Advertisement

Cybergogy for Engaged Learning: A Framework for Creating Learner Engagement through Information and Communication Technology

  • Minjuan Wang
  • Myunghee Kang

Abstract

The continued and growing need for new learning opportunities, linked with newer information systems and communication technologies, has pushed online learning into the center of the discussion of educational practice. There is a need to establish a framework for generating meaningful and engaging learning experiences for distance students with diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. We coin the term “Cybergogy” as a descriptive label for the strategies for creating engaged learning online. Our model of Cybergogy for Engaged Learning (see Figure 1) has three overlapping/intersecting domains: cognitive, emotive, and social. This model is a synthesis of current thinking, concepts, and theoretical frameworks on the extent and nature of the three domains in learner engagement online. The instructors can use this model to profile each learner and then design tactics to engage individuals accordingly, a process we call “customized engagement.” As a consequence, learners will not only have the opportunity to accomplish their learning goals, but also will be actively involved in the learning process.

Keywords

cybergogy engaged learning online presence instructional design online facilitation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Arnone, M. P. (2003). Instructional design strategies to foster curiosity, from http://www.ericit.org/digests/EDO-IR-2003-01.shtmlGoogle Scholar
  2. Bandura, A., & Cervone, D. (1986). Differential engagement of self-reactive influences in cognitive motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 38, 92–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., & Pyke, C. (2001). A taxonomy of student engagement with educational software: An exploration of literate thinking with electronic text. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24(3), 213–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bangert-Drowns, R. L., & Pyke, C. (2002). Teacher ratings of student engagement with educational software: An exploratory study. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(2).Google Scholar
  5. Brown, B. L. (1997). New learning strategies for Generation X [Electronic version], 184, from Retrieved from Eric Database.Google Scholar
  6. Carrier, S. I., & Moulds, L. D. (November 2003). Pedagogy, andragogy, and cybergogy: exploring best-practice paradigm for online teaching and learning. Paper presented at the the 9th Annual Sloan-C/ALN (Asynchronous Learning Networks) Conference, Orlando, Florida.Google Scholar
  7. Currin, L. (12/16/2003). Feelin’ groovy. Elearn Magazine. Retrieved March 22, 2004 from http://elearnmag.org/subpage/sub_page.cfm?article_pk=10221&page_number_nb=1&title=FEATURE%20STORYGoogle Scholar
  8. Dirkx, J. (Spring 2001). The power of feelings: Emotion, imagination, and the construction of meaning in adult learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 89, 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Driscoll, M. P. (2002). How people learn (and what technology might have to do with it) [Electronic version]. ERIC Digest, 1–4.Google Scholar
  10. Dweck, C.S., & Leggett, E.L. (1988). A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological Review, 95, 256–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eppler, M.A., & Harju, B.J. (1997). Achievement motivation goals in relation to academic performance in traditional and non-traditional college students. Research in Higher Education, 38, 557–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Foegen, A., & Hargrave, C. P. (Winter 1999). Group response technology in lecture-based instruction: exploring student engagement and instructor perceptions. Journal of Special Education Technology [Online]. 14(1), 3–17.Google Scholar
  13. Garrison, D. R., & Archer, W. (2000). A transactional perspective on teaching and learning: A framework for adult and higher education. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  14. Hall, E. T., & Hall, M. R. (1990). Understanding cultural differences. Yarmouth, Me.: Intercultural Press.Google Scholar
  15. Hannafin, M. et al. (2003). Cognitive and learning factors in web-based distance learning environment. In Moore, M. & Anderson, W. (Eds.). Handbook of distance education. Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. Mahwah, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  16. Hara, N., & Kling, R. (2000). Students’ distress with a Web-based distance education course: An ethnographic study of participants’ experiences. Center for Social Informatics, Indiana University, Working paper.Google Scholar
  17. Heyman, G.D., & Dweck, C.S. (1992). Achievement goals and intrinsic motivation: their relation and their role in adaptive motivation. Motivation and Emotion, 16, 231–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hill, J. R., Wiley, D., Nelson, L. M., & Han, S. (1996). Exploring research on internet-based learning: from infrastructure to interactions. In D. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp.433–449). New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  19. Hiltz, S. R. (November 7–12, 1998). Collaborative Learning in Asynchronous Learning Networks: Building Learning Communities. Paper presented at the WebNet 98 World Conference of the WWW, Internet, and Intranet Proceedings, 3rd, Orlando, FL.Google Scholar
  20. Hoyert, M. S., & O’DelI, C.D. (2000a). Goal orientation in traditional and non-traditional aged college students. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  21. Hoyert, M.S., & O’Dell, C.D. (2000b). Goal orientation and response to failure in a challenging college course. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  22. Hutchins, H. M. (Fall 2003) Instructional Immediacy and the Seven Principles: Strategies for Facilitating Online Courses. Retrieved March, 6, 2004 from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/fall63/hutchins63.htmlGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones, B. F., Valdez, G., Nowakowski, J., & Rasumssen, C. (1995). Plugging In: Choosing and Using Educational Technology: Council for Educational Development and Research, the North Central Regional Education Laboratory (NCREL).Google Scholar
  24. Kaplan-Leiserson, E. (December 2003). We-Learning: Social Software and E-Learning, from http://www.learningcircuits.org/2003/dec2003/Kaplan.htmGoogle Scholar
  25. Katz, Y. (2002). Attitudes affecting college students’ preferences for distance learning [Electronic version]. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 2–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Keller, J. M., & Suzuki, K. (1988). Use of the ARCS motivation model in courseware design. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.). Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  27. Kiger, P. J. (March, 2001). At First USA bank, promotions and job satisfaction are up. Workforce, 54–56.Google Scholar
  28. Kort, B., Reilly, R., & Picard, R. (2001). External representation of learning process and domain knowledge: Affective state as a determinate of its structure and function, retrieved February 14, 2004 from http://affect.media.mit.edu/AC_research/lc/AI-ED.htmlGoogle Scholar
  29. LaViolette, P. A. (1979). Thoughts about thoughts about thoughts: The emotional-perceptive cycle theory. Man-Environment Systems, 9, 15–47.Google Scholar
  30. LaViolette, Paul A. Teaching with Feeling in Mind. Reprinted from On the Beam, 6(2) (1986). Retrieved Jan 12, 2003 from http://www.etheric.com/LaViolette/Feel-ingtones.htmlGoogle Scholar
  31. Locke, E. A., Frederick, E., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1984). Effects of self-efficacy, goals and task strategies on task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 69, 241–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lumpe, A. T., & Chambers, E. (Fall 2001). Assessing teachers’ context beliefs about technology use. Journal of Research on Technology in Education. Retrieved from the WilsonWeb datase, 34(1), 93–107.Google Scholar
  33. Magna Publications, I. (April 2002). Understanding Student Frustration. Online Classroom. Retrieved from the WilsonWeb database, 1–2.Google Scholar
  34. McLeod, S. H. (1991). The Affective Domain and the Writing Process: Working Definitions. Retrieved February 4, 2004 from http://jac.gsu.edu/jac/11.1/Articles/6.htmGoogle Scholar
  35. Merrill, D. (2002). First principals of instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 43–59.Google Scholar
  36. O’Regan, K. (September 2003). Emotion and E-learning. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(3), 78–92.Google Scholar
  37. Oren, A., Mioduser, D., & Nachmias, R. (April-2002). The Development of Social Climate in Virtual Learning Discussion Groups, from http://www.irrodl.org/content/v3.1/mioduser.htmlGoogle Scholar
  38. Reis, R. (2003). Tomorrow’s Professor Msg.#342 Teaching for Engagement, from http://sll.stanford.edu/projects/tomprof/newtomprof/postings/342.htmlGoogle Scholar
  39. Riding, R. J., & Rayner, S. (1998). Cognitive styles and learning strategies: understanding style differences in learning and behaviour. London: David Fulton Publishers.Google Scholar
  40. Roedel, T.D., Shraw, G., & Plake, B.S. (1994). Validation of a measure of learning and performance goal orientations. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 54, 1013–1021.Google Scholar
  41. Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25, 71–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Shin, N. (2003). Transactional presence as a critical predictor of success in distance learning. Distance Education, 24(1), 69–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Simon, G. (2002). E-tivities: The key to active online learning. London: Kogan Page Ltd.Google Scholar
  44. Snell, J. C. (2000). Teaching generation X & Y: An essay part 2: Teaching strategies [Electronic version]. College Student Journal, 34(4), 482–484.Google Scholar
  45. Social Software Alliance, S. S. (2004). Alliance Charter, from http://www.socialtext.net/ssa/index.cgi?Alliance%20CharterGoogle Scholar
  46. Stahl, G. (1999). Perspectives on collaborative knowledge-building environment: Toward a cognitive theory of computer support for learning. Retrieved December 10, 2001 from http://orgwis.gmd.de/~gerry/publications/conferences/1999/csc199/kbd_workshop/kbe_theory1.pdfGoogle Scholar
  47. Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  48. Wang, M. J. (2000). The Construction Of Shared Knowledge In An Internet-Based Shared Environment For Expeditions (iExpeditions): A Study Of External Factors Implying Knowledge Construction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri, Columbia.Google Scholar
  49. Wang, M. J., & Poole, M. (2004). Nurturing a dynamic online learning community among teens. In M. Kalantzis & B. Cope (Eds.), The International Journal of Learning, 9. Melbourne, Australia: the University Press/Common Ground. [Online]. Retrieved December 1, 2004 from http://LC2002. Publisher-Site.com/ProductShop/Google Scholar
  50. Wang, M. J. & Aurilio, S. (2004). Does socializing enhance learning outcomes in online settings? Paper to be presented at Ed-Media 2004 conference, Lugano, Switzerland, June 21–26, 2004.Google Scholar
  51. Wang, M. J., Sierra C., & Folger, T. (2003). Building a dynamic online learning community among adult learners. Educational Media International (Special Issue: computer-mediated communication), 40(1/2), 49–61.Google Scholar
  52. Wegerif, R. (March 1998). The Social Dimension of Asynchronous Learning Networks. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 2(1), ??Google Scholar
  53. Weiss, R. P. (2000, November). Emotion and learning [Electronic version]. Training and Development, 54, 44–48. Retrieved February 10, 2004, from EBSCO Host research database.Google Scholar
  54. White, W. & Weight, H. (2000). Online teaching guide: A handbook of attitudes, strategies, and techniques for the virtual classroom. Needham Heights, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
  55. Wlodkowski, R. J. (Summer 2003). Fostering Motivation in Professional Development Programs. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education(98), 39–47. Retrieved from WilsonWeb.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wlodkowski, R. J., & Ginsberg, M. B. (Sep 1995). A framework for culturally responsive teaching. Educational Leadership Alexandria, 53(1), 17–. Retrieved from ProQuest.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Minjuan Wang
    • 1
  • Myunghee Kang
    • 2
  1. 1.San Diego State UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Ewha Womans UniversityKorea

Personalised recommendations