Transcript
  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    1/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 1 of 17

    Boyer, D. Matthewpresented 16 April 2009 at AERA 2009

    Poster Session:Design Thinking: Across Formal and Informal Learning Environments

    Designing for Community:

    UnderstandingSense of Community in Virtual Learning Environments

    As teachers increasingly go online to support their professional learning, they are met with a

    wide array of opportunities for engaging in what researchers and developers have termed virtualcommunity. In 2004sDesigning for virtual communities in the service of learning(Barab et al.,

    2004), as with other reports of research surrounding online communities, various authorsinvestigate what community means in virtual environments. Comparing these online groups to

    physical-world communities of practice, researchers continue to explore the ways in whichvirtual environments can support professional learning communities.

    What is not clear is just what community means for researchers, designers, and participants. This

    paper begins to summarize various aspects of community that authors have previously identified,in an attempt to create a framework for understanding not only what community means in a

    virtual learning environment, but also how designers who seek to build online community canapproach the creation of their online environments.

    This framework supports understandingsense of community, an individual participants thoughts

    and feelings about their identity and connection to the online group. While the broad termcommunity is discussed, the purpose of this paper is to focus on creating both conceptual and

    operational descriptions of sense of community. Through an interpretation of current literature,as well as analysis of an online learning environment intentionally designed to support a sense of

    community in participants, this research provides a design framework that both informs and isinformed by research, and suggests ideas for practical design applications.

    I begin with an overview of several areas related to community in virtual learning environments,

    specifically research around communities of practice, teacher professional development inlearning communities, and virtual communities. From this foundational information, I present a

    framework to identify the aspects of a virtual learning community that contribute tounderstanding an individuals sense of community. I discuss this emerging framework as it is

    informed by research, as it looks in practice, and as it may be intentionally designed.

    Purpose

    As is evidenced by scholarly investigations into online community from a variety of researchperspectives (Barab et al., 2001; Dede, 2004; Gray, 2004; Neff, 2002; Palinscar et al., 1998;

    Preece, 2000; Riel & Polin, 2004; Schlager & Schank, 1997; Selwyn, 2000; Smith & Kollock,1999), we as researchers have been intrigued by the possibility of taking what we know about

    physical world communities and using that knowledge to create virtual environments thatsupport similar types of connection and communication between community members. The

    ability to facilitate organizations online has led to the use of virtual environments to supportprofessional learning, from virtual organizations like TappedIn (Schlageret al., 2002) and the

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    2/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 2 of 17

    Apple Learning Interchange, to online courses for graduate work or other ongoing professionaldevelopment.

    The purpose of this research is to sift through the ever-increasing body of research on online

    learning and virtual communities in order to identify the important characteristics for those

    seeking to analyze, design, or construct virtual environments that support an individuals senseof community. This paper presents an important clarification: central to the creation of asustained, supportive community of practice, whether physical or virtual, is attention to a set of

    issues related to developing a sense of community in individual participants. These issues arecombined in a research and design framework that can be used to inform ongoing research on

    virtual learning environments as well as facilitate the development of future online projects.

    Process

    Before developing this framework, I began by examining foundational research on a variety ofareas related to online communities of practice for teacher professional development. Summative

    information about these areas is presented in the Perspective section of this paper. From thisbackground information, I move to a discussion of the framework itself, presenting six aspects

    that contribute to understanding sense of community.

    To build this framework, I used existing research to inform the different aspects, along withinformation from an analysis of an online graduate course designed to support a sense of

    community in individual participants. Through this two-pronged approach, I was able to refinemy observations of the virtual learning environment with research literature from previous

    studies. The resulting framework is a conceptual overview, meant to assist researchers in theiranalysis and designers in their creation of virtual learning environments that seek to develop a

    sense of community.

    Perspective

    To understand how an individuals sense of community can contribute to their successfulparticipation in virtual learning environments, it is necessary to reflect upon foundational

    research into areas related to communities of practice and professional learning. The followingsection presents information on the areas of communities of practice, teacher professional

    learning, and virtual communities. This foundational research helps to understand not simplywhat community means in a broader sense, but also why community can be such a powerful

    concept when developing learning environments and activities.

    Communities of Practice

    Communities of practice have existed as long as man has created social structures aroundbuilding collective knowledge. From the time of apprenticeship-based guilds and communities

    of artisans, there have existed groups of people seeking to engage in discourse around commonexperiences and share in the construction of new understanding toward collective goals. More

    recently, industries and organizations have developed their own communities of practice, geared

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    3/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 3 of 17

    toward the development of communal understanding and the creation of new knowledge. Thesecommunities are pervasive to our culture, existing in endless iterations (Wenger et al., 2002).

    These communities are also important to our continued expansion as a knowledge-based society,as groups come together to create a dynamic structure for investigation and creation. In these

    communities, knowledge is not simply an information artifact, but rather a dynamic process of

    co-creation where learning is a living process, socially constructed through discourse andsharing. At times, understanding is tacit to the group, existing as the underpinnings of thecommunitys creation and central to their ability to function. Other times, the knowledge created

    becomes explicit, in that it is shared between members and possibly outside of the communityitself.

    Communities of practice exist across many dimensions, including time, location, participants,

    size and purpose. For example, a group of twenty teachers may come together for a five-dayprofessional development workshop at their school with the task of creating a scope and

    sequence for a future unit of study. In another example, four architects situated in separate citiesaround the globe use communication technologies to complete a building design over a period of

    months. These communities can continue past their current iterations or choose to dissolve oncetheir task is completed; the community of practice defines its own structure and sustainability.

    In one model of communities of practice, there are three criteria for examining these

    communities: domain, community and practice (Wenger et al., 2002). Domain refers to thecommon ground shared by the participants. Community involves the social interactions that

    become the foundation for the construction of new knowledge. Practice includes severalvariables: framework, ideas, tools and information. Framework defines the component structures

    for communication and sharing, while ideas are the concepts and topics for investigation. Toolscan be anything from communication technologies to the physical implements used to create and

    display the information as artifacts.

    Put another way, communities of practice involve the creation of shared knowledge and beliefs,while bringing together individual histories that intertwine interdependent participants involved

    in a communal enterprise. The participants develop relationships that respect individualdifferences and viewpoints, but allow for everyone to interact within an ongoing and

    reproducible endeavor (Barab et al., 2004).

    A community of practice exists through ongoing interaction focused on the sharing ofinformation toward the social construction of new knowledge. Situated in practice, the members

    engage with archival and current material while interacting with each other (Anderson et al.,2000). Through this communal work, an individual participant creates an identity that is related

    to their role in the community, but can also come to understand the purpose and importance oftheir work within larger contexts (Gray, 2004).

    Teacher Professional Development through Professional Learning Communities

    Under many current models of teacher professional development, teachers are asked to leave

    their classrooms to participate in educational activities designed to improve their teaching andhave a positive impact on student learning and achievement. They are removed from the very

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    4/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 4 of 17

    situations they wish to improve and provided with provocative panaceas that promise positivechange. When they return to their classrooms, the status quo environment that has inhibited the

    development of organically instigated change by its very structure, teachers are expected tointegrate their newfound knowledge into faulty existing structures. It is customary to assume

    that teachers can implement change without providing environmental or systemic change. They

    are removed from their practice, provided with episodic anecdotes of innovation, and thenreturned to the realities of their classrooms (Grossman et al., 2001).

    Professional development must be informed by new perspectives and constructed towardappropriate goals. Rather than episodic, it must be a career-long process with ongoing

    involvement. Instead of removing it from the classroom, it must occur in context, or at the veryleast, be tied directly to context for positive transfer of training to occur. It must begin with the

    work of the teacher. It must focus on student knowledge and achievement. It must beappropriate to the current stage of the teachers career (Schlager & Fusco, 2004).

    For change in professional practice to occur, it must be change that is self-sustaining and

    generative (Franke et al., 1998). Teachers can only practice the changes they have encounteredwhen their environment provides ongoing support for innovations to take hold and prosper.

    Also, the practices must be part of continual growth, in which necessity requires investigationand this inquiry leads to further change. Change in the system does not occur without change to

    the individual, but change in the individual cannot happen if the system does not provide roomfor this to develop (Christiansen & Ramadevi, 2002). This interrelationship necessitates a

    communal and systemic approach to change.

    Collaboration between teachers supports the very things that current professional developmentactivities lack: ongoing cognitive and emotional support for teachers (Marx et al., 1998). In such

    professional learning communities, teachers are able to learn new information, converse abouttheir new understanding, and explore and reflect upon current and new practices. They support

    each other as they attempt to integrate innovations, while providing the environment to take risksand experiment with new ideas.

    In these types of community, teachers have opportunities to participate in both formal and

    informal learning experiences. A more structured focus on a particular topic may provide theattention to a necessary innovation, while engaging in informal exchanges provide the necessary

    connections that help to create and sustain a community of practice (Palinscar et al., 1998).Through these formal and informal experiences, participants have the opportunity to connect to

    new content, new practices, new colleagues, new curricula, and deeper opportunities for learning(Cox, 2004).

    Teacher professional development situated in professional learning communities can involve a

    wide range of participants, but can be most effective when there is a diversity of individuals whoeach bring their expertise and experiences to the group. For example, a community that involves

    both classroom teachers and university researchers and students allows participants to not onlyuse their individual strengths, but also try on different roles, developing their individual

    understanding through the different perspectives of other community members. Teachers canlearn from the research-based knowledge of university participants, and the university

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    5/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 5 of 17

    participants can place their academic understanding within the context of classrooms andpractice (Putnam & Borko, 2000).

    Within these communities, there is the possibility that each group will create its shared goals and

    choose to focus on specific or general topics to develop through their interactions. This mutual

    investigation of a topic can have either a cohort or issue focus, engaging in communalprofessional discourse toward more general understanding or progressing toward a prescribedgoal centered on a particular topic (Sherer et al., 2003).

    Current norms of professional practice can inhibit the development of such professional

    communities of teachers. Most teachers are accustomed to practicing in private, with littleinterference from peers (Thomas et al., 1998). They do not engage in critical analysis of their

    own work, let alone allow others to reflect critically on their professional practices. For manyteachers, collegial discourse is not the norm, and must be supported through policy and practices

    that seek to re-conceptualize the ways in which teachers view their communal practice.

    Virtual Communities of Practice

    Building on educational research on situated learning and distributed cognition, researchers andpractitioners have discussed the nature of communities of practice as it pertains to teacher

    communities and professional development (e.g., Barab et al., 2004; Schlager & Fusco, 2004).Many of these models began with the work of Lave and Wenger focused on physical, face-to-

    face communities that support participant learning in deeply contextual environments (Lave,1991; Wenger, 1996). With the integration of networked technologies into education, however,

    these conversations have turned to the use of technology to create virtual communities ofpractice that connect users beyond the constraints of distance and time.

    Using ICT to support the development of virtual communities of practice extends the

    opportunities implicit in physical, face-to-face communities. Fundamentally similar to their face-to-face relatives, virtual communities of practice rely on synchronous and asynchronous ICT to

    facilitate group interactions. A virtual community of practice requires ongoing interactionfocused on the sharing of information toward the social construction of new knowledge (Barab et

    al., 2004). Allowing participants to be geographically distant but virtually collocated, onlinecommunities use current activities, digital resources, and archived content, to support participant

    interactions. Working with others in the virtual environment, the individual has an identitywithin the community, with the opportunity to view their individual role within the context of the

    collective purposes of the group.

    Virtual communities of practice may occur in a variety of online settings, however, instructionaldesigners constructing virtual learning environments need to understand more specifically the

    issues related to a user-centered approach to designing for community. Rather than focus broadlyon a general community approach, a framework of design issues that contribute to a sense of

    community supports the creation of virtual learning environments that are focused on theindividual student (user, participant). While different authors seem to each take new perspectives

    on the topic, the framework presented in this paper seeks to organize related aspects fromprevious works into more conceptually-forgiving categories.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    6/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 6 of 17

    Creating the Framework

    Given this continued focus on online community among researchers and designers, a goal of this

    research is to extend beyond amorphous discussions of concepts to create a practical, accessible

    framework that identifies important aspects for researchers and designers. What is presented inthis paper as a set of six important issues is a summation of ongoing research, infused withanalysis of a virtual learning environment designed to support an individual sense of community.

    Researchers and designers who focus on an individual sense of community can use the following

    aspects as they analyze and build for a sense of community. Understanding the factors thatcontribute to or detract from an individuals sense of community in a virtual learning

    environment provides a lens for understanding, conceptually and operationally, what placecommunity has in virtual learning environments and how best to support it.

    Analyzing an existing virtual learning environment was an important component for creating the

    framework. The six issues, without practical application and examples, are simply an inert list.As this framework is meant to provide a lens for research and support for designers, it is

    necessary that each aspect be understandable in both theoretical and practical ways. As I presentthe framework, although I begin each section with interpretation and summation from existing

    research, I also provide analysis related to the virtual learning environment. This is meant toilluminate the practical, usable nature of the framework as a research and design tool.

    The virtual learning environment that I used was a course-based environment constructed for an

    online Masters level Educational Technology course in Action Research that used the onlineANGEL course management system (ANGEL Learning, 2006). The course members were all

    classroom teachers who were also part of a Master of Arts in Educational Technology program ata Midwestern research university (RU/VH in the basic Carnegie classification). A subset of

    members of this course consented to have their interactions analyzed as well as be interviewedfor their impressions about the course. Students who consented to participate also filled out an

    online survey related to their experiences in the course. The survey included items focusing onuser beliefs about their own interactions in the online group as well as reflections on group

    interactions. It is available in Appendix A.

    The following conceptual framework, then, is a presentation of research literature along with aninterpretive analysis of one virtual learning environment. As is evident, aspects of the framework

    often tie closely with each other, creating an interconnected set of issues for researchers anddesigners. I present each aspect with attention to both the theoretical and practical. After this

    analysis, I provide a brief discussion related to how designers can understand and use theframework aspects in their constructions.

    A Framework for Understanding a Sense of Community

    Understanding an individuals sense of community in a virtual learning environment involves six

    interconnected aspects. They are: task centrality

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    7/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 7 of 17

    common purpose engaged presence role connectedness activity continuity and collocation tool and vocabulary fluency

    The following discussion presents each issue from the perspectives of current research literatureas well as application in a virtual learning environment.

    Task Centrality

    Task centrality refers to what value the user places on the activities that she can or must perform

    in the environment. A higher centrality of task means that the user views the activity in whichthey are engaging to be important to their involvement in the virtual environment. Task centrality

    includes the concept of participation structures for providing varied access points forparticipation (Riel & Polin, 2004) and is connected to the common purpose of the environment

    as impacted by user beliefs and designer decisions.

    Considering the online course, none of the survey participants felt that they were unable toengage with the tasks facilitated by the environment, which would include discussion forums,

    downloading content, accessing emails, and synchronous chat. Different teams chose to usedifferent technologies, although only a few groups chose to use synchronous technologies within

    the ANGEL framework.

    In attempting to find consensus on their beliefs about the course activities, there was a broadrange of comments about what their instructors asked them to do in the virtual environment.

    Some felt that some discussion activities were too prescriptive or lacked a clear purpose otherthan busywork, indicating some disagreement about the nature and importance of the course

    activities.

    Eleven of the fourteen participants felt that technology facilitated their group process well orvery well. No participant felt that technology functioned poorly in this capacity. This is

    connected to the idea of common purpose, in that the ability of each member of the group tocommunicate and make their communications accessible and usable by others in the group

    influences the ability of the group to perform necessary and expected coursework tasks.

    Common Purpose

    Commonality of purpose contributes to an individuals sense of community when that individualuser believes she shares in a common endeavor with others in the virtual environment. A

    common purpose can include a shared goal among users in the online group (Johnson, 2001), butcan be broader to encompass variations on individual goals. So long as the user views their

    personal goals as productively related to those of the explicit common goals or implicit personalgoals of other users, there exists a common purpose for their continued participation in the

    environment.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    8/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 8 of 17

    Survey participants reported a wide range of purposes for their participation in the online course.Most believed that their participation was somehow tied to their development as researchers, and

    half mentioned a focus on their use of technology as practitioners. When asked about theirinstructors goals, there were many different interpretations as well. Some believed the course

    was meant to build students capacities to perform ongoing, action research in their own

    classrooms.

    As for their own goals, some students spoke directly to the necessity of taking the course to

    accomplish the requirements for the Masters degree. Others responded with a focus on theirprofessional learning, and many included how their improved learning would impact their

    classroom practice and interactions with parents. Only two commented that completion of theaction research project (ARP) was their initial expectation for participating in the online course,

    while almost all responded that the ARP became the main focus of their continued involvementthroughout the project.

    Engaged Presence

    Continued participation in a common purpose is one aspect of supporting individual users as they

    create a more engaged presence in the virtual environment. Constructing their individual identityonline by presenting activity artifacts for others to interpret, users are able to use different

    technologies to present a virtual identity. In professional learning environments, users shareprofessional and personal information they deem important for their fellow users to know about

    them. Without the physical world cues that help us to form our perceptions of others, users mustconstruct their own identities and interpret those of others based on a smaller set of information

    (Donath, 1999). An engaged presence goes beyond having a clearly identifiable identity in thevirtual environment to include issues of depth and types of interactions and the importance of an

    individuals role in the environment.

    To facilitate the construction of their professional identities in the virtual learning environment,participants were expected to have URLs on their ANGEL profile page that link to their

    professional portfolio. How often students access other students information in order to form aprofessional identity (albeit amorphous and ill-defined) of participants they do not know in the

    physical world was unclear. It seems, however, that the materials students could use for thispurpose was limited to others abilities to share their information in an accessible and useful

    manner, meaning that the range of information varied to a large degree but was presentnonetheless.

    To the extent which the amount of interactions could be an indicator for how engaged in the

    activities, groups, and communications the participants are in the virtual environment, it is againunclear how the majority of students felt due to the low level of participants. From the study

    participants, however, it was clear that they felt their level of participation and involvement wasthe same or above that of the other members of their team. This could be one indicator for how

    individuals perceive not only their identity and engagement, but also how they see their rolecompared to others in the group.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    9/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 9 of 17

    An important consideration for this sample population is that, within the virtual environment ofthe online course, many participants knew other team and class members from their physical

    cohorts in two Midwestern sites and a site in the United Kingdom. This factor, making thelearning environment for some students hybrid rather than completely virtual, does not have a

    clear interpretation from the data collected.

    Role Connectedness

    Role connectedness can contribute to an individuals sense of community by further engagingthe user through their virtual identity. In a course-based virtual learning environment, the

    participants have an explicit role as students in an academic course, but in this instance they alsohave the additional role of reflective practitioner who engages in ongoing professional

    development. Activity structures in the environment are designed to support both roles, whileimplicitly supporting the development of the latter. Given that users are expected to contribute

    and interact through of their role as students, different users may have different beliefs about thisrole. Relationships between users in different roles may take longer to develop than in physically

    collocated communities, given the asynchronicity of communication (Wellman & Gulia, 1999),but can develop into close, nuanced relationship that require the attention and activity typically

    given to strong physical-world relationships. While issues of trust are important to severalaspects of the framework, trust is especially important for connecting the perceived and explicit

    roles of participants in the virtual learning environment (Rovai, 2002). Users who feel theirparticipation is important to interconnected interactions in the virtual environment may be more

    apt to continue on a path of productive engagement.

    Implicit in the design of the group structure in the online course is that each participant is equallyresponsible for group. Perhaps not overtly stated, the implication of individual grades for

    coursework provides the means to interpret individual contribution as vital to group success. Thecourse instructors reinforced individual roles throughout online materials that described the

    course information along with particular descriptions of course project. It would seem to bedifficult for an individual to be interacting with team members but not feel some connectedness

    of their role to the functioning of the team.

    This, however, is precisely what some participants reported, feeling little to no connection toteammates and the functioning of their team. They viewed their participation as significantly

    independent without a clear role connected to the states team goals. This is not predictive of whattypes of roles motivate individuals to participate. Research specifically targeting the function of

    roles and their interconnectedness could, however, provide important information for the explicitand prescriptive aspects of role definition and interdependence.

    In the online course, groups were expected to create norms for their interactions. These norms

    appear to have provided the necessary structure for facilitating the continuity of participation inteam activities. While individual levels of contribution fluctuate over time, study participants

    seem, for the most part, to have abided by the norms set by their teams. In one sense, this can beinterpreted as a shared understanding of roles and clear expectations for continued participation.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    10/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 10 of 17

    Activity Continuity and Collocation

    Continuity of activity refers to the path of productive engagement. Integrating design aspectsrelated to both content and technologies, the virtual environment provides the structure for users

    continued involvement. Content is informed by the instructional design underpinning the

    environment while it informs the activity structure employed. The technologies used can help tosupport or inhibit the activity, so issues of interface design become important for creatingactivity structures that support ongoing activity. Collocation of the activities can occur in a

    variety of settings, both physical and virtual, however, designing for virtual collocation clearlybounds the activity. The virtual space becomes a metaphor for other physical collaborative

    spaces, and provides a central environment for interacting with professionals regardless ofgeographic location (Bringelson & Carey, 2000).

    There is an explicit ebb and flow to the pace of activities presented in the online course as

    defined by their presentation and description from instructors to students. At times, moreongoing, highly participatory asynchronous discussions are expected, when at others the

    instructors require more summative, prescriptive individual submissions for course assignmentsrelated to ARPs. Survey responses rarely focused on the change in activity. Rather, many

    reported a change in their expectations and level of commitment based on types of tasks.

    In more open-ended virtual learning environments, such as TappedIn or Apple LearningInterchange, the continuity of activity may be more forgiving in the facilitation of group and

    individual progress. In the course-based structure of the online group with a clear start and finishto the work to be done for the course, participants may not expect to engage in a sustained

    environment that continues past the temporal end of the course and supports the continuation ofany existing community of practice. Even when clearly stated as an objective for the virtual

    learning environment, this conception seems foreign to the reinforced notion of temporallybounded coursework.

    Tool and Vocabulary Fluency

    User interactions with activities in the virtual environment are related to their fluency with the

    technology tools as well as with the shared vocabulary used by others in the environment. Howtools are designed for an environment, along with how new activities and tools are introduced

    into the environment, are important design issues that impact and are influenced by user fluency(Schlager & Fusco, 2004). Attempting to support user fluency with the vocabulary used by

    others in the virtual environment can be addressed with assistance structures (e.g., faqs), sharedglossaries, or inline links. The goal is to provide the user with an unhindered entry point to

    interactions in the environment, thereby lessening external factors that may negatively impacttheir continued participation in the virtual environment.

    As mentioned previously, the survey participants responded that the technology tools were no

    significant hindrance to the functioning of their groups. Unfortunately, there was no datacollection item devoted to vocabulary fluency, although all of the study participants appeared to

    have completed their assigned activities, implying that fluency with vocabulary related to thecourse did not hinder involvement.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    11/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 11 of 17

    Summary

    As much as these aspects provide a way toward understandingsense of community as a design

    concept, they cannot provide a precise definition for how each participant will interpret their

    individual sense of community. To some individuals, certain aspects are more important thanothers. While one participant may have more interactions with individual activities rather thandynamic conversations with other participants in the virtual environment, they may still feel a

    strong connection to other users and the group. As dynamic systems, virtual learningenvironments cannot be designed to guarantee that each user will feel an identical sense of

    community.

    The value of this framework, then, lies not in a prescriptive definition for sense of community,but rather in the usage of the framework to inform research and design. Considering this set of

    issues as they inform the design and implementation of virtual learning environments to supportcourse-based professional learning, instructional designers can retain a user-centered design

    focus while seeking to support the development of communities of practice within the courseenvironment. Ultimately, understanding what design aspects contribute to an individual sense of

    community can provide important feedback about the success of the virtual learningenvironment.

    Designing for a Sense of Community

    This leads us to a brief discussion of how this framework can be used to inform future designs.

    Instructors or instructional designers who create purposeful, structured learning environmentsusing a variety of tools, including instructional methodologies and prescriptive instructional

    design models, can use this framework to better understand and support a sense of communityamong individuals in a given virtual learning environment. As mentioned previously, this

    framework is not intended to be prescriptive; rather, it illuminates important considerations fordesigners as they visualize and construct activities and opportunities for interaction among

    participants.

    Task Centrality

    To engage learners in the environment, it is important that activities have a clear connection tothe common purpose of the group. At the task level, it is vital that time spent is perceived as time

    well spent. Toward this goal, designers should make explicit, frequent connections betweeninteractions online and their perceived benefit from a variety of viewpoints. Sharing their

    understandings through various lenses, as teacher, as student, as researcher, as member of theirlarger school community, what do these issues we are discussing mean? Engaging students in the

    how and the why helps to develop the who, what, when and where. Developing tasks that arewell-defined and perceived as moving toward explicit individual and common goals should be

    the focus of the instructional design.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    12/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 12 of 17

    Common Purpose

    To achieve a greater understanding and connection to the common purpose of the group, virtuallearning environments that seek to develop an individual sense of community in each participant

    should have both explicit and implicit goals. Explicit goals are those shared by the instructional

    designers with the students. They are accessible and often repeated in various forms. Althoughindividual users will have their own goals, to contribute to their sense of presence, a participantmust be connected to the common goals of the group. Explicit representations of common goals

    provide ongoing points for the individual to stay connected to the group.

    Implicit goals are also important, as they inform the choices that designers make throughout thelife of the virtual environment. These are the goals that drive the activities and activity structures

    in the online course. Whether this is conceived as a pedagogical framework or content-basedmodel, more important is that design decisions are made consistently within the implied purpose

    of the project.

    Engaged Presence

    Creating a more engaged sense of presence relies on connecting a participants activity to theirinterpretations of their own and others roles and identities in the online space. Presence, then, is

    not simply the amount of activity, in its ongoing ebb and flow, but also the way that the userinterprets this activity. Providing motivating activities that tie the users role to the workings of

    others in the environment contributes to an immersive, interconnected presence in theenvironment. For interactions to initiate and flourish, individuals must be present in the

    environment, which means more than just logging into the virtual space. Who they are and whatthey are doing in the space contributes to how engaged and necessary they feel toward the online

    group.

    Role Connectedness

    Returning to the idea from the online course participants who felt that they had similar or higherlevels of participation when compared to other students on their team, it is interesting to consider

    the possibility that evaluating others in a virtual group can strongly influence connectedness tothe group. Once an individual student begins to form judgments about other participants as a

    result of consciously or unconsciously processing their perceptions about other users, she movesinto a more hierarchical, administrative perspective where she is not only interacting but also

    providing support and commentary. In groups where norms were clearly defined and postedpublicly, participants have a clearer distinction of their own role and the roles of others. As these

    roles interconnect, individuals become tied to each other, depending on individual contributionsto support collective endeavors.

    Activity Continuity and Collocation

    Perhaps course-based professional learning environments would be best served by explicitly

    engaging responses from participants about the course structure and how best to spend theencapsulated structure of the course. This concept is deeply engrained in both teachers and

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    13/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 13 of 17

    students, and could possibly be a used to create more intensive, short range team facilitation thatuses the strengths of an individuals sense of community to connect them deeply with course

    activities and classmates.

    Activity continuity is dependent on an individual users level of comfort and understanding of

    the technology tools and the language used to communicate with other members of thecommunity. Having consistent, important reasons to use the technologies to communicate withteam members who are virtually collocated allows individuals the opportunity to complete

    activities in an efficient, unobtrusive manner.

    Tool and Vocabulary Fluency

    Tool fluency becomes an issue for an individuals sense of community when inexperience with aspecific technology inhibits participation in course activities. Providing support for learning to

    use tools effectively is an important instructional design consideration, and can be typically befacilitated by resources found outside the virtual learning environment. Facilitating an

    independent-learning model that expects student use of tutorials and other learning materials tosupport their own development can produce self-regulated learning of technologies, an important

    component to developing fluency.

    Vocabulary fluency can be an issue when instructors or fellow students use ambiguous,incorrect, or novel vocabulary in their communication. Creating a shared lexicon for terminology

    used in the facilitation of activities and discussions in the virtual space can support individuals asthey seek to become more comfortable using context and content specific vocabulary.

    Understanding how to use the technology tools ties back to task centrality and the ability to

    complete the coursework tasks expected by teammates and instructors. Vocabulary can meanterms related to digital technologies or subject area, and being fluent in the language of the

    communications means a greater chance for individuals to understand, interpret, and share ideas.

    Discussion

    This framework for conceptually and operationally understandingsense of community as itpertains to individual participants in a virtual learning environment is just a beginning. The true

    test of its validity and functionality is the way that it is used in future research and developmentprojects. As it currently exists, it is meant as a guide for those seeking to analyze current online

    groups or those who would like to design future environments in a way that can help build asense of community in participants. Through this process of application and analysis, it is my

    hope that the framework continues to develop in ways that help us better understand whatcommunity means and how to design for it in our online interactions.

    With all of the discourse surrounding learning communities, both physical or virtual, the term

    community has lost clarity in its meaning. Some writers may refer to any grouping of people as acommunity, distorting its original descriptions in the research literature. To be a useful construct

    for research and development, we as researchers must clearly identify what we mean by

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    14/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 14 of 17

    community for professional learning, before we can attempt to intentionally create onlineenvironments that seek to support professional learning communities.

    This was the primary motivation for this study: to develop a framework for researching,

    evaluating and designing toward an individual sense of community. Although some researchers

    have created related frameworks for observing online communities, this project took theapproach of summating available conceptualizations and examples using it to reflect on a virtuallearning environment designed with the explicit goal of supporting professional community.

    While the design framework presented in this project supports the view that instructionaldesigners should be focused on user-centered designs that support an individual sense of

    community, it is not a large leap to move from theoretically desiring a community of practicetoward more practical, design-based applications of theory.

    As was evident in using this framework for understanding an individuals sense of community as

    it pertains to the design of the virtual learning environment, there are many associated issues todiscuss and research. To form a more balanced conceptual understanding of community that

    influences more practical design applications, it is necessary to apply this design framework to avariety of virtual learning environments. Without understanding how each aspect applies to

    different contexts, attempting to create a summative conceptual definition forsense ofcommunity is premature. One future direction for this research is to apply the framework to the

    creation of a virtual learning environment, using design-based methodology to inform theconstruction process and reflect on the ongoing research. As this framework is focused on

    design decisions, it seems important to implement the ideas through a design project, and reflectthrough empirical research.

    An individuals sense of community is only one area of an instructional design puzzle that

    confronts teachers who create virtual learning environments to support online learning. Evenwhen instructors do not explicitly design for an individuals sense of community, many of the

    aspects presented in the framework pertain to how individuals contribute to and gain from thevirtual learning environment. Understanding how sense of community can be used to inform the

    design of these environments is an important consideration for any instructional designers usingICT to support learning.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    15/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 15 of 17

    References

    Anderson, J. R., Greeno, J. G., Reder, L. M., & Simon, H. A. (2000). Perspectives on learning,thinking and activity.Educational Researcher, 29(4), 11-13.

    ANGEL Learning. (2006). ANGEL learning management suite. Retrieved 17 December 2006,

    2006, from http://www.angellearning.com/Barab, S. A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. H. (2004).Designing for virtual communities in the service oflearning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Barab, S., MaKinster, J., Moore, J. A., Cunningham, D. J., & The ILF Design Team. (2001).Designing and building an on-line community: The struggle to support sociability in the

    inquiry learning forum.Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 71-96.

    Barab, S., MaKinster, J., & Scheckler, R. (2004). Designing system dualities: Building onlinecommunity. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling & J. H. Gray (Eds.),Designing for virtual

    communities in the service of learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.Bringelson, L. S., & Carey, T. (2000). Different (key)strokes for different folks: Designing

    online venues for professional communities.Educational Technology & Society, 3(3), 58-64.

    Christiansen, H., & Ramadevi, S. (2002).Reeducating the educator : Global perspectives oncommunity building. Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Cox, M. D. (2004). Introduction to faculty learning communities. In M. D. Cox & L. RIchlin(Eds.),Building faculty learning communities (Vol. 97, pp. 5-23). San Francisco: Jossey-

    Bass.Dede, C. (2004).Distributed-learning communities as a model for educating teachers. Paper

    presented at the Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education, Online.Donath, J. (1999). Identity and deception in the virtual community. In M. A. Smith & P. Kollock

    (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace. New York: Routledge.Franke, M. L., Carpenter, T., Fennema, E., Ansell, E., & Behrend, J. (1998). Understanding

    teacher's self-sustaining generative change in the context of professional development.Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 67-80.

    Gray, B. (2004). Informal learning in an online community of practice.Journal of DistanceEducation, 19(1), 20-35.

    Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher community.Teachers College Record, 103(6), 942.

    Johnson, C. M. (2001). A survey of current research on online communities of practice.Internetand Higher Education, 4, 45-60.

    Lave, J. (1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. In L. B. Resnick, J. M. Levine &S. D. Teasley (Eds.),Perspectives on socially shared cognition (pp. 63-82). Washington,

    DC: American Psychological Association.Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1998). New technologies for

    teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 33-52.Neff, M. D. (2002). Online knowledge communities and their role in organizational learning. In

    K. E. Rudestam & J. Schoenholtz-Read (Eds.),Handbook of online learning :Innovations in higher education and corporate training(pp. 335-352). Thousand Oaks,

    Calif.: Sage Publications.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    16/17

    Boyer, D. M.,Designing for Community page 16 of 17

    Palinscar, A. S., Magnusson, S. J., Marano, N., Ford, D., & Brown, N. (1998). Designing acommunity of practice: Principles and practices of the gisml community. Teaching and

    Teacher Education, 14(1), 5-19.Preece, J. (2000). Online communities : Designing usability, supporting sociability. New York:

    John Wiley.

    Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking have to sayabotu research on teacher learning?Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4-15.Riel, M., & Polin, L. (2004). Online learning communities: Common ground and critical

    differences in designing technical environments. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling & J. H. Gray(Eds.),Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning. New York:

    Cambridge University Press.Rovai, A. (2002). Building sense of community at a distance.International Review of Research

    in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1).Schlager, M., & Fusco, J. (2004). Teacher professional development, technology, and

    communities of practice: Are we putting the cart before the horse? In S. Barab, R. Kling& J. Gray (Eds.),Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning. New

    York: Cambridge University Press.Schlager, M. S., Fusco, J., & Schank, P. K. (2002). Evolution of an on-line education community

    of practice. In K. A. Renninger & W. Shumar (Eds.),Building virtual communities:Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 129-158). New York: Cambridge University

    Press.Schlager, M. S., & Schank, P. K. (1997). Tapped in: A new on-line teacher community concept

    for the next generation of internet technology. Paper presented at the CSCL'97: TheSecond International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning,

    Toronto.Selwyn, N. (2000). Creating a "Connected" Community? Teachers' use of an electronic

    discussion group. Teachers College Record, 102(4), 750-778.Sherer, P., Shea, T. P., & Kristensen, E. (2003). Online communities of practice: A catalyst for

    faculty development.Innovative Higher Education, 27(3), 183-194.Smith, M. A., & Kollock, P. (1999). Communities in cyberspace. London ; New York:

    Routledge.Thomas, G., Wineburg, S., Grossman, P., Myhre, O., & Woolworth, S. (1998). In the company

    of colleagues: An interim report on the development of a community of teacher learners.Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 21-32.

    Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Virtual communities as communities: Net surfers don't ridealone. In M. A. Smith & P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace. New York:

    Routledge.Wenger, E. (1996). Communities of practice: The social fabric of a learning organization. The

    Healthcare Forum Journal, 39(4), 20-25.Wenger, E., McDermott, R. A., & Snyder, W. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice : A

    guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Wineburg, S., & Grossman, P. (1998). Creating a community of learners among high school

    teachers.Phi Delta Kappan, 79(5), 350-353.

  • 7/31/2019 Designing for community: Understanding sense of community in virtual learning environments.

    17/17

    Boyer, D. M., Designing for Community page 17 of 17

    Appendix A

    Aspects of Community in an Online Course: Student Survey1.What do you think the instructors of the online course would like you to get out of this

    course? :: TEXT BOX

    2.What do you think you are getting or will get out of this course? :: TEXT BOX3.Rank the following on a five-point scale:

    a. a. how you think your project team works together as a group. :: 5 PT LIKERT VERY POORLY POORLY NEUTRAL WELL VERY WELL

    b. how you are engaging with others in your group :: 5 PT LIKERT VERYPOORLY POORLY NEUTRAL WELL VERY WELL

    c. how others in your group are engaging with group assignments :: 5 PT LIKERT VERY POORLY POORLY NEUTRAL WELL VERY WELL

    d. How you feel you are engaging with course tasks and responsibilities :: 5 PTLIKERT VERY POORLY POORLY NEUTRAL WELL VERY WELL

    e. how other students in the course are engaging with course assignments :: 5 PTLIKERT VERY POORLY POORLY NEUTRAL WELL VERY WELLf. how you feel technology supports your ability to work with your group ::: 5 PTLIKERT VERY POORLY POORLY NEUTRAL WELL VERY WELL

    g. Optional: Briefly explain your response. :: TEXT BOX4.What were your goals and expectations for participating in the online course? Have they

    changed over time and, if so, how? :: TEXT BOX

    5.Please provide any further comments that you would like to share about your involvementwith the online course. :: TEXT BOX


Top Related