Online Interest Groups: Virtual Gathering Spaces to Promote Graduate Student Interaction

This article discusses a 15 month educational innovation project, the objective of which was to investigate the perceptions of health profession students about their participation in a program-wide virtual community gathering space (Clinical Interest Groups) during their online graduate studies. Participants were students in two graduate programs who joined online forum discussions of the Clinical Interest Groups. The project was developed as action research and employed an exploratory, descriptive methodology to generate data from three sources: participant responses to a 15-item Likert type questionnaire, five open-ended questions included on the questionnaire, and online postings contributed by participants to the forum discussions. Findings of use to online educators are that the Clinical Interest Groups provided a gathering place in which graduate students could discuss common interests and support one another, and that participation in the groups was limited due to competing demands on students’ time from other commitments. DOI: 10.4018/ijopcd.2012100105 64 International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 2(4), 63-76, October-December 2012 Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. INTRODUCTION Literature suggests that supportive studentstudent interactions foster social and academic integration (Kanuka & Jugdev, 2006; Rourke et al., 1999; Thomas, 2000) and that such integration leads to increased satisfaction (Mayne & Wu, 2011; Richardson & Swan, 2003) and course completion (Lovitts, 2000, 2001; Rourke et al., 1999). Literature also reveals that studentstudent ties and support evolve over time (Oren, Mioduser, & Nachmias, 2002; Stodel, Thompson, & MacDonald, 2006; Yuan, Gay, & Hembrooke, 2006). However, the research investigating social integration in online learning that was reviewed for this study focused on students in discrete courses as the unit of study. Research was not found that examined the experience of social integration from a perspective that takes into account the development of student-student interactions over time. Our action research project is unique in that it was completed from a ‘program’ perspective and spanned several discrete courses taken over a period of time. Other online educators may be interested in replicating this innovation with graduate students who are health care practitioners. In this article we describe findings from a research project that investigated the experiences, reflections and feelings of students who participated in a program-wide virtual community gathering space during their online graduate studies. Online interest groups (Clinical Interest Groups) were created within Moodle, an online learning platform, to provide opportunities for health professions students to engage in asynchronous discussions about shared clinical interests, distinct from the online activities of any particular course. While the main purpose of the project was to explore learners’ perceptions of participating in a non-graded program-wide activity, a secondary purpose was to consider ways in which we could improve our online learning environments and students’ online learning experiences based on their feedback. CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK AND LITERATURE REVIEW The project was guided by the Community of Inquiry (COI) framework described by Rourke, Anderson, Garrison, and Archer (1999). The COI framework highlights three major dimensions of the online learning environment that overlap to form the educational experience of the student: social presence (interpersonal connection), cognitive presence (construction of meaning through communication) and teaching presence (facilitation of active learning). Of these dimensions, social presence is the most relevant to this project. Social presence is defined as the ability of learners to project themselves socially and emotionally in a community of inquiry (Rourke et al., 1999). Social presence includes feeling comfortable, safe and willing to accept both support and differing points of view (Anderson, (2005). Rourke et al. suggest that social presence increases academic, social and institutional integration, resulting in increased persistence and course completion. There are a number of studies that have supported this suggestion, concluding that social presence is created in online learning environments and contributes positively to learning, satisfaction and persistence in online learning (Aragon, 2003; Mayne & Wu, 2011; Melrose & Bergeron, 2006; Richardson & Swan, 2003; Russo & Benson, 2005; Swan & Shih, 2005; Tu, 2002). On the other hand, feelings of isolation can be exacerbated when students do not feel a sense of social presence or when they do not feel that they are part of a community (Jung, 2001). Social presence is based in social integration. In graduate studies, Lovitts (2000) explained that social integration “develops through informal, casual interactions between and among graduate students and faculty outside the classroom” (para. 6). Social integration has been found to increase program completion and reduce program attrition (Thomas, 2000; Tinto, 1975). Online graduate students International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 2(4), 63-76, October-December 2012 65 Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. appreciate course designs that include optional nonacademic social discussion forums to promote social integration (Pate, 2008). As Rovia (2002) comments, although learning needs will attract adult learners to a program, they are not sufficient to retain them; social integration has a significant positive effect on retention of adult learners. Online educators are responsible to provide educational intervention activities that enhance social integration by creating a ‘social dimension’ within educational programs (Kanuka & Jugdev, 2006; Mayne & Wu, 2011), inviting collaboration (Shen & Wu, 2011), building a sense of community and reducing feelings of isolation (Brandes, 2006; McGivney, 2004). Social integration activities must include more than course-related activities. From their synthesis of studies that explored social issues in online course activities, Oren et al. (2002) concluded that support of social activities in online learning environments must extend beyond course activities. They suggested creating a range of virtual spaces in order to respond to different social needs, and enabling participants to contact each other for multiple purposes rather than solely for learning purposes. Viewing social integration as integral to success, Saunders and Lynch (2008) used web sites with interactive membership pages and blogs to help education students become more integrated into the graduate student community of their program. However, it is important to note that student-student ties and support evolve over time: they become strong by ‘the end of the course’ (Atack, 2003; Oren, Mioduser, & Nachmias, 2002; Stodel, Thompson, & MacDonald, 2006). Similarly, Yuan, Gay, and Hembrooke (2006) found that connectedness in task-related social networks grew significantly over time. Based on this review of literature, we speculated that it could be a useful educational strategy to provide a virtual space for graduate students to engage in interactive activities with fellow students who share common interests. Such a space would create an electronic network of practice. In industry, the term ‘network of practice’ refers to informal emergent social networks or groups where individuals with common interests interact and exchange information (Seely-Brown & Duguid, 2000). In educational settings, the term ‘network of practice’ evolved from Wenger’s work with ‘communities of practice.’ Wenger asserted that professionals are believed to learn best during informal workplace gatherings where stories are shared, novices learn from experts and gaps in practice knowledge are identified (Berry, 2011; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1998; Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002; Wenger, 2006, 2009). In virtual learning communities, electronic networks of practice involve selforganizing networks of geographically distributed individuals who share a mutual interest in engaging with others in discussions related to a common practice but who do not know one another, do not meet face to face and interact via online, computer-mediated communication (Daniel, Schwier, & McCalla, 2003; Wasko & Faraj, 2005). We reasoned that the creation of such a network amongst the students could reduce feelings of isolation, facilitate increased social integration and create a sense of belongingness to the university. In addition, the space could assist students to establish links between course activities and their employment and other personally relevant activities. CLINICAL INTEREST GROUP RESEARCH PROJECT Participants in the Clinical Interest Groups were enrolled in a Master of Nursing (MN) or Master of Health Studies (MHS) program at a Canadian university. While students in the MN program hold undergraduate degrees in nursing, those in the MHS program come from a variety of health disciplines including nursing, physiotherapy, occupational health, dietetics, and medicine. Course work in the program is completed exclusively online using the Moodle learning management system. The primary medium for communication and interaction is asynchronous text-based threaded discussions completed in 14-week online courses. However, there is no opportunity outside of the courses 66 International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 2(4), 63-76, October-December 2012 Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. for students to gather together and interact with other learners in their programs. The programs focus on development of leadership skills and, despite the fact that most students are employed in clinical settings and have extensive clinical expertise, there is no option for students to engage in discussions with their peers about clinical areas of interest. We created a Moodle environment that facilitated interactions amongst students with similar professional practice interests. The environment consisted of password-protected discussion fora for three interest groups in the clinical areas of mental health, gerontology, and spirituality and healing. These foci for the Clinical Interest Groups were selected on the basis of an informal review of clinical interests expressed on program application forms and faculty expertise. The Clinical Interest Groups were opened for participation via an invitation to students posted on our faculty website, and participants were invited to join one or all of the groups. In order to gain access to the Clinical Interest Groups, participants e-mailed a request to join the groups to a faculty member of the research team who did not have teaching responsibilities in the program. The participants received an email response from the faculty member that provided access information (URL and password for the Moodle site) and offered general suggestions for respectful participation. Faculty members of the research team posted a welcome to each of the three Clinical Interest Groups, and a graduate student monitored the groups on a daily basis and facilitated discussions by responding to comments and posing questions to extend conversations. Thirty-one students and faculty were provided access to the Clinical Interest Groups during a 15 month timeframe. Requests for participation from students at other universities were not able to be accommodated. A request from an undergraduate student at our university was accepted. At the same time as access to the Clinical Interest Groups was provided, participants were invited to participate in a research project investigating their experiences of participating in the Clinical Interest Groups. Full ethical approval of the research was granted by the university’s Research Ethics Board. Participants were informed that they would be asked to complete a questionnaire about their experiences in the interest groups, and that the frequency and content of their discussions in the groups would be analyzed. Only 8 of the 31 participants in the interest groups responded with their consent to participate in the research project. Those 8 participants were emailed the questionnaire approximately six months after initially accessing the interest groups. Only 5 participants returned completed questionnaires. The Clinical Interest Group innovation was developed as an action research project. Action research is a reflective, iterative process in which educators use research techniques to examine their practice carefully, systematically and with the intention of applying their findings directly to their own and other educators’ every day work (Altrichter, Feldman, Posch, & Somekh, 2007; Corey, 1949; Kemmis & McTaggart, 1990; Koshy, Koshy, & Waterman, 2011). Kemmis and McTaggart (1988) offered the seminal explanation that action research is a deliberate, solution-oriented investigation that is group or personally owned and conducted. It is characterized by spiraling cycles of problem identification, systematic data collection, reflection, analysis, data-driven action taken, and, finally, problem redefinition. The linking of the terms “action” and “research” highlights the essential features of this method: trying out ideas in practice as a means of increasing knowledge about or improving practice (Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988). Action research is valued more for the change it can initiate in everyday practice than for a quantitative goal of working with large sample sizes and generalizing the findings to a broader audience (Koshy, Koshy, & Waterman, 2011). “The action researcher is interested in the improvement of the ... practices in which he [sic] is engaging. He undertakes research in order to find out how to do his job better – action research means research that affects actions” (Corey, 1949, p. 63). In our Clinical International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 2(4), 63-76, October-December 2012 67 Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. Interest Group project, we sought to improve our teaching practice through the action of providing and then collecting data about a programwide virtual community gathering space with a small group of our online graduate students. We continue to work with our participants to reflect, analyze and redefine our educational innovation. An exploratory, descriptive design was employed to collect data about the Clinical Interest Groups innovation. We did not locate existing research that examined students’ perceptions of participating in program-wide virtual communities and this design supported our desire to find out about students’ perceptions (exploratory) and describe what we found (descriptive). “Descriptive study is the method of choice when straight descriptions of phenomenon are desired” (Sandelowski, 2000, p. 339). The expected outcome of such research is a straight and “largely unadorned” (p. 337) descriptive summary of the data. Qualitative data are summarized in the language of participants without transformation into abstract conceptualizations or theory. Quantitative data are summarized as descriptive statistics such as frequencies and measures of central tendency. The team used across-method triangulation to obtain multiple perspectives of the students’ experiences of the Clinical Interest Groups (Thurmond, 2001). Across method triangulation refers to the use of quantitative and qualitative data collection methods and analysis to support data completeness (achieving as complete an understanding as possible) and confirmation (determining the extent to which findings derived from different methods converge or are confirmed) (Casey & Murphy, 2009). Data were collected via a questionnaire that included both quantitative measures (a 6-point Likert scale) and a qualitative component (written responses to open-ended questions) (Appendix). In addition, data were collected through analysis of the postings that participants contributed to the Clinical Interest Group forum discussions. The Likert scale included 15 6-point items designed to measure the extent to which participation in the interest group discussions supported clinical expertise (items 1, 2, and 3), problem-solving and critical thinking (items 4 and 5), and social presence and integration (items 6 to 9 and items 11 to14). Two items (10 and15) measured overall usefulness of the interest group discussion. These ordinal-level data were analyzed by calculating the median to determine if the quantitative measures confirmed the qualitative comments of the participants. The open-ended items on the questionnaire (see Appendix for specific questions) were designed to solicit qualitative data about the students’ experiences of participating in the interest groups, such as reasons for joining and memorable experiences. In addition, forum discussion postings of those participants who consented to the study were analyzed to discern themes within the discussions (Loiselle, Profetto-McGrath, Polit, & Beck, 2007). The qualitative data from the open-ended questions and the forum postings were analyzed using a process of “thematising” (Mitchell & Jones, 2004) in which themes in the data emerged through an iterative process of reading and re-reading the data. Three criteria guided the generation of themes: recurrence, repetition and forcefulness (Owen, 1984). Recurrence of ideas within the data occurs when ideas are determined to have the same meaning but different wording (for example, “connections with other learners” and “connecting to people”). Repetition refers to the existence of the same ideas using the same wording (for example, “sharing ideas” and “ideas were shared freely”). The final criterion, forcefulness, is found when the importance of a response was reinforced by the emphatic tone of the response or the use of quotation marks, underlining, italics or bolding to provide emphasis (for example, “if we keep others joining, it will grow and prosper!”). To overcome potential bias of a singleinvestigator approach and enhance the credibility of the findings and interpretations, the study made use of investigator triangulation in which more than one researcher collected and analyzed data (Halcomb & Andrew, 2005; Thurmond, 2001). The study employed a team approach with multiple investigators and 68 International Journal of Online Pedagogy and Course Design, 2(4), 63-76, October-December 2012 Copyright © 2012, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited. intra-team collaboration and communication to decrease the potential of bias in gathering and analyzing data. The team consisted of four educators experienced in the delivery of online courses to graduate students in health disciplines, a research assistant who was a senior graduate student at the university and an instructional media analyst who designed the Moodle learning environment for the Clinical Interest Groups. Each member of the team was involved in development of the design of the study and the questionnaire as well as analysis of the data that were generated in the study.