A dynamic analysis of the interplay between asynchronous and synchronous communication in online learning: The impact of motivation

With the increased affordances of synchronous communication tools, more opportunities for online learning to resemble face-to-face settings have recently become available. However, synchronous communication does not afford as much time for reflection as asynchronous communication. Therefore, a combination of synchronous and asynchronous communication in e-learning would seem desirable to optimally support learner engagement and the quality of student learning. It is still an open question though, how to best design online learning with a blend of synchronous and asynchronous communication opportunities over time. Few studies have investigated the relationship between learners' actual use of synchronous and asynchronous communication over time. Therefore, this study addressed that relationship in an online course (N = 110), taking into account student motivation, and employing a dynamic inter-temporal perspective. In line with our assumptions, we found some support for the expected association between autonomous motivation and engagement in asynchronous and synchronous communication, be it restricted primarily to the first course period. Also, positive relations between engagement in synchronous and asynchronous communication were found, with the strongest influence from using asynchronous to synchronous communication. This study adds to the knowledge base needed to develop guidelines on how synchronous communication can be combined with asynchronous learning.

[1]  Genevieve Marie Johnson,et al.  Synchronous and Asynchronous Text-Based CMC in Educational Contexts: A Review of Recent Research , 2006 .

[2]  Theo J. Bastiaens,et al.  The impact of intrinsic motivation on e-learning in authentic computer tasks , 2004, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[3]  R. Luppicini.  Review of computer mediated communication research for education , 2007 .

[4]  HrastinskiStefan,et al.  Design exemplars for synchronous e-learning , 2010 .

[5]  Cindy E. Hmelo-Silver,et al.  Problem-based Learning: A Research Perspective on Learning Interactions , 2000 .

[6]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Developing the role concept for computer-supported collaborative learning: An explorative synthesis , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[7]  Jan-Willem Strijbos,et al.  Content analysis: What are they talking about? , 2006, Comput. Educ..

[8]  Øystein Sørebø,et al.  The role of self-determination theory in explaining teachers' motivation to continue to use e-learning technology , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[9]  Zehra Akyol,et al.  The impact of course duration on the development of a community of inquiry , 2011, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[10]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  The role of scaffolding and motivation in CSCL , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[11]  Edward L. Deci,et al.  Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior , 1975, Perspectives in Social Psychology.

[12]  S. Jeanne Horst,et al.  Evaluating existing and new validity evidence for the Academic Motivation Scale , 2005 .

[13]  D. Allen,et al.  What is Problem-Based Learning? , 2006 .

[14]  S. Vlachopoulos.  THE ROLE OF SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY VARIABLES IN PREDICTING MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS' SUBJECTIVE VITALITY IN PHYSICAL EDUCATION , 2012 .

[15]  Ji-Hye Park,et al.  Factors Influencing Adult Learners' Decision to Drop Out or Persist in Online Learning , 2009, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[16]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Remedial Online Teaching on a Summer Course , 2006 .

[17]  A. E. Veldhuis-Diermanse,et al.  Collaborative learning through computer-mediated communication in academic education , 2001 .

[18]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  A dynamic analysis of why learners develop a preference for autonomous learners in computer-mediated communication , 2014, Interact. Learn. Environ..

[19]  Hans Spada,et al.  Barriers and Biases in Computer-Mediated Knowledge Communication , 2010 .

[20]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Social Presence, Web Videoconferencing and Learning in Virtual Teams , 2009 .

[21]  F. Guay,et al.  Optimal learning in optimal contexts: The role of self-determination in education , 2008 .

[22]  Hyo-Jeong So,et al.  When groups decide to use asynchronous online discussions: collaborative learning and social presence under a voluntary participation structure , 2009, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[23]  S. Ludvigsen,et al.  Learning Across Sites : New Tools, Infrastructures and Practices , 2010 .

[24]  Hanna Järvenoja,et al.  Research on Motivation in Collaborative Learning: Moving Beyond the Cognitive–Situative Divide and Combining Individual and Social Processes , 2010 .

[25]  Stefan Hrastinski,et al.  Design exemplars for synchronous e-learning: A design theory approach , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[26]  Marylène Gagné,et al.  Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace: A self-determination theory perspective , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[27]  R. Vallerand,et al.  On the Assessment of Situational Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS) , 2000 .

[28]  J. Arbaugh,et al.  A Structural Equation Model of Predictors for Effective Online Learning , 2005 .

[29]  Dorothy H. Evensen,et al.  Factors Affecting Small-Group Tutorial Learning: A Review of Research , 2000 .

[30]  Youngjin Yoo,et al.  The Impact of Knowledge Coordination on Virtual Team Performance Over Time , 2007, MIS Q..

[31]  Helge I. Strømsø,et al.  Content and processes in problem-based learning: a comparison of computer-mediated and face-to-face communication , 2007, J. Comput. Assist. Learn..

[32]  M. Maznevski,et al.  Bridging Space Over Time: Global Virtual Team Dynamics and Effectiveness , 2000 .

[33]  Trena M. Paulus,et al.  Challenge or connect? dialogue in online learning environments , 2006, J. Comput. High. Educ..

[34]  Steve Graham,et al.  APA Educational Psychology Handbook. , 2011 .

[35]  Stefan Hrastinski,et al.  The potential of synchronous communication to enhance participation in online discussions: A case study of two e-learning courses , 2008, Inf. Manag..

[36]  Bruce M. McLaren,et al.  Supporting Collaborative Learning and E-Discussions Using Artificial Intelligence Techniques , 2010, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[37]  E. Deci,et al.  Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions. , 2000, Contemporary educational psychology.

[38]  Monique Hanslo,et al.  From peripheral to full participation in a blended trade bargaining simulation , 2004, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[39]  Vic Lally,et al.  Online teaching in networked learning communities: A multi-method approach to studying the role of the teacher , 2007 .

[40]  E. Deci,et al.  Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. , 2010 .

[41]  Evelyne F. Vallières,et al.  On the Assessment of Intrinsic, Extrinsic, and Amotivation in Education: Evidence on the Concurrent and Construct Validity of the Academic Motivation Scale , 1993 .

[42]  D. Garrison,et al.  The Development of a Community of Inquiry over Time in an Online Course: Understanding the Progression and Integration of Social, Cognitive and Teaching Presence. , 2008 .

[43]  E. Deci,et al.  The effects of instructors' autonomy support and students' autonomous motivation on learning organic chemistry: A self-determination theory perspective , 2000 .

[44]  Jay Pfaffman,et al.  Computer-Mediated Communications Technologies , 2007 .

[45]  Robert M. Bernard,et al.  How Does Distance Education Compare With Classroom Instruction? A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature , 2004 .

[46]  E. Deci,et al.  Handbook of Self-Determination Research , 2002 .

[47]  Mien Segers,et al.  Evaluating the effects of redesigning a problem-based learning environment , 2003 .

[48]  A. P. Rovai.  In search of higher persistence rates in distance education online programs , 2003, Internet High. Educ..

[49]  Kuan-Chung Chen,et al.  Motivation in online learning: Testing a model of self-determination theory , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

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

[51]  Min Liu,et al.  A study of learning and motivation in a new media enriched environment for middle school science , 2011 .

[52]  Heinz Mandl,et al.  Facilitating Collaborative Knowledge Construction in Computer-Mediated Learning Environments with Cooperation Scripts , 2005 .

[53]  RocaJuan Carlos,et al.  Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace , 2008 .

[54]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  The role of academic motivation in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[55]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Why Increased Social Presence through Web Videoconferencing Does Not Automatically Lead to Improved Learning , 2014 .

[56]  Tammy Schellens,et al.  Collaborative learning in asynchronous discussion groups: What about the impact on cognitive processing? , 2005, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[57]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[58]  Charles R. Graham.  BLENDED LEARNING SYSTEMS: DEFINITION, CURRENT TRENDS, AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS , 2005 .

[59]  P. Kirschner,et al.  Toward a Framework for CSCL Research , 2013 .

[60]  Robert Maribe Branch,et al.  Autonomy, Affiliation, and Ability: Relative Salience of Factors that Influence Online Learner Motivation and Learning Outcomes , 2010 .

[61]  R. Vallerand,et al.  Intrinsic, extrinsic, and amotivational styles as predictors of behavior: A prospective study. , 1992 .

[62]  R. Vallerand.  Toward A Hierarchical Model of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation , 1997 .

[63]  Dirk T. Tempelaar,et al.  Investigating the relations between motivation, tool use, participation, and performance in an e-learning course using web-videoconferencing , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[64]  Lin Muilenburg,et al.  How Do Students Participate in Synchronous and Asynchronous Online Discussions? , 2001 .