Bargh, John. "The Human-Internet Interaction.” Journal of Social Issues- Vol.58, Issue 1 December 17, 2002:
The question has been posed by many: Does the Internet and Technology affect social skills? In research, Dr. John Bargh, assistant professor at NYU states that “because the quality or nature of Internet interaction differs in important ways from face-to-face interaction, some people feel more comfortable in one domain than the other.” He specified that this was determined on the personality of individuals as either extroverted or introverted. He emphasized that “people who already possess relatively greater social skills have profitable social interactions” on the Internet compared to those “who are less socially skilled.” Research shows that the lack of emotional or physical cues in online communication creates an “atmosphere of ambiguity.” Students are required to interpret the meaning of a message without these important clues.
In the same article, Dr. Bargh mentions that professionals are in disagreement over the topic of effects of Internet use and socialization. “Several scholars have contended that Internet communication is an impoverished and sterile form of social exchange compared to traditional face-to-face interactions, and will therefore produce negative outcomes (loneliness and depression) for its users as well as weaken neighborhood and community ties.” Others believe that the Internet “affords a new and different avenue of social interaction that enables groups and relationships to form that otherwise would not be able to, thereby increasing and enhancing social connectivity.”
John A. Bargh holds a PhD and is a Professor in the Department of Psychology, New York University. “His research focuses mainly on the role of nonconscious influences on emotion, judgment, and social behavior” and I believe that he is highly qualified to speak on the topic of socialization and distance learning. His views are researched and documented. Although they are written at college level, the concept is one discussed in many social circles, making the journal relevant to the average person. The studies mentioned in the journal were conducted in the early 2000's. In other subjects this might be considered up-to-date but in a study of technology, I think this is almost outdated. As quickly as technology changes, I imagine it is difficult to stay current on research and nearly impossible to find students who are not affected by the Internet for a control group. The journal did not take an affirmative stand but gave weight to both sides of the issue. I think it may be too soon to know of any long term lasting effects.
Wood, Christina. "The Virtual Classroom Redefines Education." Edutopia. April 10, 2010
In an article posted on Edutopia, Christina Wood spoke positively of the effects of distance learning and student interaction. “Many students respond to this learning environment in a way they don’t in a classroom. Online interaction can enhance community." She also emphasized that despite this advantage, "an online class requires discipline and motivation. Some students aren’t up to it, even if they excel in a traditional classroom setting.”
This article was written by a freelance writer that had conducted her own research in several virtual schools throughout the country. It was well written and could be beneficial in supporting the use of distance learning but it lacked evidence on the emotional effect of virtual schools upon the individual student. I have taken online classes for the convenience and joined posts that allowed for a community feeling among students, but I still find it to be a less rich experience than face-to-face interaction.
Postman, Neil. “Virtual Students, Digital Classroom.” In The Norton Reader, Eleventh edition. New York, NY: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 2004.
I found this article too interesting to omit. I will not try to analyze it; I merely post the author's own words:
"…though new technologies may be a solution to the learning of “subjects,” they work against the learning of what are called “social values,” including an understanding of democratic processes. If one reads the first chapter of Robert Fullghum’s All I Really Needed to Know I Learned in Kindergarten, one will find an elegant summary of a few things Ravitch’s scenario has left out. They include learning the following lessons: Share everything, play fair, don’t hit people, put things back where you found them, clean up your own mess, wash your hands before you eat, and, of course, flush. The only thing wrong with Fullghum’s book is that no one has learned all these things at kindergarten’s end. We have ample evidence that it takes many years of teaching these values in school before they have been accepted and internalized. That is why it won’t do for children to learn in “settings of their own choosing.” That is also why schools require children to be in a certain place at a certain time and to follow certain rules, like raising their hands when they wish to speak, not talking when others are talking, not chewing gum, not leaving until the bell rings, exhibiting patience toward slower learners, etc. This process is called making civilized people. The god of Technology does not appear interested in this function of schools. At least, it does not come up much when technology’s virtues are enumerated."
This leads into a video that I discovered on edutopia.com on the subject of social and emotional learning. Technology is not going away. As educators, it will be important to embrace it and stay current. However, there will always be a need for human interaction.
"Emotion in Education: An Interview with Maurice Elias." Edutopia. December 10, 2007.
"Maurice Elias's interview was recorded on December 10, 2007, at the CASEL Forum, an event in New York City that brought together seventy-five global leaders in education and related fields to raise awareness about social and emotional learning (SEL) and introduce important scientific findings related to SEL."
Dr. Elias stresses the importance of interpersonal relationships and calls this the "foundational building block of learning." I felt that his view was timeless and I found myself agreeing strongly with him. Distance learning is a wonderful thing... but it can not replace human interaction and we must find the balance between the two.
Well, I spent the previous 30 minutes writing out a long, well thought out response for your post, and it did not post due to a technical computer error, which frustrates the heck out of me. (Mark one tally up against the benefits of distance-learning. LOL! :)
ReplyDeleteI will try this again, although this post will be much more succint.
Kelly, I thought your blog entry was excellent because it was thorough, provided a lot of information, and, maybe most importantly, was fair and balanced.
It was obvious to me - and I hope I am correct here - that while you have taken and enjoyed distance-learning classes in your educational pustuits, that you seem to prefer the social interaction provided in a more "traditional, land-locked" physical classroom.
In spite of your preference, you still provided an article which premise was to dismiss the idea that students who spend time on the computer in a distance-learning classroom are less likely to be social inside or outside of the classroom than students who attend "traditional, land-locked" classrooms.
That approach offered a nice element of objectivity to your blog post.
By the end of this semester, I will have completed 18 courses since January of 2009. Five of those course have been distance-learning courses -- all through Tri-C. I have tremendously enjoyed all of those courses.
I do think it takes a certain mindset as well as discpline to do well as a student in a distance-learning class. While one works in isolation, the student needs to take an approach that mirrors that if they actually were attending a physical classroom twice or three times a week; meaning, they must show up on-line several times a week and be willing to engage their fellow classmates and instructor as if they were in a traditional classroom.
Another aspect of whether a distance-learning class is successful and engaging for the students lies with the instructor. The instructor needs to take a lot of time to think of a well-thought out format and content areas that he or she wants the students to work and function. In four of my distance-learning classes, the discussion forums were dynamite and the level of social engagement between the students equalled that to what one might find in a physical classroom. In one of the classes, the discussion topics were so narrow, that all of the students found themselves with little to say and the discussions petered out after just a few days and the discussion forums ended up being tedious and boring.
Excellent blog post.
Erik