Enhancing non-task sociability of asynchronous CSCL environments

While from a technological perspective Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) systems have been improved considerably, previous studies have shown that the social aspect of the CSCL is often neglected or assumed to happen automatically by simply creating such virtual learning environments. By distinguishing between students' non-task social interactions from on-task interactions, and through a content analysis, this paper demonstrates that non-task interactions do occur frequently in CSCL environments. Furthermore, by conducting a self-reported survey, the present study operationalizes non-task sociability of CSCL environments and determines factors that affect them. The findings from the survey revealed that the sense of cohesion and awareness about others significantly impact the non-task sociability of CSCL. Furthermore, the study demonstrates that the perception of self-representation and perception of compatibility affect the sense of cohesion and awareness about others and indirectly contribute to the perceived non-pedagogical sociability of the environment. The findings of this paper can be used in future research for investigating the relationship between the non-task sociability of CSCL and other CSCL factors. The study also provides the CSCL lecturers and facilitators with a conceptual model by which sociability can be explicitly addressed in their course planning and delivery processes. And finally, this study develops and validates an instrument that guides required changes in current CSCL systems to improve the non-task social functionality of the environment.

[1]  A Pingsmann,et al.  Sample size and statistical power. , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[2]  P. Fahy Indicators of Support in Online Interaction , 2003 .

[3]  F. Fiedler,et al.  Leader attitudes, group climate, and group creativity. , 1962, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[4]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  A Practical Guide To Factorial Validity Using PLS-Graph: Tutorial And Annotated Example , 2005, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[5]  Starr Roxanne Hiltz,et al.  Mediators of the effectiveness of online courses , 2003 .

[6]  Raven Wallace,et al.  Online Learning in Higher Education: a review of research on interactions among teachers and students , 2003 .

[7]  Etienne Wenger,et al.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[8]  Saskia Brand-Gruwel,et al.  Students' experiences with collaborative learning in asynchronous Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning environments , 2004, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[9]  Michael Barnett,et al.  Developing an Empirical Account of a Community of Practice: Characterizing the Essential Tensions , 2002 .

[10]  Patrick J. Fahy,et al.  Patterns of Interaction in a Computer Conference Transcript , 2001 .

[11]  R. Campbell,et al.  A Theory of Leadership Effectiveness. , 1968 .

[12]  J. Hair Multivariate data analysis , 1972 .

[13]  Eun-Ju Lee,et al.  Deindividuation Effects on Group Polarization in Computer-Mediated Communication: The Role of Group Identification, Public-Self-Awareness, and Perceived Argument Quality , 2007 .

[14]  Hans van Buuren,et al.  Determining Sociability, Social Space, and Social Presence in (A)synchronous Collaborative Groups , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[15]  Brian K. Walker,et al.  Bridging the Distance: How Social Interaction, Presence, Social Presence, and Sense of Community Influence Student Learning Experiences in an Online Virtual Environment , 2007 .

[16]  Ad de Jong,et al.  Psychological safety and social support in groupware adoption: A multi-level assessment in education , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[17]  William Lewis,et al.  PLS, Small Sample Size, and Statistical Power in MIS Research , 2006, Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06).

[18]  Giuseppe Riva,et al.  The Sociocognitive Psychology of Computer-Mediated Communication: The Present and Future of Technology-Based Interactions , 2002, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[19]  John A. Gardner,et al.  Barriers to student computer usage: staff and student perceptions , 1999, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[20]  J. Walther Computer-Mediated Communication , 1996 .

[21]  P. Uys Critical Success Factors in The Infusion of Instructional Technologies for open Learning in Development Settings: The Case of the University of Botswana , 2003 .

[22]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  Validation Guidelines for IS Positivist Research , 2004, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[23]  J. Walther,et al.  Relational communication in computer-mediated interaction , 1990 .

[24]  A. P. Rovai Development of an instrument to measure classroom community , 2002, Internet High. Educ..

[25]  A. Hollingshead,et al.  Collaborative learning and computer‐supported groups , 1999 .

[26]  Michael Rebstock,et al.  International online management education courses: A study of participation patterns , 2005, Internet High. Educ..

[27]  Duane T. Wegener,et al.  Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. , 1999 .

[28]  Guan-Yu Lin,et al.  Social Presence Questionnaire of Online Collaborative Learning: Development and Validity , 2005 .

[29]  Janet L. Lear Interactive class design and sense of community in online distance education classes: A mixed methods research study , 2007 .

[30]  Brian H. Spitzberg,et al.  Toward the Development and Validation of a Measure of Cognitive Communication Competence. , 1995 .

[31]  Alfred P. Rovai,et al.  Classroom community at a distance: A comparative analysis of two ALN-based university programs , 2001, Internet High. Educ..

[32]  Janine Onffroy Shelley Factors that Affect the Adoption and Use of Electronic Mail by K-12 Foreign Language Educators , 1998 .

[33]  Yan Li,et al.  Students' participation intention in an online discussion forum: Why is computer-mediated interaction attractive? , 2007, Inf. Manag..

[34]  Izak Benbasat,et al.  Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation , 1991, Inf. Syst. Res..

[35]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Designing electronic collaborative learning environments , 2004 .

[36]  John D'Ambra,et al.  Do nontask interactions matter? The relationship between nontask sociability of computer supported collaborative learning and learning outcomes , 2012, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[37]  Stephen H. Fairclough,et al.  Fundamentals of physiological computing , 2009, Interact. Comput..

[38]  Fatos Xhafa,et al.  A layered framework for evaluating on-line collaborative learning interactions , 2006, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[39]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: a review of the research , 2003, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[40]  R. Gorsuch Exploratory factor analysis: its role in item analysis. , 1997, Journal of personality assessment.

[41]  Maish R. Nichani,et al.  Can a community of practice exist online , 2002 .

[42]  James Boyle,et al.  Factors influencing the success of computer mediated communication (CMC) environments in university teaching: a review and case study , 2000, Comput. Educ..

[43]  Paul A. Kirschner,et al.  The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environment , 2002, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[44]  Charlotte N. Gunawardena,et al.  Analysis of a Global Online Debate and the Development of an Interaction Analysis Model for Examining Social Construction of Knowledge in Computer Conferencing , 1997 .

[45]  E. Rogers Diffusion of Innovations , 1962 .

[46]  F. Bookstein,et al.  Two Structural Equation Models: LISREL and PLS Applied to Consumer Exit-Voice Theory , 1982 .

[47]  Päivi Häkkinen,et al.  What Makes Learning and Understanding in Virtual Teams So Difficult? , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[48]  J. Walther Relational Aspects of Computer-Mediated Communication: Experimental Observations over Time , 1995 .

[49]  Z. Berge,et al.  Student barriers to online learning: A factor analytic study , 2005 .

[50]  P. Fahy Addressing some Common Problems in Transcript Analysis , 2001 .

[51]  J. Finn,et al.  An exploration of helping processes in an online self-help group focusing on issues of disability. , 1999, Health & social work.

[52]  Alfred P. Rovai,et al.  The Classroom and School Community Inventory: Development, refinement, and validation of a self-report measure for educational research , 2004, Internet High. Educ..

[53]  P. Shea,et al.  A study of teaching presence and student sense of learning community in fully online and web-enhanced college courses , 2006, Internet High. Educ..

[54]  D Davies,et al.  The community integration measure: development and preliminary validation. , 2001, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[55]  Sara McNeil,et al.  Facilitation interaction, communication and collaboration in online courses , 2000 .

[56]  Ted Clark,et al.  Disadvantages of collaborative online discussion and the advantages of sociability, fun and cliques for online learning , 2003 .

[57]  Cynthia Phillippy Cadieux,et al.  Variables associated with a sense of classroom community and academic persistence in an urban community college online setting , 2002 .

[58]  Traci Carte,et al.  Cohesion in virtual teams: validating the perceived cohesion scale in a distributed setting , 2006, DATB.

[59]  Amy Soller,et al.  Supporting Social Interaction in an Intelligent Collaborative Learning System , 2001 .

[60]  R. Duran Communicative adaptability: A measure of social communicative competence , 1983 .

[61]  Jennifer Preece,et al.  Sociability and usability in online communities: Determining and measuring success , 2001, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[62]  Maggie McPherson,et al.  The failure of a virtual social space (VSS) designed to create a learning community: lessons learned , 2004, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[63]  Joanna S. Gorin,et al.  Evaluating Collaborative Learning and Community , 2005 .

[64]  P. Kollock DESIGN PRINCIPLES FOR ONLINE COMMUNITIES , 1997 .

[65]  J. Walther Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1992 .

[66]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[67]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[68]  José Bidarra,et al.  Current Developments and Best Practice in Open and Distance Learning , 2000 .

[69]  Detmar W. Straub,et al.  The psychological origins of perceived usefulness and ease-of-use , 1999, Inf. Manag..

[70]  Thomas Chesney,et al.  An investigation of sociability measurements in online communities , 2005, Int. J. Web Based Communities.

[71]  Joanne M. McInnerney,et al.  Online Learning: Social Interaction and the Creation of a Sense of Community , 2004, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[72]  Russell Spears,et al.  Love at first byte? Building personal relationships over computer networks. , 1995 .

[73]  Jose Luis Rodriguez-Illera,et al.  Investigating university students' adaptation to a digital learner course portfolio , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[74]  A. Hron,et al.  A review of web-based collaborative learning: factors beyond technology , 2003, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[75]  Ton de Jong,et al.  Technology-Enhanced Learning: Principles and Products , 2009 .

[76]  Ron Oliver,et al.  Exploring the development of learning communities in online settings , 2002 .

[77]  James Laffey,et al.  Assessing Social Ability in Online Learning Environments , 2006 .

[78]  T. Clark,et al.  Within and Beyond Communities of Practice: Making Sense of Learning Through Participation, Identity and Practice , 2006 .