (plural subject) feels competent and satisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of performance of a task which is evaluated as challenging.<br />“Although it will be tough at the beginning, because it’s our first online assignment, I’m positive that WE will do great in the end!! Come on!”<br />C9 > The group (plural subject) feels incompetent and unsatisfied with his/her performance or his/her expectations of low performance of the task.<br />“We didn’t hurry up and got lost in nuances, and now we won’t have time to review our work. Here’s the result, guys!! ”<br />
  38. 38. Group-membersorientation<br />C10 > The group members, jointly or individually, contribute to create and maintain a sense of group identity.<br />“Hi ladies and gentlemen!!, I hope we will be a united team this time, like we were the previous times!! So well-tuned.”<br />C11 > The group members, jointly or individually, contribute to create and maintain social interaction.<br />“COME ON, NOW MORE THAN EVER! LET’S DO OUR BEST!!! See you around here ”<br />C12 > The group members, jointly or individually, express positive feelings of belonging to the group.<br />“Now that we’re done, I would like you know how proud I feel of our team!! ”<br />
  39. 39. Results<br />A greatamount of messages show SP:<br />
  40. 40.
  41. 41. CategoriesIntragroup<br />
  42. 42. CategoriesIntergroup<br />
  43. 43. Individual profiles G.I (1)<br />
  44. 44. Individual profiles G.I (2)<br />
  45. 45. Individual profiles G.II<br />
  46. 46. Individual profiles G.III<br />
  47. 47. Individual profiles G.IV (1)<br />
  48. 48. Individual profiles G.IV (2)<br />
  49. 49. Conclusion<br /><ul><li>Longitudinal look at a completereal-contextactivity in order to drawtheevolution of social presencealongthelearningprocess.
  50. 50. The categories allow to study how the participants make sense of the learning task and the learning process, how they react to difficulties and success, and how the group members contribute to a positive social climate for collaboration.
  51. 51. Two perspectives are considered: the individual by herself and the individual as a team member in direct relation with the peers (Järvelä, Volet, & Jävernoja, 2010).
  52. 52. Emergent ‘profiles’ of social presence, both at a teamlevel and individually (Murphy, & RdguezManzanares, 2006).
  53. 53. Need to interprettheresults of theanalysis of social presence in relation to theanalysis of theteachingpresence and thecognitivepresence (Garrison, Cleveland-Innes, & Fung, 2010).</li></li></ul><li>Conceptualizing Social Presence as a Motivational Component in E-Learning: a Case Study in Blended Teacher Educationthanks very much for your attentionResults presented here are part of the research project:Supporting learning in text-based asynchronous learning networks teacher presence and teacher functions in Knowledge building processes. Project leader Prof.C.Coll. Funded by the ComisiónInterministerial de Ciencia y Tecnología (grant code: SEJ2004-07658-C02-01)<br />Ana Remesal, Rosa Colomina, Marc Clarà<br />http://www.psyed.edu.es/grintie/?lang=en<br />12th ICM Porto, Sept. 2-4, 2010<br />

×