You are here:

Getting the Mix Right Again: An Updated and Theoretical Rationale for Interaction
ARTICLE

IRRODL Volume 4, Number 2, ISSN 1492-3831 Publisher: Athabasca University Press

Full Text

Abstract

No topic raises more contentious debate among educators than the role of interaction as a crucial component of the education process. This debate is fueled by surface problems of definition and vested interests of professional educators, but is more deeply marked by epistemological assumptions relative to the role of humans and human interaction in education and learning. The seminal article by Daniel and Marquis (1979) challenged distance educators to get the mixture right between independent study and interactive learning strategies and activities. They quite rightly pointed out that these two primary forms of education have differing economic, pedagogical, and social characteristics, and that we are unlikely to find a “perfect” mix that meets all learner and institutional needs across all curricula and content. Nonetheless, hard decisions have to be made. Even more than in 1979, the development of newer, cost effective technologies and the nearly ubiquitous (in developed countries) Net-based telecommunications system is transforming, at least, the cost and access implications of getting the mix right. Further, developments in social cognitive based learning theories are providing increased evidence of the importance of collaborative activity as a component of all forms of education – including those delivered at a distance. Finally, the context in which distance education is developed and delivered is changing in response to the capacity of the semantic Web (Berners-Lee, 1999) to support interaction, not only amongst humans, but also between and among autonomous agents and human beings. Thus, the landscape and challenges of “getting the mix right” have not lessened in the past 25 years, and, in fact, have become even more complicated. This paper attempts to provide a theoretical rationale and guide for instructional designers and teachers interested in developing distance education systems that are both effective and efficient in meeting diverse student learning needs.

Citation

Anderson, T. (2003). Getting the Mix Right Again: An Updated and Theoretical Rationale for Interaction. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 4(2),. Athabasca University Press. Retrieved December 3, 2023 from .

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Adria, M., and Woudstra, A. (2001). Who’s on the line? Managing student communications in distance learning using a one-window approach. Open Learning, 16(3), 249 – 261.
  2. Anderson, T., and Garrison, D.R. (1995). Transactional issues in distance education: The impact of design in audioteleconferencing. American Journal of Distance Education, 9(2), 27 – 45.
  3. Anderson, T., and Garrison, D.R. (1998). Learning in a networked world: New roles and responsibilities. In C. Gibson (Ed.), Distance Learners in Higher Education. (P. 97-112).
  4. Bates, A. (1990). Interactivity as a Criterion for Media Selection in Distance Education. Annual Conference of the Asian Association of Open Universities. ERIC Document No. ED329245
  5. Berners-Lee, T. (1998). Realizing the Full Potential of the Web. World-Wide Web Consortium. Retrieved April 3, 2003 from: http://www.w3.org/1998/02/Potential.html
  6. Berners-Lee, T. (1999). Weaving the Web: The original design and ultimate destiny of the WorldWide Web by its inventor. San Francisco: Harper.
  7. Clark, R.E. (1994). Media will never influence learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 42(2), 21 – 29.
  8. Coldeway, D. (1991). Patterns of behaviour in individualized distance education courses. Research in Distance Education, 3(4), 6 – 10.
  9. Collis, B., and Moonen, J. (2001). Flexible learning in a digital world. London: Kogan Page.
  10. Corbin, J., and Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13, 3 – 21.
  11. Daniel, J., and Marquis, C. (1979). Interaction and Independence: Getting the mixture right. Teaching at a Distance, 15, 25 – 44.
  12. Daniel, J., and Marquis, C. (1988). Interaction and independence: Getting the mix right. In D. Sewart, D. Keegan and B. Holmberg (Eds.) Distance Education: International perspectives. (P. 339-359). London: Routledge.
  13. Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education. New York: Macmillan. Retrieved May 21, 2001 from: http://www.ilt.columbia.edu/projects/digitexts/dewey/d_e/contents.html
  14. Fulford, C.P., and Zhang, S. (1993). Perceptions of Interaction: The critical predictor in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 7(3), 8 – 21.
  15. Garrison, D.R., and Shale, D. (1990). A new framework and perspective. In D.R. Garrison and D. Shale (Eds.), Education at a distance: from issues to practice. (P. 123-133). Malabar,
  16. Garrison, R., Anderson, T., and Archer, W. (2000). Critical thinking in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education 2(2), 87 – 105. Retrieved July 15, 2003 from: http://www.atl.ualberta.ca/cmc/CTinTextEnvFinal.pdf
  17. Garrison, D.R., Anderson, T., and Archer, W. (2000). Critical Thinking and Computer Conferencing: A model and tool to assess cognitive presence. Retrieved July 15, 2003 from: www.atl.ualberta.ca/cmc/CogPresPaper_June30_.pdf
  18. Greer, J., McCalla, G., Vassileva, J., Deters, R., Bull, S., and Kettel, L. (2001). Lessons learned in deploying a multi-agent learning support system: The I-Help experience. AIED. Retrieved April 2, 2003 from: http://julita.usask.ca/Texte/Aied01-camera.pdf
  19. Holmberg, B. (1989). Theory and practice of distance education. London: Routledge.
  20. Jaspers, F. (1991). Interactivity or Instruction? A reaction to Merrill. Educational Technology, 31(3), 21 – 24.
  21. Jonassen, D. (1991). Evaluating constructivistic learning. Educational Technology, 31(10), 28 – 33.
  22. Juler, P. (1990). Promoting interaction; maintaining independence: Swallowing the mixture. Open Learning, 5(2), 24 – 33.
  23. Kirby, D., and Boak, C. (1987). Developing a system for audio-teleconferencing analysis. Journal of Distance Education, 2(2), 31 – 42.
  24. Kirkup, G., and von Prummer, C. (1990). Support and Connectedness: The needs of women distance education students. Journal of Distance Education, 5(2), 9 – 31. Retrieved April l2, 2003 from: http://cade.athabascau.ca/vol5.2/7_kirkup_and_von_prummer.html
  25. Kozma, R. (1994). Will Media Influence Learning? Reframing the debate. Educational Technology Research& Development, 42(2), 7 – 19.
  26. Kramarae, C. (2003). Gender equity online, when there is no door to knock on. In D. Moore and W. Anderson (Eds.) Handbook of Distance Education. (P. 261-272). Mahwah, NJ.:
  27. Langer, E. (1989). Mindfulness. Reading, MA.: Addison-Wesley.
  28. Laurillard, D. (1997). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge.
  29. Lipman, M. (1991). Thinking in Education. Cambridge, UK.: Cambridge University Press.
  30. Litzinger, M.E., Carr, A.A., and Marra, R. (1997). Constructivism, Feminism, and Systemic Change: Finding Common Ground. Presented at the Annual Conference of the Association of Educational Communications and Technology, Albuquerque, NM.
  31. May, S. (1993). Collaborative Learning: More is not necessarily better. American Journal of Distance Education, 7(3), 39 – 49.
  32. McCrosky, J., and Richmond, V.P. (1992). Increasing teacher influence through immediacy. In Richmond V.P. And J. McCrosky (Eds.) Power in the Classroom: Communication, control, and concern. (P. 200-211).
  33. Moore, M. (1989). Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 3(2), 1 – 6.
  34. Parker, L., and Olgren C. (1980). Teleconferencing and interactive media. Madison, WI.: University of Wisconsin Extension Press.
  35. Potter, J. (1998). Beyond Access: Student perspective on support service needs in distance education. The Canadian Journal of University Continuing Education/Revue canadienne de l’éducation permanante universitaire, 24(1) Retrieved October 15, 2002 from: http://www.extension.usask.ca/cjuce/articles/v24pdf/2413.pdf
  36. Roberts, J. (1998). Compressed Video Learning: Creating active learners. Montreal: Cheneliere/McGraw-Hill.
  37. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R., and Archer, W. (2001). Methodolgical issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 12. Retrieved July 15, 2003 from: http://www.atl.ualberta.ca/cmc/2Rourke_et_al_Content_Analysis.pdf
  38. Rourke, L., and Anderson, T. (2002). Using peer teams to lead online discussions. Journal of Interactive Media in Education 1. Retrieved July 15, 2003 from: http://wwwjime.open.ac.uk/2002/1/rourke-anderson-02-1-01.html
  39. Russell, T. (2000). The No Significant Difference Phenomenon. Retrieved Nov. 22, 2000 from: http://cuda.teleeducation.nb.ca/nosignificantdifference/
  40. Saba, F., and Shearer, R. (1994). Verifying key theoretical concepts in a dynamic model of distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(1), 36 – 59.
  41. Seels, B. (1997). Theory development in educational/instructional technology. Education Technology, 37(1), 3 – 5.
  42. Sims, R. (1999). Interactivity on stage: Strategies for learner-designer communication. Australian Journal of Educational Technology, 15(3), 257 – 272. Retrieved May 25, 2002 from: http://cleo.murdoch.edu.au/ajet/ajet15/sims.html
  43. Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative learning theory, research, and practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
  44. Sutton, L. (2001). The principles of vicarious interaction in computer-mediated communications. Journal of Interactive Educational Communications, 7(3), 223 – 242. Retrieved July 15, 2003 from: http://www.eas.asu.edu/elearn/research/suttonnew.pdf
  45. Turoff, M. (1997). Alternative futures for distance learning: The force and the darkside. Virtual Learning Environments and the Role of the Teacher. UNESCO/Open University. Retrieved April 2, 2003 from: http://eies.njit.edu/~turoff/Papers/darkaln.html
  46. Wagner, E.D. (1994). In support of a functional definition of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(2), 6 – 26.
  47. Wenger, E. (2001). Supporting communities of practice: A survey of community-orientated technologies. (1.3 Ed.) Shareware. Retrieved Mar 12, 2003 from: http://www.ewenger.com/tech/
  48. Wilson, B. (1997). Thoughts on theory in educational technology. Educational Technology, 37(1), 22 – 26.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Cited By

View References & Citations Map

These links are based on references which have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Links

Also Read

Related Collections