Leo's+Page

**Research Interest**
I have been progressively fascinated with the phenomenon of interaction, particularly within an asynchronous learning context. As Vygotskii (1962) (note original spelling) would explain relative to social behavior, nearly all learning involves language. Similarly, Moore (1989) identified three major types of interaction: a) learner-content, b) learner-instructor, and c) learner-learner. My interest would reside in the latter two, constituting a naturalistic examination of behavior which would probably lend itself well to a qualitative study. I came across several pieces of literature over the past five or six years discussing diverse aspects of interaction such as the concept of social presence, instructor persona, the dynamics and roles of interlocutors as they negotiate and create meaning in academic settings (and consequently productive collaboration), etc. In terms of the study design and what to investigate specifically, I am still pondering which direction I should take. I have come across concepts and approaches such as code-switching (a means to structure talk in interaction), as well as the field of sociolinguistics, ethnomethodology, narrative analysis, and critical discourse analysis (CDA).

**Theoretical Foundations**
As cited in Spector, Merrill, Merrienboer, and Driscoll (2008) (p. 15), social constructivism, derived from sociocultural approaches to cognitive psychology, would represent a contributing foundation to my research. There are certain assumptions surrounding social constructivism that made this construct attractive and relevant:

1. Social constructivism is based on specific assumptions about reality, knowledge, and learning (Kim, 2009). To understand and apply models of instruction that are rooted in the perspectives of social constructivists, it is important to know the premises that underlie them. According to Kim (2009):

a) Social constructivists believe that reality is constructed through human activity. Members of a society together invent the properties of the world. For the social constructivist, reality cannot be discovered: it does not exist prior to its social invention.

b) To social constructivists, knowledge is also a human product, and is socially and culturally constructed. Individuals create meaning through their interactions with each other and with the environment they live in.

c) Social constructivists view learning as a social process. It does not take place only within an individual, nor is it a passive development of behaviors that are shaped by external forces. Meaningful learning occurs when individuals are engaged in social activities.

In addition, the authors offer insight into the field of educational communications and technology, which has introduced me to communications theory (pg. 24). Peters (1999) explains that "communication" is a word with a rich history. From the Latin communicare, meaning to impart, share, or make common, it entered the English language in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. Interestingly, he mentions that its meaning was not in the least cognitive (in the sense of cognitive activity): communicatio generally involved tangibles, suggesting physical exchange or interaction. This definition would support the concept of social constructivist theory.


 * References**

Kim, B. (2009). //Social Constructivism//. Retrieved from http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Social_Constructivism#Assumptions_of_Social_Constructivism

Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. //The American Journal of Distance Education, 3//(2). Retrieved January 24, 2005, from http://www.ajde.com/Contents/vol3_2.htm#editorial

Peters, J. D. (1999). //Speaking into the air: A history of the idea of communication//. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Merrienboer J. V., & Driscoll, M. P. (Eds.). (2008). //Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology// (3rd ed.). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

**Literature Review**
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) would represent my broad research interest, characterized as as a set of approaches to answer questions about the relationships between language and society (Rogers, R., Malancharuvil-Berkes, E., Mosley, M., Hui, D., & O’Garro Joseph, G., 2005). Education researchers in particular have employed discourse analysis as a way to make sense of the ways in which people make meaning in educational contexts. Historically, critical discourse analysis has constituted an attempt to bring social theory and discourse analysis together to describe, interpret, and explain the ways in which discourse constructs, becomes constructed by, represents, and becomes represented by the social world. The word “discourse” comes from the Latin discursus, which means “to run to and fro.” Within a CDA tradition, discourse has been defined as language use as social practice. That is, discourse moves back and forth between reflecting and constructing the social world. Seen in this way, language cannot be considered neutral, because it is caught up in political, social, racial, economic, religious, and cultural formations. CDA is what Fairclough (1992) has referred to as a textually oriented form of discourse analysis (TODA).

The following areas relate to and help inform CDA:

**a. Positioning Theory.**

Positioning theory, a framework with roots in social psychology (Harré & Van Langenhove, 1999), provides a way of examining the dynamic relationship between conversation partners by focusing on each speaker’s position relative to the other. Conceptually, the structure of conversations can be considered tri-polar: it consists of positions, strorylines and speech-acts (Harre & Van Langenhove, 1999). By means of this triad conversations can be analyzed to uncover their episodic structures. Episodes are considered the structures of social encounters. Broadly speaking, the production of discourse rests on a number of assumptions, mainly:

1. the role that language plays in the production of social reality; 2. the importance placed on the organizational nature of practical reasoning; 3. the decisive intervention of symbolic communication; and 4. the consideration that is given to the rules and resources that govern social explanations, negotiation and management of meaning in the actual interaction.


 * b. Emotions in Discourse. **

Emotions can be sensitive to cultural differences across various settings. One way to examine emotions is to analyze the vocabularies people use to describe their own and other’s emotions, which can be called the local emotionology. This approach investigates judgments of meanings, and the social force of emotion displays.

**c. Social Presence**

According Paz Dennen (2007), asynchronous discussion is a rather limited communication medium, with primary (and almost exclusive) reliance on the written word as a mode of expression. Participants develop impressions of each other based on their word choices, both in the moment and in the overall course context. The lack of a single, shared understanding of social presence is problematic regarding the improvement of online teaching and learning in that it may be hampered by unexplored assumptions about the nature, role, and function of this critical element of computer-mediated interaction. Short et al. (1976) define social presence as "the degree of salience of the other person in a mediated interaction and the consequent salience of the interpersonal interaction."

**d. Social Constructionism**

Social constructionism emphasizes the importance of culture and context in understanding what occurs in society and constructing knowledge based on this understanding (McMahon, 1997). This perspective is closely associated with many contemporary theories, most notably the developmental theories of Vygotsky and Bruner, and Bandura's social cognitive theory. The term "social constructionism" is sometimes used loosely for a variety of positions in psychological theory within at least one version of which positioning theory has a place. Two assumptions are derived from social constructionism according to Harré & Van Langenhove (1999): a) what people do, publicly and privately, is intentional, and b) what people are, to themselves and to others, is a product of a lifetime of interpersonal interactions.

**e. Activity Theory**

Activity theory emphasizes purposeful social interaction (Spector, Merrill, Merrienboer, & Driscoll, 2008). It is considered a philosophical framework integrating the objective, the sociocultural, and the ecological. The Vygotskian perspective postulates that social relations among people generally underlie all higher functions and their relationships. According to San Millan Maurino (2007), a mind emerges through social interactions with others and the environment, mediated by artifacts, signs, and language. Human development is thus achieved by mastery of cultural experiences, habits, behavior, and methods of reasoning [within discourse].


 * References**

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Harré, R., & Van Langenhove, L. (1999). Positioning Theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd.

McMahon, M. (1997, December). Social Constructivism and the World Wide Web - A Paradigm for Learning. Paper presented at the ASCILITE conference. Perth, Australia.

Rogers, R., Malancharuvil-Berkes, E., Mosley, M., Hui, D., & O’Garro J. (2005). Critical Discourse Analysis in Education: A Review of the Literature. Review of Educational Research, 75(3), pp. 365–416.

San Millan Maurino, P. (2007). Online Asynchronous Threaded Discussions: Good Enough to Advance Students through the Proximal Zone of Activity Theory?

Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The Social Psychology of Communication. New York, NY: John Wiley.

Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Merrienboer J. V., & Driscoll, M. P. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (3rd ed.). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stearns, P. N., & Stearns, C. Z. (1988). Emotion and social change. New York: Holmes & Meier.

Gap in the Research
Although the analysis of discursive behavior across different contexts has been fairly documented, the processes and consequences of such behavior merit further inquiry. Anderson (2009) describes how there is a persistent ontological gap existing within discussants found in asynchronous academic settings during discursively negotiated exchanges. The use of positioning theory as a dialogical model can shed light on such a gap by enabling self-awareness (similar to a metacognitive approach) and helping clarify distinctions between traditional roles and positions taken in conversation. Anderson (2009) further explains that by analyzing positioning as being mediated, one acknowledges how interactions construct meanings of practices both in reference to the interactions themselves and in terms of how these interactions relate intertextually and intercontextually to relevant texts, practices and participants.

RQ1. How can mediated language affect instructional outcomes in asynchronous discourse?

RQ2. How can different ways of participating in academic asynchronous settings enable understanding of discussant co-construction of knowledge?

Problem Statement
The practice-based view of knowledge construction is recognized as an important epistemological perspective in the knowledge management literature. However, the examination of how various discursive devices and practices influence the nature of interactions and outcomes across various settings remains to be undertaken to greater depth. From a practices stance, Fernie, Davies, Kantor, and McMurray (1993) have observed that educators, like researchers, often assume the validity of discrete roles and labels in instructional contexts which constrain how we view and therefore understand learners. Similarly, Heizmann (2011) speaks of employing a power perspective in conversation and how the issue of power facilitates contesting, accepting, and/or furthering individual and group knowledge. These practices have not been studied from a social constructionist view. As an example, a more rigorous application of positioning theory to the examination of discourse would shed greater light on the study conducted by Sosa and Gomez (2011) which focused on teachers who are positioned and position themselves as "effective." Further, the social constructionist assumption that what people do, publicly and privately, is intentional would better explain the work on community rapport undertaken by Kwong Ho (2011). The ways rapport was managed within three communities of practice by using differing linguistic strategies determined how well members maintained a harmonious relationship. In contrast to the work conducted by Heizmann (2011), Beltran (2010) described the use of power as a positive repositioning tool when examining the social construction of proficiency among lingusitically diverse students.

Supporting Theory
Harre and Langenhove (1999) explain that discursive phenomena are not regarded as manifestations of what goes on "inside" the mind, but that they have to be represented as the phenomena themselves. Positioning theory focuses on understanding how psychological phenomena (such as cognitive activity) are produced in discourse.

Methodology

 * ** Research Methodology ** || **Strengths ** || **Limitations ** || **Authoritative Primary Source for Methodology ** || **Rationale for adoption/non-adoption of method** ||
 * **Mixed methods** || A sequential mixed methods approach seeks to expand on the findings of a particular method by beginning with a qualitative or quantitative approach and then following up with an alternative method. || A potential limitation is that one may not challenge the assumption that collecting both types of data will better enable the investigator to understand the research problem. || Campbell, D., and Fisk, D. (1959) || Lends itself well to statistical and text analysis ||
 * **Content Analysis** || Content analysis reflects a close relationship with socio- and psycholinguistics || Can be inherently reductive, particularly when dealing with complex texts. Tends too often to simply consist of word counts. Often disregards the context that produced the text, as well as the state of things after the text is produced can be difficult to automate or computerize. || Berelson, B. (1952) || Good unobtrusive method for collecting prose information about discussant behavior. ||
 * **Microethnography** || It can produce deep analysis of phenomena which may be impossible to perceive in real time observation and which may be too heavily laden with common sense perceptions for participant-observers to see through them. || Fine-grained analyses of texts can be extremely time-consuming and painstaking. || Duranti, A. (1997), Hanks, W.(1996), Goodwin, C. (1998), Goffman, E. (1974), Hutchins, E. (1991) || Can elucidate meaningful academic engagement maintained through social organization of thread structure. ||

member-check with participants, engage in peer review, establish and maintain a paper trail of theorizing and analytic steps taken. ||
 * **Research Questions** || **Methodology ** || **<span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif';">Sample ** || **Data collection methods** || **Statistical analysis** ||
 * How can the use of asynchronous threaded discussion as an adaptive model affect learning? || <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 13.3333px;">Mixed methods, application of CDA (critical discourse analysis) || <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 13.3333px;">Purposive sampling, obtained from voluntary class participation in an effort to best understand the problem/research question || <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 13.3333px;">Documents (thread discussion episodes) || Critical discourse analysis validity claimed by triangulating data,
 * Can learning outcomes be understood through operationalizing the construct of discussion? || <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 13.3333px;">Employing positioning theory as a theoretical framework from which to examine threaded discourse || <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 13.3333px;">Obtained via participant consent to access artifacts (thread transcripts) || <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 13.3333px;">Documents (thread discussion episodes) || <span style="font-family: 'Calibri','sans-serif'; font-size: 13.3333px;">Qualitative data analysis of unstructured information by collecting and analyzing threaded discourse events through classification (coding), sorting, arranging and interpreting of interlocutor contributions. ||

Significance of the Study
**How will your study fill a gap in the current research?**

The analysis of discursive behavior across different contexts has been fairly documented. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is amongst the most popular methodologies for the analysis of language and texts in management and organization studies. CDA has been employed in relation to a wide range of topics such as professional and organizational identity, workplace control and resistance, mergers and acquisitions, industrial disputes, strategic sensemaking, and institutional logics, to name a few. However, the processes and consequences of discursive behavior within academic settings have been insufficiently examined, representing a gap in our current understanding of dialogic phenomena within such settings and consequently merit further inquiry.


 * <span style="color: #333333; font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">How will your research advance the profession of educational technology? **

It will further emphasize the realization that distance education (in the form of information/communication technology) is more than a method of distribution. Those of us in the business of education need to remember that disseminating techniques are a means to an end, not the end itself. As McLuhan (2003) stated "'the medium is the message', because it is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action." Delving into critical discourse analysis of academic activity by employing narrative analysis tools will represent a viable example of how technology can help inform communication pedagogy and studies in human communication within threaded, asynchronous environments.


 * <span style="color: #333333; font-family: Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">How will your research effect positive social change through the “improvement of human or social conditions by promoting the worth, dignity, and development of individuals, communities, organizations, institutions, cultures, or societies”? **

Changes in language use are linked to wider social and cultural processes, hence the importance of using language analysis as a method for studying social change. Increasingly, there has been a "linguistic turn" in social theory, which has resulted in language been accorded a more central role within social phenomena. Specifically, educators have been under pressure to adopt new discourse practices within existing activities such as teaching, particularly regarding types or styles of discourse unique to synchronous and asynchronous settings. These alterations in discourse effect positive social change by developing efficacious, rich communication among faculty and learners assuring successful instructional outcomes and promoting cooperative and collaborative behavior. In sum, relating detailed properties of texts systematically to social properties of discursive events will contribute to our understanding of these instances of social practice.

Dissemination of Research
//** Journals for Publication **//


 * The Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (JCMC)** is a peer-reviewed electronic scholarly journal, focusing on social science research on computer-mediated communication, publishing work by scholars in communication, business, education, political science, sociology, media studies, information science, and other disciplines.


 * International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (IJHCI)** is a scholarly journal emphasizing the human element in relation to the systems in which humans function, operate, network, and communicate, including software, hardware, and their various contexts of use.


 * The Electronic Journal of Communication (EJC)** is a peer-reviewed, scholarly journal devoted to the study of communication theory, research, practice, and policy.

// **Professional Venues** //


 * Association for Educational Communications and Technology (AECT) International Convention.** I subscribe to the association's earlier conception of education as information conceived and delivered as thoughtfully formulated messages. My research in CDA would meaningfully contribute to better understanding this conception in efforts to improve educational communication (sorry, two sentences!).

and encapsulates the concept of interdisciplinary science that studies the societal and technological dimensions of knowledge evolution in digital society.
 * International Conference on Information Society (i-Society)** is co-sponsored by IEEE (Institute for Electronic and Electrical Engineers)