American Journal of Distance Education

ISSN: 0892-3647 (Print) 1538-9286 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hajd20

Social Learning Theory and Web-Based Learning Environments: A Review of Research and Discussion of Implications Janette R. Hill , Liyan Song & Richard E. West To cite this article: Janette R. Hill , Liyan Song & Richard E. West (2009) Social Learning Theory and Web-Based Learning Environments: A Review of Research and Discussion of Implications, American Journal of Distance Education, 23:2, 88-103, DOI: 10.1080/08923640902857713 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08923640902857713

Published online: 15 May 2009.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 8795

View related articles

Citing articles: 28 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=hajd20 Download by: [37.44.207.80]

Date: 17 January 2017, At: 08:10

The Amer. Jrnl. of Distance Education, 23: 88–103, 2009 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN 0892-3647 print / 1538-9286 online DOI: 10.1080/08923640902857713

Social Learning Theory and Web-Based Learning Environments: A Review of Research and Discussion of Implications

1538-9286 0892-3647 HAJD The Amer. Jrnl. of Distance Education, Education Vol. 23, No. 2, April 2009: pp. 1–26

SOCIAL HILL, SONG, LEARNING AND WEST THEORY

Janette R. Hill University of Georgia

Liyan Song Towson University

Richard E. West Brigham Young University

Abstract: Since the 1970s, cognitive psychological perspectives have dominated pedagogical frameworks and models for designing technology-mediated teaching and learning environments. More recently, social learning perspectives have received attention as viable or even desirable frames for research and practice related to teaching and learning, particularly in Web-based learning environments (WBLEs). In this article, the authors analyze these social learning perspectives and how they can be used in the design and implementation of online learning. This review and analysis of the research related to social learning perspectives on WBLEs provides several implications for future research and practice: (1) examining learners’ individual characteristics in WBLEs, (2) identifying strategies for promoting social interaction in WBLEs, and (3) developing effective design principles for WBLEs.

This article explores how social learning perspectives can be used in the design, development, and implementation of Web-based learning environments (WBLEs). The purposes of this article are (1) to review and analyze the literature of WBLEs from the perspective of social learning theory and (2) to provide suggestions for the design and development of WBLEs using the frame of social learning theory with implications for future research. To select literature sources for inclusion in our review, we searched major databases for peer-reviewed articles and their reference lists (e.g., ERIC, Correspondence should be sent to Janette R. Hill, University of Georgia, LEAP, River’s Crossing, Athens, GA 30602. E-mail: [email protected]

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

89

Education Abstracts), and reviewed the contents of the articles exploring issues related to social learning and online environments. From this pool, we selected those that were most current, exhibited sound research methodologies, and provided a general understanding of social learning in online learning situated primarily in a Web-based context. This process eliminated some studies that addressed online learning generally but not social learning theory factors specifically. For purposes of this article, we explored WBLEs set within a formal learning setting; informal learning environments (e.g., multiuser environments in which learning may occur as a result of interactions) are not included. We view WBLEs as settings that enable learners to interact and observe the results of their interactions while responding to and engaging with others, leading to a possible development of a more cohesive community of learners. Although there are many other useful formats for online learning, the focus of this article is on Web-based learning environments that are interactive in nature.

APPLYING CONSTRUCTS FROM SOCIAL LEARNING THEORIES IN WBLEs Several factors influence teaching and learning per social learning perspectives: context, culture and community, and learner characteristics. In the following section, we present a description and related attributes, as well as a synthesis of WBLE research, to illustrate each social learning construct (for an overview, see Table 1).

Context Context is integral to how cognition facilitates understanding (Brown, Collins, and Duguid 1989). According to Pea (1993), cognition involves exploiting various resources in the environment (human and nonhuman) in order to develop understanding. Thus, human interactions within WBLEs, as well as WBLE resources, help to initiate, sustain, and support associated social learning processes. Interactions. From a social learning perspective, knowledge is constructed while individuals are engaging in activities, receiving feedback, and participating in other forms of human interaction in public, social contexts (Henning 2004). Because cognition is not considered an individual process, learning and knowing are shaped by the kinds of interactions a student has with others, and the context within which these interactions occur. The role of interactions has been widely studied in online learning and is considered central to a successful learning experience (Garrison and Cleveland-Innes 2005). For a student, these interactions may be with other students, instructors, or the content

90

HILL, SONG, AND WEST

Table 1. Application of Social Learning Constructs in WBLEs Construct Context

Applications in WBLEs Interactions

Group and class size

Resources

Culture and Community

Culture

Community

Learner Characteristics

Epistemological beliefs

• Provide opportunities for creating and sharing in-depth messages • Enable support by more knowledgeable others • Encourage interaction by the instructor and peers • Monitor group size to enable support from more knowledgeable others (i.e., peers) • Monitor class size to enable consistent and engaged interaction • Encourage effective use of postings and other resources • Provide strategies to identify, interpret, and utilize resources • Facilitate online interactions so they meet the needs of learners from a variety of cultures • Provide multiple formats for communication to meet differing cultural needs • Facilitate connection-building in small and large groups • Support collaborative activities • Take into consideration reflective thinking abilities • Gain an understanding of epistemological beliefs of students to guide design

Individual learning styles

• Gain an understanding of learning styles to guide design • Enable different levels of interaction to accommodate individual learning styles

Self-efficacy

• Enable choice in interactions to minimize social anxiety • Promote self-regulated learning

Motivation

• Incorporate authentic activities • Send messages regularly to motivate learners

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

91

(Garrison and Cleveland-Innes 2005; Moore 1989). Further, the length of these interactions may be short and brief or long and sustained. The integration of tools and resources to support interaction within WBLEs has received considerable attention (e.g., Hill and Hannafin 2001; Krentler and Willis-Flurry 2005; Northrup 2001). Research indicates that students perceive greater social interaction when creating and sharing in-depth online messages (e.g., King 2002). The question of how and when these interactions occur arises. Hara, Bonk, and Angeli (2000) analyzed online discussions conducted using a “starter-wrapper” technique in a graduate-level educational psychology course, where every student served at least once as “starter,” who initiated weekly discussion by asking questions related to the readings, and once as “wrapper,” who summarized the weekly discussion. Analysis of transcripts indicated that although students tended to post minimal comments during the conference, their starter-wrapper entries were lengthy, cognitively deep, and embedded with peer references. Moreover, student comments reflected both their experiences and self-awareness. Weekly online conference activity graphs further revealed that student comments became more interactive over time. Consistent with social learning approaches, learners were both encouraged to engage in social discourse and supported in their efforts. Results also indicated that individual learners were often dependent on the directions of the discussion starter, reinforcing the importance of shared experiences in a WBLE. There are many ways to support interaction in WBLEs. How much interaction is needed is an important consideration; what kind of interaction and how the interactions may influence the learning process remains a question. Biesenbach-Lucas (2003) studied students’ perceptions of asynchronous online discussion assignments in two graduate-level teaching training courses. The researchers assigned students to small groups for an entire semester, required them to post weekly contributions to their group’s online discussion forum, and asked them to make explicit references to course readings and group members’ postings. Results indicated that although students generally reported that required online discussions increased social interaction, some perceived the interactions and discussions as forced and unnatural due to the requirement to link to previous messages. According to Biesenbach-Lucas, the requirement to react to and expand on an existing topic may stifle students’ motivation to initiate new topics or raise alternative issues. To successfully promote engagement between and among learners, we need to identify both the benefits and risks of required versus elective interactions. Another characteristic of social learning theories is that of modeling. A model is a pattern or example that is provided to a student to illustrate how one might behave. The expectation is that observing the model will impact the student’s perceptions and understandings about the subject (Lefrancois 1982), something that has been supported by research in face-to-face settings (e.g., Bandura 1977). Research is also beginning to provide evidence of this in online environments.

92

HILL, SONG, AND WEST

An example of how modeling impacts online learning is found in online discussions. Some studies have found that when there is a strong example, or model, of how to reflectively interact with others in WBLEs (e.g., discussion board), then the class engages in the learning more effectively. For example, Garrison and Cleveland-Innes (2005) conducted a study in which they surveyed seventy-five undergraduate students representing four different groups: two groups with low teacher presence (low modeling) and two groups where there was high teacher presence (high modeling). They found that in the last group, where high teacher presence combined with a course design that emphasized critical discourse, students engaged in much deeper and more meaningful learning. Group and Class Size. Group size and peer collaboration also appear to influence the quality of WBLE interactions. Caspi, Gorsky, and Chajut (2003) examined the effect of group size on asynchronous discussion groups. Of approximately two hundred courses that offered optional, asynchronous discussion groups, the researchers randomly selected forty-seven for their study. The basic unit in the study was a “message” with the properties of authorship (instructor or student) and date and time of the posting. A second unit in the study was a “thread,” defined as an initial message with all replies to it categorized according to instructor involvement: instructor-learner interaction or learner-learner interaction. Results indicated that whereas the proportion of learner-to-learner interactions increased as group size increased, the proportion of learner-instructor interactions decreased. As group size increased, the interval between instructors’ postings decreased. These findings support the idea that more knowledgeable others (i.e., peers) can support students as they develop knowledge and understanding. Palloff and Pratt (1999) suggested that large-enrollment online classes tend to generate a greater number of postings, which may overwhelm the instructor and the learners. The authors suggested an optimal class size of 15–20 students for online WBLEs. Research has indicated that smaller groups may also encourage both learners and instructors to consistently engage each other and assist with social interaction (Hill, Raven, and Han 2007; Kreijns, Kischner, and Jochems 2003). Yet there is a desire in many institutions to increase the numbers in online classes. Because community discourse is central to social learning perspectives, examining WBLE interaction best practices for varied course enrollments is needed. Resources. WBLEs present both opportunities and challenges in the creation and use of resources (Hill and Hannafin 2001). From a social learning perspective, resources can support the presentation of multiple perspectives as well as varied representations (e.g., text, video, sound). Using diverse resources, learners can explore different ways of knowing as well as use resources that might better match their learning styles, goals, and preferences.

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

93

Despite rapid growth in multimedia, text remains a dominant format for information sharing in WBLEs. Research indicates that the permanence, ease of distribution, and familiarity of text makes students’ and instructors’ ideas and comments easily and conveniently accessible. Petrides (2002) studied posting use as a resource in a Web-supported higher education classroom. She collected data from online postings in discussion boards and chat rooms as well as students’ written evaluations. Students reported that they referred repeatedly to postings (peer, instructor) and that the written resources afforded additional time to reflect and express opinions. Similar findings were reported in Vonderwell’s (2003) study of an online technology in education course offered to preservice education majors. The researcher conducted interviews with twenty-two preservice teachers and analyzed student-to-instructor e-mail transcripts and asynchronous discussion transcripts to explore the communication perspectives and experiences of students in an online course. All students expressed that the online environment provided them with opportunities to pose more questions to the instructor, though it was less personal. In both studies it appears that the ability to socially construct knowledge and share experience, central to social learning theory, enabled learners to create and distribute knowledge to promote understanding. It is important to note that merely making resources available may have little impact on cognition or learning success (Hill, Domizi, et al. 2007). Rather, instructors need to provide, and students need to develop, strategies to identify, interpret, and otherwise utilize available resources. Whipp and Chiarelli (2004) examined how six graduate students used and adapted traditional selfregulated learning strategies to complete tasks and cope with challenges in a Web-based technology course. Participants reported adapting the strategies used in traditional face-to-face contexts to WBLE resource use (e.g., using peers’ online postings as models). These findings help underscore the social learning emphasis of the role of individual skills and knowledge in both sharing and interacting with a community.

Culture and Community Culture. The influence of culture during online learning has been primarily explored through two lenses: gender and ethnicity. Recent research indicates that female students tend to want more support, have a stronger sense of learning community, and exhibit a more connected communication pattern (Jeong 2006; Rovai 2002; Wheeler 2002). Fahy (2002) examined gender-related communication differences in the use of linguistic qualifiers and intensifiers in a fifteen-week online graduate course. The study focused on linguistic qualifiers and intensifiers in the transcripts of 356 postings. Results indicated that female students tend to use more qualifiers (e.g., “I think,” “maybe”), whereas

94

HILL, SONG, AND WEST

male students tend to use more intensifiers (e.g., “very,” “only”). If men and women have a tendency to present ideas in different ways as described, how the messages are read and interpreted may vary as well, providing insight for implementation as well as the facilitation of online discussions. Strengthening our understanding of the impact of gender on WBLE culture and how best to facilitate communication is an area for further investigation. Ethnicity also appears to influence perceptions of the online learning experience. Studies exploring English as a Second Language learners have provided insight into how an online environment may help assist in the learning process. In Biesenbach-Lucas’s (2003) study of nonnative speakers, participants indicated that asynchronous discussions helped facilitate assimilation of the course content. Some (e.g., Petrides 2002) have speculated that asynchronous discussions allow more time to reflect, which may be particularly valuable among learners with limited synchronous, real-time language fluency. Based on such fundamental design decisions, WBLE communication affordances may enable or limit opportunities to address individual cultural needs and the needs of the larger group. Lim (2004) studied the differences in students’ perceptions of online learning in Korea and the United States. A total of 95 graduate and undergraduate students from Korean universities and 141 graduate and undergraduate students from a U.S. university completed an online questionnaire designed to measure the level of learning motivation. Lim’s findings indicated significant motivation differences between Korean and U.S. students. Korean students were more goal-oriented and tended to attribute learning success to efforts; American students were more oriented toward emphasizing mastery of learning over time and enjoying the learning process itself. Lim’s findings suggest cultural differences in WBLEs influence students’ attitudes toward and approaches to learning. Given the significance of individuals and their interactions within a community from a social learning perspective, seeking to fully understand the role of cultural differences and how they may impact interactions in WBLEs may assist with facilitating interactions across cultures. Community. WBLE researchers and designers have identified potentially important relationships between perceived sense of community and perceived learning processes (Hill 2002; Hill, Raven, and Han 2007). Strategies designed to support community building, such as group work and team-building activities, may improve the quality of interactions among participants (Rovai 2002; Hill, Raven, and Han 2007). Further, providing diverse opportunities for social-peer interaction may strengthen the sense of community. Group collaboration and communication are strategies frequently used in WBLEs. Some scholars have suggested that by working in groups, participants gain community knowledge as well as understanding about how to communicate with peers (Northrup 2001). From a social learning perspective, it is important to create and sustain a sense of community within WBLEs

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

95

(Palloff and Pratt 1999). Hill, Raven, and Han (2007) explored WBLE community building involving two Web-based, graduate-level courses taught at two universities. One group comprised a single instructor and students in a master’s-level information technology course; the other included an instructor and the students in a master’s-level instructional design course. In both classes, students reported a stronger connection with their own team members than with the larger class group and also wanted a variety of ways to interact with each other. As indicated in related research (Kreijns, Kischner, and Jochems 2003), we need to attend to both the cognitive and social dimensions of interactions to facilitate group forming, structure, and dynamics. Hiltz et al. (2000) reported findings from a field experiment on collaborative learning. They used a 2 × 2 factorial design (offline and asynchronous communication; individual and group work) to compare differences in groups versus individuals in solving ethical case-based scenarios with and without computer-mediated communication support. Results indicated that when students were actively engaged in collaborative (group) online learning, their learning was as good as or better than that of students in the traditional classroom. However, working alone online was found to be less effective than the traditional classroom format. These studies provide insight into the potential positive impact of collaboration on learning outcomes and the benefits from integrating collaborative (group) activities into WBLEs.

Learner Characteristics Although many learner characteristics influence cognitive activity, four are especially significant from a social learning perspective as they pertain to the nature of knowledge and the role of the learner: epistemological beliefs, individual learning styles, self-efficacy, and motivation. Epistemological Beliefs. Personal epistemology reflects one’s beliefs “about the definition of knowledge, how knowledge is constructed, how knowledge is evaluated, where knowledge resides, and how knowing occurs” (Hofer 2002, 4). As individuals experience and learn, their thinking and judgment about knowledge and knowing changes. This, in turn, has implications for others learning with and from the individual. Researchers have examined the influence of epistemological beliefs on individual engagement in WBLEs. For example, Tsai and Chuang (2005) studied the correlation between epistemological beliefs and preferences toward Internet-based learning environments by administering questionnaires to 324 Taiwanese high school students. Results indicated that students holding constructivist-oriented beliefs tended to prefer Internet-based learning environments that fostered inquiry learning and reflective thinking. According to the researchers, the beliefs were probably more related to a preference for

96

HILL, SONG, AND WEST

higher-order metacognitive activities. Since epistemological beliefs influence a wide range of thinking and decision-making processes, it is important to better understand their influence on learning from WBLEs. Individual Learning Styles. There are myriad individual traits that influence the learning process, ranging from general styles to specific abilities or skills. Individual learning styles “describes learner preferences for different types of learning and instructional activities” (Jonassen and Grabowski 1993, 5). As students experience a variety of learning environments, online and face-toface, their predilections for learning may become reinforced or they may change as students adapt to new settings. Graff (2003) studied the influence of individual characteristics during online learning among undergraduate psychology students using two forms of a Web-based instructional system, one with course content segmented to a greater degree than the other, to investigate the influence of information segmentation and a Web system overview on learning. Using Riding’s Cognitive Style Analysis, the results indicated that analytic personalities like information less segmented whereas imager personalities perform better in more information segmented WBLEs. Given the indications of differences with information processing styles (i.e., analytics vs. imagers), Graff concluded that WBLE creators and implementers should account for different cognitive styles when designing systems to meet individual needs. Self-Efficacy. According to Bandura (1993), self-efficacy reflects the confidence learners report in approaching and handling new tasks. From a social learning perspective, self-efficacy is context-dependent, associated with social anxiety and attention. Research indicates that self-efficacy influences the likelihood of engaging with a task or instruction, the confidence reported in learning, and the probability that knowledge or skill will be applied (Hill and Hannafin 1997; Pajares 1996). More recent studies have indicated that selfefficacy may also be related to learning contexts. In a qualitative study of adult learners’ self-directed learning in online environments, Song (2005) found that learners who were comfortable with online technologies reported less anxiety associated with learning via WBLEs, and they engaged more actively in bulletin board and chat discussions. Once learners become familiar with the distance learning technology, they tend to become less anxious and less frustrated (Hara and Kling 1999; Song et al. 2004), thus increasing the likelihood of individual learning as well as support for the larger community. Motivation. Motivation is categorized as being either intrinsic or extrinsic to the learner. Intrinsic motivation refers to behaviors that are engaged in for personal interest or desire for mastery, whereas extrinsic motivation refers to behaviors that are performed for externally prized consequences (Deci et al. 1991). Consistent with social learning perspectives, Lim and Kim (2003)

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

97

examined how different types of motivation affected learners’ online learning and learning application. They administered a motivation questionnaire to a group of seventy-seven undergraduate students who enrolled in an online course between 2000 and 2001 at a university in the southeastern United States. The researchers investigated five different types of motivation: course relevancy, course interest, affect/emotion, reinforcement, and self-efficacy. Results indicated that all motivation variables except course interest showed a significant effect on student learning in the individual ANCOVA model where one type of motivation was considered at a time as a covariate. However, only reinforcement and self-efficacy were found to be significant motivation variables influencing students’ learning in the simultaneous ANCOVA model, whereas all types of motivation were simultaneously considered covariates. The findings of the study imply the significance of motivation factors in online learning and the complexity of motivation as an influencing factor.

IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE This review and analysis of the research related to social learning perspectives on WBLEs provides several implications for future research and practice: (1) examining learners’ individual characteristics in WBLEs, (2) identifying strategies for promoting social interaction in WBLEs, and (3) developing effective design principles for WBLEs.

Examining Learners’ Individual Characteristics in WBLEs Hartley and Bendixen (2001) emphasized the importance of individual characteristics in online learning, calling for research to examine the impact of individual characteristics on online learning success. Individual characteristics include prior knowledge, epistemological beliefs, cultural background, and self-regulation skills. Prior Knowledge. Some studies have investigated how prior knowledge impacts students’ learning (Hill and Hannafin 1997; Land and Hannafin 1996; Song 2005; Song et al. 2004). Results of the studies are similar in that the impact is generally significant. What remains largely unanswered is what enables, and how students stimulate, the recall of students’ prior knowledge in their learning. Lack of knowledge in this area often results in misinterpreting why some learners are successful but others are not. More research in this area could help bridge the gap in our understanding in this regard. Epistemological Beliefs. It is generally believed that students’ epistemological beliefs influence how they approach learning (see, e.g., Hannafin and Hill 2002).

98

HILL, SONG, AND WEST

In the field of Web-based learning, few studies have investigated the influence of epistemological beliefs on students’ learning. Research is needed to both measure learners’ beliefs toward WBLEs and examine the impact of different epistemological beliefs on their learning experience in WBLEs. A grounded understanding in this regard could help instructors better design WBLEs to optimize students’ learning experience. Cultural Background. Several studies have examined the impact of cultural background on students’ learning experiences in WBLEs, such as gender differences (Fahy 2002; Rovai 2002; Wheeler 2002) and ethnicity (Biesenbach-Lucas 2003; Lim 2004). Although the studies are helpful in that they raise people’s awareness of its significance, more research is needed to provide in-depth knowledge and understanding of the impact of cultural perspectives. For example, what is the experience of a foreign student learning in an online course in the United States? What are the strategies that the instructor and learner can engage in to facilitate cross-cultural learning? Wang’s (2007) research serves as an example of the type of in-depth study that might provide a model for other researchers. We need to explore how culture impacts the online learning experience. Self-Regulation. Self-regulation encompasses a range of learners’ individual characteristics. It is associated with an individual’s self-efficacy, motivation, and metacognitive skills in utilizing available resources. Each component has been studied to various extents (see, e.g., Lim and Kim 2003; Oliver and Shaw 2003; Song 2005). The majority of the results indicate that all of the components play an important role in students’ learning experience in WBLEs. The question largely unanswered is how to help students develop self-regulation skills in WBLEs. Some studies have explored or suggested strategies for promoting students’ self-efficacy, such as providing technological orientation and factors influencing students’ motivation in WBLEs (e.g., Song 2005). Little is known about how to help students develop metacognitive skills in utilizing available resources in WBLEs. What we do know is that making resources available is not enough (Tripp and Roby 1994). More research is needed to investigate the cognitive processes associated with the need and/or desire to have additional resources.

Promoting Social Interaction in WBLEs Social interaction plays a significant role in students’ sense of learning community as well as students’ interaction with peers and the instructor. The review of the literature indicates that a student’s social interaction is a key to his/her learning success in WBLEs (see, e.g., Hara, Bonk, and Angeli 2000; King 2002). Yet a challenge remains in how to promote

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

99

social interaction in WBLEs where interaction often takes place in writing instead of in physical spaces. Several areas need to be considered in promoting social interaction in WBLEs, including group work and written communication. Group Work. Group collaboration has been widely studied, and research indicates that it can promote students’ learning in WBLEs (e.g., Graham and Scarborough 1999; Hiltz et al. 2000). Simply assigning students to work in groups does not necessarily guarantee that there will be collaboration among group members. In fact, students would sometimes prefer to work individually because interacting with group members can be very difficult. As a participant in Song’s (2005) study indicated, “Getting response via e-mail is like pulling teeth.” The challenge lies in how to promote collaboration among group members. Research is needed to study the group dynamics in WBLEs in order to develop effective strategies for promoting collaboration among group members. Written Communication. Social interaction in the form of writing is challenging due to the lack of facial expression, body language, and tone of voice. Written communication often gets misinterpreted (Petrides 2002). Yet, at the same time, it is a great resource because of its permanent availability to all members throughout the learning experience (Petrides 2002) and because it allows more time for people to reflect (Vonderwell 2003). In other words, social interaction in WBLEs is not immediate as it is in a physical setting. Some learners may use this delay in responses to reflect before they write. Others may be too impatient to wait for others’ responses. This may contribute to the different perceptions of WBLEs among learners. Future research related to the perceptions of courses because of this immediacy delay may provide insights to guide design and implementation.

Developing Effective Design Principles for WBLEs Understanding students’ learning experiences is only a tool to help guide instructors in improving the design of learning experiences. Although it is important to conduct research to better understand students’ learning in WBLEs, we should not wait to have all the answers and then develop design principles. Rather, research exploring and developing effective design principles for WBLEs should go hand in hand with research on understanding WBLEs. A development research approach is considered effective in providing guidelines for design principles (van den Akker 1999). We suggest combining a developmental research approach with grounded design principles (Hannafin et al. 1997). Specifically, we suggest beginning the design with grounded design principles because they can help align people’s beliefs with practice. Then we suggest using a development research approach to help refine the

100

HILL, SONG, AND WEST

design principles repeatedly. Similar lines of research need to be conducted in various types of WBLEs since there is much variance in different types of WBLEs.

CONCLUSION The use of distance learning technologies to facilitate the learning process may have once been viewed as a “passing phase” in the litany of instructional technologies. Recent reports from leading think tank organizations such as the Pew Internet and American Life Project (2005) indicate that Internet technologies and their related uses, including learning, are anything but a passing phase; indeed, for many, Internet technologies are an integral component of the learning process in formal and informal contexts. Yet, what we have done in the past may no longer be sufficient to meet the needs and expectations of the 21st-century learner. Social learning perspectives offer promising opportunities for extending and enhancing the design, development, and implementation of WBLEs. By leveraging the affordances of social learning perspectives, WBLEs may become even more viable and desirable for learning.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT We thank Dr. Michael J. Hannafin, University of Georgia, for his guidance and suggestions during initial versions of this article.

REFERENCES Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York: General Learning Press. ———. 1993. Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist 28 (2): 117–148. Biesenbach-Lucas, S. 2003. Asynchronous discussion groups in teacher training classes: Perceptions of native and non-native students. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7 (3). Available online at http:// www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v7n3/v7n3_biesenbach-lucas.asp Brown, J. S., A. Collins, and P. Duguid, P. 1989. Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher 18:32–42. Caspi, A., P. Gorsky, and E. Chajut. 2003. The influence of group size on nonmandatory asynchronous instructional discussion groups. Internet and Higher Education 6:227–240. Deci, E. L., R. J. Vallerand, L. G. Pelletier, and R. M. Ryan. 1991. Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist 26:325–346.

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

101

Fahy, P. J. 2002. Use of linguistic qualifiers and intensifiers in a computer conference. The American Journal of Distance Education 16 (1): 5–22. Garrison, D. R., and M. Cleveland-Innes. 2005. Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education 19 (3): 133–148. Graff, M. 2003. Learning from web-based instructional systems and cognitive style. British Journal of Educational Technology 34 (4): 407–418. Graham, M., and H. Scarborough. 1999. Computer mediated communication and collaborative learning in an undergraduate distance education environment. Australia Journal of Educational Technology 15 (1): 20–46. Hannafin, M. J., K. M. Hannafin, S. Land, and K. Oliver. 1997. Grounded practice in the design of learning systems. Educational Technology Research and Development 45 (3): 101–117. Hannafin, M. J., and J. R. Hill. 2002. Epistemology and the design of learning environments. In Trends and issues in instructional design and technology, ed. R. Reiser and J. Dempsey, 70–82. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/ Prentice-Hall. Hara, N., C. J. Bonk, and C. Angeli. 2000. Content analysis of online discussion in an applied educational psychology course. Instructional Science 28 (2): 115–152. Hara, N., and R. Kling. 1999. Students’ frustrations with a Web-based distance education course. First Monday 4 (12). Available online at http:// www.firstmonday.org/ Hartley, K., and L. D. Bendixen. 2001. Educational research in the Internet age: Examining the role of individual characteristics. Educational Researcher 30 (9): 22–26. Henning, W. 2004. Everyday cognition and situated learning. In Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, 2nd ed., ed. D. Jonassen, 143–168. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hill, J. R. 2002. Strategies and techniques for community building in Webbased learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education 14 (1): 67–86. Hill, J. R., D. P. Domizi, M. C. Kim, and H. Kim, M. J. Hannafin. 2007. Teaching and learning in negotiated and informal environments. In Handbook of distance education, 2nd ed., ed. M. G. Moore, 271–284. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hill, J. R., and M. J. Hannafin. 1997. Cognitive strategies and learning from the World Wide Web. Educational Technology Research and Development 45 (4): 37–64. ———. 2001. Teaching and learning in digital environments: The resurgence of resource-based learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development 49 (3): 37–52. Hill, J. R., A. Raven, and S. Han. 2007. Connections in Web-based learning environments: A research-based model for community building. In Online

102

HILL, SONG, AND WEST

learning communities, ed. R. Luppicini, 153–168. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. Hiltz, S. R., N. Coppola, N. Rotter, M. Turoff, and R. Benbunan-Fich. 2000. Measuring the importance of collaborative learning for the effectiveness of ALN: A multi-measure, multi-method approach. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 4 (2). Available online at http://www.aln.org/publications/ jaln/v4n2/v4n2_hiltz.asp Hofer, B. K. (2002). Personal epistemology as a psychological and educational construct: An introduction. In Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing, ed. B. K. Hofer and P. R. Pintrich, 3–14. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Jeong, A. 2006. Gender interaction patterns and gender participation in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. The American Journal of Distance Education 20 (4): 195–210. Jonassen, D. L., and B. L. Grabowski. 1993. Handbook of individual differences, learning and instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. King, K. P. 2002. Identifying success in online teacher education and professional development. Internet and Higher Education 5 (3): 231–246. Kreijns, K., P. A. Kischner, and W. Jochems. 2003. Identifying the pitfalls for social interaction in computer-supported collaborative learning environments: A review of the research. Computers in Human Behavior 19 (3): 335–353. Krentler, K. A., and L. A. Willis-Flurry. 2005. Does technology enhance actual student learning? The case of on-line discussion boards. Journal of Education for Business 80 (6): 316–321. Land, S. M., and M. Hannafin. 1996. A conceptual framework for the development of theories-in-action with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development 44 (3): 37–53. Lefrancois, G. R. 1982. Psychological theories and human learning, 2nd ed. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Lim, D. H. 2004. Cross cultural differences in online learning motivation. Educational Media International 41 (2): 163–173. Lim, D. H., and H. Kim. 2003. Motivation and learner characteristics affecting online learning and learning application. Journal of Educational Technology Systems 31 (4): 423–439. Moore, M. G. 1989. Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education 3 (2): 1–6. Northrup, P. T. 2001. A framework for designing interactivity into Web-based instruction. Educational Technology 41 (2): 31–39. Oliver, M., and G. P. Shaw. 2003. Asynchronous discussion in support of medical education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 7 (1). Available online at http://www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v7n1/v7n1_oliver.asp Pajares, F. 1996. Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research 66 (4): 543–578.

SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY

103

Palloff, R., and K. Pratt. 1999. Building learning communities in cyberspace. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass. Pea, R. D. 1993. Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations, ed. G. Salomon, 47–87. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Petrides, L. A. 2002. Web-based technologies for distributed (or distance) learning: Creating learning-centered educational experiences in the higher education classroom. International Journal of Instructional Media 29 (1): 69–77. Pew Internet and American Life Project (2005). Pew Internet and American life project [multiple reports]. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project. Available online at http://www.pewinternet.org/ Rovai, A. P. 2002. A preliminary look at the structural differences of higher education classroom communities in traditional and ALN courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks 6 (1). Available online at http:// www.aln.org/publications/jaln/v6n1/v6n1_rovai.asp Song, L. 2005. Adult learners’ self-directed learning in online environments: Process, personal attribute, and context. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia, Athens. Song, L., E. S. Singleton, J. R. Hill, and M. H. Koh. 2004. Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. Internet and Higher Education 7 (1): 59–70. Tripp, S. D., and W. Roby. 1994. The effects of various information resources on learning from a hypertext bilingual lexicon. Journal of Research on Computing in Education 27:92–103. Tsai, C. C., and S. C. Chuang. 2005. The correlation between epistemological beliefs and preferences toward Internet-based learning environments. British Journal of Educational Technology 36 (1): 97–100. van den Akker, J. 1999. Principles and methods of development research. In Design approaches and tools in education and training, ed. J. v. d. Akker, R. M. Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen, and T. Plomp, 1–14. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Vonderwell, S. 2003. An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspectives of students in an online course: A case study. Internet and Higher Education 6 (1): 77–90. Wang, C. M. 2007. Cultural considerations in online education: Implications for design and evaluation for Taiwanese international students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens. Wheeler, S. 2002. Student perceptions of learning support in distance education. Quarterly Review of Distance Education 3 (4): 419–429. Whipp, J. L., and S. Chiarelli. 2004. Self-regulation in a Web-based course: A case study. Educational Technology Research and Development 52 (4): 5–22.