Activity2

Analyze the electronic learning community. Describe the differences between the face-to-face classroom community and the online community. How is the online learning process different? Assess the instructor’s role in facilitating the development of the online community in a course offered totally online. Give examples and use at least three to five outside references and resources in your response. Be sure to include citations for quotations and paraphrases with references in APA format and style.

Technology is constantly changing and improving rapidly, and “education systems have an obligation to keep pace with emerging technology” (Shaffer, 2008, p. 1). If technology continues to grow at the intensity it has over the past decade, curriculum, educator preparation, instructional and assessment strategies must develop in order to effectively use technology in the classroom. Pagliaro (2010) pointed out that the need to develop 21st century learning environments has placed pressure on educators to transform teaching strategies and pedagogy to meet the demands of the technological native; a learner who has not known a world without technological applications views technology as an active medium to socialize, to connect, to collaborate, to interact with, and to learn about the world.

Numerous studies indicate that no significant difference in educational outcomes exists between web-based distance learning courses and traditional courses (Russell, 2001). At the same time, the literature suggests that favorable outcomes rely on students who have the ability to participate as active learners (Flowers, 2000). Traditional instruction has historically involved an instructor communicating to students in a face-to-face classroom arrangement. In contrast, web-based distance learning facilitates interaction between students while at the same time demoting the instructor. A key theoretical issue is the transition of the role of the instructor in a distance-learning environment. Instead of acting as a lecturer, as in a traditional environment, the instructor becomes a facilitator. The instructor faces a transition from teacher-centered to student-centered methodology. Thus, the instructor transitions from the sage to a guide (Bejerano, 2008). In addition, the instructor faces the further challenge of discerning the degree of knowledge students possess with regard to computer technology, as well as their level of access to the necessary equipment. Finally, the instructor faces the challenge of creating an environment that nurtures collaboration. This environment seems to require a flattened hierarchy, with an increased degree of equality between participants in the classroom. More nearly equal participation by the course participants, including both the instructor and the students, may enhance a sense of community among participants in a virtual learning environment (Griffin, 2007).

Though both traditional academic and virtual learning processes have notably converged in the past decade, they still can be differentiated. Traditional academic learning is more of teacher-centered instruction of synchronous meetings and scheduled groups constrained by classroom availability, while virtual learning is student-centered, asynchronous, and available anytime and anywhere. A further elaboration by Delfino & Persico (2009) distinguishes the spontaneous interaction of the traditional classroom from the extensive pre-preparation required in online learning formats. Delfino & Persico further identifies advantages and disadvantages of virtual learning, summarizing that virtual learning can be both highly interactive and simultaneously isolating because of the inherent difficulties of developing cohesiveness and true connectedness among students. More serious research should be focused on the use and effectiveness of online learning processes.

Daniel, Schwier, & Ross (2007) defined a virtual learning community as, “community of people in a virtual location where they interact, share interests and employ technology to work together to achieve their academic goals” (p. 462). Siemens (2005) evolved a theory of learning that embraces the advancements of technology and the needs of the 21st century called connectivism in the virtual learning community. The learning theory of connectivism addresses the collaboration, innovation, and communication as well as the theories of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism,which existed prior to the technology invasion and the networked world. Connective knowledge, as defined by Downes (2005) is interaction, or knowledge of the connection or the understanding of the connection. Each participant is a member in a virtual learning community and provides knowledge to the network. The knowledge is then shared through the network and connections are created for each participant creating connective knowledge.

For a course offered totally online, online instructor's role wear many hats as being: pedagogical, social, managerial, and technical. The pedagogical role is one in which the online instructor develops the course content, has the expertise to direct attention to specific concepts, skills, and principles, and serves as the moderator/facilitator for online discussion by presenting questions, probing responses and modeling behavior for an online learning environment. The social role of the online instructor is to create a learning environment that promotes group cohesiveness, and the establishment of a learning community. The managerial role is one in which the online instructor delegate course tasks, establishes the course pace and assignment timetable, manages course communications and overall organization. The technical role is one in which the online instructor ensures that the learners are comfortable with the learning system platform that is being used within the online learning environment. The goal for every online instructor should be to make the technology transparent so that the learner can concentrate on course activities rather than focusing on the technology.

Solimeno et al. (2008) found that instructors can adopt constructivist learning models online, with communications able to foster increased interaction both between the students and the instructor, as well as between students. In a similar finding, Spinks (2007) noted that when sense of community was mediated by student self-efficacy, a substantial effect on GPA developed. The researcher considered online attributes of learning communities, as well as the necessary attributes of the learning community. In addition, Spinks perceived that the sense of community required a nurturing environment, and had positive links with student success. In contrast, students without a developed sense of community might have increased risk factors for failure. In analyzing the online learning process, online students require sufficient self-discipline to complete their academic work with minimal supervision. However, not all students are prepared to function as independent learners. This may result in discouragement, and even to abandonment of student aspirations. The student is faced with a transition from passive learning to active learning in which the student must identify weaknesses within themselves, and seek help as appropriate (Bejerano, 2008). The transition from passive learning to active learning is thought to improve learning outcomes. Many institutions encourage autonomy, although the majority emphasizes individualized control which provides a degree of student independence within set limits (Holmberg, 2002).

In a virtual environment, the mediation of computers and technology changes the fundamental relationship between the online institution and the student. In addition, the student must become a full participant in the learning experience, and must engage in rigorous self-assessment. These all combine to suggest a deep change in the way that teaching and learning is done. The students face increased responsibility for their own learning (Griffin, 2007).

At the researcher’s community college, many Information Technology courses have made their transition from traditional to online or blended learning. Two important trends in education seem to lead toward different ends. Institutions seek to enhance control of courses and content; in addition, they pursue enhanced efficiency. However, growing numbers of teachers regard learner centered instruction as a superior approach. Focusing on the needs of the learner tends to emphasize flexibility and some degree of tailoring of the learning experience to the needs of the student. Thus, a highly effective virtual community might facilitate building knowledge as a social activity. In principle, an instructor could design online courses that cultivate knowledge construction through the interactions of individuals within the virtual community (Griffin, 2007). Further challenges include transitioning faculty into lifelong learners. Rapidly changing technology requires constantly refreshed skills; moreover, the details of pedagogy may change over time, thus necessitating ongoing training among the faculty. In addition, distance education may necessitate improved tools for assessment to diagnose opportunities for improvement not only among the students, but also among the faculty (Paulson, 2001).

However, the new technology is not without its challenges. If the faculty wishes to control any element of content, then they must learn new technological methods. Professional development workshops should be introduced more to train the faculty support. For instance, in the researcher’s college, the faculty staff is being trained as they make the transition from blackboard to canvas LMS.

The transition from traditional approaches to faculty as lifetime learners is likely to require substantial modification of views and attitudes. In addition, higher educational institutions face extensive costs to develop content and to provide the technological infrastructure to implement web-based education. Furthermore, assessment of students in a period when faculty and student may never meet may represent a substantial challenge (Dilbeck, 2008). Likewise, finding appropriate tools to assess and diagnose problems with the teaching itself represents a challenge (Paulson, 2001).

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">With the advent of the web 2.0 technology, increased student freedom also translates to increased student responsibility. Thus, the students face the necessity of becoming active participants in their own education. Passive participation no longer suffices when the student lacks the external structural controls available in a traditional setting. The educational institutions faces the dilemma of helping students have greater freedom and autonomy, while at the same time facing the problem of students who are unable to meet the challenge (Wilson, 2002).

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Teachers must learn methods to effectively infuse technology, using curriculum as the backbone for integration. The infusion of online communications such as virtual learning communities, blogs, or wikis used in curriculum will assist in the collaboration and professional development of teachers to use technology in their classrooms. Creating collaborative learning communities embraces the individual strengths of the learners and harnesses these strengths into a collective entity ready and willing to make long lasting and effective changes in online learning environment <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">(Pagliaro, 2010).

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">References

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Bejerano, A. R. (2008). Raising the question #11: The genesis and evolution of online degree <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">programs: who are they for and what have we lost along the way? //Communication// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Education, 57( //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">3), 408.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Daniel, B., Schwier, R., & Ross, H., (2007). Synthesis of the process of learning through <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">the discourse in formal virtual learning community. //Journal of Interactive// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Learning Research //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">, 18(4), 461-477. Retrieved from ProQuest Educational <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Journals.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Delfino, M. M., & Persico, D. D. (2007). Online or face-to-face? Experimenting with <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">different techniques in teacher training. //Journal of Computer Assisted Learning//, <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">23(5), 351-365. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00220.x

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Dilbeck, J. D. (2008). Perceptions of academic administrators towards quality indicators in <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Internet based distance education. Unpublished Ph.D., Indiana State University, United <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">States -- Indiana.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Downes, S. (2005). An introduction to connective knowledge. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Retrieved from []

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Griffin, C. A. (2007). Management 311, on-line course in leadership: //A case study evaluation.// <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Unpublished Ed.D., Northern Arizona University, United States -- Arizona.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Flowers, D. J. (2000). //Utilization-focused needs assessment: A case study of adult learners' Web// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">based distance education needs. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;"> University of South Alabama.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Holmberg, B. (2002). The evolution of the character and practice of distance education. In L. <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Foster, B. L. Bower & L. W. Watson (Eds.), //ASHE reader:Distance education: Teaching// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">and learning in higher education: The evolution of the character and practice of distance // //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">education ( //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">7-13). Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Pagliaro, G. C. (2010). //Virtual learning communities: How do they transform learning for// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">educators and teaching in the classroom? // <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Capella University). //ProQuest Dissertations and Theses,// <span style="color: #4c4c4c; font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">[]

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Paulson, K. (2001). FIPSE: Thirty years of learning anytime and anywhere. //Change, 33(//5), 37.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Russell, T. L. (2001). //The no significant difference phenomenon: A comparative research// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">annotated bibliography on technology for distance education. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;"> Littleton, CO IDECC.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Shaffer, K. (2008). //A viable solution for the computer technology curriculum dilemma.// <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">(Doctoral dissertation, Robert Morris University, United States, Pennsylvania). <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database (AAT 3328715).

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2 //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">(1), <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">article 01. Retrieved from []

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Solimeno, A., Mebane, M. E., Tomai, M., & Francescato, D. (2008). The influence of students <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">and teachers characteristics on the efficacy of face-to-face and computer supported <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">collaborative learning. //Computers & Education, 2008(//51), 109–128.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Spinks, K. N. (2007). //Predictors of Success in Asynchronous Learning With a Focus on the Role// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">of Sense of Classroom community. //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;"> Unpublished Ph.D., Walden University, United States <span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">-- Minnesota.

<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt; vertical-align: baseline;">Wilson, B. (2002). Trends and futures of education: Implications for distance education. //The// //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 3( //<span style="font-family: Georgia,serif; font-size: 10pt;">1), 103-116.