EMM v2.3 L2

'''L2. Students are provided with mechanisms for interaction with teaching staff and other students'''

Background
A common criticism of e-learning is the isolation students suffer from and the need to provide effective communication channels. Interaction is key to effective learning, particularly when not engaged in face to face teaching (Anderson, 2003). In a meta-analysis Bernard et al. (2009) compared distance education courses with each other and have found that designing ITs into distance learning courses to enhance student-teacher, student-content and student-student interaction positively influences learning outcomes. Collaborative approaches to interaction are argued to encourage deep learning, which is generally seen as desirable (Garrison and Cleveland-Innes, 2005; Muirhead, 2004; Ng and Murphy, 2005; Picciano, 2002). Garrison and Anderson (2003) identify ‘reflective and collaborative properties of asynchronous, text-based online learning [as] well adapted to deep approaches to learning’ (p. 145).

Evidence of the use of a variety of communication modes or channels and encouragement for students to engage with peers and teaching staff is used to determine capability in this process. It is not sufficient that tools be provided, there must also be activities designed to encourage their use and support of effective engagement such as set out by Salmon (2000). Students should be provided with information on how to access and use different communication channels or modes. They 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.

As with a traditional face-to-face class, it is the responsibility of the teaching staff to set the ‘ground rules’ and expectations for the communication undertaken in a particular course (Ramsden, 2003). Particularly, while many students are unfamiliar with e-learning, it is necessary for them to get clear information on how to use the communication channels effectively and appropriately (Palloff and Pratt, 2001; Harasim et al., 1995). Communicating expectations early is also essential if staff workloads are to be managed (Waterhouse and Rogers, 2004).

Related Standards and Guidelines
This process is informed by: Implementing the seven principles: Technology as lever (Chickering and Ehrmann, 1996); Quality On the Line: Benchmarks for success in internet-based distance education (Merisotis, J. P., & Phipps, R. A., 2000) teaching/learning benchmark set; Queensland University of Technology teaching capabilities framework (2004/2005); Canadian Recommended E-learning Guidelines (Barker, K., 2002); Australian National Training Authority, quality assurance information kit: Training package support materials (2002) and; Balancing quality and access: Principles of good practice for electronically offered academic degree and certificate programs (Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications, 2003).