Kirwood, Price (2005), 2008, Kirkwwod 2008

Adrian Kirkwood* and Linda Price

Learners and learning in the twenty-first century: what do we know about students’ attitudes towards and experiences of information and communication technologies that will help us design courses?

Studies in Higher Education Vol. 30, No. 3, June 2005, pp. 257–274

Method Range of Survey data at the OU

‘Learning can be enhanced when innovations take into account not only the characteristics of the technology, but also the pedagogic design, the context within which learning takes place, student characteristics and their prior experience, and familiarity with the technologies involved. So, although ICTs can enable new forms of teaching and learning to take place, they cannot ensure that effective and appropriate learning outcomes are achieved. It is not technologies, but educational purposes, that must provide the lead. Students need to understand not only how to work with ICTs, but why it can be of benefit to do so.’

‘The OU has not sought to replicate or copy traditional classroom-based education. Instead it has aimed to create a different—but equivalent—educational experience.’

‘So, students need to know not only what they are supposed to do, but also why they are expected to do it and how it will contribute to their learning. Otherwise ‘learner control’ will prove to be counterproductive, as it can promote the adoption of ‘unfocussed and inconclusive’ approaches (Laurillard, 1998).’

‘Since participants do not have visual or auditory contact with each other, contributions are not overtly influenced by preconceived notions or prejudices based upon accent or physical attributes, although any written communication can present cues about the social and gender characteristics of the writer (see, for example, Mann & Stewart, 2000). Reserved individuals need not be intimidated by the speed of response or tone of voice of other contributors. Hence learners are able to participate in a manner that is more considered and reflective than is normally possible in face-to-face sessions. However, it is a different form of discourse from face-to-face communication, and most new students have limited experience of its use and need guidance.’

Mann, C. & Stewart, C. (2000) Internet communication and qualitative research (London, Sage).

‘Some would argue that interpersonal communication, cooperation and collaboration are essential elements of higher education in the early twenty-first century (see, for example, Beaty et al., 2002).’

Beaty, L., Hodgson, V., Mann, S. & McConnell, D. (Conveners) (2002) Manifesto: Towards e- quality in networked e-learning in higher education. Available online at: http://csalt.lancs.ac.uk/ esrc/manifesto.htm (accessed 4 August 2003).

‘The most important point to conclude from the studies presented in this article is that the medium itself is not the most important factor in any educational programme— what really matters is how it is creatively exploited and constructively aligned. The educational benefits that students perceive as gains from using ICT are more significant than the intrinsic characteristics of any particular medium.’

Adrian Kirkwood* and Linda Price (2008)

Assessment and student learning: a fundamental relationship and the role of information and communication technologies

Open Learning Vol. 23, No. 1, February 2008, 5–16

‘An individual’s conception of learning will determine their expectations of what should happen in any educational situation and influence the approach to learning they adopt for specific tasks or activities. These are discussed in the following sections.’

‘Hence an important task for staff is to engender in students an appropriate conception of teaching and learning and to provide an educational rationale for learning activities. This is especially pertinent when teachers expect learners to cooperate or collaborate with others through’

‘it is how they will be assessed (or think that they will be assessed) on the task that determines an individual’s approach (Laurillard, 1979).’

‘Students’ expectations can be as important as the actual requirements for any test or assign- ment. Sambell and McDowell (1998) argue that students participate in the construction of the ‘hidden curriculum’ through their individual interpretations, perceptions and actions, which in turn reflect their orientations, prior experiences and expectations.’

‘Further, there is a relationship between the approach to teaching adopted and the approach to learning taken up by students (Lindblom-Ylänne, Trigwell, Nevgi, & Ashwin, 2006; Trigwell, Prosser, & Waterhouse, 1999).’

A. Kirkwood

Getting it from the Web: why and how online resources are used by independent undergraduate learners

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning; Oct2008, Vol. 24 Issue 5, p372-382,

Method Telephone Interview study based on volunteers from one of 4 courses two science two in Health and social care. Formal assessment requirement varied between courses.

Requirement for web activity ‘This article reports an interview study that aimed to investigate why and how independent learners use resources on the World Wide Web (subsequently referred to as the Web) while undertaking their normal coursework. The investigation was concerned not only with the academic context of courses being studied, but also any personal, domestic and employment-related experiences and circumstances that were pertinent.’

‘Insufficient attention appears to have been paid to two key aspects relating to students gaining access to and making use of Web resources. First, what factors are likely to encourage (or discourage) students in their use of Internet information resources? Second, how do learners develop the information literacy skills necessary to make effective use of the multitude of resources available via the Internet? Too little concern for the educational context and rationale for students’ use of online resources has resulted in disappointing levels of access and use by learners (Rowley et al. 2002).’

Rowley J., Banwell L., Childs S., Gannon-Leary P., Lonsdale R., Urquhart C. & Armstrong C. (2002) User behaviour in relation to electronic information services within the UK higher education academic community. Journal of Educa- tional Media 27, 107–122.

‘While all participants made some use of the Internet for social, domestic or work-related purposes, the extent to which each used the Internet for their studies seemed to be subject to various factors. Some of these acted as an incentive or approach factor, while others were a disincentive or avoidance factor. Most of the students mentioned several factors that coexisted con- currently, reflecting the complexity of their personal circumstances.’

‘The relative impact of factors in combination was shown in the four illustrative examples earlier. Although no single factor was predominant, the influence of assessment was strong in many instances, for example, in the different responses to technical difficulties encountered by Carol and Eve, and the selective attention to course elements reported by most participants.’

not technologies per se, but a wide range of contextual factors (personal as well as educational), that are important in determining whether and how students use Web resources in their learning

Open Learning 2008 Vol 23, no 1

Hopkins, Gibson, Ros i Solé, Savvides, and Starkey from Spain and the United Kingdom, who provide an overview of research on the subject of interaction. They examine the ways in which asynchronous computer-mediated communication can provide student–student and student–tutor interaction that leads to higher-order thinking and the social construction of knowledge. Learners reportedly value the opportunity to interact with their peers and tutors in online conferences but, in practice, tend to post individual messages with no reference to other postings. Conferences, therefore, tend to consist of serial monologues rather than the types of interactive discussion that would lead to the social construction of meaning. Through an examination of the effect of social presence, the role of the tutor, and the impact of task type, the authors conclude that asynchronous computer conferencing is not only welcomed by most students, but also that the ‘social presence’ facilitated by this mode can improve student satisfaction, engagement and retention.

Wosnitza & Volet (2005)

Marold Wosnitza & Simone Volet (2005)

Origin, direction and impact of emotions in social online learning.

Learning and Instruction, 15, 449-464

Notes

· KRO - Concept of emotional arousal can be questioned

· Authors talk in terms of emotions ‘ directed at’ e.g. p456 task directed emotions, but surely using their framework the appraisal would be the causal agent. It is inherent in the description of the student reactions but it is not described in that way. Also talk in terms of emotions as a trigger.

· Multiple sources for emotion

· Interventions (teachers) depend on source and need to be able to recognize the source ( ? link to DP work)

· See individuals as p455 ‘mediating emotions’ (KRO link to frontal)

· How does conflict fit into this and in fact any work from any author about motivation? Although note authors do not talk specifically in terms of motivation

· Authors never found any evidence of positive emotions ‘ directed at’ the technology

· Claim that emoticons are common but do not evidence

· In social learning case study the participation record of others was a key factor of emotional ?arousal( KRO link to task relevance and values)

describe how within a group a group course of action is discussed; is this how emotion links to collaborative?

Concepts

Identifies the following as concepts that have developed around socio-emotional experience in online environments

· Social presence

· Sociability (Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., & Jochems, W. (2002). The sociability of computer-supported collaborative learning environments. Journal of Education Technology and Society, 5(1), 8e22.)

· Social-emotional affordances Volet, S., & Wosnitza, M. (2004). Social affordances and students’ engagement in cross-national online learning: an exploratory study. Journal of Research in International Education, 3(1), 5e29.

· Distributed emotions

however

P450 ‘ mediating role of students’ appraisals of online learning activities and the process of emotion arousal remains less well known.

Emotion

Agrees that the literature on emotions is very diverse but claims that p450 ‘ but only a few of the extant theories form the basis of research on emotions related to learning ‘

Appraisal

Base their approach on appraisal theory

Frijda, N. H. (1986). The emotions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Lazarus, R. S., & Lazarus, B. N. (1994). Passion and reason: Making sense of our emotions. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ellsworth, P. C., & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In R. J. Davidson,

H. Goldsmith, & K. R. Scherer (Eds.), Handbook of the affective sciences (pp. 572e595). New York:

Oxford University Press.

They conceptualise appraisal operating at two levels

The primary level involves an assessment of familiarity, degree of challenge, which are considered alongside relevance to personal goals and interests. More specifically things that are familiar and not too challenging do not arouse much emotion whilst the unfamiliar and challenging lead to anxiety.

(KRO but surely these only relate to the task?, technology rather than the interaction. Also Jones described in more in terms of previous experience)

The secondary level is concerned with evaluating o the appropriateness of the different courses of action available to the learner.

In this way, the emotional valence and the appraisal of action will impact on learning although students will vary as to whether any action taken stems from a positive or a negative valence.

P455 ‘ their arousal ( emotions) is an appraisal process triggered by a perceived potential harm or benefit for the learner in the learning situation’ the reason for the arousal being linked to an attribution process.

Emotion type

Get the following as a source for another approach

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 91e105.

After a review of the various methods available an particularly the timing of data collection, they concluded that a multiple method approach is desirable

Evidence their claims about appraisal based on two case studies

1. Maths class, 8^th graders, thinking aloud and simulated recall

2. University students, online course, transcripts of CMC and questionnaire.

Based on case study 2 p457 ‘ in summary, the analysis of social online learning situations reveals a range of other directed emotions in addition to self, task, and technology directed emotions. Emotions generated in social online environments are not different in nature from those generated in face-to-face ( they didn’t convincingly evidence this claim ( ? rather assumed) therefore (thesis will question this). What is different in online learning is the fact that emotions are expressed via technology ( how? No specific information) and the disclosure of emotions is of necessity voluntary ( thesis will not make this assumption). In contrast face to face situations offer the possibility of detecting emotions through facial expression and bodily language which may not always be voluntary disclosures of emotions’

The impact of emotions on learning and the significance for teacher intervention

P458 A number of studies have shown that ‘ when education based on computer conferencing fails, it is usually because there has not been a responsible teaching presence an appropriate leadership and direction exercised ‘ ( G, A & A, 2000, p96)

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment:

computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2e3), 87e105.

The process of emotion arousal is triggered by an activity that presents different degrees of challenge or familiarity to the learner and also difference degrees of relevance .

sw

Authors claim that appraisal and emotional arousal processes be used as conceptual tools to illustrate the impact of emotions on the individual students learning process.

The authors provide two case studies that ‘s stress the importance of teachers’ understanding the processes that trigger negative emotions in order to intervene effectively’

But

‘if emotions are not spontaneously disclosed, as is necessary in online learning ( a point the thesis will consider without making prior assumption) , teachers are unable to appreciate their significance on the learning process. Teachers also need to understand the full complexity, as evidenced from empirical work of the impact of student’s emotions on their motivation and further work.

Authors review of method

Considered in terms of a distinction between methods that collect evidence during learning and those that collect after.

(1) survey , specifically of emotions ( Pekrun paper) Emotions bring draw attention to the problematic nature of disclosure particularly when emotional experience is salient. Process of emotional experience is not revealed ( KRO ?process of empathizing with the experience revealed by the DP work ) KRO retrospective and therefore surely involves attribution

(2) observation

(i) Facial expression - FACs – ( details on this method from old notes ). For online it would require video recording ( with the attendant problems of that method)

(ii) Content analysis , inobtrusive, but maybe privacy issues. Inference and interpretation although methodologies have been developed

(3) emotion diary

(4) simulated recall – present some record of the learning process (KRO not available as a continuous record it can be challenging . For group work there are complex issues, particularly ethical

(5) Practitioner records

P454 ‘overall the methods that are applicable to social online learning provide only limited (KRO for thesis one aim is to extend these) access to the complex set of emotions experienced during the learning process.’ Each of these methods has limitations. When used in combination these methods provide a more comprehensive picture of the emotion arousal process and its impact on the learning process ( actually it doesn’t, as described, tell you anything about the learning process)

J & J (2005) - volition ( emotion and learning)

Hanna Jarvenjo & Sanna Jarvela (2005)

How students describe the sources of their emotional and motivational experiences during the learning process: A qualitative approach

Learning and Instruction 15, 465-480

Introduction

P466 ‘ In learning situations, individuals make personal appraisals of the situation’s meaning based on their former knowledge and experiences ( Fredrickson, 2001). ( from page 477 Emotional experiences arise when the students interpret the situation and begin to compare it to their former experiences, and to construct personal meanings (Fredrickson, 2001).These appraisals along with situational factors and the individual’s interpretations of them arouse emotions, which then need to be controlled, at least to some extent, to ensure meaningful goal directed behaviour’

‘Research on emotions has shown that students experience a rich variety of emotions in academic settings ( Schutz & De Cuir, 2002).

Schutz, D. H., & DeCuir, J. T. (2002). Inquiry on emotions in education. Educational Psychologist, 37(2), 125e134.

Results show that academic emotions are significantly related to student motivation, learning strategies, cognitive resources, self-regulation and academic achievement (Pekrun, Goetz, Titz, & Perry, 2002)

Pekrun, R., Goetz, T., Titz, W., & Perry, R. P. (2002). Academic emotions in students’ self-regulated

learning and achievement: a program of qualitative and quantitative research. Educational

Psychologist, 37(2), 91e105.

Also, not only do the emotions themselves vary, but also their sources. Learning situations instigate a variety of self-referenced, task-related and social emotions. However, even though there is a lot of research on the effects of emotional factors on classroom learning (see, e.g., Mayring & von Rhoeneck, 2003), there is hardly any research on these issues in technology-based classroom learning contexts.

Aim

1. The aim of this study was to identify the sources of emotional experiences in computer-supported inquiry learning. Specifically, we analysed the reasons the students give as sources of their emotional experiences

2. Another aim of the study was to analyze how the case students expressed and controlled their emotions in actual learning situations. by combining the interviews with the video data uur purpose was to illustrate the aspects of students’ behaviour that are not readily observable,

Framework – volition how is it used to strengthen motivation that in turn backs up goal-directed behaviours.

Learning context

Computer – supported inquiry projects in literature taking place over 12-24 lessons of 75 min duration based in a conventional Finnish classroom context. Students aged 12-15, 7 boys and 11 girls

Forum for knowledge construction discussion

Method

Interviews– students own attributions regarding the source of their emotions obtained through semi structured interviews

All 18 Students asked to describe their goals , learning strategies, interpretations of the learning environment and self-related beliefs and feelings during semi-structured interviews.

In the first phase of the data driven analysis, students’ different kinds of descriptions of their emotional expressions were identified. After several repeated coding sessions, five coding categories were formulated based on the dialectics of data and theory (Miles & Huberman, 1994). The categories were self, task, performance, context, and social (see Table 1).

Video data and case descriptions ( 2 students one boy and one girl

Process-orientated data collection. Working processes videotaped during ten lessons.

When the researcher was familiar with the data, she looked again at the videotapes with the transcriptions and wrote specific descriptions of the students’ emotional and motivational expressions and volitional behaviour. Finally, the descriptions of the two case students were made. Also, the case students’ interview data from the same project were used to complement the case descriptions

Findings

Interview data

Emotions attributed to

self (37%), context (32%), task(12%), performance(11%) social (8%)

What follows are some relevant extracts from the interview data – note p474 ‘students’ descriptions often included more than one source for their experienced emotions’

The self-category included descriptions of experiences that derive from the students’ former endeavours, their individual interests or general thoughts concerning the situation, as well as their personal motivational beliefs about themselves when confronted with the current learning context

Context in Example 7 in which the task requires writing and sharing the created theory in the learning environment and Student 7 does not understand how commenting on the other students’ work in the computer-supported learning environment helps him with his own project

The contextual element e the implemented inquiry learning model e emphasizes collaboration and sharing, and leads the student to situations where she has to share her ideas with other students. In any case, the main source for the student’s negative emotion is social instead of contextual, since she emphasizes the interaction with her classmates. The student feels anxious when the other students can read her notes in the computer-supported learning environment. The main source for the emotional experience is social although the situation was created by the inquiry model.

Combining interview data with video data

In the descriptions that follow the focus is on the expression of the emotions and how control of these emotional experiences varied in the different phases of the learning project and between the case students.

Despite the fact that for both these students 38% ( Ville) and 37%(Anna) of emotions were attributed to self, Anna talked about her emotional experiences in the interviews approximately as much as Ville, and her answers included emotional descriptions in all categories, compared to Ville’s, who did not have any performance descriptions there were some contrasts when it came to looking at the video data.

Ville ( male student) ‘ he expresses his non-task orientation and frustration by shaking his head and talking to himself e.g. non, non, no . “he lays his head on his desk and mumbles to himself

Anna ( female student) ‘almost never expresses her feelings by talking or using gestures

Conclusions

‘The cases of Anna and Ville illustrate the importance of volitional control. Anna had good self-regulation skills and she managed to control her emotional reactions and action towards the goal during the whole project. The analyses of the interviews and video data showed that she was able to highlight the motivational aspects of the task, as can be seen in Example 14, and she also seemed to be able to maintain focus and effort toward the goals despite distractions.

Ville’s working improved after he managed to control his emotions. When the goal became clearer, he was able to better regulate his actions. At the end of the project he seemed to take more responsibility for his own learning, and even if he still expressed his emotions and got distracted from time to time, he managed to return to work after the distractions much more easily.

‘Anna and Ville’s cases demonstrate how emotions can be controlled during the learning process. As Ville showed during the first part of the project, if the emotions overcome the control efforts, learning and cognitive actions become impossible. Cognitive actions may also indicate emotional control, as can be seen in Ville’s Example 14, where writing the computer notes is used as both a cognitive strategy and for controlling the emotional state.’

Learning through discussion

In this study there were surprisingly few responses in the social-category, even though the pedagogical model and computer-supported learning environment emphasized collaboration and knowledge sharing. It seems that social sources for emotional experiences are difficult to investigate and identify from the data, even though students seem to recognize the social aspects of the learning situation. It could be that emotions caused by social sources are so private that students do not want to disclose them.

affective 2010 Jones

Ann Jones (2010)

Affective issues in learning technologies: emotional responses to technology and technology’s role in supporting socio-emotional skills

Journal of Interactive media in education

http://jime.open.ac.uk/2010/09

Considers the topic of affective issues in learning technologies by looking back at two projects ( Cicero in 1980 and Bubble dialogue in 1990s) and making comparisons between findings then and more recent work.

Note article also talks about anxiety

Definition of affect

Based on Oates & Nudy (1996) encompases , emotion, mood, attitude and value

Case study 1 -1980 – Cicero

students ( Brain and Behaviour) booked sessions at Regional centre. 4 interactive sessions available

Methods

questionnaires before, during, and after specifically looking at reactions, expectations, attitude.

37% used it – unprompted response from several that they found it to be fun

58% intended to do so.

Follow up interviews at Residential school as to why it was not used

P6 ‘in informal interviews, students were prepared to reveal more about their fears that they expressed in questionniares’

Findings

Barriers

· Scared

· Embarrassed about using it in front of others

· Iy or 2 y reports of a bad computer experience.

These findings were fed back into the construction of the final questionnaire when it was confirmed. ( KRO then don’t want to repeat this when students are working with others)

Students made a cost/ benefit analysis of perceived need which in turn depended on how well it was integrated into the course , the decision depending on the influence of affective factors ie fear, lack of confidence, embarrassment.

Led to a model of barriers that operated at three stages

· Access to hardware,

· access to the program,

· access to the course.

But p6 ‘ doesn’t point up inter-relatedness of the different barriers’

Comparisons with now

Kirkwood and Price (2008) assessment important for take up p 7 ‘ influences what gets studied and how it gets studied’

Confidence and access remain as issues

Case- study 2 Bubble dialogue -1990s nb one of the themes is about handling conflict

P15 ‘ The powerful aspects of bubble dialogue are

Cartoon like graphics, role play, identification, thought/specch distiction, layers of mediation

‘ can express difficult emotions without having to ‘own’ them by ascribing them to the characters that they role play’

2 levels of mediation

children involved didn’t talk directly to a person but interact through a computer, also the child is a character

YM's talk about designing and using a course with goole apps

Why use Google apps

Flexibility as a VLE ( if VLE available not fit for purpose)

Translation functionality

Apps as shared documents ? whether or not these are places to collaborate

can scaffold - same applies (KRO had issue whether IM had done too much scaffolding ie scaffolded before he knew what ZPD was in terms of the individuals in his student cohort)

KRO? - can you scaffold a wiki as easily as you can a google doc?

demanding for students - new pedagogy, new technology, new subjects matter. KRO- should have asked him what he intended by new pedagogy as he did admit at question time that most of the activity took place on the LH of the CF. Does more content ( teacher inclinatyion) lead to less discussion

contrived - assessment tasks, including participation, presence, personal diaries. KRO forum threads

Lowenthal social presence review

Lowenthal, P.R. (2010)

The evolution and influence of social presence theory on online learning

Kidd, T.T. (ed). Online education and adult learning: New Frontiers for teaching practices. Hershey, PA:IGI Global

Need to link paper numbering with book numbering

Social presence - conceptualized in many ways, social interaction, immediacy, intimacy, emotion and or connectedness

History

1. (telecommunications) Short et al, 1976 – social presence – defined as degree of salience (p4 ‘ i.e. the quality or state of being there’) ‘ to explain the effect telecommunications media can have on communication. In particular that communication is strengthened by the addition of visual information but as research progressed they decided that this depended on the situation/ application ie without visual for some situations with exchanges that involved exchanges of intimate information.

Communications media differ in the amount of salience they offer and these differences play an important role in how people interact ( KRO underestimated the agency of the users )

Williams (1978b) found that physical presence may be even more important for people communicating than visual information. – deficit theory

2. Cueless theory (Rutter) (CMC) Eyes or total physical presence? Also ideas of psychological distance – deficit theory

3. Media Richness theory (Daft, Lengel, Trevino) (CMC) – where p11 ‘richness defined as the potential information –carrying capacity of the data. ‘ e.g. a wink is high in information, it is rich. F-f highest, a spreadsheet lowest ‘ a medium’s capacity for immediate feedback, the number of cues and channels utilized, personalization, and language variety’ p 560 of their article , all influence the degree of media richness – deficit theory

4. SIT (CMC)– started conversation, specifically in the context of CMC, around cues being filtered in . Walther 1992 p12 ‘ argued that human social nature is the same in CMC and f-to-f . Given enough time, he believed that people will find ways to compensate ‘

5. research in educational context online learning ( cf media, organization, communication studies) Gunawardena, Garrison, Anderson and Archer p13 ‘ began reconceptualising social presence theory – moving away from technologigal deterministic conceptualizations of mediated communication’

(KRO -missed out Keisler)

(KRO heading) move from a focus on the medium to a focus on peoples’ actions.

Herring (2007) much of the meaning and significance of CMC depends on its surrounding discourse.

Berge & Collins, 1995) the absence of social cues will interfere with T & L

Lombard & Ditton (1997) p14 ‘identified six interrelated ( and cross disciplinary) but distinct ways people understand presence

Presence as social richness

Presence as realism

Presence as transportation

Presence as immersion

Presence as social actor within medium

Presence as medium as social actor

Definitions of social presence in learning contexts

· Gunawardena (1995, p151) ‘the degree to which a person is perceived as a ‘real’ person in mediated communication

· Garrison et al (2000, p94) ‘ the ability of participants in a community of inquiry to project themselves socially and emotionally as real people’ – measured by student & teacher ability to project themselves as real i.e. the process. i.e.content analysis of online discussion using the frame of affective, interactive and cohesive messages

· Tu and McIssac (2002, p149) ‘the degree of feeling, perceptionm, and reaction of being connected by CMC to another intellectual entity through a text-based encounter’

· Picciano (2002, p22) ‘a student’s sense of being in and belonging in a course and the ability to interact with other students and the instructor’’ measured students sense of belonging to a community’ i.e an outcome

Definitions share a focus on the ‘realness’ of other people and on being there

Measurement

Challenge of the method p19,20. – get Swan (2003), Swan and Shih(2005) ******* multi faceted approach

Gunawadena, & Tu tend to focus on people’s attititudes (bipolar attitude scale, option to choose 1 of 5 categories from across the scale) as a measure whilst Garrisong and Rourke focused on their behaviour.

References

Arbaugh, J. B., Cleveland-Innes, M., Diaz, S. R., Garrison, G. R., Philip, I., Richardson, J. C.,Shea, P., & Swan, K. P. (2008). The community of inquiry framework: Development,validation, and directions for further research. Paper presented at the annual meeting of

the American Education Research Association, New York, NY.

Argyle, M., & Cook, M. (1976). Gaze and mutual gaze. London: Cambridge University.

Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry, 28, 289-304.

Baym, N. K., Zhang, Y. B., & Lin, M-C. (2004). Social interaction across media: Interpersonal communication on the Internet, telephone, and face-to-face. New Media & Society, 6(3),

Benbunan-Fich, R., Hiltz, S. R., & Harasim, L. (2005). The online interaction learning model: Anintegrated theoretical framework for learning networks. In S. R. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 19-37).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Berge, Z., & Collins, M. (1995). Computer-mediated communication and the online classroom: Overview and perspectives (Vol. 1). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.

Biocca, F. (1997). The cyborg's dilemma: Progressive embodiment in virtual environments. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol3/issue2/biocca2.html

Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a more robust theory and measure of socialpresence: Review and suggested criteria. Presence: Teleoperators & Virutal Environments,12(5), 456-480.

Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (2002). The social life of information. Boston: Harvard Busines Press.

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizational design. In L. L. Cummings & B. M. Staw (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (191-233). Homewood, IL: JAI Press.

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.

Daft, R. L., Lengel, R. H., & Trevino, L. K. (1987). Message equivocality, media selection, and manager performance: Implications for information systems. MIS Quarterly, 11(3), 355-366.

Danchak, M. M., Walther, J. B., & Swan, K. P. (2001, November). Presence in mediated instruction: Bandwidth, behavior, and expectancy violations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of Asynchronous Learning Networks, Orlando, FL.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Grubb, A., & Hines, M. (2000). Tearing down barriers and building communities: Pedagogicalstrategies for the web-based environment. In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Issues in Web-based pedagogy: A critical primer (pp. 365-380). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Gunawardena, C. N. (1995). Social presence theory and implications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 1(2/3), 147-166.

Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer-mediated conferencing environment. The American Journal of Distance Education,11(3), 8-26.

Henninger, M., & Viswanathan, V. (2004). Social presence in online tutoring: What we know and what we should know. In P. Gerjets, P. A. Kirschner, J. Elen, & R. Joiner (Eds.), Proceedingsof the first joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with Computers (CD-ROM). Tuebingen: Knowledge Media Research Center.

Herring, S. C. (2007). A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse. Language@Internet, 4(1). Retrieved from http://www.languageatinternet.de/articles/2007

/761/Faceted_Classification_Scheme_for_CMD.pdf

Hiltz, S. R., & Turoff, M. (1993). The network nation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Hostetter, C., & Busch, M. (2006). Measuring up online: The relationship between social presence and student learning satisfaction. Journal of Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 6(2), 1-12.

Hughes, M., Ventura, S., & Dando, M. (2007). Assessing social presence in online discussion groups: A replication study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(1), 17-29.

Kiesler, S. (1986). The hidden messages in computer networks. Harvard Business Review, 64(3), 46-54, 58-60.

Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39(10), 1123-1134.

Kemp, N. J., & Rutter, D. R. (1986). Social interaction in blind people: An experimental analysis. Human Relations, 39(3), 195-210.

Kramer, A. D. I., Oh, L. M., & Fussell, S. R. (2006). Using linguistic features to measure presence in computer-mediated communication. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 913-916). New York: ACM Press.

Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017-1031.

Laffey, L., Lin, G. Y., & Lin, Y. (2006). Assessing social ability in online learning environments. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17(2), 163-177.

Lombard, M., & Ditton, T. (1997). At the heart of it all: The concept of presence. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 3(2). Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol3/issue2/lombard.html

Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2003). Loneliness and social uses of the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 659-671.

Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the Internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientists, 45(3), 420-435.

Picciano, A. (2002). Beyond student perceptions: Issues of interaction, presence, and performance in an online course. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 6(1), 21-40.

Read, S. J., & Miller, L. C. (1995). Stories are fundamental to meaning and memory: For social creatures, could it be otherwise? In R. S. Wyer (Ed.), Knowledge and memory: The real story (pp. 139-152). Hillsday, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Richardson, J. C., & Swan, K. (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68-88.

Robinson, P. (2000). Where is every-body? In R. A. Cole (Ed.), Issues in Web-based pedagogy: A critical primer (pp. 111-123). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2001). Assessing social presence in asynchronous text-based computer conferencing. Journal of Distance Education, 14. Retrieved from http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol14.2/rourke_et_al.html

Rovai, A. P. (2002). Building a sense of community at a distance. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1). Retrieved from

http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/79/153

Russo, T., & Benson, S. (2005). Learning with invisible others: Perceptions of online presence and their relationship to cognitive and affective learning. Educational Technology & Society, 8(1), 54-62.

Rutter, D. R. (1984). Looking and Seeing: The Role of Visual Communication in SocialInteraction. London: John Wiley.

Rutter, D. R. (1989). The role of cluelessness in social interaction: An examination of teaching by telephone. In D. Roger & P. Bull (Eds.), Conversation (pp. 294-312). Philadelphia, PA:

Multilingual Matters.

Rutter, D. R., Pennington, D. C., Dewey, M. E., & Swain, J. (1984). Eye-contact as a chance product of individual looking: Implications for the intimacy model of argyle and dean. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 8(4), 250-258.

Short, J. A. (1974). Effects of medium of communication on experimental negotiation. Human Relations, 27(3), 225-234.

Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons.

Swan, K. (2003). Developing social presence in online course discussions. In S. Naidu (Ed.), Learning and teaching with technology: Principles and practices (pp. 147-164). London: Kogan Page.

Swan, K., & Shih, L. F. (2005). On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 9(3), 115-136.

Tallent-Runnels, M. K., Thomas, J. A., Lan, W. Y., Cooper, S., Ahern, T. C., Shaw, S. M., et al. (2006). Teaching courses online: A review of the research. Review of Educational Research, 76(1), 93-135.

Thurlow, C., Lengel, L., & Tomic, A. (2004). Computer mediated communication: Social interaction and the Internet. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Tu, C.-H. (2000). On-line learning migration: From social learning theory to social presence theory in a CMC environment. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 2, 27-37.

Tu, C.-H. (2002a). The impacts of text-based CMC on online social presence. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/PDF/1.2.6.pdf

Tu, C.-H. (2002b). The measurement of social presence in an online learning environment.International Journal on E-Learning, 1(2), 34-45.

Tu, C.-H., & Corry, M. (2004). Online discussion durations impact online social presence. In C. Crawford. et al. (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference 2004 (pp. 3073-3077). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Tu, C.-H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131-150.

van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). The network society: Social aspects of new media (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Vrasidas, C., & Glass, G. V. (2002). A conceptual framework for studying distance education. In C. Vrasidas & G. V. Glass (Eds.), Distance education and distributed learning (pp. 31-55). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52-90.

Walther, J. B. (1994). Anticipated ongoing interaction versus channel effects on relational communication in computer-mediated interaction. Human Communication Research, 20, 473-501

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43.

Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F., & Park, D. W. (1994). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A meta-analysis of social and antisocial communication. Communication

Research, 21(4), 460-487.

Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 529-563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wise, A., Chang, J., Duffy, T., & Del Valle, R. (2004). The effects of teacher social presence on student satisfaction, engagement, and learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 31(3), 247-271.