L2 2 2

=Students are provided with course documentation describing how different communication channels will support their learning. =

Evidence
Students should be given a clear explanation as to why the channels or modes have been included within the course and how they will assist in achieving the learning objectives of the course. Students are more likely to take a deep approach to learning if they are intrinsically motivated. To be intrinsically motivated they need to see the relevance and importance of what they are being required to do. (Rust 2002, p. 150). Therefore, clear linkage of communication channels to wider course, programme and institutional objectives is necessary. If asynchronous discussion in an online forum is supposed to enhance students’ critical analysis and analytic thought skills, then students need to be told that this is its purpose.

Ellis et al. (2009) studied what it is that students perceive as most relevant in terms of e-learning. They also note correlations between e-learning approaches and outcome variables. ‘Significant strong correlations were found between the deep approaches, the e-learning variables, perceptions of the quality of e-learning, and achievement. We interpret these results as evidence for the careful structuring and design of e-learning activities and resources’ (p. 316). They further note that in order to enhance the e-learning experience we must illustrate the value of various activities. ‘Some awareness-raising about the nature and purpose of submissions and online feedback would be a useful teaching strategy if we wish to improve the quality of e-learning’ (p. 316). Students need to be guided through the e-learning activities. Sometimes there is resistance to participation or a low perception of the value of contributions by staff and students because the learners don’t understand the link between objectives and activities

Resources
An example of how students’ work through familiarizing themselves with interactive technology is given by Salmon (2000), who highlights the importance of interactivity, proposing a model of online teaching and learning, which characterises interactivity over five steps of learning. At stage one, access and motivation, interaction is minimal and focused on the learner resolving technical and operational issues and the teacher welcoming and encouraging the learner. Stage two, online socialisation, sees the sending and receiving of messages contribute to learners’ familiarisation with the technical, cultural, and social environments. Stage three, information exchange, involves increased interaction with both people and course content, and in ‘searching [and] personalizing software [for] facilitating tasks and supporting use of learning materials’ (p. 26). Stage four, knowledge construction, is intensively interactive and engages teacher and learners in conferencing for facilitating collaborative learning processes. At stage five, development, interaction decreases as learners attend more to ‘individual learning responsibilities, using links beyond closed conferences, and teaching/learning interaction focuses on supporting and responding activities (p. 26). Salmon observes that although the online environment, with its lack of visual cues, is ‘new and potentially alien…for many participants’, others find that it provides freedom, for expression, and from distractions (p. 28).