This study uses social network analysis (SNA) in an innovative way to describe interaction and explain how interaction influences sense of community of students in online learning environments. The findings reveal differences on sense of community between two similarly structured online courses, and show unique interaction patterns for students in the two courses. These results should prove to be interesting to researchers of online learning both on a theoretical and methodological basis.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmelungC. (2005). A context-aware notification framework for developers of computer supported collaborative environments. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri-Columbia, Columbia.
2.
AndersonT. (2003). Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 4(2), 1–14.
3.
ArbaughJ. B. (2000). How classroom environment and student engagement affect learning in Internet-based MBA courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 63(4), 9–26.
4.
CarabajalK.LapointeD., & GunawardenaC. N. (2003). Group development in online learning communities. In MooreM. G. & AndersonW. G. (Eds.), Handbook of distance education (pp. 217–234). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5.
CereijoM. V. P.YoungJ., & WilhelmR. W. (2001). Factors facilitating student participation in asynchronous web-based courses. The Journal of Computing in Teacher Education, 18(1), 32–39.
6.
CunninghamR. D. (1992). Beyond educational psychology: Steps toward an educational semiotic. Educational Psychology Review, 4, 165–194.
de LaatM. F.LallyV., & LipponenL. (2004). Patterns of interaction in a networked learning community. In ELearn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Washington DC, USA, 1–5 Nov 2004.AACE.
9.
EastmondD. V. (1995). Alone but together: Adult distance study through computer conferencing.Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.
10.
ErtmerP. A., & StepichD. A. (2004). Examining the relationship between higher-order learning and students' perceived sense of community in an online learning environment. Paper presented at the proceedings of the 10th Australian World Wide Web conference, Gold Coast, Australia.
11.
FrymierA. B. (1993). The impact of teacher immediacy on students' motivation over the course of a semester. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association, Miami Beach, FL.
12.
GibbsJ. (1995). Tribes.Sausalito, CA: Center Source Systems.
13.
HarrerA.ZeiniS., & PinkwartN. (2006). Evaluation of communication in web-supported learning communities—An analysis with triangulation research design. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 2(4), 428–446.
14.
HaythornthwaiteC.KazmerM.RobinsJ., & ShoemakerS. (2000). Making connections: Community among computer-supported distance learners. Paper presented at the Association for Library and Information Science Education 2000 Conference. San Antonio, Texas. Retrieved July 3, 2003 from: http://www.alise.org/conferences/conf00_Haythornthwaite_Making.htm
15.
LipmanM. (1991). Thinking in education.New York: Cambridge University Press.
16.
McMillanD. W., & ChavisD. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 6–23.
17.
NurmelaK.PalonenT.LehtinenE., & HakkarainenK. (2003). Developing tools for analyzing cscl process. In WassonB.LudvigsenS., & HoppeU. (Eds.), Designing for change in networked learning environments. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning 2003 (pp. 333–342). Kluwer, Dordrecht.
18.
PalloffR. M., & PrattK. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace.San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
19.
RichardsonJ. C., & SwanK. (2003). Examine social presence in online course in relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68–88.
20.
RourkeL.AndersonT.GarrisonD. R., & ArcherW. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing, Journal of Distance Education, 14(3), 51–71.
21.
RovaiA. P. (2002a). Development of an instrument to measure classroom community. Internet and Higher Education, 5(3), 197–211.
22.
RovaiA. P. (2002b). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. Internet and Higher Education, 5(4), 319–332.
23.
RovaiA. P., & WightingM. J. (2005). Feelings of alienation and community among higher education students in a virtual classroom. The Internet and Higher Education, 8(2), 97–110.
24.
ScottJ. (2000). Social network analysis: A handbook.London: Sage.
25.
ShaleD., & GarrisonD. R. (1990). Introduction. In ShaleD. G. D. R. (Ed.), Education at a distance (pp. 1–6). Malabar, FL: Robert E. Kriger.
26.
SuB.BonkC. J.MagjukaR. J.LiuX., & LeeS. (2005). The importance of interaction in web-based education: A program-level case study of online MBA courses. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 4(1), 1–19.
27.
TintoV. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
TuC., & CorryM. (2002). E-Learning communities. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3(2), 207–218.
