Ho, C. H., & Swan, K. (2007). Evaluating online conversation in an asynchronous
learning environment: An application of Grice's cooperative principle. The
Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 3-14.
Much research regarding distance education has been criticized on several points.
Critics claim that true or original research in the field is lacking, and also assert
that the validity and reliability of the instruments used to measure the research
have been questionable. Lastly, some critics cite a lack of theoretical or conceptual
framework underpinning much of the research dedicated to distance education.
The journal used is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal dedicated to scholarly
presentation and dissemination of theoretical and applied information and research
as it related to the use of Internet and IT technologies in the field of higher
education.
The authors are researchers at SUNY-Albany and Kent State University. They
tackle these objectives in their case study (evaluation) of asynchronous
communication in an online-learning environment examining four hypotheses. The
tool they used to measure the information regarding their four hypotheses was
originally developed for measuring oral discourse in a face-to-face learning
environment and is based on the theoretical foundation of Grice’s Cooperative
Principle as it relates to classroom discussion and has had previously been proven
to be a reliable and valid tool.
The authors found support for three of their four hypotheses, drawing positive
relationships between increased Gricean ratings and direct responses to online
postings as assigned by their instructors, in addition to demonstrating a
relationship between measured actual learning and their Gricean scores. The
authors admit multiple limitations in their study - namely small sample size and
course specific subject matter- as factors that limit the generalizability of their
findings. The statistical methods they used to analyze their findings were stringent
and objective (ANOVA, Pearson, Tukey, etc.) and give strength to their findings.
The results open the door for further studies to be conducted and investigations
into the discussions of online students and their relationship with their learning
success and outcomes.
Garrison, D. R., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Fung, T. S. (2010). Exploring causal
relationships among teaching, cognitive and social presence: Student
perceptions of the community of inquiry framework. The Internet and Higher
Education, 13(1), 31-36.
The Community of Inquiry (CoI) framework is a philosophical and theoretical
framework that has been applied specifically to assessing higher education and
learning, and recently, has been used to evaluate three core elements that have an
(theoretical) impact on learning in distance education. These elements are:
teaching, cognitive and social presences.
The journal used is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal dedicated to scholarly
presentation and dissemination of theoretical and applied information and research
as it related to the use of Internet and IT technologies in the field of higher
education.
The authors are all researchers, with the primary investigator being a prolific writer
in the field of education research, much of it aimed at distance education.
The authors use the CoI survey tool, previously established as a valid and reliable
tool, and confirmed correlation between teaching presence, defined as “the design,
facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes for the purpose of
realizing personally meaningful and educationally worthwhile learning outcomes”,
and the creation and maintenance of social and cognitive presence. They assert that
such a causal relationship supports the belief that teaching presence plays a vital
and primary role in “sustaining an online learning environment and realizing
intended learning outcomes.”
Their results are strengthened by the fact that not only is their assessment tool
reliable and valid, but their participants (287 respondents), two educational
programs and fourteen individual learning courses studied, help to eliminate
within-program and student (subject) bias from the survey. Additionally, these
multiple layers of stratification add a possible level of generalizability that can be
applied to other institutions, programs and courses.
Swan, K., Day, S. L., Bogle, L. R., & Matthews, D. B. (2014). A collaborative,
design-based approach to improving an online program. The Internet and
Higher Education, 21, 74-81.
Recently, it was revealed that almost one-third of college students have taken at
least one online course. It is obvious that online-learning differs from that of
classroom or face-to-face learning, not only in content but also in approaches to
instruction. Much has been made in the past of whether one form of learning was
superior to that of another and multiple media comparison studies in the last few
decades tried to address that. Now, however, researcher and studies seem to be
going away from comparison of one over the other and trends are starting to be
seen in education research involving the study of rubrics and assessment tools used
by online educators and course developers in order to improve the quality of
design and implementation of their courses in an effort to improve learning
outcomes.
The journal used is a peer-reviewed, quarterly journal dedicated to scholarly
presentation and dissemination of theoretical and applied information and research
as it related to the use of Internet and IT technologies in the field of higher
education.
The primary investigator/author is a prolific writer in the field of education
research, as well as a Stukel Distinguished Professor for Educational Leadership
(University of Illinois).
The authors use design-based method of approach to this study based on a
theoretical framework mentioned in a previous bibliography (Community of
Inquiry) and the Quality Matters (QM) assessment tool, a peer-reviewed
instrument which uses design principles in order to assist faculty with addressing
and adjusting course design in order to maximize “well-specified outcomes,
objectives and assessments.” The goal was to assess four college courses (over
time in different semesters) after an initial offering, followed by QM changes in
the second semester and CoI improvements in subsequent semesters and then
correlate the findings.
The authors attempted to answer three questions using these tools and the concept
of a course design revision(s) as having an impact on student learning outcomes.
They studied four courses, with 214 students as subjects, at one university in a
fully online graduate program. Their findings were mixed and despite the authors’
assertions that their hypotheses were held up by the results (in general terms), the
facts paint a somewhat different picture. Two of the courses show no significant
difference in outcomes using CoI and/or QM improvements. Their subjects and
site for the study proved to be a limiting factor in the generalizability of their
findings. While the authors admit lack of generalizability, the remaining data lends
itself to the interpretation that a more valid assessment tool or return to the
drawing board in the form of a pilot study, in order to more adequately field and
test improvements and their subsequent effects on learners using the CoI and QM
frameworks, would be prudent.