Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How and why do students of higher education participate in online seminars?

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Online education is continuing to gain popularity in educational institutions and organizations. Hitherto, most research has occurred at aggregated levels, while few researchers have studied how and why individuals participate in online education. It is essential to examine individual perceptions and relationships in order to understand how students behave in relation to others. This paper investigates how students of higher education participate in online seminars and why they participate in certain ways. An online class that attended asynchronous and synchronous online seminars was studied. Electronic logs were used to examine how students participated and interviews were used to illustrate why they participated. It was revealed that the participation of students varied between aspects such as exchanging information, managing tasks and providing social support and the emphasis of these aspects were related to the tool they communicated through. A number of participation inhibitors were identified and it was also suggested how these inhibitors can be addressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alavi, M., & Dufner, D. (2005). Technology-mediated collaborative learning: A research perspective. In S. R. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 191–213). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antonenko, P. D., Ogilvie, C. A., Niederhauser, D. S., Jackman, J., Kumsaikaew, P., Marathe, R. R., et al. (2011). Understanding student pathways in context-rich problems. Education and Information Technologies.

  • Augustsson, G. (2010). Web 2.0, pedagogical support for reflexive and emotional social interaction among Swedish students. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 197–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bassili, J. N., & Joordens, S. (2008). Media player tool use, satisfaction with online lectures and examination performance. Journal of Distance Education, 22(2), 93–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bento, R., & Schuster, C. (2003). Participation: The online challenge. In A. Aggarwal (Ed.), Web-based education: Learning from experience (pp. 156–164). Hershey: Idea Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bristol, T. J. (2010). Twitter: Consider the possibilities for continuing nursing education. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 41(5), 199–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1990). Communities of learning and thinking, or a context by any other name. In D. Kuhn (Ed.), Developmental perspectives on teaching and learning thinking skills (Vol. 21, pp. 108–126). London: Karger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 17(1), 32–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlén, U. (2010). A professional community goes online: A study of an online learning community in general medicine. Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlén, U., & Jobring, O. (2005). The rationale of online learning communities. International Journal of Web Based Communities, 1(3), 272–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, T., Cox, G., Eden, A., & Hanslo, M. (2004). From peripheral to full participation in a blended trade bargaining simulation. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(2), 197–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cercone, K. (2008). Characteristic of adult learners with implication for online learning design. Association for the Advancement of Computing In Education Education Journal, 16(2), 137–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chou, C. C. (2002). A comparative content analysis of student interaction in synchronous and asynchronous learning networks. Paper presented at the 35th International conference on system sciences, Hawaii.

  • Cole, M. (2009). Using wiki technology to support student engagement: Lessons from the trenches. Computers & Education, 52(1), 141–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniel, B., Schwier, R. A., & McCalla, C. (2003). Social capital in virtual learning communities and distributed communities of practice. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 29(3), 113–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wever, B., Schellens, T., Valcke, M., & Van Keer, H. (2006). Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: A review. Computers & Education, 46(1), 6–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelson, D. C., Pea, R. D., & Gomez, L. (1996). Constructivism in the collaboratory. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments: Case studies in instructional design (pp. 151–164). Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analysing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 377–404). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredericksen, E., Picket, A., Shea, P., Pelz, W., & Swan, K. (2000). Student satisfaction and perceived learning with on-line courses: Principles and examples from the SUNY learning network. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2), 7–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garrison, D. R., & Anderson, T. (2003). E-learning in the 21st century: A framework for research and practice. London: RoutledgeFalmer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, R., Crosby, M., Swan, K., & Shea, P. (2005). Qualitative and quisitive research methods for describing online learning. In S. R. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 103–120). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harasim, L., Hiltz, S. R., Teles, L., & Turoff, M. (1995). Learning networks: A field guide to teaching and learning online. Cambridge: The MIS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatzipanagos, S., & Warburton, S. (2009). Feedback as dialogue: Exploring the links between formative assessment and social software in distance learning. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(1), 45–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C. (2000). Online personal networks: Size, composition and media use among distance learners. New Media & Society, 2(2), 195–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Building social networks via computer networks: Creating and sustaining distributed learning communities. In K. A. Renninger & W. Schumar (Eds.), Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 159–190). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C. (2006). Facilitating collaboration in online learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 10(1), 7–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C., & Kazmer, M. (Eds.). (2004). Learning, culture and community in online education: Research and practice. New York: Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haythornthwaite, C., Kazmer, M., Robins, J., & Shoemaker, S. (2000). Community development among distance learners: Temporal and technological dimensions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1).

  • Henri, F. (1991). Computer conferencing and content analysis. In A. Kaye (Ed.), Collaborative learning through computer conferencing: The Najaden papers (pp. 117–136). London: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, D. (1999). A new method for analyzing patterns of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 13(2), 37–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiltz, S. R., Coppola, N., Rotter, N., Turoff, M., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2000). Measuring the importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: A multi-measure, multi-method approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(2), 103–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hrastinski, S. (2006). Introducing an informal synchronous medium in a distance learning course: How is participation affected? The Internet and Higher Education, 9(2), 117–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hrastinski, S. (2008a). The potential of synchronous communication to enhance participation in online discussions: A case study of two e-learning courses. Information Management, 45(7), 499–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hrastinski, S. (2008b). What is online learner participation? A literature review. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1755–1765.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaldemark, J. (2005). The ups and downs of learning online. In A. Méndez-Vilas, B. González-Pereira, J. Mesa-González & J. A. Mesa-González (Eds.), Recent research developments in learning technologies. m-ICTE2005, the 3 rd International Conference on Multimedia and ICTs in Education (Vol. III, pp. 1233–1238). Badajoz, Spain: FORMATEX.

  • Jaldemark, J. (2008). Participation and genres of communication in online settings of higher education. Education and Information Technologies, 13(2), 129–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jaldemark, J. (2010). Participating in a boundless activity: Computer-mediated communication in Swedish higher education Unpublished thesis. Umeå: Umeå University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., & Land, S. M. (2000). Theoretical foundations of learning environments. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonsson, L., & Säljö, R. (2009). The online seminar as enacted practice. In M. H. Stansfield & T. M. Connolly (Eds.), Institutional transformation through best practices in virtual campus development: Advancing e-learning policies (pp. 38–54). Hershey: Idea Group.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kinshuk, & Chen, N. S. (2006). Synchronous methods and applications in e-learning. Campus-Wide Information Systems, 23(3).

  • Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. A., Jochems, W., & van Buuren, H. (2011). Measuring perceived social presence in distributed learning groups. Education and Information Technologies.

  • Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazur, J. M. (2004). Conversational analysis for educational technologists: Theoretical and methodological issues for researching the structures, processes, and meaning of on-line talk. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 1073–1098). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Münzer, S. (2003). An evaluation of synchronous co-operative distance learning in the field: The importance of instructional design. Educational Media International, 40(1–2), 91–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (1999). Building learning communities in cyberspace: Effective strategies for the online classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2003). The virtual student: A profile and guide to working with online learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community. New York: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robson, C. (2002). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Malden: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romiszowski, A., & Mason, R. (2004). Computer-mediated communication. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 397–431). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2000). Methodological issues in the content analysis of computer conference transcripts. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 8–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. P. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance. International review of research in open and distance learning, 3(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rovai, A. P. (2007). Facilitating online discussions effectively. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 77–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Säljö, R. (1999). Learning as the use of tools: A sociocultural perspective on the human-technology link. In K. Littleton & P. Light (Eds.), Learning with computers: Analysing productive interaction (pp. 144–161). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seddon, K., Postlethwaite, K., & Lee, G. (2011). Understanding the experience of non contributory online participants (readers) in National College for School Leadership online communities. Education and Information Technologies.

  • Seufert, S., Lechner, U., & Stanoevska, K. (2002). A reference model for online learning communities. International Journal on E-Learning, 1(1), 43–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sim, J. W. S., & Hew, K. F. (2010). The use of weblogs in higher education settings: A review of empirical research. Educational Research Review, 5(2), 151–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stemler, S., E. (2004). A comparison of consensus, consistency, and measurement approaches to estimating interrater reliability. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 9(4).

  • Sutton, L. (2001). The principle of vicarious interaction in computer-mediated communications. International Journal of Educational Telecommunications, 7(3), 223–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, K., & Shea, P. (2005). The development of virtual learning communities. In S. R. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), Learning together online: Research on asynchronous learning networks (pp. 239–260). Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, M. M. (1998). Distance learners in higher education. In C. C. Gibson (Ed.), Distance learners in higher education: Institutional responses for quality outcomes. Madison: Atwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tweddell Levinsen, K. (2007). Qualifying online teachers: Communicative skills and their impact on e-learning quality. Education and Information Technologies, 12(1), 41–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R. (1998). The social dimension of asynchronous learning networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2(1), 34–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wertsch, J. V. (2007). Mediation. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 178–192). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiertz, C., & de Ruyter, K. (2007). Beyond the call of duty: Why customers contribute to firm-hosted commercial online communities. Organization Studies, 28(3), 347–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woo, Y., & Reeves, T. (2007). Meaningful interaction in web-based learning: A social constructivist interpretation. The Internet and Higher Education, 10(1), 15–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Media Technology, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, School of Computer Science and Communication, Lindstedtsv. 3, SE-100 44, Stockholm, Sweden

    Stefan Hrastinski

  2. Department of Education, Mid-Sweden University, Universitetsbacken 1, SE-871 88, Härnösand, Sweden

    Jimmy Jaldemark

Authors
  1. Stefan Hrastinski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jimmy Jaldemark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Hrastinski.

Additional information

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hrastinski, S., Jaldemark, J. How and why do students of higher education participate in online seminars?. Educ Inf Technol 17, 253–271 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-011-9155-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-011-9155-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation