Anderson, T (2003)

Getting the mix right again: An updated and theoretical rationale for interaction

Key concepts

＊The purposes of this paper à distinguish between interaction leading to learning in any informal context and those types of interaction that occur in a formal education context.
＊Equivalency theorem of interaction
Deep and meaningful formal learning is supported as long as one of the three forms of interaction (student-teacher; student-student; student-content) is at a high level. The other two may be offered at minimal level, or even eliminated, without degrading the educational experience.
High levels of more than one of these three modes will likely provide a more satisfying educational experience, though these experiences may not be as cost or time effective as less interactive learning sequences.
＊An interaction-based model of e-Learning
1. Paced, Collaborative Learning / community of inquiry
· Learning is sequenced, directed, and credentialed through the assistance of a teacher.
· Using a lot of net-based synchronous and asynchronous (video, audio, computer conferencing, chats, or virtual world) interaction
· Binds learners in time, forcing regular sessions or group paced learning
· Suffer from an inability to scale to large numbers of learners
2. Independent Study
· Structured Learning Resources (search & retrieval, tutorials, simulations games, virtual labs, e-books)
· The independent student is not alone; colleagues, peers, family are significant sources of support and assistance locally or distributed across the net
＊Three functions that a good educational theory performs.
1. Helps to envision new worlds – Getting the mix right involves a series of tradeoffs (knowing how one type of interaction can effectively substitute for another), and provides an essential decision making skill in the distance educators’ knowledge base.
2. Helps to make things – Getting the mix right helps to position and make judgments of the arsenal of available tools as to their potential effectiveness and efficiency in program planning.
3. Helps to be honest –Getting the mix right encourages challenging evaluations: How much of the educational process can be composed of interaction with non-human entities? How much of the human interaction should take place face-to-face or in real time?