Student Cognitive Presence in Small Group Collaboration Facilitated by Mobile Instant Messaging

  • Yuhan QIAO The University of Hong Kong
  • Ying TANG The University of Hong Kong
  • Khe Foon HEW The University of Hong Kong

Abstract

Cognitive presence describes the co-construction of knowledge in an online learning community. Few previous studies examined the development of cognitive presence in using mobile instant messaging (MIM) for academic purposes. Specifically, students nowadays set up small-size MIM discussion groups to work on group projects in higher education. No study has examined the establishment of cognitive presence in these small groups. This paper reports a multi-case study, investigating three self-initiated discussion groups in higher education. Data were collected primarily from the online interactive records and students’ semi-structured interviews. The Community of Inquiry framework was utilized as the guidance for coding process. The results show that students demonstrated cognitive presence in the group discussions, yet only 36% of the total messages contained indicators of cognitive presence. The majority (64%) of messages were on non-academic topics, such as greetings and casual social talks. In the interviews, we found students like using MIM for social purposes, but not for academic purposes, due to the social nature of MIM, the possible delayed responses, and the lack of “facilitators”.
Keywords: Mobile instant messaging, Cognitive presence, Community of inquiry.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Allagui, B. (2014). Writing through WhatsApp: An evaluation of students writing performance. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 8(3-4): 216-231.
2. Almekhlafy, A., & Alzubi, A. A. F. (2016). Mobile-mediated communication a tool for language exposure in EFL informal learning settings. Arab World English Journal, 7(1): 388-407.
3. Bouhnik, D., & Deshen, M. (2014). WhatsApp goes to school: Mobile instant messaging between teachers and students. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 13: 217-231.
4. Darabi, A., Arrastia, M. C., Nelson, D. W., Cornille, T., & Liang, X. (2011). Cognitive presence in asynchronous online learning: A comparison of four discussion strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(3): 216-227.
5. De Leng, B. A., Dolmans, D. H., Jöbsis, R., Muijtjens, A. M., & van der Vleuten, C. P. (2009). Exploration of an e-learning model to foster critical thinking on basic science concepts during work placements. Computers & Education, 53: 1-13.
6. Dillenbourg, P. (1999). Collaborative learning: cognitive and computational approaches. In Dillenbourg, P. (Ed.). Pergamon, Elsevier Science
7. Garcia, A. C., & Jacobs, J. B. (1999). The eyes of the beholder: Understanding the turn-taking system in quasi-synchronous computer-mediated communication. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32(4): 337-367. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973rls3204_2.
8. Garrison, D. R. (2016). E-learning in the 21st Century: A Community of Inquiry Framework for Research and Practice. Taylor & Francis.
9. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 2(2–3): 87−105.
10. Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2001). Critical thinking, cognitive presence, and computer conferencing in distance education. American Journal of distance education, 15(1): 7-23.
11. Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. J. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment. American journal of distance education, 11(3): 8-26.
12. Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2012). Student participation in online discussions: Challenges, solutions, and future research. Springer Science & Business Media.
13. Holsti, O.R. (1969) Content analysis for the social sciences and humanities, Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
14. Hou, H. T., & Wu, S. Y. (2011). Analyzing the social knowledge construction behavioral patterns of an online synchronous collaborative discussion instructional activity using an instant messaging tool: A case study. Computers & Education, 57(2): 1459-1468.
15. Kanuka, H., Rourke, L., & Laflamme, E. (2007). The influence of instructional methods on the quality of online discussion. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(2): 260-271.
16. Lai, A. (2016). Mobile immersion: An experiment using mobile instant messenger to support second-language learning. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(2): 277-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2015.1113706.
17. Lee, S. M. (2014). The relationships between higher order thinking skills, cognitive density, and social presence in online learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 21: 41-52.
18. Lee, S. W., & Rine, D. C. (2004). Case Study Methodology Designed Research in Software Engineering Methodology Validation. In the Sixteenth International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering. Pp: 117-122.
19. MI, G. M., & Meerasa, S. S. (2016). Perceptions on M-Learning through WhatsApp application. Journal of Education Technology in Health Sciences, 3(2): 57-60.
20. Naismith, L. (2007). Using text messaging to support administrative communication in higher education. Active Learning in Higher Education, 8(2): 155-171.
21. Quan‐Haase, A., Cothrel, J., & Wellman, B. (2005). Instant messaging for collaboration: A case study of a high‐tech firm. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 10(4): 00-00.
22. Rodriguez, M. A. (2014). Content analysis as a method to assess online discussions for learning. SAGE Open, 4(4), 2158244014559019.
23. Rambe, P. & Bere, A. (2013). Using mobile instant messaging to leverage learner participation and transform pedagogy at a South African University of Technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4): 544-561.
24. Rau, P. L. P., Gao, Q., & Wu, L. M. (2008). Using mobile communication technology in high school education: Motivation, pressure, and learning performance. Computers & Education, 50(1): 1-22.
25. Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: Wiley.
26. So, S. (2016). Mobile instant messaging support for teaching and learning in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 31: 32-42.
27. Statista. (2017). Number of monthly active WhatsApp users worldwide from April 2013 to January 2017 (in millions). Retrieved May 20, 2017, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/260819/number-of-monthly-active-whatsapp-users/
28. Tang, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2017). Is mobile instant messaging (MIM) useful in education? Examining its technological, pedagogical, and social affordances. Educational Research Review, 21: 85-104. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.05.001.
29. Tencent. (2017). Tencent Announces 2017 First Quarter Results. Retrieved May 20, 2017 from https://www.tencent.com/zh-cn/articles/15000611495014502.pdf
30. Wang, Y., Fang, W. C., Han, J., & Chen, N. S. (2016). Exploring the affordances of WeChat for facilitating teaching, social and cognitive presence in semi-synchronous language exchange. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 32(4):18-37.
31. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: design and methods. Applied social research methods series, v. 5. Biography, Sage Publications, London.
32. Zucker, D. M. (2009). How to do case study research. Teaching Research Methods in the Humanities and Social Sciences. 2.
Statistics
6 Views | 9 Downloads
How to Cite
[1]
QIAO, Y., TANG, Y. and HEW, K. 2018. Student Cognitive Presence in Small Group Collaboration Facilitated by Mobile Instant Messaging. International Journal of Educational Technology and Learning. 2, 1 (Jan. 2018), 14-24. DOI:https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20448/2003.21.14.24.
Section
Articles