||Effects of Presenting Peers’ Learning Progress in e-Learning: a Social Facilitation Perspective
||Department of Engineering Science
big-five personality model
This work is an interdisciplinary study of information technology, education and social psychology, under the main theme electronic learning. Electronic learning (e-learning) is the next generation of learning. It provides comprehensive supports to students and can overcome geographical and time limitations compared to traditional classroom learning. There is a dramatic difference between traditional classroom learning and e-learning. One of the significant discrepancies is the nature of the social context, which is also the focus of this thesis. The lack of in-person contacts in e-learning does not isolate students from the social thoroughly, yet with the assistance of technology, there is still room for much more creative learning activities that facilitates the interactivity between students. A large body of studies have been carried out to investigate the effects of various types of social interaction in the e-learning environment. In this study, Social presence theory and social presence theory is reviewed and an experiment was designed to examine the influence of information about peers’ progress on students’ learning effect and learning speed. Other variables such as personality traits were concerned in the study. Forty-four students of an elective course in a senior high school at Tainan City, Tainan participated in the experiment. The result shows that students’ learning effect is not affected significantly by information about peers’ progress, whereas, the speed of reading learning materials were affected by information about peers’ progress. Results were discussed with social presence theory and social presence theory.
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Thesis organisation 3
CHAPTER 2 THEORETICAL DEVELOPMENT 5
2.1 Social facilitation 5
2.2 Social presence 8
2.3 Theoretical basis 9
2.4 Big-Five personality model 10
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH DESIGN 12
3.1 Participants 12
3.2 Materials & settings 12
3.2.1 Learning system 13
3.2.2 Learning materials 18
3.2.3 Questionnaires 18
3.3 Design & procedure 19
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS 22
4.1 Internal consistency of NEO-FFI-R 22
4.2 Rated course difficulties 22
4.3 Learning performance 23
4.4 Personal factors 30
4.5 Satisfaction 33
4.6 Computer self-efficacy 35
4.7 General discussion 35
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION 37
APPENDIX A: Questionnaire – learning system feedback & personal information 42
APPENDIX B: Questionnaire – course feedback 44
Aiello, J. R. & Douthitt, E. A. (2001). Social facilitation from Triplett to electronic performance monitoring. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 5(3), 163-180.
Aluja, A., García, O., Rossier, J. & García, L. F. (2005). Comparison of the NEO-FFI, the NEO-FFI-R and an alternative short version of the NEO-PI-R (NEO-60) in Swiss and Spanish samples. Personality and Individual Differences, 38(3), 591-604.
Aragon, S. R. (2003). Creating social presence in online environments. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 2003(100), 57-68.
Baturay, M. H. & Bay, O. F. (2010). The effects of problem-based learning on the classroom community perceptions and achievement of web-based education students. Computers & Education, 55(1), 43-52.
Bond, C. F. & Titus, L. J. (1983). Social facilitation: a meta-analysis of 241 studies. Psychological Bulletin, 94, 265-292.
Baron, R. S. (1986). Distraction-conflict theory: Progress and problems. Advances in Hydroscience, 19, 1-40.
Cochrane, T. (2005). Interactive QuickTime: developing and evaluating multimedia learning objects to enhance both face-to-face and distance e-learning environments. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 1, 33-54.
Corston, R. & Colman, A. M. (1996). Gender and social facilitation effects on computer competence and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14, 171-183.
Dashiell, J. F. (1930). An experimental analysis of some group effects. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 25, 190-199.
Dewiyanti, S., Brand-Gruwel, S., Jochems, W., & Broers, N. J. (2007). Students' experiences with collaborative learning in asynchronous Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(1), 496-514.
Eklund, J., Kay, M. & Lynch, H. M. (2003). E-learning: emerging issues and key trends: a discussion paper. Australian National Training Authority.
Geen, R. G. (1979). Effects of being observed on learning following success and failure experiences. Motivation and Emotion, 3(4), 355-371.
Geen, R. G. (1983). Evaluation apprehension and the social facilitation/inhibition of learning. Motivation and Emotion, 7(2), 203-212.
Evans, C. S. & Marler, P. (1994). Food calling and audience effects in male chickens, Gallus gallus: their relationships to food availability, courtship and social facilitation. Animal Behaviour, 47, 1159-1170.
Geen, R. G. (1991). Social Motivation. Annual Review of Psychology, 42, 377-399.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The big-five factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1216-1229.
Gunawardena, C. N. & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer mediated conferencing environment. The American journal of distance education, 11(3), 8-26.
Hall B. & Henningsen D. D. (2008). Social facilitation and human–computer interaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2965-2971.
Hayashi, A., Chen, C., Ryan, T. & Wu, J. (2004). The role of social presence and moderating role of computer self efficacy in predicting the continuance usage of e-learning systems. Journal of Information Systems Education, 15(2), 139-154.
Hew, K. F. & Cheung, W. S. (2008). Attracting student participation in asynchronous online discussions: A case study of peer facilitation. Computers & Education, 51(3), 1111-1124.
Homer, B. D., Plass, J. L., & Blake L. (2008). The effects of video on cognitive load and social presence in multimedia-learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 786-797.
Johnson, R. D., Hornik, S. & Salas, E. (2008). An empirical examination of factors contributing to the creation of successful e-learning environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66, 356–369.
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J. & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39(10), 1123-1134.
Lin, Y.-T., Huang, Y.-M., Cheng, S.-C. (in press). An automatic group composition system for composing collaborative learning groups using enhanced particle swarm optimization. Computers & Education.
Maher, D. (2009). The importance of elementary school students’ social chat online: Reconceptualising the curriculum. Computers & Education, 53(2), 511-516.
McCrae, R. R. & Costa, P. T. (2004). A contemplated revision of the NEO Five-Factor inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 36(3), 587-596.
Okita, S. Y., Bailenson, J., & Schwartz, D. (2007). The mere belief of social interaction improves learning. In Proceedings of the Twenty-ninth Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. August, Nashville, USA.
Park, S. & Catrambone, R. (2007). Social facilitation effects of virtual humans. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics, 49(6).
Resta, P. & Laferrière, T. (2007). Technology in support of collaborative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 19(1), 65-83.
Richardson, J.C., Swan, K., (2003). Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students’ perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 7(1), 68–88.
Sanders, G. S. (1981). Driven by distraction: An integrative review of social facilitation theory and research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17(3).
Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London. New York: Wiley.
Stein, L. M. (2009). Individual differences in social facilitation. Graduate School-New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey.
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643–662.
Terry, D. J. & Kearnes, M. (1993). Effects of an audience on the task performance of subjects with high and low self-esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 15(2), 137-145.
Triplett, N. (1898). The dynamogenic factors in pace-making and competition. American Journal of Psychology, 9, 507-533.
Uziel, L. (2007). Individual differences in the social facilitation effect: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(3), 579-601.
Vighnarajah, Wong, S. L., Bakar, K. A. (2009). Qualitative findings of students’ perception on practice of self-regulated strategies in online community previous term discussion. Computers & Education, 53(1), 749-760.
Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F. & Park, D. W. (1994). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: a meta-analysis of social and antisocial communication. Communication Research, 21(4), 460-487.
Wheeler, S. (2005). Creating Social Presence in Digital Learning Environments: A Presence of Mind?. Featured Paper for the TAFE Conference, Queensland, Australia: 11 November, 2005.
Welsh, E. T., Wanberg, C. R., Brown, K. G. & Simmering, M. J. (2003). E-learning: emerging uses, empirical results and future directions. International Journal of Training and Development, 7(4), 245-258.
Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269-274.
Zanbaka, C., Ulinski, A., Goolkasian, P., & Hodges, L. F. (2004). Effects of Virtual Human Presence on Task Performance. Proc. International Conference on Artificial Reality and Telexistence 2004, 174-181.