Improving Online Interaction Among Blended Distance Learners at Makerere University

  • Harriet M. Nabushawo
  • Paul B. Muyinda
  • Ghislain M. N. Isabwe
  • Andreas Prinz
  • Godfrey Mayende
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 715)

Abstract

This article reports on a study done to improve interaction among distance learners offering the blended Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) programme at Makerere University. The study attempts to answer the question: How can a Learning Management System be used to improve learner interaction on the blended B.Ed. programme at Makerere University? The study adopted the Affordance eLearning Design Framework. This study was done among 54 students studying a Policy Planning and Implementation course on the B.Ed. programme. The study employed qualitative approaches to data collection and analysis. These included semi-structured interviews and observation of the interaction logs within the groups and open forums. The results revealed that LMS affordances coupled with well-structured activities increased interaction among learners. Other factors that accelerated interaction and participation included grading of contributions and regular tutor presence. In conclusion, technology alone cannot bring about interaction among students; the way the activity is structured should be emphasized for interaction.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work has been supported by the DELP project which is funded by NORAD. Special appreciation to the University of Agder and Makerere University, who are in research partnership, for their support.

References

  1. Anderson, T.: Modes of interaction in distance education: recent developments and research questions. In: Moore, M., Anderson, G. (eds.) Handbook of Distance Education, pp. 129–144. Erlbaum, NJ (2003)Google Scholar
  2. Bower, M.: Affordance analysis–matching learning tasks with learning technologies. Educ. Media Int. 45(1), 3–15 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gallimore, R., Tharp, R.: Teaching mind in society: teaching, schooling and literate discourse. In: Moll, L.C. (ed.) Vygotsky and Education: Instructional Implications and Applications of Socio Historical Psychology. Cambridge University Press (2002)Google Scholar
  4. Jonassen, D.H.: Objectivism versus constructivism: do we need a new philosophical paradigm? Educ. Tech. Res. Dev. 39(3), 5–14 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Knight, J.: Coaching. J. Staff Dev. 30(1), 18–22 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. Mayende, G., Isabwe, G.M.N., Muyinda, P.B., Prinz, A.: Peer assessment based assignment to enhance interactions in online learning groups. Paper Presented at the International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), 20–24 September 2015, Florence, Italy (2015)Google Scholar
  7. Mayende, G., Muyinda, P.B., Isabwe, G.M.N., Walimbwa, M., Siminyu, S.N.: Facebook mediated interaction and learning in distance learning at Makerere University. Paper Presented at the 8th International Conference on e-Learning, 15–18 July, Lisbon, Portugal (2014)Google Scholar
  8. Mayende, G., Prinz, A., Isabwe, G.M.N., Muyinda, P.B.: Learning groups for MOOCs: lessons for online learning in higher education. Paper Presented at the 19th International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL2016), 21–23 September, Clayton Hotel, Belfast, UK (2016)Google Scholar
  9. Moore, M.G.: Theory of transactional distance. Theor. Principles Distance Educ. 1, 22–38 (1993)Google Scholar
  10. Wagner, E.D.: In support of a functional definition of interaction. Am. J. Distance Educ. 8(2), 6–29 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harriet M. Nabushawo
    • 1
  • Paul B. Muyinda
    • 1
  • Ghislain M. N. Isabwe
    • 2
  • Andreas Prinz
    • 2
  • Godfrey Mayende
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Open and Distance LearningMakerere UniversityKampalaUganda
  2. 2.Department of Information and Communication TechnologyUniversity of AgderGrimstadNorway

Personalised recommendations