Presentation includes: Identification of issues in distance learning Introduction to Channel Expansion Theory (CET) Application of CET to distance learning Proposed hypothesis Presented fall 2013 to my graduate course in Communication Theory

1. Testing the effects of Channel Expansion Theory on
distance learning
Sheena Williams

2. Overview
 Identify issue
 Introduce Channel Expansion Theory
 Apply CET to issue
 Present hypothesis

3. Distance Learning
National Center for Education Statistics
defines DL as:
 “a formal educational process in which the
instructor and the student are not in the
same location….instruction might be
synchronous or asynchronous”
(Parsad & Lewis, 2008, para. 1).
 Thus, technology has removed the
restrictions of time and space

4. Students
 Who benefits from distance learning courses?





Individuals with disabilities
Parents
Full-time employees
Students in areas where transportation as an issue
Military

5. Enrollment
 Robust increase in enrollment
 6.9 million students in 2012 (Allen & Seaman, 2013)
 77% of campuses offer online courses (AndersonAvouris, Boyles, & Rainie, 2012)
 70% of universities have DL as part of long-term strategy

6. FtF vs. CMC
Can online education be as beneficial for students as
classroom learning?

7. Course Design
 Fundamental change from traditional learning
 Heavily rely on communication (Hiltz, 1990; Schrum, 1995; Schrum & Lamb, 1996)



One-on-one with faculty
Group work with peers
Discussion Boards

8. DL Issue
 High Attrition Rates
 Poor performance
(Owens, Hardcastel, & Richardson, 2009; Schrum, 1997; Sitzmann, Bell, & Bauer, 2010; Wiesenberg & Hutton, 1996)

9. Performance Outcomes
The observed scores relating to the level of achievement
that can be compared against a scale to determine a level of
proficiency and/or comprehension

10. Student Performance
 Student perceptions of technology and its use in
communicating with faculty and peers

Students struggle with….
 technical issues
 understanding technology
 communication with faculty and other students
 course content and context
(Owens, Hardcastel, & Richardson, 2009; Schrum, 1997; Sitzmann, Bell, & Bauer, 2010; Wiesenberg & Hutton, 1996)

11. Student Performance
 Participation lower than expected (Wiesenburg & Hutton, 1996).
 Students frequently felt isolated (Owens, Hardcastel, & Richardson, 2009)
 Technology alters communication (Lea & Spears, 1991)

12. What to consider….
Technology alters
a student’s ability
to effectively
communicate
Participation and
understanding of
course material
Affect
performance
outcome

13. Channel Expansion Theory
Carlson & Zmud (1994)
 Media richness depends on a user’s perception of the
medium

14. CET Roots
 Media Richness Theory (Daft & Lengel, 1986)
Uncertainty
Equivocality
Media Richness

15. Media Richness
 Important in creating a shared understanding in
communication
 Ability to encode and decode

Avoid misunderstandings/unclear messages

16. CET & Media Richness
 Not dependant on channel’s characteristics but the
user’s perception of the channel in reducing
equivocality and uncertainty

17. Perceived Richness
an individual’s self-reported appraisal of the ability of
a medium to overcome uncertainty and equivocality

18. Effective Communication
 “communication effectiveness and richness
perceptions are strongly bounded by a channel user’s
communication experiences” (Carlson & Zmud, 1999)

19. Perceptions of richness
 Based on prior knowledge-building experience
with:
 Medium
 Partner
 Topic
 Context

20. CET and Media Richness
Channel
Topic
Context
Richer
Leaner
Partner

21. CET and Media Richness
 Media richness is:
 Fluid
 Subjective
 Linear and developing across time.

22. Channel Selection
 As you gain experience you are able to select which
channel will fit your needs
Experience
Perceived
Richness
Effective
Communication

23. CET Applied
 Various media
 Diverse situations
 CET applied to educational context (Fernandez, Simo, Sallan, & Enache, 2013)
 Different individuals showed different overall levels of
perceived media richness

Experience with the channel and with the partner significantly
relate to the perception of the online forum’s richness

24. Hypothesis
The richer a student perceives a channel to be, the
greater their performance outcome will be in a distance
learning course using that channel.

25. References
Allen, I. E. & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States. New York, NY: The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved
from http://sloanconsortium.org/
Anderson, J.Q., Boyles, J.L., & Rainie, L. (2012). The future impact of the Internet on higher education: Experts expect more-efficient collaborative environments
and new grading schemes; they worry about massive online courses, the shift away from on-campus life. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center, Pew
Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org
Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Ramirez, A., Jr., Dunbar, N. E., Kam, K., & Fischer, J. (2002). Testing the interactivity principle: Effects of mediation, propinquity, and
verbal and nonverbal modalities in interpersonal interaction. Journal of Communication, 52, 657-677. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02567.x
Carlson, J. R., & Zmud, R. W. (1999). Channel expansion theory and the experiential nature of media richness perceptions. Academy of Management
Journal, 42, 153-170.doi:10.2307/257090
Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32, 554–571.
doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554
Fernandez, V., Simo, P., Sallan, J. M., & Enache, M. (2013). Evolution of online discussion forum richness according to channel expansion theory: A longitudinal
panel data analysis. Computers & Education, 62, 32-40. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.020
Parsad, B. & Lewis, L. (2008). Distance education at degree-granting postsecondary institutions: 2006-07. (NCES 2009044). Washington D.C.: U.S. Department of
Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov
Ngwenyama, Ojelanki K., & Lee, Allen S. (1997). Communication richness in electronic mail: Critical social theory and the contextuality of meaning. MIS
Quarterly, 21, 145-167. doi:10.2307/249417
Owens, J., Hardcastel, L., & Richardson, B. (2009). Learning from a distance: The experience of remote students. Journal of Distance Education, 23, 57–74.
Retrieved from http://www.jofde.ca/
Rozell, E. J., & Gardner, W. L. (2000). Cognitive, motivation, and affective processes associated with computer-related performance: A path analysis. Computers in
Human Behavior, 16, 199-222. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(99)00054-0
Schrum, L. (1998). On-line education: A study of emerging pedagogy. New Directions for Adult & Continuing Education, 78, 53-61. doi:10.1002/ace.7806
Schrum, L. (1995). Educators and the Internet: A case study of professional development. Computers & Education, 24, 221-228. doi: 10.1016/0360-1315(95)00012-B
Schrum, L., & Lamb, T. A. (1996). Groupware for collaborative learning: A research perspective on processes, opportunities, and obstacles. Journal of Universal
Computer Science, 2, 717–731. Retrieved from http://www.jucs.org/
Sitzmann, T., Ely, K., Bell, B. S., & Bauer, K. N. (2010). The effects of technical difficulties on learning and attrition during online training. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Applied, 16, 281-292. doi:10.1037/a0019968