Conversation Theory for Postsecondary E-Learning

Introduction

            Computer-mediated communication has swiftly advanced over several decades, finding landscapes of usability in business, healthcare, economics, politics, and education. In education, the fastest growing field for the use of computer-mediated communication is in the area of postsecondary E-learning (Electronic Learning). E-learning is also referred to as computer-mediated, technology-mediated, or online learning, all of which are forms of adult distance education (Johnson, 2008). Within this sphere of education, communiqué via synchronous or asynchronous techniques and technologies affords learners and learning facilitators, opportunities, alternatives, and resources, with the intention of exchanging beliefs, ideas, perspectives, and knowledge collaboratively (Mayes & de Freitas, 2011; Strang, 2011).

            Within asynchronous learning environments, conversations occur by way of discussion threads, e-mails, wikis, and blogs (text-based), as well as, podcasts, YouTube, and Facebook, without consideration of time or place (delayed time) (Huang & E-Ling, 2012). On the other hand, in synchronous learning environments, conversations attempt to mirror face-to-face interactions, via videoconferencing technologies and assemblage formats for collective collaboration, such as Skype, GoToMeeting, or WebEx, which allow learners and facilitators to congregate in real-time from differing locations (Qidong, Griffin & Xue, 2009). Of late, a great deal of research attention has been given to the emerging technologies utilized for conversations in postsecondary e-learning situations (Burns, 2013; Helland, 2013; Wei, Kuo-Cheng, Don-Lin & Ming-Chuan, 2013; Kiraikenks, 2011; Lunt & Curran, 2010; Haggis, 2009). However, for the purpose of this article, technologies will be viewed as tools and means for knowledge creation through conversations, rather than the focus subject.

            This article will discuss (a) what conversation is, (b) how it is used to construct meaningful learning experiences, and (c) its use in knowledge creation, particular to e-learning. Moreover, this article will discuss theoretical frameworks of seminal and current research, which indicate the value of conversational learning within the e-learning atmosphere. Conversation in education is the most significant component within the learning process, because society's ability to advance fluidly and successfully in a digital information age, is dependent on its ability to appreciate and glean information from one another through conversation, regardless of the technology used (Saadatmand & Kumpulainen, 2013; Pangaro & Blumenschein, 2012; Elmendorf & Ottenhoff, 2009; Pask, 1976).

Effectual Conversation for E-Learning

            Human society is the only creature on the planet that communicates via conversation. Other creatures communicate by varying means and methods; however, none has the capacity for conversation. An understanding of the significance of conversation in human society is beneficial to the comprehension and importance of conversation within a learning setting (Baker, Jensen & Kolb, 2002). Luppicini (2008) argues, "Conversation allows us to share information, express opinions, create and support social relationships, and persuade others" (p. 1).

            Holland & Childress (2008) report that e-learning is undergoing a paradigm shift in relation to an emerging field in research and practice surrounding conversation in e-learning. Holland and Childress argue that in times past, conversation has been limited in the sense of autonomous expression inside e-learning settings. Asynchronous discussion threads have a tendency to limit conversations, in terms of exchanging values, ideas, and opinions that are contrary to the instructor's views or those articulated in the course reading materials. Elmendorf & Ottenhoff (2009) propose, thus, conversation is less autonomous, and more dependent on the views of those outside the adult learner's respective intellectual processes. Benson (2011) asserts that within this type of e-learning environment, learning becomes irrelevant, mundane, and meaningless, particularly for adult learners, who value personal autonomy. "The independence necessary to chart one's own course through life and to develop one's own understanding of what is valuable and worth doing" (p. 12), is hindered when options for personal autonomy are non-existent (Benson, 2011).

            In an effort to elicit comprehensive appreciation of the need for and effectiveness of conversations in e-learning, an explanation of conversation, in relation to learning is appropriate. Dubberly & Pangaro (2009) describe, "...an 'effective conversation' as an interaction in which the changes brought about by conversation have lasting value to the participants" (p. 3). 

Conversations to Learn

Image 1.1: Conversations to Learn. (Dubberly & Pangaro, 2009, p. 4)).

             
Furthermore, the researchers articulate specific components that should be present, in order for learning to occur in conversation: Context, language, exchange, agreement, and (trans)action.

Components of Effective Conversations

Image 1.2: What is Conversation? (Pangaro & Blumenschein, 2012, p. 14).

            Pangaro & Blumenschein (2012) emphasize that although many conversations pursue the components sequentially (as the image above reflects), there are effective learning conversations that contain each of the components, without utilizing the sequential pattern. First, this may be due to time limits prompting a return to the conversation at a later time/date. Second, this may be due to difficulties during execution of one component or another. In this case, the components may be rearranged, in order to reach the end of the conversation, where one or more participants have gleaned satisfactory information and learned from the conversation (Dubberly & Pangaro, 2009).

            Third, the learning environment may necessitate alignment to address the conversational needs and preferences of the learners. Finally, learners may need to pause and evaluate the mismatch in the conversation that is hindering the exchange for satisfactory learning to ensue. This may constitute a need for arbitration with others learners or the learning facilitator (Elmendorf & Ottenhoff, 2009).

Conversation Theory: Theoretical Framework

          Andrew Gordon Pask (1928-1996), (Roca, 1996) known to his friends and colleagues as Speedie, because of his energetic lifestyle and love for discovery learning, was a cybernetics expert, who held higher education degrees. "...his life-long research spanned biological computing, artificial intelligence, cognitive science, logic, linguistics, psychology, and artificial life" (Pangaro, 1996, para 2). His interest in how humans learn from their respective environments and how this learning "...relates to others through language" (Roca, 1996, para 3). Pask's interest in linguistic and cognitive connections in conversation led him to develop the Conversation Theory (CT) in the 1970's (Baker, Jensen & Kolb, 2002).

             During this same period, educationalists were evaluating and utilizing Learning Styles Theories to enhance learning opportunities for adult learners. Pask did not align his thinking with the traditional adult learning theories of the day, but consequently, formulated a simplified model to address his theoretical framework of conversation. Pask's CT argues that conversation occurs at three differing levels: 1) Natural language (general discussion), 2) Object languages (for discussing the subject matter), and 3) Metalanguages (for talking about learning/language). These levels are divided between theorized learning strategies that would be utilized for conversation levels. The first type of learning strategy is the Serialist. The Serialist prefers to progress through learning structures sequentially. The second type of learning strategy is the Holist. The Holist prefers to progress through learning structures through relationships of higher order thinking. Moreover, Pask declared that learning should be formulated in arrangements that provide conversational opportunities, whereby teachback could develop. Teachback provided evidence of learned subject matter, because when true learning had transpired, a learner would have the capacity to teach the learned subject matter to another, which generates knowledge creation (University of New York-Cortland, 2013). "Learning from one another to create new knowledge--the medium is conversation" (Baker, Jensen & Kolb, 2002, p. 3). 

       Conversation Theory (CT) has been tested and implemented in previous and current asynchronous and synchronous adult learning environments with effectual findings and results. For example, from 2007-2008, Elmendorf & Ottenhoff, tested CT with adult learners in differing disciplines to determine if the theory was viable and valuable in all e-learning coursework situations. The researchers utilized CT in first-year biology, as well as, third-year Shakespearian literature. Interesting, Elmendorf & Ottenhoff, found that CT's effectiveness for adult e-learners crossed disciplines successfully, leading to improved conversation skills, deeper learning, and formulated knowledge creation among diverse learners (Elmendorf & Ottenhoff, 2009.

Summary

            The purpose of this article was to discuss (a) what conversation is, (b) how it is used to construct meaningful learning experiences, and (c) its use in knowledge creation, particular to e-learning. Moreover, the article discussed theoretical frameworks of seminal and current research, which indicate the value of conversational learning within the e-learning atmosphere of asynchronous and synchronous environments. Conversation in education is the most significant component within the learning process, because society's ability to advance fluidly and successfully in a digital information age, is dependent on its ability to appreciate and glean information from one another through conversation, regardless of the technology used (Saadatmand & Kumpulainen, 2013; Pangaro & Blumenschein, 2012; Elmendorf & Ottenhoff, 2009; Pask, 1976). It is also worth noting that Conversation Theory has not been exhaustively written about or tested in contemporary postsecondary e-learning. It warrants an extensive treatment in literature, as well as, future studies to determine its effectiveness and usability, in terms of constructing knowledge creation among a larger population of postsecondary e-learners.

References

 

Baker, A. C., Jensen, P. J. & Kolb, D. A. (2002). Conversational learning: An experimental approach to knowledge creation. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Benson, P. (2011). Teachers’ and learners’ perspectives on autonomy. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/chiofluan/nguyenngocan

Burns, M. (2013). Success, failure or no significant difference: Charting a course for successful educational technology integration. International Journal of Emerging Technology for Learning, 8(1), 38-45. doi: 10.3991/ijet.v8i1.2376

Dubberly, H. & Pangaro, P. (2009). What is conversation? How can we design for effective conversation? ACM Interactions, July/August, 1-9. Retrieved from http://www.dubberly.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/ddo_article_whatisconversation.pdf

Qidong, C., Griffin, T. E., & Xue, B. (2009). The importance of synchronous interaction for student satisfaction with course Web sites. Journal of Information Systems Education, 20(3), 331-338. Retrieved from Education Research Complete.

Haggis, T. (2009). What have we been thinking of? A critical overview of 40 years of student learning research in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 34(4), 377-390. doi: 10.1080/03075070902771903

Helland, P. (2013). Condos and clouds. Communications of the ACM, 56(1), 50-59. doi:10.1145/2398356.2398374

Holland, J. & Childress, M. (2008). Conversation theory conceptualized in e-learning environments, (pp. 80-89). In R. Luppicini (Ed.) Handbook for Conversation Design for Instructional Applications. Hershey, PA: Information Science.

Huang, X. & E-Ling, H. (2012). Synchronous and asynchronous communication in an online environment: Faculty experiences and perceptions. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 13(1), 15-30. Retrieved from Education Research Complete.

Johnson, G. (2008). The relative learning benefits of synchronous and asynchronous text-based discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(1), 166-169. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00739.x

Kiraikenks, K. (2011). Barriers to learning and development. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/kiraikenks/barriers-to-learning-8711695

Lunt, T., & Curran, J. (2010). 'Are you listening please?' The advantages of electronic audio feedback compared to written feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(7), 759-769. doi: 10.1080/02602930902977772

Luppicini, R. (Ed.). (2008). Handbook for conversation design for instructional applications. Hershey, PA: Information Science.

Mayes, T. & de Freitas, S. (2011). JISC e-learning models desk study: Stage 2: Review of e-learning theories, frameworks, and models. JISC, 2(1), 1-43 (Special Issue). Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/Stage%202%20Learning%20Models%20%28Version%201%29.pdf

New York University-Cortland. (2013). Background of Gordon Pask: Conversation Theory. Retrieved from http://web.cortland.edu/andersmd/learning/Pask.htm

Pangaro, P. (1996). Biography of Andrew Gordon Pask (1928-1996). Retrieved from http://www.gwu.edu/~asc/biographies/Pask/bio.html

Pangaro, P. & Blumenschein, A.  (2012). School & society, conversations & learning networks: International perspectives and meta-trends. Proceedings from Cisco-Plus & Reddrummer Conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Retrieved from http://pangaro.com/cisco2012/index.html

Pask, G. (1976). Conversation techniques in the study and practice of education. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46(1), 12-25. Retrieved from http://www.pangaro.co/pask/pask%20conversational%20techniques%20in%20edu%20-r.pdf

Roca, L. (1996). Gordon Pask's obituary. International Journal of General Systems, 26(3), 219-222. Retrieved from http://informatics.indiana.edu/rocha/pask.html

Saadatmand, M. & Kumpulainen, K. (2013). Content aggregation and knowledge sharing in a personal learning environment: Serendipity in open online networks. International Journal of Emerging Technologies for Learning, 8(1), 70-78 (Special Issue). doi: 10.3991/ijet.v8iS1.2362

Strang, K. (2011). Asynchronous knowledge sharing and conversation interaction impact on grade in an online business course. Journal of Education for Business, 86(4), 223-233. doi:10.1080/08832323.2010.51015

Wei, C., Kuo-Cheng, Y., Don-Lin Yang1, D., & Ming-Chuan, H. (2013). Data migration from grid to cloud computing. Applied Mathematics & Information Sciences, 7(1), 399-406. Retrieved from OmniFile Full Text Select (H.W. Wilson).

Additional Resources

Pangaro, P. (2013). Conversation model. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/43677920
Pangaro, P. (2013). Conversations=transactions. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/44042397 

Pangaro, P. (2013). Conversations for innovation. Retrieved http://vimeo.com/44040146

Pangaro, P. (2013). Models of connection. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/43677920

Pangaro, P. (2013). Economy of Insight. Retrieved from http://vimeo.com/43608943