Social Presence

Anderson, T., Archer, W., Garrison, D., & Rourke, L. (2007). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), Retrieved from http://auspace.athabascau.ca/bitstream/2149/732/1/AssessingSocial Presence In Asynchronous Text-based Computer Conferencing.pdf

          A fairly comprehensive review starts this article which eventually discusses a study of the discussion posts from two graduate level classes.  The difference between the two classes was the level of activity the instructor contributed.  The main reason for the study was to develop and test the efficacy of an tool used to analyze the social presence during educational computer conferences.  Their study includes a table for analyzing textual responses and different types of responses are given paragraph descriptions.  Included in this content analysis of social presence are: affective responses, interactive responses, and cohesive responses. 
 

Bulu, S. T. & Zahide, Y. (2008, January). Communication behaviors and trust in collaborative online teams. Educational Technology & Society, 11(1), 132. Retrieved from  http://www.ifets.info/journals/11_1/10.pdf

This article cites research that states that asynchronous classes are more effective than synchronous classes at creating community learning.  Asynchronous classes give students a chance to think about the information before responding.  However, there is not enough research to thoroughly examine the social interaction in the online environment.

Colorado, J., Childress, M., & Holland, J. (Producer). (2009). Instructor interaction and course design factors on student sense of classroom community in an online learning environment.  Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/jozenia/instructor-interaction-and-course-design-factors-on-student-sense-of-classroom-community-in-an-online-learning-environment           

         

           This is a short slideshow that explains a survey examining how the instructor’s interaction and pieces of the course affect how students feel about the class and the community it creates. 

Dzakiria, H. (2008). Students' accounts of the need for continuous support in a distance learning programme, Open Learning, 23(2), 103-111. doi:10.1080/02680510802051913

           The professors at a university in Malaysia asked their students what they felt about their online classes in a small study.  Their discussions revealed that the students felt that learning support was their largest issue. Researchers found that students missed the interaction with their instructors to a greater degree than the researchers had previously realized.  Many students felt lonely and unconnected in online classes.  Not being able to make eye contact or any of the other ways to make yourself known as an individual were felt to be negatives.  Students also were not comfortable asking for help via email.  Not knowing how soon to expect a response from the instructor was disheartening to some students.  At times they did not understand the teacher’s response and at times they did not know how to phrase the

      

Friend Wise, A., Padmanabhan, P., & Duffy, T. M. (2009). Connecting online learners with diverse local practices: The design of effective common reference points for conversation. Distance Education, 30(3), 317-338.  doi:10.1080/01587910903236320     

           This study looks at the idea of creating digital objects to help online learners obtain a greater level of intimacy when participating in online discussions.  The researchers felt there were low-level interactions instead of higher-level ones due to the lack of shared context and shared reference points.  In particular, they found that new teachers who were attempting to learn from experienced teachers may us the same words yet their ideas may mean different things as they will be basing their interpretations on different experiences.  The study examines whether providing common reference points would solve the problem.  It specifically tries to measure data to discover what kind of characteristics these objects should have by comparing three different types of reference points; video, theory, and metaphor.  The use of videos and theoretical descriptions appeared to be a usable way to provide the common reference points needed for participants.  While metaphors could be used effectively with participants with a higher level of detail-focus, they were problematic for others.  The richness of representation did not appear to be a significant issue but conceptual framing may be.  They also examined whether results may have been skewed due to the choice of videos used.

Hill, J. R., Song, L., & West, R. E. (2009). Social learning theory and web-based learning  environments: A review of research and discussion of implications. American Journal of  Distance Education, 23(2), 88-103. doi:10.1080/08923640902857713

           This article is a review and analysis of the literature dealing with social learning.  Overall, it looks at social learning perspectives and how this affects the design and implementation of online learning.  Included in their review are the effects of group and class size,  the influence of culture during online learning, the influence of personal beliefs,  individual learning styles,  self-efficacy, motivation, and how to promote social interaction in group work and written communication.

Hudson, J. M., & Bruckman, A. S. (2004). The bystander effect: A lens for understanding patterns of participation. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(2), 165-195.  http://hgseclass.harvard.edu/~kahleda/projectsite/readings/BystanderEffect.pdf

           A description of the elements of conversation is followed by two case studies showing how the idea of the bystander effect can be applied to online learning.  the bystander effect is described as being the social psychological aspect that explains why people respond in certain ways in emergency situations.  The effect includes self-awareness, social cues, blocking mechanisms and diffuse responsibility.  This article asks how these can be used to learn about the participation choices of online learners.

Jianfei, G., Tregonning, S., & Keenan, L. (2008). Social interaction and participation:Formative evaluation of online CME modules. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 28(3), 172-179. doi:10.10020chp.174

          

           This study examines the participation of Canadian physicians in online social activities.  They were questioned about their perceptions of social closeness, its impact on discussions, the barriers to participation and what motivated them to overcome these barriers. 

Kehrwald, B. (2008). Understanding social presence in text-based online learning environments. Distance Education, 29(1), 89-106. doi:10.1080/01587910802004860                 

           Through extensive interviews, the author studied how online learners define social presence, give suggestions for creating and sustaining the social presence, and the role the social presence plays in the online learning environment.

Kim, J., Kwon, Y., & Cho, D. (2011). Investigating factors that influence social presence and learning outcomes in distance higher education. Computers & Education, 57(2), 1512-1520. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.02.005

          

           This study found that variables such as gender and online learning experience were not significant factors in terms of social presence or learning satisfaction.  They found that media integration and the quality of the instructor’s teaching predicted both social presence and learning satisfaction.  In contrast, the interaction of the students only predicted the amount of social presence, not the amount of learning satisfaction.  Some implications for higher education are also discussed.

Koh, J., Herring, S. C., & Hew, K. (2010). Project-based learning and student knowledge construction during asynchronous online discussion. Internet & Higher Education, 13(4), 284-291. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.003     

 

           This is a study which looks at the levels of knowledge when students are discussing project-based and non-project based ideas.  

Powell, S., Tindal, I., & Millwood, R. (2008). Personalized learning and the Ultraversity experience. Interactive Learning Environments, 16(1), 63-81. doi:10.1080/10494820701772710     

          

           This article  describes the Ultraversity, a project set up by Ultralab at Anglia Ruskin University to develop an online undergraduate program that is supposed to be personalized.  Students were surveyed and the results confirm the importance of online communities when supporting learning.  The community of inquiry is combined with personalized learning so that the instructor’s emphasis is on the group where different members trade jobs according to knowledge and experience.

Slagter van Tryon, P. J., & Bishop, M. J. (2009). Theoretical foundations for enhancing social connectedness in online learning environments. Distance Education, 30(3), 291-315. doi:10.1080/01587910903236312                              

           These authors suggest a framework that promotes thinking more systematically about developing the online social structure when teaching online.  They explain various theories of social information processing and group structure as it pertains to the online community.  They also discuss how students in a face-to-face class analyze the social environment in order to create their guidelines for interaction with each other.

Treadwell, P.,  Mudge, K., Buck, L., & Hargrave, R. (Producer). (2007). Building online learning communities. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/pt36/building-learning-communities-online-presentation          

           This slideshow is about making an online course for forest farming.  It includes an overview of social presence and also has how this extends to the surrounding community.