Applying Social Cognitive Theory

to Online LearningSloan ConferenceNovember 8, 2007

Glenda Gunter, Ph.D.Victoria Rath, M.A.

Introductions

Faculty Administrators Online Instructors Instructional Designers Public / Private Trainers

Student Success in Online Learning Lower retention; higher

withdrawal rates (42%) How do we mitigate this:

Social integrationSense of community

Student Success in Online Learning How do we mitigate this:

Immediacy behaviorsTeacher – StudentStudent – StudentStudent – ContentStudent - Technology

Social Cognitive Theory (Bandura, 1986) Learning through observation Self-Efficacy

Belief in ability Can be reinforced by others

Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation Outcome expectations

Traditional Teacher Immediacy “Teaching behaviors that

enhance closeness to and nonverbal interaction with another,” (Andersen, 1979; Mehrabian, 1981; LaRose & Whitten, 2000).

Traditional Teacher Immediacy (cont’d) Enthusiasm Eye contact Nodding Smiling Calling students by name

Online Teacher-Student Immediacy Emoticons Addressing students by name Relating to students Positive, specific feedback Responding to comments IM

Online Student-Student Immediacy Initial introductions Group projects / teamwork

Free online collaboration tools Yahoo! Messenger with IP telephony

Google DocsSlideshare

Online Student-Student Immediacy (cont’d)

Discussion boards Chat

Peer review groups IM

Online Student-Content Immediacy Relevance (ARCS) Immediate application of

learning Outcome expectancies / positive expectation (Bandura)

Online Student-Content Immediacy (cont’d) Self-regulation

AutonomyChoices in directionDiscovery learning

Rubrics

Online Student-Technology Immediacy Multimedia / digital media

Videos Camtasia (screen capture) Tutorials / Resources Provide direction to technical support

Teachers Discovering Computers (TDC) Online 14-week graduate level

course Inservice teachers Instructor led Text-based Video-enhancements

TDC (cont’d)

Wealth of Web resources Curriculum specific Immediately applicable Digital students need digital

teachers

TDC (cont’d)

43 inservice teachers began the course 20 elementary school teachers 12 middle school teachers 9 high school teachers 2 homebound / hospital; alternative education site

TDC (cont’d)

37 completed – 86% completion rate

24 completed the pretest / posttest 65% questionnaire return rate

TDC Pretest-Posttest Data 35 questions matched to the

NETS-T using a 5-Likert scale Computer attitude and anxiety Computer confidence Computer usefulness (integration)

Relevance

TDC Pretest-Posttest Data (cont’d) 5 Qualitative open-ended

questions Confidence Usefulness Integration skills Relevance

Overall Results

Mean NStd

DeviationStd. Error

Mean

Pair 1 Pretest 129.92 24 21.088 4.304

Posttest

150.63 24 14.237 2.906

Table 1: Paired Samples Statistics

Overall Results (cont’d)

Paired Differences

MeanStd.Dev.

Std. Error Mean

95% Confidence Interval of the

Difference

Lower Upper t df

Sig. (2-

tailed)

Pair 1:Pretest- Posttest

-20.71 15.87 3.24 -27.41 -14.0 -6.4 23 .000

Table 2: Paired Samples Test

Overall Results (cont’d) Greatest overall mean changes:

Lowered computer anxiety (.84)

Increased computer confidence (.72)

Overall Results (cont’d) Questions with the greatest

mean change: 30: I can identify and locate technology and digital media resources and evaluate them for accuracy and suitability. (1.17)

Overall Results (cont’d) Questions with the greatest

mean change: 14: I possess the skills, knowledge, and understanding of the concepts related to the national technology standards for PK-12 students. (1.08)

Overall Results (cont’d) Questions with the greatest

mean change: 23: I know how to apply technology and digital media to develop students’ higher-order skills and creativity. (1.04)

Overall Results (cont’d) Questions with the greatest

mean change: 11: I feel confused and frustrated when attempting to integrate technology and digital media in my curriculum. (1.04)

Qualitative Data

Responses analyzed using constructs of the Loyd/Gressard Computer Attitude Scale (Loyd & Gressard, 1984, 1985) and Keller’s ARCS Model for Motivation (1987)

Qualitative Data (cont’d) What words best describe your

experience in this course? Computer Confidence 4% ARCS 91%

Qualitative Data (cont’d) As a result of this course, how

has your understanding of the digital generation changed? Computer Confidence 30% Computer Usefulness 26% ARCS 30%

Qualitative Data (cont’d) As a result of this course, how

have your teaching strategies changed to address the needs of the digital generation? Computer Confidence 33% Computer Usefulness 62%

Qualitative Data (cont’d) As a result of this course, how

has your integration of technology into the curriculum changed? Computer Confidence 27% Computer Usefulness 64%

Qualitative Data (cont’d) What is the most important thing

you have learned in this class? Computer Confidence 39% Computer Usefulness 30% ARCS 30%

Immediacy and Cognition “Immediacy behaviors cause an

association of positive affect with the subject matter that in turn transfers to student behaviors, such as the time spent on a task, that determine cognitive outcomes.” Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia, (1964)

Immediacy and Cognition (cont’d) “The expectation of rewarding

student-teacher interactions motivates student behavior and that enhances cognitive learning.”

LaRose & Whitten, 2000

Immediacy and Cognition (cont’d) Cognitive learning is impacted by

affective learning Students’ attitudes or beliefs about the subject

Facilitated by feelings of closeness and liking

TDC and Instructional Immediacy Teacher-student immediacy

Social incentivesSpecific praise Specific feedback on workSmiling (emoticons)

TDC and Instructional Immediacy (cont’d)

Addressing student by nameRelating to the students on a personal as well as professional level

TDC and Instructional Immediacy (cont’d) Student-student immediacy

Professional development model – school-based

Many students in the same school

Created their own blended communities

TDC and Instructional Immediacy (cont’d)

Created their own social network

Could work as a team on the final project

TDC and Instructional Immediacy (cont’d) Student-content immediacy

(outcome expectancy and ARCS) Immediately applicable to learning

Positive consequences for completing the task

TDC and Instructional Immediacy (cont’d)

Relevant Motivating Increased confidence Autonomy Self-regulated

TDC and Instructional Immediacy (cont’d) Student-technology immediacy

(outcome expectancy and ARCS) Support from instructor Wealth of resources Using new technologies Creating ‘meStories’TM

Summary

TDC was very successful Utilized many instructional

immediacy strategies Instructional immediacy in an

online course IS possible Positively impacts motivation

and learning

Summary (cont’d)

Designing content that is relevant

Many of the strategies used by good face to face instructors should also be used online

References

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kember, D. (1989). A longitudinal-process model of drop-out from distance education. Journal of Higher Education, 60(3), 278-301.

LaRose, R. & Whitten, P. (2000). Re-thinking instructional immediacy for web courses: A social cognitive exploration. Communication Education, 49(4), 320-338. Retrieved January 27, 2007 from EBSCOHost.

Moskal, P. D., & Dziuban, C. D. (2001). Present and future directions for assessing cybereducation: The changing research paradigm. In L. R. Vandervert, L. V. Shavinina, & R. A. Cornell (eds.), Cybereducation: The future of long-distance learning (pp. 157-184). New York: Mary Ann Liebert

Stodel, E. J., Thompson, T. L., & MacDonald, C. J. (2006). Learners’ perspectives on what is missing from online learning: Interpretations through the community of inquiry framework. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 7(3), 1-24.