Understanding interpersonal interaction in an online professional development course

This qualitative case study was designed to examine how interpersonal interaction benefited (and did not benefit) participants in an online professional development course. In recent years, e-learning courses in workplace and organizational settings have begun to include interaction and dialogue among participants. This case study is an in-depth exploration of interpersonal interaction and social presence within one such course. Notable findings include that (1) participants valued the sharing of specific case-based knowledge by fellow participants, (2) some participants valued professional socialization with others in the field, (3) enthusiastic learners revealed complex and contradictory perspectives regarding interpersonal interaction, (4) facilitators needed to model social presence for participants, (5) some “inactive” participants were actually engaged, and (6) learners may seek online courses for purposes of intellectual safety.

[1]  D. Garrison,et al.  Assessing Social Presence In Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing , 1999 .

[2]  Consuelo L. Waight,et al.  Exploring Connections Between Human Resource Development and Creativity , 2005 .

[3]  Allan Macpherson,et al.  E-learning: reflections and evaluation of corporate programmes , 2004 .

[4]  Timothy Koschmann,et al.  Paradigm shifts and instructional technology : An introduction , 1996 .

[5]  Chuck out the chintz? “Stripped floor” writing and the catalogue of convention: Alternative perspectives on management inquiry , 2004 .

[6]  R. Stake.  The art of case study research , 1995 .

[7]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Juggling Multiple Social Worlds , 2001 .

[8]  Colin Sharp.  Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.) , 2003 .

[9]  Mingming Jiang,et al.  A Study of Factors Influencing Students’ Perceived Learning in a Web-Based Course Environment , 2000 .

[10]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Cooperation and the Use of Technology , 2007 .

[11]  Vj. Janesick.  The choreography of qualitative research design , 2000 .

[12]  Steven R. Aragon.  Creating Social Presence in Online Environments , 2003 .

[13]  Jakob Nielsen,et al.  Usability engineering , 1997, The Computer Science and Engineering Handbook.

[14]  C. Haythornthwaite,et al.  CHAPTER 7: Affordances of Persistent Conversation: Promoting Communities That Work. , 2004 .

[15]  D. Randy Garrison,et al.  Critical Inquiry in a Text-Based Environment: Computer Conferencing in Higher Education , 1999, Internet High. Educ..

[16]  S. Clegg.  Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again , 2002 .

[17]  Dawn M. Poole.  Student Participation in a Discussion-Oriented Online Course , 2000 .

[18]  Hubert L. Dreyfus,et al.  Mind over Machine: The Power of Human Intuition and Expertise in the Era of the Computer , 1987, IEEE Expert.

[19]  M. Patton.  Qualitative research and evaluation methods , 1980 .

[20]  Eugene Sadler-Smith,et al.  Technical rationality and professional artistry in HRD practice , 2006 .

[21]  B. Flyvbjerg,et al.  Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again , 2001 .

[22]  Terry Anderson,et al.  E-Learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice , 2016 .

[23]  D. Waddill.  Action e-learning: An exploratory case study of action learning applied online , 2006 .

[24]  Angela D. Benson,et al.  Assessing participant learning in online environments , 2003 .

[25]  Karen Swan,et al.  The Development of Virtual Learning Communities , 2005 .

[26]  Gilly Salmon,et al.  E-moderating: the key to teaching and learning online , 2003 .

[27]  L. Sutton.  The Principle of Vicarious Interaction in Computer-Mediated Communications , 2001 .

[28]  B. Flyvbjerg.  Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research , 2006, 1304.1186.