Strategies for increasing the interactivity of childrens synchronous learning in virtual environments

Чтобы посмотреть этот PDF файл с форматированием и разметкой, скачайте файл и откройте на своем компьютере.
i Strategies for increasing the interactivity of children's synchronous learning in virtual environments Ivan Katlianik Kellogg College , Trinity term Dissertation submitted in part - fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Education Oxford, 2013 i Abstract Enabling distant individuals to assemble in one virtual environment, synchronous distance learning appeals to researchers and practitioners alike because of its unique educational opportunities. One of the vital components of successful synchronous distance learning is interactivity. In virtual environments, interactivity is limited by the capacity of a technological medium to transmit verbal and non - verbal signals between individuals in the class. In order to increase the interactivity of learning, teachers need strategies to enable them to over come the medium’s restrictions and reveal its interactive capabilities. This study explores which of the strategies used by teachers in arranging children’s synchronous learning in virtual environments may positively affect learning interactivity, and und er what conditions those strategies are best utilised . Adhering to a qualitative approach, the study has reflected on the instructional experiences of 48 teachers, from which 15 4 interaction - enhancing strategies have been identified. While most strategies were found to be universal in various types of environments, others proved effective only under specific learning conditions . F ield experiment was conducted to examine the applicability of these stra tegies across cases with similar learning conditions. Some of the strategies were found to have effects on both synchronous and asynchronous components of learning. Often, t hese effects appeared to be implicit or deferred. Based on the data gathered, the s tudy suggests a conceptual model of interaction in learning environments. The findings of the study have both theoretic al and practical significance : they contribute to existing scientific knowledge on synchronous distance learning and also provide teacher s with applicable methodological recommendations. ii Acknowledgements My deepest thanks to my family for their in finite love, understanding, and encouragement. I am truly unable to express the depth of my gratitude for all they have done. But for their fai thful support, this research would have not been possible. I thank the European Commission, the Nordic Council of Ministers, and Mr Mads Meinert, for trust in my ideas and financial support. I am also immensely grateful to all those who were keen to shar e their time and knowledge, contributing to this study and turning it , for me , into a breath - taking and fruitful adventure : Dr Chris Davies, for rewarding supervision that guided me t hrough this research project ; Dr s Rebecca E y n on and David Mills, for inspirational session s and sharing valuable knowledge ; Dr Jane Shuyska, whose expertise and advice helped me to refine the focus of the study; Martha Newson, for proofreading this work with a tangible ; Boby Ching, for helping me c ; Yuliya Sh aviardak, for excellent organisation of the experimental learning session ; the teachers, children and parents in Minsk, who generously volunteered their time to participate in this study ; an d, finally, my friends , whose support was a nourishing spring of confidence and inspiration . Dziakuj ! (Thanks!) iii Table of contents Abstract ................................ ................................ ....... I Acknowledgements ................................ ................................ ....................... II Table of contents ................................ ................................ ............................ III 1. Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 1 2 . Literature review ................................ ................................ ............................... 4 2.1. The place of virtual learning environments in distance education ................................ ........ 4 2.2. Key themes in re search on synchronous learning in virtual learning environments ............. 6 2.3. The role of interaction ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 12 2.4. Summary of the literature review ................................ ................................ ........................ 16 3. Methodology ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 18 3.1. Research aims and questions ................................ ................................ ............................... 18 3.2. Research strategy and design ................................ ................................ ............................... 18 3.3. Instruments of data collection ................................ ................................ .............................. 22 3.4. Sampling and data gathering ................................ ................................ ............................... 25 3.5. Data analysis ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 27 3.6. Quality of findings ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 29 3.7. ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 31 iv 4. Findings ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 34 4.1. Data variation ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 34 4.2. Issues surrounding interactivity ................................ ................................ ........................... 35 4.3. Strategies for increasing interactivity ................................ ................................ .................. 39 4.4. Transferability of strategies ................................ ................................ ................................ . 53 5. Discussion and conclusions ................................ ................................ 55 5.1. Understanding and implying an active approach to increasing interactivity ....................... 55 5.2. Study limitations and directions for further research ................................ .......................... 58 5.3. Conclusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................... 59 R eferences ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 60 Appendices ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 76 A. The concept of the virtual classroom ................................ ................................ .............. 76 B. Characteristics of interactive events ................................ ................................ ............... 79 C. Teachers’ questionnaire ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 82 D. Teacher’s checklist template ................................ ................................ ........................... 83 E. Observation protocol template ................................ ................................ ........................ 84 F. Interview schedule ................................ ................................ ................................ .......... 85 G. Comparative description of the survey cases ................................ ................................ .. 86 H. CUREC approval email ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 88 I. L ist of strategies for enhancing the interactivity of synchronous distance learning ....... 89 J . List of experimentaly examined strategies and their effects ................................ ......... 10 0 K . Perceived interactivity - related changes that occurred in the experimental case .......... 104 1 1. Introduction Appealing to educators and researchers alike because of its capability of delivering education at anytime and anywhere, distance learning has taken on a variety of forms throughout its history. The most recent revolutionary change in distance learning was dictated by the proliferation of computer networks. This shi ft to online distance learning has produced a new, virtual form of learning environment as an alternative to the traditional classroom. In turn, on - going advancements in network and computer technologies have enabled the development and popularisation of a synchronous form of distance learning leading to a blurring of the boundary between traditional and virtual classrooms. Synchronous online learning prov ides unique educational opportunities in both formal and informal context s . Alongside asynchronous distance learning, it makes education potentially accessible to a wider range of individuals regardless of their location (Mountain, 2009). Promoting collabo ration and cultural exchange (Kontos and Mizell, 2005), synchronous distance learning allows multiple individuals, groups, and institutions to meet and interact in one virtual environment (Ligorio and van Veen, 2006). This particular facet of distance educ ation enables learning from primary sources and experts, without the need for students to leave their learning site (Merrick, 2005; Townes - Young and Ewing, 2005). The breadth of application makes synchronous distance learning valuable, whether it is used o n its own or combined with face - to - face or asynchronous approaches. With regards to educational outcomes, synchronous learning in virtual environments is considered at least as effective as learning in a traditional classroom (Mountain, 2009). In comparis on to asynchronous distance learning, it has a greater beneficial effect on student satisfaction (Cao, Griffin and Bai, 2009), affect (Rao, 2007), and behaviour (Stuber - McEven et al., 2009). It also allows for interplay between learners and instructors to be more socio - emotional, immediate, and meaningful (Martin, Parker and Deale, 2012). When utilised as part of comprehensive online courses, synchronous distance learning serves as an effective facilitating and humanising component (Sawyer, 1997). 2 Despite the multiplicity of benefits that promote the interest of researchers and practitioners in synchronous learning in virtual environments, this educational approach has a range of limitations. In particular, being technologically mediated, synchronous dist ance learning is highly reliant on the accessibility and quality of the technology (Graziadei et al., 1997) used by each participant in the virtual environment. Not only does the stability of the technology influence the quality of learning, so too does i ts specific features and their appropriate use (Carlson, 2011). Technology may be viewed as both a proxy and a barrier to effective synchronous interplay between members of virtual learning environments. At the same time, although technological restraints make arranging effective computer - mediated learning one of the biggest challenges in the virtual environment (Lu, 2011), the quality of synchronous distance learning remains greatly dependent on the instructional approach and strategies chosen by the instr uctors. The k ey guiding strategy to consider in order to achieve successful synchronous le arning in a virtual environment is the maximisation of its interactive characteristics (Chou, 2002, Muirhe ad and Juwah, 2004, Kobb, 2010 ). Interactivity of learning describes the interplay between learners, instructors, and content (Moore, 1989). Increasing the interactive qualities of synchronous distance learning has been found to have a positive relationship with student performance (Wei, 2012). A high level of in teractivity also decreases the transact ional distance and enhances social presence, thus narrowing the gap between virtual and real learning. As long as, in virtual environments, technology is a proxy for interactive messages, the level of learning inter activity is highly dependent on the medium’s capabilities of transmitting both verbal and non - Cobb, 2009, Yanika - Agbaw, 2010 ). However, it is not only technology that influences interactivity in virtual learning environments (Gunawardena, 1995). Rather, interactivity is defined by a multifaceted interplay between technological, instructional, and social variables (Roblyer and Wiencke, 2003). Therefore, high interactivity levels in distance lear ning can only be achieved provided the communication medium is used efficiently. Not surprisingly, the most effective strategies in virtual environments can significantly differ from those acceptable in the traditional classr oom (Gillies, 2008). Following from this, in order for remote students to have a positive learning experience, it is vital that instructors’ pedagogical and technical skills are tailored for synchronous distance learning (Lonie and Andrews, 2009). 3 Existing research, however, fails to provide any extensive information on strategies that are effective in increasing the interactivity of synchronous distance learning. While some studies disclose specific conditions for high interactivity, the informatio n is either sketchy or contextually narrow. Noticeably, existing research focuses mainly on higher education, and it is doubtful that these interactive strategies are suitable for children’s education. Studies on ways of increasing the interactivity of chi ldren’s synchronous distance learning remain relatively scarce. This forces the teachers involved with children’s distant learning to adhere to a distance learning sess ions. Hence, research is needed to find a variety of strategies that could contribute to interactivity in children’s synchronous distance learning, and to examine the relationships of these strategies with different learning contexts. This study aims to d etermine which of the strategies used by teachers in arranging children’s synchronous learning in virtual environments have positive effects on learning interactivity and under what conditions. To acc omplish this goal, the research qualitatively examined a multiplicity of teachers’ experiences gained across various learning contexts. The findings of the study have both theoretical and applied significance: they simultaneously extend existing scientific knowledge on synchronous distance learning and provide teachers with applicable The following chapters of this paper provide a comprehensive review of the literature relevant that the study is b uilt on, present and describe collected data , and discuss the research findings with relation to existing body of scientific knowledge. 4 2 . Literature review In order to situate this study within the existing body of research surrounding the notion of sync hronous learning in virtual environments and the context of children’s education , a comprehensive literature review was undertaken. This review provides a terminological basis for the research, justifies the enquiry’s focus, reveals key themes and gaps i n relevant scholarly literature, and establishes a theoretical rationale for the study. 2.1 . The place of virtual learning environments in distance education 2.1.1 . Distance and online learning Distance learning (Sawyer, 1997) with the instructor and student being located in different physical places (Parsad and Lewis, 2008; Rich 2011) . As an alternative to face - to - face learning, the distance form of instruction appeared as early as the eighteenth century, when lessons by mail were first introduced (Holmber g, 2005). However, it was not until the 1920s that distance learning came to the masses. This period is associated with the rapid spread of educational radio and television (Cassidy, 1998) and i (2001) as the first generation of distance education. The initial forms of distance learning were asynchronous and one - way in nature (Lever - Duffy and McDonald, 2007), so students w ere unable to interact directly with their teacher (Rich, 2011) . Real - time feedback became available with the introduction of teleconferencing , al., 2001). Following this, computer - mediated communication, enabled by networked computers, gave rise to the third generation of distance education (ibid.). Computer networks have since brought to the fore a new aspect of distance education called online learning (Rich, 2011). In turn, the internet as a form of computer networks that facilitates rich learning interactions (Sugar and 5 Bonk, 1995; Kerka, 1996) and allows instructors to replace the simple knowledge transfer model of teaching with advanced co nstructivist approaches has enriched online learning and has gradually become the dominant technology in distance education (Rich, 2011). 2.1.2. Virtual learning environments Given that teachers and students lack a physical connection in distance education, their interaction usually occurs solely in a virtual context. In general, for something to be ‘virtual’, its physical components are simulated and social events are modelled in non - physical form, primarily through computer technology (The Oxford English Dictionary, 2010 ). However, in practice, the boundary between virtual and physical is often vague in distance education. Dillenbourg (2000) perceives ‘virtuality’ as more of a “philosophical issue, more complex … [than] the simple difference between computerised and non - computerised elements” (11). He infers that the physical and virtual often co - exist and that there is no need to separate them artificially: an example would be students learning in front of a single screen, each using their own inputting device, which would allow for all the communication to occur in a physical space while their actions would be performed in the virtual world. The use of computerised elements alone does not constitute a virtual learning environment unless individuals interact over learning content (Oliver, 1996; Dillenbourg, 2000). Some authors (Dillenbourg, 2000; Ligorio and van Veen, 2006) emphasise the role of interactions in distance educat ion and regard virtual learning environments as exclusively social spaces that are ‘populated’ and reliant on communication. However, it is also argued that individuals can interact not only with each other but also with content or a mediating interface (M cBrian, Jones and Cheng, 2009). Therefore, although interactions are seemingly inevitable in virtual learning environments, they are often deferred and established implicitly (Henri, 1992) through saving and transferring learning content, which enables vir tual environments to allow not only group but also individual forms of learning. With this in mind, virtual learning environments can be defined as “computer - based learning environments… allowing interactions with other participants, resources, and rep resen tations” (Wilson, 1996: 8). Both asynchronous and synchronous environ ments (Lu, 2011; Martin, Parker and Deale, 2012). While asynchronous instruction 6 does not require teachers and learners to be present in the virtual environment at the same time, synchronous instruction is characterised by richer real - time interactions (Rich, 2011). Virtual learning environments that utilise synchronous instruction ar e capable of emulating multiple features of the traditional classroom in the virtual classroom ’s settings. Based on critical analysis of relevant literature ( A ppendix A) , it is summarised in this paper that the virtual classroom is a type of virtual lear ning environment where the nature, potential efficiency and effectiveness of synchronous interactions closely approaches those inherent in face - to - face settings. Consequently, it is suggested that virtual classrooms ace - to - face and distance environments, allowing for ‘ face - to - face ’ distance learning. 2.2. Key themes in research on synchronous learning in virtual learning environments 2.2.1. Reasons for implementation: pragmatic benefits The potential benefits of synchronous distance learning are widely discussed in the literature. In general, the reasons for the implementation of real - time distance instruction may be pragmatic and educational (Clark and Kwinn, 2007). First, pragmatic benefits, drawn from multiple studies, mostly emphasise the unique practical o p portunities provided by synchronous distance learning compared to face - to - face instruction. Thus, there is a great body of research underlining the capability of synchronous distance learning in providing a variety of disadvantaged students with equal educational opportunities and access to vital courses, which otherwise could not be delivered ( Falck et al., 1997; Mulrine, 2003; Andreson and Rourke, 2005; Rao, 2007; Mountain, 2009; Adewale, Ibam and Alese, 2012 ) . To achieve this, not only can instruction be delivered to individual students, but also anytime and anywhere a connection can be established between distant classes and institutions ( Ligorio and van Veen, 2006; Mountain, 2009 ) . For exam ple, Falck et al. (1997) have studied the project that linked the classrooms of two Finnish schools through videoconferencing, one being located in a geographically isolated village. With the aim of 7 providing s econdary education to students in the rural area, 502 lessons were delivered by one teacher to two groups of children over three years. As Falck et al. summarise , “despite technical and instructional problems virtual classroom has worked” (222) . Ultimately , the children in the rural school received secondary education and achieved academic results as good as those obtained by the children in the other school . Similarly, the availability of synchronous learning ensures that the potential for virtual environm ents to enhance regardless of lo cation (Sembor, 1997; Kontos and Mizell, 2005 ). In particular, this can be achieved through linking remote learning sites as noted abo ve (Ligo rio and Van Veen, 2006) , or directly connecting students online (Patterson, Carrillo and Salinas, 2012) . In addition, given the fact that access to real - time interaction can supplement instruction by learning from primary sources (Merrick, 2005), synchr onous distance learning can be used to replace phy sical field trips to good effect ( Pachnowski, 2002; Pat terson, Carrillo and Salinas, 2012 ). It can also provide students with direct connection to experts, without leaving the learning site (Townes - Young and Ewing, 2005). This promotes context - rich instruction by enabling access to alternate forms and sourc es of knowledge that can facilitate learning ( Richey, 1996; Merrick, 2005; Mountain, 2009 ). A range of organisational outcomes are also inherent in synchronous distance learning. This method reduces both the financial and time - based expenses associated w ith designing, delivering and accessing synchronous instruction. For instance, as demonstrated by Rao’s study (2007), distance courses provided for learners from different Pacific island communities gave them the opportunity to continue higher education wi thout leaving the islands or taking time off work. Along with these benefits, the opportunity to record synchronously delivered lessons allows them to be reused in an asynchronous format (Clark and Kwinn, 2007), specifically for the purpose of reaching st udents who are unable attend the session (Carlson, 2011) . As this section has shown, it is clear that many of the b enefits inherent in synchronous distance learning can also be provided by asynchronous forms of instruction. Nonetheless, the availability of real - time interactions can enrich distance learning and teaching, and provide unique educational opportunities to students. 8 2.2.2. Reasons for implementation: educational effects It can be argued that virtual learning is similar to the traditional form of learning, in that they share th e same theoretical principles (Ally, 2007) and are comprised of the same foundational educational elements (Rich, 2011). An effective virtual learning environment allows for various learning strategies based on different learning theories to be utilised (A lly, 2007). As with face - to - face learning, no single strategy in virtual learning can be considered better than others, unless specific learning goals are taken into consideration (Rich, 2011). Online learning theory supports the notion of theoretical fle xibility and suggests that all three key educational theories – behaviourist, cognitivist and constructivist – can be implemented in virtual learning environments (Ally, 2007). At the same time, synchronous instruction’s distinctive capability to promote effective collaborative learning within diverse contexts is often emphasised . This highlights the openness of virtual classrooms to social constructivist educational approaches. Using technology as the primary means of synchronous communication, students i n virtual learning environments are encouraged to share and construct common knowledge under multiple viewpoints (Ligorio and Van Veen, 2006; Stahl, Koschmann and Suthers, 2006). Learning in such settings often occurs within students’ zone of proximal deve lopment 1 and is thus facilitated through problem solving under the instructor’s guidance “or in collaboration with more cap able peers” (Vygotsky, 1978: of participants allows for communities of learne rs to be established (Salomon, 1998). In comparison to asynchronous forms of virtual learning, interactions in synchronous communication can be more socio - emotional, immediate, and meaningful (Martin, Parker and Deale, 2012). Findings regarding the overa ll cognitive effects of distance forms of learning appear to be consistent, particularly with respect to synchronous instruction. Thus, distance education is considered to be at least as effective as face - to - face instruction ( Greenway and Vanourel, 2006; Y enika - Agbaw, 2010 ), which is in line with research on the synchronous form of distance learning (Mountain, 2009). As synchronous distance learning is accompanied by the range of 1 The zone of proximal development “is the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by adult guidance or in collaboration wit h more capable peers” (Vygotsky, 1978: 33) 9 pragmatic outcomes discussed above, the effect of ‘no significant difference’ may contribute to the consistent level of interest that the topic receives. Real - time interaction in virtual environments has a positive impact on student satisfaction (Cao, Griffin and Bai, 2009). Though cert ain forms of distance learning have been charac terised by students as “tedious, slow or boring” (Falck et al., 1997 : 222), a substantial body of research has fo und that the use of technology such as videoconferencing in distance learning positively influences student affect ( Freeman, 1998; Gerstein, 20 00; Comber et al., 2004 ; Rao, 2007 ) and behaviour (Stuber - McEven et al., 2009). 2.2.3. Contextual richness As a distance form of education, synchronous learning can be delivered regardless of instructors or students’ dispositions and across a variety of contexts. Thus, virtual classrooms can be established across school, local, regional and state settings (Falck et al., 1997), as well Patterson, Carrillo and Salinas, 201 2). In addition to being used solely as a form of instruction, synchronous learning can be enhanced by asynchronous elements (Vess, 2004) or serve as a facilitating or humanising component for comprehensive online courses ( Sawyer 1997; Martin, Parker and Dea le, 2012 ). It is notable that both forms of distance learning can be complemented with face - to - face instruction enabling hybrid, or blended, instruction (Aydin and Yuzer, 2006; Yenika - Agbaw, 2010 ). The synchronous form of distance instruction can be useful in both informal and formal settings, offering unique opportunities to educational institutions (Pachnowski, 2002; Mountain, 2009 ) . Although “the thou ght of gaining ‘formal’ ed ucation in a virtual classroom…[ may sound] not only radical but also unfathomable” (Yenika - Agbaw, 2010: 112) , positive student outcomes are widely indicated by relevant studies. As a result , universities, colleges and even schools have been found to modify their curriculum in order to incorporate distance learning (Ramaswami, 2009) . Finally , the role of distance or blended formal education comes to the fore sp ecifically in virtual schools – state approved or locally accredited institutions offering credit courses using distance learning (Clark, 2001). 10 Real - time distance instruction can be beneficial regardless of the age of students (Mountain, 2009). However, while a substantial body of research discusses the practices of synchronous learning in virtual environments with relation to professional and hig her education (e.g. Yuzer, 2006; Rao, 2007; Beem, 2010; Parker, Grace and Martin, 2010; Carlson, 2011; Kupczynski, Mundy and Maxwell, 2012; Martin, Parker and Deale, 2012 ), little research spans multiple age groups (e.g. Mountain, 2009) or focuses specifically on children’s education (e.g. Falck et al., 1997; Morris, 2005; Mulrine, 2007; Cavanagh, 2009 ). 2.2.4. Challenges for implementation Since technology mediates real - time communication in distance education (Falck et al., 1997) , it i s vital that the technological components are stable when arranging learning in virtual environments. Access ibility and the quality of technology are the primary conditions that determine the extent to which it can be incorporated into educational processes (Graziadei et al., 1997) . As might be expected, technology - related challenges are widely discussed in research, particularly in early studies and those conducted in rural areas or developing countries. For i nstance, Patterson, Carrillo and Salinas (2012) initially intended to utilise live video and au dio feeds to enable discussions between students across countries. However, due to bandwidth limitations in some areas, this approach was found to be ineffective, which resulted in time loss. This consequently forced the researchers to identify alternativ e ways of establishing synchronous interaction. Even when technology is stabilised, certain issues related to the specificity of the tools used in synchronous learning can still arise. For example , when discussing real - time instruction in a distance cou rse that was delivered through videoconferencing software, Carlson (2011) indicated that when the students could simultaneously use their own microphones to talk to the instructor, they frequently talked over one another. At the same time, as Carlson infers, enabling and disabling the microphones when necessary was found to be very time consuming. Similar problems to this have also been encountered in other studies. Falck et al. (1997) , for instance, observed a slow flow of events in childr en’s communication mediated by technology. 11 Synchronous learning is commonly conceived of as being more interactive than asynchronous learning. Nevertheless, the distance between a learner and a physical classroom can still be hard to transcend in synchrono us formats (Falck et al., 1997) . Effective communication tends to depend on the capacity of a medium to transmit non - verbal signals, such as emotions and body language (Yenika - Agbaw, 2010) . The technological restraints addressed earlier make building effective computer - mediated communication one of the biggest challenges in virtual learning environments ( Walther, Anderson and Park, 1994; Morris, 2005; L u, 2011 ) . Researchers have paid much attention to the importance of common digital literacy and to how prepared individual instructors are to deliver synchronous distance learning in virtual environments. Initial barriers can be significant, especially when instructors have “never imagined any other way of teaching besides face - to - face instruction” (Yenika - Agbaw, 2010: 112) . Following from this, teachers require support and training to deliver effective lessons in a synchronous format (Mountain, 2009) . Arguably, the same is true with regard to students, particularly children, although this issue has not been directly researched. those deemed acceptable in the traditional classroom ( Hooper and Rieber, 1995; Conte, 1998; Byrom and Bingham, 2001; Goddard, 2002; Gillies, 2008 ). However, existing research on the subject does not give a comprehensive answer as to what these strategies should be. Instead, the m ajority of studies focus more on the general effects of synchronous distance learning (e.g. Roblyer et al., 2007; McBrien, Jones and Cheng, 2009; Parker and Martin, 20 10 ). In turn, literature concerning strategies for distance instruction is either bound to a narrow context ( e.g. Burns, Burniske and Dimock, 1999; Rao, 2007 ), or merely provide s general recommendations (e.g. ). The universality and applicability of these strategies remains doubtable. There fore, online instructors, especially those dealing in children’s education, are often left to rely on their own experience, which is developed through trial and error . According to Lonie and Andrews (2009), a lack of technical and pedagogical preparedness for teaching in the virtual classroom decrease s the effectiveness of the learning experience for remote students. Some other factors challenging synchronous distance learning that are not addressed directly in the literature are also identifiable. Firstly, distance learning tends to unite groups of students and 12 teachers who are unfamiliar with one another (e.g. Falck et al., 1997), which in synchronously delivered sessions can become a barrier to effective communication, especially in children’s education. Indeed, as Falck et al. infer, familiarity between pupils may enhance the quality of a virtual classroom. Secondly, communication generated through video or audio channels at a distance raises ethical concerns. Even though the potential for a video session to be recorded is considered to be one of its more pos itive aspects (Clark and Kwinn, 2007), the fact that each participant in the virtual classroom is able to make recordings without others’ knowledge calls in to question learners’ and instructors’ privacy. Finally, as extra time in front of the computer is requir ed in the virtual classroom, specific health issues may arise that are not problematic for its face - to - face equivalent (Powers and Mitchell, 1997; National Heart, Lung, an d Blood Institute, 2013). 2.3. The role of interaction 2.3.1. Definitions and char acteristics of interactions The notion of interaction underlies the key themes in research on synchronous instruction i n virtual learning environments . However, despite being addressed by a substantial amount of research ( Moore, 1983; Moore, 1993; Mahesh and Mclsaac, 1999; Powers, Davis and Torrence, 1999; Krieger, 2002; Gorsky and Caspi, 2005; Morris, 2005; Martin, Parker and Deale, 2012), the concept of interaction in distance learning is characterised by the absence of an unambiguous consensus on what i t actually represents or involves. Based on discussions at the centre of relatively early research ( Boyd and Apps, 1980; Herring, 1987; Jonassen, 1988; Wagner, 1994), interaction can be defined as a process involving at least two interconnected events that occur in relation to two or more objects. Wagner (1994) distinguishes interaction from interactivity, suggesting that “interaction functions as an attribute of effective instruction while interactivity functions as an attribute of instructional delivery s ystems” (6). In other words, while interaction addresses processes that occur between objects in an environment, interactivity describes the environment in terms of the presence and nature of interactive events that may occur in it. 13 Depending on the object s involved, Moore ( 1989 ) identified three major types of interactions inherent in learning environments: learner - instructor, learner - learner, and learner - content. In addition to these three major types, Hillman, Willis and Gunawardena (1994) suggested a fourth dimension, termed learner - interface interactions, that they defined as “a process of manipulating tools to accomplish a task” (34). However, while Moore’s classification has become dominant in subsequent research, there is inconsistency in the use of the fourth dimension. In contrast to classifications of interactions based on Moore’s approach, alternatives can also be found in the literature. Researchers also categorise interactions based on different groups of factors, such as explicitness, me diating technologies, or types of activities and events. Overall, an analysis of the literature addressing interaction directly or within certain theoretical frameworks (including transactional distance and social presence ) revealed 65 terms indicative of interactions, which were systematise d within 9 categories ( A ppendix B). 2.3.2. The significance of interactions Interactivity is a key component of successful learning in virtual learning environments ( Chou, 2002; Muirhead and Juwah, 2004 ). Research has i dentified (Kirschner et al., 2004; Yoon and Johnson, 2008) and verified (Wei, 2012) that student performance relies on learning interaction. It has also been found that as long as interactivity is at a high level, it supports deep and meaningful learning ( Anderson, 2003). Interactivity enables students to become active participants in learning and it thus enriches their social exper ience (Townes - Young and Ewing, 2005). Rich interactions enhance “socio - emotional and social processes related to group formation and group dynamics affecting affiliation, impression formation, developing affective relationships, and building social cohesiveness and comm unity” (K . , 2011: 1). In turn, as high interactivity promotes the presence o f social actors, it “can enrich … children’s learning experience and increase their motivation” (Tung and Deng, 2006: 251). Accordingly, when students are not actively engaged in the learning process, they tend to lose interest and become distracted (Fulford and Zhang, 1993). 14 Hence, in can be concluded that rich interaction has a positive influence on student academic achievements, satisfaction and motivation, as well as promoting collaborative learning and facilitating socio - emotional processes. 2.3.3. Physical separation between teacher and student can lead to “a psychological space of potential of instructors and those of the learners ” (Moore and Kearsley, 1996: 200). This space determines transactional distance , which negatively influences the effectiveness of learning (Moore, 1993). According to Moore, t o decrease students’ and teacher’s perce ptions of transactional distance, it is important to optimise dialogue (the extent of communication constructiveness), structure (course organisation and its impact on student engagement), and learner autonomy (level of self - directed learning). Transacti onal distance is a psychological rather than geographical concept, and it exists both in virtual and face - to - face environments (Moore, 1993). Therefore, it can be used to compare the distance is generally perceived as a useful framework for understanding the processes involved in distance learning ( Garrison, 2000; Jung, 2001 ). However, based on a review of six studies that tested Moore’s framework, Gorsky and Caspi (2005) defined Moore ’s theory as tautological and reducible to a single variable of dialogue. As long as Moore (1993) considers dialogue to be a synonym for purposeful and constructive interactions, it can be inferred that interactivity in a learning he level of transactional distance. Apart from transactional distance, the concept of social presence has also been found to directly relate to interaction. Short, Williams and Christie (1976 ) initially identified social presence as the “degree of salience of the other person in a mediated communication and the consequent salience of their interpersonal interactions” (65) . However, as research continues to redefine social presence (Picciano, 2002) by considering it under different theoretical perspectives, a clear and unambiguous definition of the concept is yet to be achieved. At the same time, across various studies , social presence is broadly conceived of as a psychological term addressing individuals’ perceptions of how they feel about interacting with others (Kim , 2011 ). 15 Despite disagreements in definitions, researchers have similar conclusions about the nature and effects of social presence in virtual environments. Studies have indicated the positive influence that social presence has on perceived le arning outcomes (e.g. Gunawardena, 1995; Russo and Benson, 2005; Weinel et al., 2011 ). Social presence has also been found to enhance students’ engagement with learning (Cobb, 2009) and satisfaction ( Gunawardena, 1995; Gunawardena and Zittle, 1997; Richard son and Swan, 2003 ). Moreover, being a facilitator of collaboration ( Cunawardena and Zittle, 1997; Ko, 2012 ), social presence is considered a vehicle for social learning (Tu, 2000). Of special interest for this study is the relationship between social pres ence and interaction. Though this relationship is emphasised across research, its direction appears equivocal. For instance, Wei (2012) suggests that social presence enhances learning interactions in virtual environments. Contrary to this, other studies (e .g. Short, Williams and Christie, 1976; Tu and McIsaac, 2002; Levy and Stockwell, 2006; So and Brush, 2008 ) imply that interaction is a factor in, or indicator of, social presence. These points of view suggest that a high level of interactivity facilitates students’ perceptions of social presence, which in turn increases the extent of their interactions . 2.3.4. Conditions for high interactivity The dominant descriptive feature o f interactive environments is the capacity to transmit both verbal and non - verbal signals between participants ( Daft and Lengel, 1986; Cobb, 2009; Yanika - Agbaw, 2010 ), which enables rich communication ( Short, Williams and Christie, 1976; Daft and Lengel, 1 986). At the same time, according to Gunawardena (1995), even advanced synchronous forms of distance learning create interaction patterns that tend to be different from those occurring in face - to - face environments. Therefore, it can be argued that interact ivity in the virtual classroom does not solely depend on the medium (Gunawardena, 1995); rather it is a complex function of learning and instruction (Wagner, 1994), defined by “a complex interplay of social, instructional, and technological variables” (Rob lyer and Wiencke, 2003: 85). Importantly, interactivity in an environment depends on the quality of interactions while having little connection with their quantity or frequency (Tu and Mclsaac, 2002; Lowenthal, 2010). According to Zhang and Fulford (1994) , quality and usefulness, rather than number and 16 interactivity in virtual environments. Instructors can either enhance or decrease interactivity depending on how efficiently they ma nage communication processes (Roblyer and Wiencke, 2004) and whether they choose appropriate teaching techniques (Gunawardena, 1995). Therefore, high interact ivity in virtual environments can only be achieved providing the communication medium is efficient ly used. In order to utilise asynchronous learning tools, “instructors need to move away from the popular lectur e approach” (Mountain, 2009: 40); this means that they require training in illies, 2008). A range of studies have attempted to determine specific methods to enhance interaction (for instance, Norton, 2001; Palloff and Pratt, 2007; Martin, Parker and Deale, 2012 ). N evertheless, it is arguable that their inferences remain im practi cal due to being either too broad or too context - bound . 2.4. Summary of the literature review This literature review has revealed multiple pragmatic and educational reasons for implementing synchronous distance learning across a variety of learning and s ocial contexts, indicating the importance of virtual environments with real time interaction in education. Nevertheless , synchronous distance learning is accompanied by a range of challenging factors, most of which impose limitations on establishing an eff ective social interplay between individuals in virtual learning environments. The interactivity was found to be the fundamental condition for increasing the educational potential of learning environments, facilitating learning process, and, consequently, increasing student motivation, satisfaction, and attainment. While technology in virtual learning environments provides opportunities for arranging interaction, the instructor still plays a dominant role in establishing a sufficient level of interactivity . However, the existing body of relevant studies fails to provide instructors with thorough guidelines as to how to implement effective strategies in synchronous distance learning. While some research indicates specific principles of good practice, these w ere 17 found to be either vague or contextually narrow and, hence, hard to a pply. Furthermore, the relevant literature focuses predominantly on higher education, making the appropriateness of most strategies for children’s education questionable. Resultantly, research which reveals interac tivity - enhancing strategies for children’s synchronous distance learning and examines the relationships between these strategies and specific contexts is warranted. 18 3. 1 . Research aims and questions Based on the knowledge obtained through the literature search and the gaps that this revealed in the literature, it was decided that this research project should aim to explore which strategies used by teachers in arranging children’s synchronous learning in virtual environments are capable of enhancing interactivity and under what conditions . The study incorporated both theoretical and applied objectives : to extend the theoretical base for further research on synchronous di stance learning , and to provide teachers involved in this form of learning with general guidance applicable to their professional practice. In accordance with the study’s key objectives, two questions drove the research: 1. Regarding synchronous learning in virtual environments, which strategies employed by teachers can best facilitate interactivity? 2. In what ways do specific learning conditions determine the effectiveness of interactivity - enhancing strategies for synchronous learning in virtual environ ments ? 3. 2 . Research strategy and design To answer the research questions, the study first reflected on a diverse array of individual teachers’ experiences and then considered the multiplicity of strategies they utilised in synchronous distance learning. T he project also explored a variety of conditions under which certain strategies have been found to be effective. Furthermore, emergent themes and conditions were correlated and systematised. Ultimately, the research findings were selectively examined bas ed on their validity, transferability, and applicability. Following this, two stages went on to mould the research project ( T able 1 ). The first stage , which aimed to develop theoretical propositions from data and understand the relationships between facts, adhered to an inductive strategy which Blaikie (2000) defines as particularly 19 valuable in pursuing exploratory objectives and answering ‘what’ quest ions. According to Blaikie, inductive research starts with data accumulation and leads to “making generalisations about the patterns or regularities that exist in the data obtained” (103). To make theoretical generalisations in this study, it was necessary to accumulate data from multiple teachers’ experiences, reveal any common strategies they used, and to correlate these strategies with the variety of conditions under which they had proven effective. In light of this, a cross - sectional, or social survey d esign was employed, which established a focus on the analysis of a variety of cases and the relationships between them ( Blaikie, 2000; Bryman, 2008 ). Table 1 – S tages of the research project Stage Aim Design Strategy / Data Sampling Data collection 1 Theory generation Cross - sectional (social survey) Inductive / Qualitative Maximum variation, multiple cases Questionnaire 2 Theory verification Quasi - experimental Deductive / Qualitative Maximum variation, one case Questionnaire, observation, interviews According to Breakwell (2000), in the early inductive phase of research, cross - sectional designs benefit from qualitative data treatment. In this study, gathering qualitative data from multiple teachers was vital for disclosing as many strategies as possi ble without limiting the respondents with pre - specified categories (Patton, 2004). Furthermore, this approach allowed rich descriptive information to be obtained about unique contexts where specific strategies had been spotted. In order to gather rich qual itative data, a self - completion questionnaire was chosen as the primary instrument for data collection. This approach was adopted for a number of reasons. First, it allowed data obtained from different participants’ perspectives to be aggregated ( Patton, 2 004; Bryman, 2008 ), which consequently informed the study about the (Marshall and Rossman, 2006). Secondly, by collecting personal, factual data based on a pre - determin the respondents’ experiences. Finally, this approach was beneficial as it reached a sufficiently large number of participants, thus enhancing ultimate generalisations, for it is known that the 20 “plausibility of any general law is proportional to the number of instances of it that have been observed” (Harre, 1972: 42, in Blaikie, 2000: 103). The questionnaire was designed to employ both closed and open - ended questions in order to increase the amount of collected data. This, however, raised the issue of a reasonable sample’s size and composition , which is common in research directed towards theory development (Blaikie, 2000). Since the study was focused on individuals’ exp eriences as bounded cases, it was important to justifiably maximise the number of participants with experiences acquired in unique contexts. At the same time, in order to avoid unmanageable data redundancy (Lincoln and Guba, 1985), the number of cases had to be limited “based on expected reasonable coverage of the phenomenon given the purpose of the study” (Patton, 2004: 246). cases that could comprehensively illustra te the studied process of synchronous dis tance learning (Denzin and Lincoln 2000; Silverman, 2005 ). In particular, the maximum variation logic of purposive sampling was followed, as this approach reveals “central themes which cut across a great deal of variation” (Ritchie and Lewis, 2003: 79). Necessary variation was variety of settings where synchronous distance learning typically occurs (Patton, 200 4). These factors were then utilised to distinguish and select unique cases that met the inclusion criteria. The first, inductive stage of the study was designed to produce theoretical propositions able to “provide clear enough categories and hypotheses so that crucial ones can be verified” (Glaser and Strauss, 1967: 3). Taking into account that knowledge obtained via inductive strategies is considered subject to further examination (Blaikie, 2000), the s econd stage of this study adopted a deductive logical approach in order to examine the theoretical propositions that were produced (Kelle, 1995). According to Blaikie (2000), a deductive study begins with the proposal and testing of hypotheses, which are then matched with the data collected through observations or experiments. With this in mind, it was first hypothesised that the strategies revealed by the above approach could increase interactivity in virtual learning environments, provided they were appl ied within similar contexts to those where they had initially been found effective. To test this proposition, it was necessary to examine the strategies with in - depth qualitative analysis of each case in which a strategy had been identified. In light of th is, a crucial - case study appeared to be the most appropriate design, as it is capable of challenging 21 hypotheses by finding and analysing one or a few cases that most closely fit a theory (Eckstein, 1975). As Yin (1989 : 38) puts it, crucial - case studies ai m to support hypotheses by analytic generalisation “in which a previously developed theory serves as a template to compare empirical studies”. Yin suggests that provided at least two cases support the same theory, replication can be justifiably claimed. Si nce the conclusions made at the first stage of this research were supported by at least one case, obtaining confirmation in just one additional case would sufficiently increase the validity of the study’s results. However, finding an appropriate crucial - ca se appeared to be impossible due to the fact that this theory, which needed verification, had been developed within the same project. To cope with this issue, elements of experimental design were utilised to emulate a crucial - case study approach. Experim ental design is considered especially useful in qualitative studies when there is a need to reach confidence in the validity of casual findings (Bryman, 2008). Experiments involve testing cause - effect relationships through collecting evidence that demonstr ates the influence of one variable on another (Breakwell, Hammond and Fife - Schaw, 2000). At the second stage of this study, the influence of specific strategies (dependent variables or causes) on the interactivity of learning in a virtual environment (in de pendent variable or effect) was examined. The need to examine multiple combinations of different causes indicated the appropriateness of a fac torial experimental design and that multiple experimental groups needed to be established (Blaikie, 2000). Howev er, a qualitative approach to data processing allowed for more valuable data to be obtained in a single - group design which, despite being uncommon for quantitative research, was found to be particularly useful in this study. Although approaching only one g roup was beneficial in terms of establishing in - depth qualitative analysis, it did not allow for all the strategies found at the first stage of this study to be examined. In order to increase the number of strategies tested, a purposive sampling strategy was used. Specifically, maximum variation logic was followed: out of all the available cases, only those whose unique characteristics were relevant to the widest possible range of the strategies were selected . Consequently, since participants were not rand omly selected and only one group was used, the design of the second stage of this study should be considered as quasi - experimental, rather than true - experimental (Robson, 2002). 22 Once a case was selected for the experimental study, it was necessary to deter mine which of the strategies appropriate to this case had not been used in the participants’ group before and, therefore, could be examined in terms of its effects on the experimental group. To do so, prior to the intervention session, a short checklist w and a systematic observation of a recent distance learning session from the participants’ group was conducted. Only strategies that were neither indicated by the teacher nor noted in the observation were advised to be implemented in the experimental stage. The observation procedure was also applied to the intervention session in order to detect which of these strategies had been utilised and could be accountable for changes in the environment’s level of interacti vity. Qualitative methods of data gathering made it possible to follow a post - test only approach, which revealed the effects caused by the implementation of new strategies in the virtual learning environment. In order to gain a sufficient amount of data wh ilst only approaching participants once, a focus was placed on the teacher and students’ perceptions of any changes that happened in the environment during the intervention session. This made interviews a particularly appropriate instrument of data collec tion: according to Patton (2004), as a method of data gathering, interviews enable participants to describe perceived changes in the environment without being tied or cued by standardised categories. The interviews in this study had a semi - structured design and were administered to the teacher and children after the experimental session finished. The children were interviewed in a group in order to encourage rich discussion and to promote the expression of different views with respect to the changes that occurred (Patton, 2004) through the establishment of a supportive environment in a more natural atmosphere (Marshall and Rossman, 2004). 3. 3 . Instruments of data collection 3. 3 .1. Questionnaires At the first stag e of this study, a self - completion questionnaire was used to gather data (A ppendix C) . The questionnaire consisted of two parts. The first, context - related part - ended questions retrieving background information about 23 t he contexts in which the respondents had gained their experiences of teaching in virtual environments with synchronous modes of learning. The quantity and composition of these questions were prompted by examples of virtual learning environments found in re levant literature. The context - related questions were intended to enhance the comparability of the data retrieved from the participants who completed the qu estionnaire (Breakwell, Hammond and Fife - Schaw, 2000). The first part of the questionnaire was cond ucted within sampling procedures, so it was sent out prior to the subsequent questions. The second part of the questionnaire contained three questions, all of which were open - ended and which therefore enabled respondents to gi ve answers “in their own terms …[ in order to] allow u nusual responses to be derived…[ that could be] useful for exploring new areas” (Bryman, 2012: 247). One question was used to gather additional, detailed information about the settings and conditions of the respondent’s work in virtua l learning environments. The other two were designed to obtain data about strategies that teachers perceived of as enhancing the interactivity of virtual learning environments. However, pilot results indicated that the term interactivity was likely to be m isinterpreted by the respondents, so the strategy - related questions were redesigned to ask the teachers about general methods which they found to contribute to any aspects of learning in virtual environments. The researcher, in turn, had to filter the res ponses during data analysis to determine those strategies that were relevant to interactivity. 3. 3 .2. Checklist and observation In order to collect data from teachers regarding the strategies that had been followed in the participant’s academic group prio r to the experimental session, a checklist was used (A ppendix D) . This was designed in the form of a questionnaire, with each item standing for one specific strategy. The list of strategies was based on the findings of the first stage of the study. Despi te being important for further enquiry, the data drawn from the checklist had limited reliability as it was based on individual, subjective p erspectives (Breakwell, Hammond and Fife - Schaw, 2000). In order to maximise the degree of accuracy in determining s trategies not previously applied within the participant’s learning group, each teacher’s response was 24 correlated with an observation of one recent regular learning session conducted in the intervention group. According to Bryman (2008) , systematic observa tions can be helpful in r ecognising teaching styles and understan ding what actually happens in lessons . Given that the themes for the observation had been identified and described beforehand, the observation protocol was also designed in the form of a checklist ( A ppendix E ). This allowed for “the existence or non - existence of the behaviours” to be noted (Breakwell, Hammond and Fife - Schaw, 2000: 235). The experimental session was observed and analysed, based on its screen recording. This enabled more flexibility in the observation procedure and allowed for analysis at a level of reliability and detail not possible in a direct observation (Breakwell, Hammond and Fife - Schaw, 2000). Once the observation was completed, the protocol was matched with the tea cher’s checklist: if either the researcher or the teacher detected a strategy, the session was considered to have been previously used in the environment and was not considered to be a factor that could be accountable for changes in the level of interact ivity. Afterwards, the observation was replicated in the intervention session, in order to reveal the range of strategies that had been utilised by the teacher. 3. 3 .3. Interviews According to Fontana and Frey (1994: 361), the “understanding of an individ ual or a group perspective” can be particularly aided by the use of interviews. Wit h this in mind, two interviews – one with the teacher and one with the group of children – were conducted after the intervention session, in order to determine the extent t o which the new strategies affected participants’ perceived level of interactivity in the virtual learning environment. The interview with the teacher was also intended to garner her understanding of the specific effects of each new strategy that she had a pplied in the session. A partially - structured interview design was chosen to establish a sufficiently focused yet in - depth discussion: only a brief list of themes guided the interviewer, ensuring that all key points were covered ( Appendix F ). Such an appr oach proved particularly efficient in the children’s group interview: first, it allowed the interviewer to establish a more natural and comfortable atmosphere for discussion (Marshall and Rossman, 2004 ) ; besides this, maintaining focused 25 interactions kept responses short, which maximised the number of information - r ich answers (Breakwell, Hammond and Fife - Schaw, 2000). Both interviews were audiotaped and transcribed before analysis. The teacher’s interview was piloted and the children’s interview was discuss ed with their class teacher prior to being administered. Based on the results of piloting procedures, minor changes were made to the sequence of addressed topics. 3. 4 . Sampling and data gathering For the purposes of the first stage of the study, the sampl e population was drawn by means of a purposeful sampling strategy from a commercial online database of schoolteachers (N=64,502), representing predominantly Eastern European countries (98%). Firstly, an electronic message was sent out with a description o f the study, requesting teachers’ voluntary informed consent to participate in the survey and providing a link to the contextual part of the teacher questionnaire. The contextual questions identified the teachers who had experience of working in virtual en criteria), and determined the contextual conditions u nder which they had gain ed this experience. Overall, 743 teachers (1% of the sample population) met the inclusion criteria and g ave their consent to participate in the survey. In order to establish a more in - depth investigation while still maintaining across - cases variation, the number of participants was minimised. This was achieved by only including unique cases in the final samp le (Patton, 2004) which were in turn identified through analysis of the answers to the contextual questions. When the analysis revealed two contextually identical cases, the teacher who reported longer instructional experience was chosen for the final sam ple. Ultimately, the final sample encompassed 52 participants, of which 48 (Ap pendix G) completed the follow - up experiential part of the questionnaire. This resulted in a response rate of 92%; replacements with the same follow - up questionnaire. Alth ough small samples are common in qualitative re search (Miles and Huberman, 1994; Ritchie and Lewis, 2003 ), a large number of participants in a qualitative study can be particularly helpful to explore a phenomenon, pr ovided the study’s research aims are met and that this approach can be reconciled with the time and resources available (Patton, 2004). 26 In this study, a reasonably large quantity of participants was considered essential to reveal the variety of strategies used in synchronous distance learning a nd, thus, to sufficiently saturate the data. The specificity of the sample at the first stage of the study was balanced by the - depth analysis being deliberately moved from single c ases to common themes within the entire data set . Unlike the first stage of this research project, the second stage was aimed at in - depth analysis of single rather than multiple cases. Since a small sample size was accompanied by the goal of testing the mu ltiplicity of hypotheses, a purposive sampling strategy was found to be beneficial, as this approach aims to access the cases where the processes being explored are most likely to occur (Denzin and Lincoln, 2000). To select an information - rich sample that could contribute to this study, the sampling process followed two steps and employed a combination of strategies. Firstly, the researcher employed a snowball sampling approach by contacting a range of head teachers using email addressed published on school websites and asking them to recommend teachers that they knew to have practiced instruction in virtual environments with synchronous forms of learning over a prolonged period. Such a strategy allowed for the accumulation of information - rich and accessible cases that fitted with the purposes of the study (Patton, 2004). Secondly, to examine as many theoretical propositions as possible, maximum variation sampling was employed: out of 24 available cases, 1 was selected the learning conditions of which were re levant to the greatest number of strategies under examination . Overall, 13 of 154 strategies (20%) were found to be relevant to the chosen case . Ultimately, a group of nine participants represented the final sample: a female Bel arusian language teacher age d 27 , and her 8 students aged 10 to 12 ( Table 2 ). The experimental study was conducted in a school in Minsk, Belarus, after voluntary informed consent was obtained from the head teacher, participating teacher, children and their parents. In advance of the session was videotaped and observed. Following the intervention session, the interview was conducted with the teacher, while the children were interviewed the fo llowing day. The intervention session was screen recorded for the purposes of further observation. 27 Table 2 – Participants of the experimental stage Participant Gender Age Data collection Teacher (2T1) F 27 Questionnaire, Interview Student 1 (2S1) F 10 Group interview Student 2 (2S2) F 12 Student 3 (2S3) F 11 Student 4 (2S4) M 10 Student 5 (2S5) M 12 Student 6 (2S6) M 11 Student 7 (2S7) M 11 Student 8 (2S8) M 12 3. 5 . Data analysis Analysis of the data gathered at the first stage of this study was initiated by coding it, based on a pre - specified set of descriptive categories. According to Miles and Huberman (1994), the use of descriptive codes allows segments of data to be summarised, while the use of a pre - defined coding framework enables the researcher to tie data with research questions and establish grounds for further cross - case analysis. In light of this, three master codes were originally identified, namely ‘context’, ‘strategy’, and ‘interaction’. During analysis, the first two codes were expanded upon with descriptive sub - codes that were formed by the growing body of data (Punch, 2009). In contrast, the ‘interaction’ item was kept constant in order to unambiguously identify the pieces of data related to the interactivity con cept; it consisted of 6 5 sub - codes, standing for interactivity indicators that had emerged from the literature analysis (Appendix B). Ultimately, the descriptive, first - level coding allowed contextual characteristics and interactivity - related strategies in herent in each particular case to be identified. Furthermore, this coding device promoted subsequent cross - case analysis through systemising data from different cases within a unified scheme of categories. At the next level of coding, the data assigned to each of the categories were analysed and broken down into smaller, more meaningful units (Punch, 2009). This process can be identified as the pattern (Miles and Huberman, 1994), inferential (Punch, 2009), or analytical coding 28 phase (Richards, 2009). Findin g patterns in data was specifically useful in this study due to the large number of cases involved (Miles and Huberman, 1994): specifically, through a cross - case data review, common patterns were found which described the typical strategies used by teacher s and which distinguished the characteristics of virtual learning environments where these strategies had proven effective. To guide the analysis of correlations between the disclosed strategies and contexts of virtual learning environments, a variable - by - variable matrix was constructed. Miles and Huberman (1994) infer that variable - by - variable analytical displays allow variable - oriented and case - oriented strategies to be combined. Thus, utilising this type of analytical tool in the present study enabled t he researcher to overview cross - case commonalities while keeping data linked was recursively analysed by means of multiple strategies : clustering, variable par titioning, and factoring (Miles and Huberman, 1994) . Data collected at the second stage of the study from the teacher’s and children's interviews were combined and simultaneously coded with a pre - specified set of categories. These categories were identified as ‘effect’, ‘interaction’, and ‘strategy’. The ‘ef fect’ category was used to identify changes caused by the implementation of new strategies in the virtual learning environment; this category was extended with new thematic sub - codes during the review of the transcripts. The ‘interaction’ category had the same structure as it did in the first stage of the study, containing a range of pre - defined sub - codes designed to extract data relevant to the concept of interactivity. The ‘strategy’ category was also pre - specified and was kept constant during the anal ysis; it was used to distinguish data linked to specific strategies. To facilitate the analysis of cross - category data relationships, an effect matrix was designed. According to Miles and Huberman (1994: 137), effect matrices are capable of indicating "wh at changes a particular treatment brought about in its target population" by displaying data constructed matrix, the variety of strategies stood for the dependent vari ables and established the rows of the matrix, while the columns were used to indicate outcomes that were summarised as ‘positive’, 'no effect', and 'negative’. 29 Apart from the methods described above, memoing was used throughout the analysis as llowing the analysis to: conceptualise empirical data; refine and expand codes; produce key categories and describe those categories’ relationships; and shift towards a more comprehensive understanding of data (Miles and Huberman, 1994). 3. 6 . Quality of findings 3.6.1. Reliability Throughout the study, measures were taken to ensure the reliability of data and findings. The initial choice of data collection strategies were with the research aim and questions. Efforts were made to ensure that the dependability of the utilised methods was met: the structure of the observation protocol and the teacher’s checklist were coherent with previous research findings drawn from the li terature analysis; the questionnaire and the teacher’s interview were piloted before administration, and the children’s interview had a preliminary stage which was reviewed and refined by their teacher. The transcripts of the interviews were revised by an external assistant, which maximised their completeness and precision ( Silverman, 2000 ; Gibbs, 2007). The coding of the collected data was crosschecked with another coder to reach an ‘inter - coder agreement’ (Creswell, 2009); after clarification of disagree ments in coding, the inter - coder reliability was calculated to be 92%, using Miles and Huberman’s (1994) formula. The data was partly check - coded by the researcher to evaluate the internal consistency of coding, which reached a level of 94%. Both intra an d inter - coder agreements succeeded the recommended minimum level of 90% (Miles and Huberman, 1994). 3. 6 .2. Validity and generalisation Triangulation was used as the key strategy to ensure internal validity and increase the findings’ credibility ( Patton, 2 000; Creswell, 2009 ). According to Miles and Huberman (1994), the validity of findings increases when they are confirmed by several independent sources of data. Silverman (2000) emphasises that in order to maximise validity, it is important to not only try 30 and confirm findings, but also attempt to test and refute them by using multiple data sources . In his paper, Silverman also questions the appropriateness of triangulation as a strategy for es he suggests appear to imply similar logic to that of triangulation. Creswell (2009) argues that in qualitative research, data can be triangulated when it is collected either from multiple participants’ perspectives or by means of different methods of da ta collection. Analogically, Denzin (1970) distinguished two forms of triangulation – within - method and between - – both of which were implied in this study. The majority of the findings in this study emerged from analysing data that was retrieved fro m several sources. The questionnaire contained at least two different questions addressing the same phenomenon, and the internal consistency of answers was crosschecked for each case (Patton, 2000). Most of the themes that emerged from the questionnaire re sponses reflected on the perspectives of several respondents and, therefore, added to their validity (Creswell, 2009). Determining common patterns across participants during data analysis helped to identify deviant cases and allowed further analysis to con firm or refute findings (Silverman, 2010); this entailed the refinement of a number of conclusions that had been made beforehand. The findings based on the questionnaire data were further verified by the field experiment which also employed a set of triangulated methods: the teacher’s and children’s interviews were used to collect data on the same phenomenon, and the teacher’s response to the checklist was validated by the results of the observation. Care was also taken to safeguard the external valid ity of findings, a process also referred to in qualitative research as transferability, theoretical validity (Maxwell, 1992), or generalizability (Miles and Huberman, 1994). Although findings in qualitative studies cannot be generalised in the probabilisti and be made generalizable to a broader theory (Yin, 2003). In this study, external validity was s. Thus, cross - case analysis undertaken at the first stage of the research project provided grounds for the transferability of findings across similar contexts (Miles and Huberman, 1994). The variation of these contexts was maximised through adherence to p urposive sampling procedures. Further to this, the characteristics of sample cases where specific themes arose were sufficiently reported (Punch, 2009). In the second stage of the study, the theoretical propositions produced by the first stage were analyse d by projecting them on to alternative cases , constituting what 31 Yin (1989) termed ‘analytic generalisation’. Along with these approaches, the field experiment examined the applicability, or pragmatic validity, of findings by applying and challenging them, rather than looking at findings in similar contexts (Kvale, 1989) . 3. 7 . 3. 7 .1. This study obtained approval from the University of Oxford Central University Research collection (Appendix H ). Once permission for the project was granted, the accepted methodology was strictly followed at all stages of the study. In addition to following CUREC protocols, the researcher ensured that the study was consistent with the Brit ish Educational Research Association’s Ethical Guidance for Educational Research (BERA, 2011) and the Social Research Association’s Ethical Guidelines (SRA, 2003). 3. 7 .2. Voluntary informed consent Since the study required access to a school selected by the researcher, it was essential to gain and maintain the consent of the school’s head teacher throughout the research process. In light explanation of the study to ensur e that consent was an informed choice. The head teacher was Once a teacher and group of children were selected to take part in the study, voluntary informed consent was also obtained from participants to ensure that they understood what was being asked of them and agreed to participate without duress (BERA, 2011). Considering that the children involved were regarded as ‘people whose ability to give free and informed consent is in quest ion’ (BPS, 2010), informed consent had to be sought on their behalf from parents or guardians (BERA, 2011). Therefore, the teacher, parents, and guardians were provided with y’s aims, participants’ role in the study, data collection and processing procedures, confidentiality and 32 anonymity guarantees, the voluntary nature of participation, and the procedure for opting - out ( SRA, 2003; Bryman, 2008; CUREC, 200 9, 2010 ). Although formal consent was obtained from parents, the children were also informed of their right to withdraw at any time with no adverse consequences. The children’s assent to participate was continuously assessed during data collection through sensitive attention to their verbal and non - verbal signals (BPS, 2010). Prior to starting data collection, the children received a leaflet providing key information about the study and explaining their role and rights. Hence, voluntary informed consent was obtained from the children “by means appropriate to their age and competence level” (BPS, 2010: 16). Regarding the online questionnaire, the responding teachers were provided with an online information sheet, attached to the email containing the link to the questionnaire fo rm. Before submitting the form, the teachers had to tick a checkbox to confirm their informed and voluntary consent to participate. 3. 7 .3. Participant respect and welfare Throughout the study, the researcher prioritised participants’ welfare, aiming to prevent any possible intrusion, stress or distress, physical or psychological discomfort, or any other harm ( SRA, 2004; Bryman, 2008 ). Study - related activities and meetings were scheduled at a time and place convenient for the participants, who were treate d “fairly, sensitively, with dignity, and within an ethic of respect” (BERA, 2011: 5). Data collection methods excluded any deception or touching on sensitive information. Given the cross - national, multilingual context of the study, verbal and written inte ractions with the participants were held in the language of their preference. The researcher took special care to protect the children’s interests (SRA, 2004), conducting the study in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Chil d (BERA, 2011). The children were interviewed in groups to minimise any possible psychological discomfort. No tests were utilised in the study, and the children’s regular academic work was not disrupted. The researcher maintained a professional and sensiti ve attitude to the children and their activities at all times. 33 3. 7 .4. Treatment of data The researcher treated participants’ data confidentially and anonymously (BERA, 2011). In accordance with the Data Protection Act (1998), only relevant and adequate personal information was collected by the methods described above, which was then kept up - to - date and processed according to the researcher’s rights. The data subjects were informed about, and provided with the right to a ccess and alter, their personal information upon request or to object to it being stored or processed (SRA, 2004). To ensure privacy, unique codes were used instead of the participants’ names to label data. All the data were fairly and lawfully processed, and no participant was made identifiable in the research summary (Bryman, 2008), neither directly nor by means of ‘deductive disclosure’ (Tracy, 2010: 847). Research data were securely stored and made available only to the researcher a nd his supervisor (BE RA, 2011). The list matching participant codes with the names of subjects was located separately from other research materials (SRA, 2004). No hard copies of the data were kept, and all the electronic files were encrypted and stored in a computer with lock ed access. Once the data were no longer necessary for the purposes of this study, they were destroyed. 34 4. Findings 4.1. Data variation To obtain the information - rich data necessary for determining strategies for increasing the interactivity of synchronous learning in virtual environments, it was vital to achieve variation in the characteristics of the survey’s cases. Th is variation was established by means of a purposive sampling strategy: the maximum number of unique cases was selected from those availa ble. Characteristics of the cases were primarily drawn from the teachers’ answers to close - ended questions addressing the contexts in which they had gained their experience of working in virtual environments with a synchronous mode of instruction. Minor a mendments to the description of 14 (29%) cases were made based on the teachers’ detailed narrative s of their work. The comparative characteristics of all 48 survey cases are presented in Appendix G . The sampling strategy allowed for saturated data to be collected and analysed. As a result, with a single case indicating 2 to 26 single strategies, overall, 154 interactivity - related strategies were identified in this study. Out of these, 145 strategies (94%) came from at least two cases, which allowed for the within - a few respondents (AT08, AT13, AT24, AT32, AT35, AT 41) stated that they used no specific strategies in online work. Nevertheless, the subsequent description of their approaches led to the identification of a range of interactivity - related strategies with the exemption of case AT41. For example, teacher AT1 3 began with stating: Well, I would not say I use any specific strategies. I just try to do only what works best for me. (AT13) However, further on she reported: I found it specifically important to introduce short (not too long) breaks during sessions as they prevent tiredness and stimulate children’s engagement in what is happening in the classroom. (AT13) 35 At the same time, not all teachers provided enough data from which interactivity - related strategies could be identified (AT19, AT41). In two cases (AT4 2, AT47), the teachers gave no descriptions of their approaches to teaching in the virtual learning environment whatsoever. 4.2. Issues surrounding interactivity 4.2.1. Identifying interactive events ng discovered and the interactivity of synchronous learning in a virtual environment, the chart of interactive events’ characteristics produced in the literature review was used. A strategy was identified as interactivity - related provided it had a connecti on with at least one item in one or more sections of the chart. This allowed interactivity - related strategies to be determined from the whole range of instructional … peer - evaluation is defi nitely a good way to make children participate in discussing Although the teacher did not explicitly consider peer - evaluation to be an interactional strategy, the indicated effec ts were found to be connected to interactivity. This was due to their connection with one indicator of interactivity (connectedness), two characteristics of interactive events (learner - learner direction and visual or audio channels), and two types of interactive actions (evaluation procedure, commenting and peer - evaluation activities). It was also found that some strategies may have an implicit, delayed effect on interactivity. For instance, teacher AT18 stated: I can deliver far less information when teaching online, so it is crucial for me to properly estimate how much I can do in one session. Otherwise, you easily run out of time and often have to rush from one activity to another or jus t skip some part of the lesson … [Rushing] interferes with th e initial plans and changes the focus from managing online learning to dealing with time and organisational issues. (AT18) According to this statement, whilst an objective assessment of the amount of content that can be delivered in one session does not directly increase the interactivity of learning; 36 not following this strategy can ultimately break the lesson’s structure, decrease the level of the instructor’s engagement, and consequently entail a loss of control over the interactive processes. Due to the aforementioned issues, the majority of strategies indicated by the survey’s respondents were found to have at the very least, an implicit influence on interactivity, which explains the relatively large number of strategies ultimately found. 4.2.2. Ty pes of interactions by directions In projecting data collected on the chart of interactive events’ characteristics, no evidence of interactions occurring in the learner - interface direction was found. The teachers do not seem to perceive a technological med ium itself as a source or target of interactive events; instead, they view the technological element of virtual environments as a mediator for establishing interaction between the participants and the content: Enabling text chat is usually a good idea. It enables discussions to continue in those moments when the connection’s quality suddenly weakens, limiti ng video or audio accessibility …If children have access to text chat most of the time, they can ask for clarification, as well as report on any technical problems if they arise. (AT18) Besides, contrary to the reviewed literature, some teachers indicated that not only learners but also instructors take part in interacting with the content: I try to plan sessions flexibly and think about alternative scenari os for each session. Depending on how well students deal with the materials and activities, I modify the sequence of the lesson’s activities or the composition of its content . (AT25) A few respondents also indicated that pieces of content are capable of i nteracting as well: [S]o sometimes, I create quizzes using PowerPoint and set the presentation to show students specific web pages with some media content, depending on the kids’ answers. (AT06) It was found that interactive events may occur between more t han two subjects: Developing an online discussion is definitely much easier with one student… and it is even more complex when there is more than one instructor involved. (AT23) I find it necessary to minimise the amount of content covered and tools used si multaneously in either individual or group work. (AT18) 37 Generally, teachers tend to perceive a technological medium as an analogue or substitute for the traditional classroom medium: Technology enables me to emulate the standard classroom and establish learning activities that are familiar to the children. (AT14) relying on my experience in the traditional classroom. When the connection is good and stable … there is actua lly no big difference [between traditional and virtual teaching] . (AT15) Hence, in accordance with the view of the survey’s respondents, it can be summarised that interactions in learning environments occur between a varied number of learners, instructors, and pieces of content in any direction through a mediating interface, such as the virtual or traditional classroom (Figure 1 ). This advancement led to an alteration of the list of items in the chart of interactive events’ characteristics: specifically, th e items in the category of interaction directions were changed to Learner ↔ Content, Learner ↔ Instructor, Learner ↔ Learner, Instructor ↔ Content, Instructor ↔ Instructor , and Content ↔ Content . As long as the interactivity of learning environments was de termined to be dependent on the use of a medium, for a disclosed strategy to be regarded as interactivity - related, enhancing the quality of that medium or increasing the efficiency of its use were considered sufficient . Figure 1 – A directional pyramid of interactions in the learning environment L – learner(s) I – instructor(s) C – piece(s) of content M – medium L I C M 38 4.2.3. The synchronicity of interactive events Analysis of the teachers’ descriptions of their practices led to the assumption that a chain of inter active events should not necessarily be considered as being either a synchronous or asynchronous type. Rather, interactive events can dynamically vary between synchronous and asynchronous formats. Therefore, the boundary between the synchronous and asynchr onous is often vague, and interactions of contrasting types may occur in a parallel way s on different levels of a discussion. For example, teacher AT39 explained: When explaining something new, I encourage my students to text their questions. First of all, it precludes possible disruptions. Doing this, I try to combine similar questions and answer these at once, which also saves some time for the session. Although my answers become delayed in this case, I find this approach helpful in keeping the overall di scussion in the virtual class more organised. (AT39) As follows, one strategy may have effects on both synchronous and asynchronous interactions in the same environment. In light of this, in looking for interactive - related strategies, it was deemed reasona ble to assess their ultimate interactive effects, rather than local or temporary influences. 4.2.4. Increasing interactivity: strategies versus conditions On being asked about ways of increasing the effectiveness of learning in virtual environments, not only did teachers suggest specific strategies but they also demonstrated a preference for conditions is not always clear - cut, as both are determinants of the environment’s interactivity and can be often described in similar terms. The principal difference, though, is that strategies are actions a teacher can deliberately choose, while conditi ons are the initial, pre - existing characteristics of an environment. Once a strategy is identified and examined, it can point to relevant learning conditions, and vice versa. For instance, based on the survey’s responses, it was found that minimising the number of st udents in the virtual class can lead to an increase in the interactivity of learning (AT01, AT02, AT08, AT13, AT18, AT25, AT36, AT38). This strategy, in turn, implies that working in small classes is potentially more interactive than working in large ones. In cases where a teacher does not have the opportunity to change the composition of the class, 39 the number of students can be considered as one of the initial learning conditions. Although in these cases the potential level of interactivity still depends on the pre - specified class size, the teacher has no direct control over this factor. Conditions and strategies can have mutual connections, and it is sensible to analyse pre - existing learning conditions when choosing which strategies to app ly in the virtual environment. Thus, not all teachers defined a large class size as limiting the level of interactivity. From a few of the responses (AT14, AT24, AT32), it followed that large classes can actually be more interactive than small ones under s pecific complementary learning conditions, such as a high quality network connection (AT32). Similarly, some strategies were found to work better under specific learning conditions, thusly revealing the interactivit y potential of these conditions . For inst ance, splitting students into small groups was found to be particularly effective in large - sized classes (AT13, AT14, AT25, AT40). In this study, each strategy that emerged from the survey’s responses was analysed for its relevance to learning conditions common to the cases where it had been found. Appendix I contains the list of all revealed strategies and indicates relevant and limit ing learning conditions . The table also provides links from all the strategies to the cases from which they have emerged. The list of strategies is ordered according to the number of evidencing cases. 4.3. Strategies for increasing interactivity Ultimately, 154 strategies were identified from the survey’s responses. These were split into four logical categories: preparation and training, structure and management, interplay and communication, and evaluation. 4.3.1. Preparation and training Forty - one of the discovere d strategies were characterised as preparatory. Being applied prior to learning sessions, they have a deferred influence on the interactivity of synchronous learning in a virtual environment. 40 Part of these strategies is associated with a proper configuration of the medium and network connection. Teacher AT08 addressed this issue in detail: You do not want to con ng on in the classroom) . T his is why you need to be aware of technical conditions and the limitations of your students before the lesson begi ns. It enables you to set the software and quality of d ata more or less accurately… S of a single student who has lower connection. (AT08) These assertions alongside other participants’ opi nions suggest that in order to prevent unexpected disruptions in the course of the actual session, the environment’s configuration related to the signal transition of the learning environment instruments should be set up and tested in advance (AT08, AT17, AT25). In determining the appropriate level of data quality, it is logical to refer to the characteristics and capabilities of the least technologically advanced connection in the group should set the bar for the class (AT17, AT32). As well as being dependant on a strong and stable connection, the interactivity of synchronous distance learning relies on the quality of the virtual environment’s graphical , audio, a nd video features. The teachers indicated that avoiding small details or patterns on the screen enhances the understanding of content (AT09, AT28). The implementation of a large screen may have the same effect, and it also positively influences the interac tivity of interplay between learners and instructors (AT01, AT20, AT22, AT33). Apart from this, while customising the theme of the interface according to the subject or topic may facilitate students’ motivation and participation (AT21), designs with destru ctive elements should be avoided as they conduce the loss of students’ attention and involvement (AT30). Overall, as eight of the respondents indicated, there is a need for the interface design to be accessible and usable by all members of the virtual clas sroom, including guests or parents who may assist the children. A clear, intuitive learning interface was reported to increase learners’ involvement and support the smooth running of the session, particularly for small children (AT13, AT26). When audio is the key channel of interactions in the virtual learning environment, the quality of sounds must be prioritised and maximised in order to enhance the clarity of the information being transmitted (AT18, AT21, AT30). Apart from using quality aud io recording and 41 producing devices (AT06, AT39), audio can be enhanced by the proper configuration of the technological medium: [It is important to] be very careful when configuring the quality of audio. If you set a h igh quality, there could be… a delay b efore the others hear what you have said. When lots of people are connected, any communication can be ruined. On the other hand, when audio is of a poor quality, there is a high risk of misunderstanding what is said. So, some kind of balance is required . (AT21) As was stated by five of the respondents, while using the microphone, the members of the learning environments should reduce any background noises they possibly can. Amongst other e transition of the sound from speakers into the microphone: … it is impossible to speak using microphones if someone does not use headphones , because if you say something and it is transmitted to that person, the sound goes back through the microphone, the n it is transmitted to this person again, and so on. If there are two students who do not have microphones, a lot of background noise is created . (AT06) There are more preparatory strategies to consider when the audio component of the environment is accomp anied by the use of video. The respondents noted the importance of enhancing the quality of participants’ on - screen pictures when video is utilised in the environment. With this in mind, not only should high quality video devices be implemented if possib le (AT01), but also the ways in which the cameras are utilised and the image is displayed need to be optimised. In particular, maximising the size of the image on the screen may increase interactivity, because it allows for more non - verbal signals to be tr ansferred and properly recognised by children and instructors (AT04). Similar results are promoted by arranging proper lighting, as it can significantly enhance the picture quality (AT01) even in environments with a poor network connection (AT20). In addit ion, it was found that it is effective to place the camera right in front of the face close to the monitor, as it creates “the illusion …that the person in the screen is looking into your eyes, which increases a sense of reality ” (AT22) , and “makes childre n watch and listen” (AT31). Using the camera zoom with the device placed at a distance may also enhance the realistic effect because of the minimisation of the picture’s possible distortions (AT01). 42 Regardless of how well the medium seems to be set up, co ntingency plans must be made in case of the loss of connection. Even the teachers who worked in technologically advanced environments noted the importance of being prepared for an unexpected disconnection: I try to have a task prepared that does not requir e a strong connection or even any solve occasional technical issues. (AT28) Importantly, the children must be prepared for unplanned disconnections as well, and be awar e of what alternative actions to take in case of emergencies. The teachers should provide means of communication that can be used if a child loses connection : at the children know they MUST follow. When I write in the c hat – “SILENCE”, they must stop talking. They usually do. We also have “NO WEBCAM”, “NO CHAT”, “BREAK 5”, and so on. (AT33) The children have my phone number, so they can call me in case they are experiencing any problems… but more often it is me who makes the call. (AT12) When the online session involves using any supplementary materials, these should be given to all the children in advance (AT06, AT15, AT24, AT34). A high quality and reliability of the materials must be ensured to prevent dis ruptions during the virtual lesson (AT15, AT34). In light of this, some of the respondents (AT15, AT31, AT37, AT44) found it beneficial to use existing and proven materials when acceptable. It was also emphasised that materials of any kind have to be re students work (AT08, AT27, AT25, AT29). Preparation for children’s synchronous distance learning sessions should involve the delivery of sufficient training to the classrooms’ members. Prop er training ensures that all members have t he necessary technical skills that are vital in achieving effective interplay. In the training sessions, it is a good idea to describe the technical limitations of the environment (e.g. possible signal delays) and to ensure the class members know how to deal with them. Five respondents deemed i children may require time to get used to them. Specifically, when a new environment is going to be brought into use, one or a few introductory sessions held in advance can be u sed for practicing the necessary technical and communicational skills by children in a relaxed atmosphere (AT03, AT08, AT17). 43 Both training and introductory sessions can be used for establishing and reviewing the classroom rules, which, according to five control over interactive processes that occur in the virtual classroom. At the same time, for some children (e.g. the younger ones), the effects of training can be limited, so the additional support of adult s may be necessary during the course of the session. 4.3.2. Structure, content, and management Structure and content To deliver the same amount of content, the virtual learning environment requires at least as much time as is required in a traditional cl assroom. As running out of a session’s time inevitably leads to the disruption of the instructor’s plans, the amount of content covered within one session should be objectively estimated and, if possible, minimised (AT14, AT18, AT26). To retain control of the thread of events in the classroom and to establish a logical connection between them, the respondents deem it reasonable to lea ve up to 30% of the sessions’ time f ree of any compulsory activity ( AT14, AT18, AT25, AT31). For compulsory activities, it wa enables the instructors to configure the session around the students’ progress and link together the different parts of the lesson: For many activities, it makes no sense predicting the exact time they will take. You must be prepared to establish an activity’s length during the session in order to ensure it yields the expected results and is linked to the subsequent activities. What i s reasonable is … estimating the maximum time the activity may take and determining which of its components ca n be excluded if necessary… You need to know where you can get more time from if you need it. (AT18) Once carefully planned, the session plan and structure should be strictly adhered to (AT44, AT30, AT17, AT11 ). Teacher AT11 indicated that keeping the session focused facilitates interplay, increases the productivity of learning activities, and stimulates student engagement. The teacher also clarified certain points throughout the lesson: 44 I try to hold the child ren focused on the lesson and avoid distractions. Time after time, I ask simple questions, remind them what we have done, explain what we are going to do next, call students by their names, and so on. (AT11) Explicitly marking the start of sessions was fou nd to increase learner engagement and connectedness, as well as to gain the children’s attention (AT03, AT27, AT48, AT22). According to five respondents, the teacher must also ensure the instruction pace meets the progress of all the students and fits in w ith any technical limitations. To retain the children’s productivity in learning activities, it was found that limiting each piece of work to 10−15 minutes and introducing short breaks throughout the sessions was effective (AT08, AT21). Teacher AT08 stated : The lesson might seem very dynamic, but you must remember the students are sitting still at their computers lacking physical activity, which in the end leads to a fall in interest, motivation, engagement and productivity in whatever they do. (AT08) It wa s indicated by some of the respondents that students’ motivation and productivity can be raised if they can see their progress during the session (AT11, AT35, AT45) and “do not feel as if there were stuck in one spot” (AT09). During individual or group act ivities, time reminders of any kind are of special help, for they can both stimulate concentration on a task and ensure adherence to the session’s timetable. Once the session is finished, the teacher may find it provident to allow the children to stay in t he virtual classroom (AT01, AT33, AT44): and have some hang - out time. First of all, through this, they indirectly improve their technical skills. Besides … it develops in them a better attitude to the virtual environment in general. It also makes them feel that the virtual environment is a social space, so they are more willing to work collaboratively in the subsequent session s…[ They] then spend less time in off - task conversatio ns during the sessions itself. (AT01) Ten of the survey cases showed that the interactivity of synchronous distance learning benefits from a flexible and dynamic choice of methods and tools used in the virtual session. Although, as was posed previously, th e introduction of new approaches to onlin e instruction should be gradual as introducing “even minor nove lties in children’s learning…[ may] stimulate their interest and participation” (AT08). Specifically, the respondents reported positive interactivity - rel ated effects in the occasional conduction of virtual field trips (AT07, AT08, AT32), periodic change to the lesson component’s sequence (AT01), alterations in the amount of time dedicated 45 to learning activities (AT02, AT15), and invited remote guests (AT05 , AT14, AT20, AT38). When guests participate, it is necessary for the teacher to assist them in working with the children: It i s important to understand that professionals in some fields are not necessarily prepared or know how to interact with children. Actually, many people get embarrassed when talking to children and need support [from the teacher]. (AT14) Assigning children to the role of presenter was found to be another way of stimulating their engagement and knowledge sharing (AT11, AT25, AT28). The teacher may also be wise to adhere to a facilitative approach rather than to a purely instructional approach, moving from lecture to communication and discussion (AT11). This is particularly apt in distance education , given that the boundary between th e roles of the instructor and learner is more blurred compared to that of traditional classrooms (AT09, AT11, AT28). At the same time, regardless of this difference, fundamental strategies of the traditional classroom still appear to be appropriate for the practice of synchronous distance learning, as long as there is evidence of positive effects (AT09, AT14, AT27). This is also the case with the different types of activities employed: As well as in the [traditional] classroom sessions, I take advantage of such forms of work as experimenting, observation, or presentation, which make it more interesting and easier for the students to deal with and learn new content. (AT14) Management It is advisable for teachers in virtual environments, using a synchronous f orm of instruction, to establish ways of contacting any student, at any time during any activity (AT09, AT13, AT29, AT33). As teacher AT09 stated: One of the worst things that can happen is not having a way of getting in touch with one or a few students in the class…[ which] is often equivalent to the students’ disconnection. (AT09) When monitoring the progress of the class, it is important to pay particular attention to the achievements of the students making the least progress (AT30, AT09, AT14, AT32). N on - verbal activities (such as eye or body movements and facial expressions) can be used for discerning the students’ attitudes and motivation levels (AT06, AT40, AT38). Similarly, 46 when monitored, off - task text chat messages can indicate or predict deviant , unwanted behaviour that may lead to breaks in the flow of interactive events (AT04, AT14). Interplay and communication The overall interactivity of the session benefits from interactions being stimulated from the very beginning of the lesson: How you st art the session is how it will cont inue…t o get children engaged and participating throughout the session, I give them a simple task to complete in groups, or an individual task w ith the subsequent sharing of results. T his is a good further eff ective group work. (AT02) To promote interactivity, it is important to establish and maintain a constant logical connection between the episodes of interplay between learners, instructors, and content . In doing so, it was found that ensuring each raised qu estion is dealt with is important (AT35, AT11, AT07, AT11). To save instructional time and prevent disruptions in delivering content, the respondents recommend inducting and addressing several relevant questions at once (AT45, AT39, AT34). Three of the res pondents (AT28, AT26, AT09) underlined the necessity of taking children's attention away from the technology in order to establish a sense of realness of the interactions occurring. Thus, teacher AT09 inferred: When children are completely engaged in a spe cific activity or task, they seem to forget they are interacting via technology. (AT09) In order to maintain the level of interactivity already established, teachers, as facilitators of online learning, should minimise time spent away from the virtual clas sroom during the session (AT13, AT17, AT26, AT27). This is of particular importance when young children or large groups of students are involved, which in itself makes effective interplay more difficult to achieve (AT26, AT27). At the same time, it was fou nd that, while keeping the children within easy reach, providing them with time away from the teacher when they are working on a task either individually or in groups can increase interactivity by promoting self - disclosure and mutual attention among the st udents (AT06). 47 Participation To promote students’ engagement in synchronous distance learning, not only do equal opportunities for participation have to be provided for all children (AT09, AT12, AT13, AT27), but the teacher also needs to actively encourag e the participation of each class member. One of the difficulties the teacher is likely to encounter, especially in large classes, is the necessity of managing students with different levels of achievement. To cope with this, teachers are advised to assign different roles (e.g. expert and learner) to the children based on their achievements and assign relevant tasks (AT21). Specific tasks can be prepared for the high and low achievers (AT13, AT14). In cases where not all the children’s questions have been a nswered within the session, the opportunity should be provided for the students to ask any remaining questions after the lesson is finished (AT01, AT09, AT23, AT31). Group work The strategy most frequently indicated by the survey’s respondents was dividin g the students into small groups: Managing a large number of students can be problematic. Therefore, you should always consider breaking the class into smaller groups. (AT02) When arranging group work, combining children of different levels of motivation o r achievement may help decrease academic and social gaps between them (AT14, AT21, AT28). Whatever the composition of the group, assigning a leader role to one of the students can help the teacher in managing group work (AT12, AT14, AT21). The leaders sho uld be periodically changed, if possible, in order to provide equal participation opportunities for all the students (AT14, AT21). The groups’ composition and size should also vary, as this may enhance student relationships (AT05, AT14); however, using fix ed groups can occasionally be preferable: We have divided the children into two fixed groups based on their academic results. When group work is required, the children know what to do, so it takes little time to arrange this process… We designate different children as group leaders so they can explore different roles in collaborative activities. (AT21) 48 When local and more remote children are present at the same time, multiple interactive characteristics of the virtual learning environment can be enhanced by selecting the participants of groups, taking no account of their location and familiarity with each other (AT07, AT08, AT12, AT13): As in … [ my] class, students often do not know each other, I try to combine local and distant students in one group as early between the students and I supplement this with further class work. (AT08) Once group work is finished, the teacher may wish to share each group’s results with the others (AT01, AT17, AT24): Comparing group s’ results entails an emulative effect and enhances group work efficiency. (AT01) It is helpful to discuss a group’s work with the whole class in order to smooth the - class activities. (AT17) Medium and materials To establish effective synchronous distance learning , the instructor should ensure that the children can manage any tools or materials that are employed (AT16, AT24, AT26). With this in mind, it seems sensible to simplify the technological component if possible. To increase clarity in communication, the connection’s stability should be prioritised over quality (AT13). Throughout the session, the connection quality needs cons tant checking (AT02, AT07): When something indicates that the connection has weakened, I stop the discussion and conduct a small connection test: the students activate their microphones and webcams, we keep silent for a few seconds, then I call each studen t by the name, and the students are required to raise a hand when they hear their names. (AT02) If technical issues are identified on a student’s side, they must be addressed sensitively to avoid distressing the student and, if possible, after the session (AT20, AT25, AT30): If a student can fix a technical problem quickly, it i s best if the instructor tells them how. If not, then it is more effective to adapt activities to the student’s technical setup. (AT20) 49 Once a technical feature is not used or is bei ng used inappropriately, access to it should be denied to the children (AT14, AT18, AT25, AT27). At the same time, enabling text chat at all times was found by the respondents to be beneficial as it enables them to monitor off - task messages (AT04, AT14), t o induct questions without disruption (AT39, AT45), to clarify messages distorted by other tools (AT05, AT18, AT32), and to report technical difficulties (AT05, AT09). Special care, however, should be taken with younger students who may have limitations in using text - based features (AT29). A few respondents pointed out that polls can often serve as a more interactive, appealing, and manageable alternative to text - based questions, especially when teaching in large groups of students (AT09, AT14). A few respo ndents found it helpful to record sessions for the purposes of subsequent analysis and self - reflection (AT02, AT18), extracting valuable pieces of the lesson and referring to them in further sessions (AT02, AT32), and providing students with the opportunit y to find or recall any piece of information covered in the session (AT02, AT18). 4.3.3. Interplay and communication Communication and feedback According to six of the respondents, in order to ensure the effectiveness of interactions, it is important to constantly check the children’s understanding of the content. This goes in line with the suggestion that the interactivity of the learning environment is dependent on the efficacy of the questioning and listening by the teacher (AT03, AT17, AT38). One of t he relevant tactics indicated by five respondents was to not quote students’ messages in full, but only relevant passages, and refer explicitly to their senders when replying . To make the most of a medium’s interactive cap abilities, the teacher should be accessible to the children (AT03, AT07, AT31). In particular, the students need opportunities to ask questions (AT07, AT09, AT31, AT32), and the teacher should encourage this by emphasising his or her readiness to provide any necessary support, within rea son (AT03, AT07, AT31). Once questions arise, it is vital that the instructor responds. According to teacher AT07 , 50 Ignoring children and avoiding their questions decreases their interest, motivation, and willingness to ask questions afterwards. If I cannot answer a question immediately, I at least try to indicate that I have heard or read it and will cover it later. (AT07) Children’s attitudes and how much they learn in a virtual learning environment are positively affected by a teacher’s reflection on thei r achievements. This reflection can be established by providing students with summative reports (AT01, AT15), in which not only academic results, but also their participation is assessed: What can also positively influence the children’s work is preparing individual reports. It is time consuming, but it can produce positive results. First of all, in the virtual class, when a child receives such a report, they realise that their individual activity is important . (AT15) It is useful to evaluate the student’s progress in participation, dealing with specific tasks, and individual and group work. Not least important, however, is to provide them with some comments on what they can improve or change in subsequent sessions. (AT01) Either in reports or on - going comme just criticise the negative aspects of a child’s work (AT10, AT18). Six of the respondents indicated that taking account of non - verbal messages promotes a better awareness of students’ understa nding or attitudes and may thus help the teacher in building more effective interaction. At the same time, non - verbal information can be distorted by a technological medium, so it should only be relied upon when the teacher can be sure of an accurate int erpretation. The teachers find it helpful to make children explicitly aware of the existence of feelings in the virtual environment and to promote emotional expression. Those teachers working in text - based environments consider emoticons especially valua ble in supplementing communication with an emotional component when an unambiguous interpretation is ensured (AT02, AT12, AT20, AT33). At the same time, the teachers should clarify ethical issues to the children: [The students] feel less responsible for wh at they say in a virtual environment… they use offensive language more readily. The teacher should explain that virtual words have real effect s . (AT11) 51 Medium Simultaneous talking was found as having a high potential of disrupting intera ctions (AT06, AT13, AT17, AT20). At the same time , while six of the respondents – five of whom regularly work in groups of nine and more children – deem it feasible to encourage students to turn off microphones when not talking, two teachers – teaching in clas ses of two to sixteen students – indicate the opposite (AT04, AT06). Thus, teacher AT04 explained: I used to limit the use of the microphones as well, but it did not always work well. Often students forgot to activate the microphone before starting to talk and vice versa. (AT04) Teacher AT06 outlines the advantages of leaving the microphone on from a different perspective : As in traditional classrooms, students need to be allowed to speak any time they want to. It makes sense to ensure that the microphones are on at all times. The teacher …must take measures to ensure their proper use (as well as in the traditional classroom, children may be required to ask for permission or raise their hand before interrupting the teacher). At the same time, it’s virtual environment, as the teacher can block any channels of communication whenever necessary. (AT06) Four teachers pointed out the importance for the speaker to be identifiable at all times (AT06, AT13, AT38, AT40), which can be vital in large - sized groups of children (AT13). Supplementing discussion with text chat was found helpful in obtaining alternative opinions, which students may not wish to express by other means (AT08, AT14): I noticed that some children can be reluctant to enter into video or audio - based discussions …However , the same students may be quite active participants when text chat is used. I try to encourage everyone to participate in discussions of any kind, but I also leave chat acti vated when possible. (AT08) Presence A few respondents emphasised that synchronous discussion in a virtual learning environment benefits from participants being perceived of as real people (AT20, AT37). For example, t eacher AT20 suggested: 52 [In the virtual classroom], although the whole group is present at the same time, everyone remains physically alone, and this inevitably diminishes the quality of the discussion and influ ences students’ participation… To achieve a sense of reality, teachers can describe or of the surrounding sounds audible to the children. In other words, it is useful to create the illusion for the children that they are in the same room as the teacher. (AT20) The participants need to be introduced to each other in advance or at the beginning of the first session: the teachers and class guests may be well - advised to present themselves to the children when they meet for the first time (AT11, AT12, AT31, AT43), as well as to introduce children who are unfamiliar with each other (AT07, AT37): If there is a new child in the class, I start by saying a few words about all the children and describe their positive qualities. Alternatively, I ask all the children to introduce themselves. This is important, because in an unfamiliar environment, children are not willing to participate in class work. (AT37) It is a good idea for teachers in virtual environments to maximise the times when the children can see them, either by video or image. Accord ing to five of the respondents, this reminds the children of the teacher’s presence. One respondent (AT05) reported that when there is a teacher’s picture shown on the screen, children initiate discussions with the teacher more frequently. On the other hand, for some individual and group activities where the teacher’s participation is not required, a higher level of student privacy can be beneficial (AT09). Seven teachers indicated that r eferring to each other by name enhances student engagement, emotion al expression, connectedness, intimacy, and mutual attention. For this reason, having instructors’ and students’ names on the screen, especially in newly established groups, is beneficial. Similar effects were indicated by a few respondents (AT05, AT07, AT13) in relation to establishing social and academic relationships between learners and instructors out of the virtual classroom. AT33). Thus, wh ile children may work from their homes, the teacher should analyse how comfortable it is for them to use microphones or cameras: 53 On a few occasions I had to forbid the use of video in the [virtual] classroom, because students simply began to watch and disc uss each other’s rooms. This not only disrupted the lesson, but it also made some children uncomfortable. And some students just turned off their cameras themselves. (AT33) Sensitive issues ought to be addressed in private so as not to adversely affect chi ldren’s attitudes to the virtual environment (AT15, AT44, AT45). For the same reason, the teacher should only share privately obtained data with the children's permission (AT15). 4.3.4. Evaluation To improve the efficiency of instruction in virtual envir onments, it may be prudent for teachers to analyse the most and the least successful sessions (AT09, AT14, AT17). This analysis can be supplemented by obtaining the children's feedback on the sessions (AT01, AT09, AT28): It is useful to review a recorded s ession and analyse what did and did not work. (AT09) The children should be asked for their opinion on the sessions, for they may provide useful data for analysis from their perspective. It may be vitally important to know what the students would like to c hange in the virtual classroom. As an option, the teacher may send an anonymous survey after a session or conduct a poll. (AT28) The teachers should then determine and analyse the reasons for the children's disconnection or attrition , as these may be indic ative of manageable shortcomings of a technical, instructional, or social nature in the environment (AT02, AT28). 4.4. Transferability of strategies The following experimental case was presented by a teacher from Belarus who taught the national language and a group of eight of her students. The teacher had had experience of conducting after - class distance sessions in synchronous format to this group of children. By the time of the experiment, the children had been members of the same class for six years and knew each other well. The teacher had known the children for nine months. Previous virtual sessions had been delivered by the teacher using a piece of software that enabled, among other things, two - way video, audio, and text communication, screen sh aring, file sending, polling, and session recording. 54 Based on the experimental case characteristics, 118 strategies were initiall y identified as relevant . These were drawn from survey cases with characteristics similar to the experimental case. Further, b ased on the teacher’s checklist and observation data, 49 strategies were identified that had not previously been used in the environment. These strategies were recommended for use in the experimental session. Post - observation showed that 32 strategies were ultimately applied by the teacher in the experimental session. From the teacher’s interview data, it was concluded that 23 (71%) of the strategies had had a positive effect on the environment’s interactivity, 8 (25%) had a neutral effect on interactivity , and 1 (4%) ha d a negative outcome (Appendix J ). Overall, the teacher perceived the use of the strategies as improving the interactive qualities of learning: I could certainly see improvements during this session due to the new strategies , both in ter ms of the session’s development and in terms of the children’s work and interplay. And in my perception, this lesson was significantly closer to a lesson in the [traditional] classroom. (BT01) The children’s group interview indicated nine directions in which positive changes related to learning interactivity had occurred: attitude, clarity, content, emotions, interface, interplay, sense of authenticity, stability, and timing. Out of these directions, negatively perceived effects were only found in three areas: clarity, interface, and sense of authenticity. Appendix K provides a summary on the themes revealed in the children’s interview data with reference to the most descriptive quotes. Overall, according to the teacher’s and students’ interview responses, after the implementation of the new strategies the level of interactivity in the learning environment was raised. Although the experimental stage of the study allowed the examination of only 32 of 154 strategies, it justified the validity of the findings and demonstrated the transferability of the strategies found in similar cases. 55 5. Discussion and conclusions 5.1. Understanding and implying an active approach to increasing interacti vity 5.1.1. Strategies for increasing the interactivity of synchronous distance learning Interactivity is considered an essential element of successful learning in virtual environments ( Chou, 2002; Muirhead and Juwah, 2004; Kobb, 2010 ). According to major theoretical schools, learning entails changes in either the behaviouristic (Skinner, 1975) or cognitive schemes (Illeris, 2002) of students. Similarly, in an educational context, interactive interplay leads to an alteration of one’s actions (Burke, 1982) or challenges one’s perceptions (Garrison, 1993). With this in mind, it is arguable that establishing interactive relationships between learners, instructors, and content promotes learning. Analogically , it can be hypothesised that a n educationally effect ive learning environment could be characterised as interactive. It follows that in order to enhance the effectiveness of synchronous online learning, teachers should take measures to increase its interactivity. However, a close connection between interact ivity and learning makes the boundary between interactive and non - interactive effects vague. While some strategies have a relatively direct influence on the level of interactivity in the virtual environment, many lead to interactive effects indirectly or i n a deferred manner. This phenomenon explains the existence of a wide range of strategies that can be justly viewed as connected to interactivity. instructional, and technological factors. Placing this proposition under a broader perspective with an emphasis placed on the concept of interactivity being fundamentally similar across physical and technological environments, the strategies for increasing interactivity can be categorised as instructional (influencing ways of arranging and performing instruction), contextual (affecting demographical and environmental elements of learning), and 56 environmental (influencing the choice and utilisation of a specific medium). Depending on its nature, one strategy may incorporate characteristics of only one or a few categories. Moreover, as long as interactivity is considered a function of instruction and learning (Wagner, 1994), strategies related to any of the categories may indicate both actions of the teacher or features of the medium, and specific behaviours of the learners. Applying strategies to increase the interactivity of synchronous learning in virtual environments should begin in advance of the sessions. As soon as the initial learning conditions are known, appropriate preparatory strategies can be selected and followed. Consequently, having prepared and planned a learning session to promote interactivity, teachers may then uncover more of the environment’s interact ive potential by shifting from a ‘subconscious’ instruction towards deliberate teaching enhanced by proper strategic decisions. Achieving a sufficient level of interactivity promotes a lesson’s fluency, which makes synchronous distance learning focused les s on the environment and more on constructing a productive interplay between the class members. Online learning by its fundamental educational principles is similar to traditional learning (Ally, 2007). In line with this assumption, the study showed that instead of relying on systematically chosen strategies, teachers dealing with synchronous distance learning can find it effective to rely on traditional instructional methods and to enhance them according to their personal experience and on - going adjustmen t to what works best. However, even seemingly effective synchronous learning benefits from adherence to a set of interactivity - enhancing strategies deliberately chosen in accordance with the environment’s characteristics. Thus, the experiment conducted in this study proved this assumption by demonstrating that slight, yet appropriate changes in a teacher’s approach to instruction may increase the interactive characteristics of virtual learning environments. It follows that the effectiveness of learning c an be enhanced if a teacher, moving from a traditional to a synchronous distance form of instruction, has access to training on the choice and application of strategies for increasing the interactive qualities of virtual learning environments. Furthermore, when interactivity involves both teaching and learning, proper training is essential for the children, too. 57 5.1.2 . The role of learning conditions Although applying specific strategies in a learning environment (either virtual or traditional) may lead to increasing its level of interactivity, reliable predictions about the extent of such effects can only be made provided the environment’s learning conditions are taken into account. While there are universal strategies for increasing interactivity, other s are only effective unde r specific learning conditions. T he se conditions determine a potential, maximum level of in teractivity in the environment, which can be reached provided appropriate strategies are carefully selected and efficiently followed. Obvio usly, learning environments exist under a multiplicity of learning conditions, and teachers may apply more than one strategy at a time. Interactivity is, in turn, dependent on the interplay of of factors influencing the environment (Roblyer and Wiencke, 2004). The ultimate level of interactivity, therefore, is not simply a sum of separate values; rather it is a characteristic constituted of complex combinations of learning con ditions and sets of strategies . I n the ‘ideal’ environment in inte ractivity terms, the combination of learning conditions maximises the highest possible level of interacti vity , and the instructor’s strategies fit the se le ar ning conditions perfectly . In this case, changing a ‘ perfect ’ set of strategies leads to diminishin g the actual interactivity level without lowering the environment’s interactive potential. On the ot her hand, altering a combination of learning conditions may entail a decrease in the maximum interactivity level that can be achieved. Furthermore, contrary to the ‘ideal’ case , a zero level of interactivity can be noted if either no interactive learning conditions are present or no appropriate strategies are followed (e.g. no internet connection in a purely videoconference - based environment, or the teacher i s using audio conferencing to deliver content to students who do not have audio devices). It is clear that the implementation of certain strategies can, and often presupposes, subsequent changes to the environment’s conditions. Thus, for instance, trainin g students on how to work in the virtual classroom entails changing the learner’s proficiency in using the medium and thus modifies the initial learning conditions of the environment. Once the conditions have been changed, to maintain or increase the level of interactivity, th e teacher should reconsider the I n order to maximise interactivity when applying new strategies in 58 a learning environment, it is necessary to recursively review the environment’s learning conditions that are affected to ensure that any strategies are applied appropriately. 5.2. Study limitations and directions for further research Despite the fact that the study’s aims were achieved and research questions were comprehensively answered, the ultimate findings have a set of limitations that indicate directions for further research in the field. Firstly, while a purposive sampling strategy allowed the disclosure of interactivity - related strategies from cases covering all the distinctive characteristics of virtual learning environments drawn from the literature analysis, the study did not cover every possible combination of these characteristics. This means that comprehensive as it is, the list of discovered strategies cannot be considered complete, for further str ategies could be found in studies of alternative, less common cases of synchronous learning in virtual environments. Nevertheless, as the majority of the strategies (93%) that emerged from the survey’s data were confirmed by at least two cases, it can be claimed that the necessary data saturation has been successfully achieved. Secondly, this study did not aim to measure the extent of the influence that specific strategies used by teachers have on the interactivity of synchronous learning in virtual environments across a variety of learning conditions. Although the interactivity - related effects of each revealed strategy were confirmed by at least one case, using purposive sampling did not enable a justification of the relative importance of one strategy over another, or a likely difference in a strategy’s effects across distinctiv e learning conditions. Therefore, in order to evaluate the relevant significance of the strategies, a comparative analysis is required. Thirdly, while specific disclosed strategies were found most appropriate to certain learning conditions, their transfer ability to cases with different learning conditions was not examined. Consequently, the potential effects that the strategies may have on interactivity in synchronous learning environments with alternative learning conditions need to be further assessed. 59 Finally, aiming to actively examine the applicability of the strategies across cases with similar learning conditions by applying them to a case where they had not been previously implemented , the experimental study could not cover the whole range of the r evealed strategies, as not all of them had been relevant to the settings of the experimental learning environment. Besides, given that the experimental data reflected on a single intervention session, the implemented strategies were examined only on their short - term effects. Hence, there is a need for further, detailed evaluation of both the short and long - term effects of the revealed strategies and their combinations on the interactivity of synchronous learning in virtual environments. 5.3. Conclusion Int eractivity is a key element of successful synchronous distance learning, influencing students’ achievements, satisfaction and motivation. The level of interactivity is highly dependent on the initial learning conditions of an environment. At the same time, the interactive potential of learning environments may only be fully revealed by means of a pertinent choice and application of interaction - enhancing strategies. While some of these strategies can be universally applied across a variety of environments, o thers may only benefit interaction under specific learning conditions. Building interactivity is a prolonged process, so the application of strategies should begin prior to the learning sessions and should not stop as soon as the sessions finish. Synchronous distance learning, in a way, can be compared to learning through a wall: the individuals are very close but are also separated; they all work in one common environment while staying on their own; their communicat ion is live and synchronous but, at the same tim e, is mediated and restricted . This wall describes the technical mediums, the characteristics of which may significantly vary, thus determining the environment’s interactivity limitations, as well as its pot ential. In order to increase learning interactivity and effectiveness, teachers need to adhere to strategies to overcome the medium’s restrictions and reveal its interactive potential. Ultimately, children’s learning experiences in the virtual environment can only be enhanced provided the technology, content, and class members support each other and co - exist in harmony. 60 R eferences Adewale, O. S., Ibam, E. O. and Alese, B. K. (2012) A web - based virtual classroom system model. Turkish online journal of dist ance education , 13 (1), 211 – 223. Ally, M. (2007) Nomadicity and information access: the mobile digital library for people on the move. In: G. Needham and M. Ally (eds.). M - libraries: libraries on the move to provide virtual access . London: Facet Publishing, 37 – 46. Anderson, T. (2003 ) Getting the right mix again: a n updated and theoretical rationale for interaction. International review of research in open and distance l earning , 4 (2), 1 – 14. Anderson, T. and Rourke, L. (2005) Videoconferencing in k ind ergarten - to - grade 12 settings: a review of the literature. [Online]. Available from: http://www.learnquebec.ca/export/sites/learn/en/content/clc/documents/Literature_Review_on_ Educational_Video - Conferencing_in_K - 12.pdf [Accessed 19 February 2013]. Argyl e, M. and Dean, J. (1965) Eye - contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry , 28 , 289 – 304. Ashkeboussi, R. (2001) A comparative analysis of learning experience in a traditional vs. MAHE journal , 24 , 5 – 21. Aydin, B. and Yuzer, T. V . (2006) Building a synchronous virtual classroom in a distance English language teacher training (DELTT) program in Turkey. Turkish o nline j ournal of d istance e ducation , 7 (2), 9 – 20. Bandura, A. (1986) Social foundations of thought and action: A social co gnitive theory. New York: Prentice Hall. Beem, K. (2010) Virtual classes, real policy. Education digest: essential readings condensed for quick review , 76 (1), 20 – 26. 61 Biocca, F. and Harms, C. (2002) De fi ning and measuring social presence: contribution to t he networked minds theory and measure. In: F. R. Gouveia and F. Biocca (e ds). Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Presence . Porto: Universidad Fernando Pessoa, 7 – 36. Blackmun, E. et al. (2001) . [Online]. Available from : http://wenku.baidu.com/view/1436a28302d 276a200292e0d.html [Accessed 10 February 2013] . Blaikie, N. (2000) Designing social research: the logic of anticipation . Cambridge: Polity. Boyd, R. and Apps , J. W. (1980) Redefining the discipline of adult education . San Francisco: Jossey - Bass. Breakwell, G., Hammond, S. M., Fife - Schaw, C. (eds.) (2000) Research methods in psychology. 2nd ed. , London: SAGE. British Educational Research Association (2011) research . [Online]. Available from: http://www.bera.ac.uk/publications/ [Accessed 8 February 2013]. Code of human research ethics . Leicester: The British Bryman, A. (2008) Soc ial research methods . 3rd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bryman, A. (2012) Social research methods . 4th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. Burns, M., Burniske, J. and Dimock, V. (1999) On the road to stude nt - centered learning: TAP into learning. TAP into learning , 1 (2), 2 – 10. Byrom, E. and Bingham, M. (2001) Factors influencing the effective use of technology for teaching and learning: lessons learned from the SEIR - TEC intensive site schools. [Online]. Available from: http://www.seirtec.org/publications/lessons.pdf [Accessed 11 May 2013] . 62 Cao, Q., Griffin, T. E. and Bai, X. (2009) The importance of synchronous interaction for student satisfaction with course web sites. Journal of information s ystems education , 20 (3), 331 – 339. Carlson, K. (2011) Using Adobe Connect to deliver online library instruction to the RN to BSN program. Journal of library & information services in distance learning , 5 (4), 172 – 180. Cassidy, M. (1998) Historical perspect ives on teaching with technology in K - 12 schools. The New Jersey journal of c ommunication , 6 (2), 170 – 184. Cavanagh, S. (2009) Web Connects K - 12 Students with Scientists. Education Week , 29 (11), 13. Chou, C. (2002) A comparative content analysis of studen t interaction in synchronous and asynchronous learning networks . Proceedings of the 35th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HI, 2002. Unpublished. Clark, D. N. and Gibb, J. L. (2006) Virtual team learning: a n introductory study team exercise. Journal of management education , 30 (6), 765 – 787. Clark, R. C. and Kwinn, A. (2007) The new virtual classroom: evidence - based guidelines for synchronous e - learning. [Online]. Available from: http://common.books24x7.com/t oc.aspx?bookid=27251 [Accessed 11 February 2013] . Clark, T. (2001) Virtual schools: trends and issues. A study of virtual s chools in the United States . [Online]. Available from: http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/virtualschools.pdf [Accessed 03 February 201 3] . Cobb, S. C. (2009) Social presence and online learning: a current view from a research perspective. Journal of interactive online learning , 8 (3), 241 – 254. Comber, C., Lawson, T., Gage, J. A., Cullum - Hanshaw, A. and Allen, T. (2004) Report for schools of the DfES: video conferencing in the classroom project . [Online]. Available from : http://www.learnquebec.ca/export/sites/learn/en/content/clc/documents/video_conferencing_fin al_report_may04.pdf [Accessed 14 February 2013] . Conte, C. (1998) Technology in schools: hip or hype? Education digest , 63 (5), 28 – 33. 63 Creswell, J. W. (2009) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches . 3rd ed., Los Angeles: SAGE. CUREC, the University of Oxford (2009) SSH/IDREC/2009/P15.1. [Online]. Proto col proforma . [Online]. Available from: https://www1.admin.ox.ac.uk/curec/oxonly/protocols/ [Accessed 24 January 2013]. CUREC, the University of Oxford (2010) MSD/IDREC/2005/P2.1.2. [Online]. Protocol proforma . [Online]. Available from: https://www1.admin. ox.ac.uk/curec/oxonly/protocols/ [Accessed 24 January 2013]. Daft, R. L. and Lengel, R. H. (1986) Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management science , 32 , 554 – 571. Denzin , N. and Lincoln , Y. (eds.) (2000) Handb ook of qualitative research . London: SAGE . Denzin, N. K. (1970) The research act in sociology . Chicago: Aldine. Dillenbourg, P. (2000) Virtual learning environments . [Online]. Available from: http://tecfa.unige.ch/tecfa/publicat/dil - papers - 2/Dil.7.5.18.doc [Accessed 24 January 2013]. Eckstein, H. (1975) Case study and theory in political science. In: F. J. Greenstein and N. W. Polsby (eds.). Handbook of political s cience . Reading, MA: Addison - Wesley, 94 – 137. Falc k, A. - K. et al. (1997) Testing virtual classr oom in the school c ontext. Distance e ducation , 18 (2), 213 – 2 24. Fontana, A. and Frey, J. H. (1994) Interviewing: the art of science . In: N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln (eds.). Handbook of qualitative research . Thousand Oaks: SAGE, 361 – 376. Freeman, M. (199 8) Video conferencing: a solution to the multi - campus large classes problem? British journal of educational technology , 29 (3), 197 – 210. Fulford, C. P. and Zhang, S. (199 3) Perceptions of interaction: t he critical predictor in distance education. American journal of distance education , 7 (3), 8 – 21. 64 Garrison, R. (2000) Theoretical challenges for distance educati on in the 21st century: a shift from structural to transactional issues. International review of re search in open and distance learn ing , 1 (1), 1 – 17 . Gerstein, R. B. (2000) Videoconferencing in the classroom: special projects toward cultural understanding. Computers in the schools , 16 (3 / 4), 177 – 186. Gibbs, G. (2007) Analyzing qualitative data . Los Angeles: SAGE. Gillies, D. (2008) Student perspective s on videoconferencing in teacher education at a distance. Distance education , 29 (1), 107 – 118. Giossos, Y., Koutsouba, M., Lionarakis, A. and Skavantzos, K. (2009) Reconsidering Moore’s transactional distance theory. European journal of open distance and eLearning , 2 , 1 – 6. Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research . New York: Aldine de Gruyter . Goddard, M. (2002) What do we do with these computers? Reflections on technology in the classroom. Journal of research on technology in education , 35 (1), 19 – 26. Gorsky, P. and Caspi, A. (2005) A critical analysis of transactional distance theory. Quarterl y review of distance education , 6 (1), 1 – 11. Graziadei, W. D. et al. (1997) Building asynchronous and synchronous teaching - learning environments: exploring a course/classroom management system solution . [Online]. Available from: http://horizon.unc.edu/proj ects/monograph/CD/Technological_Tools/Graziadei.html [Accessed 14 April 2013] . Greenway, R. and Vanourek, G. (2006) The virtual revolution: understanding online schools. Education n ext , 6 (2), 34 – 41. Gunawardena, C. N. (1995) Social presence theory and imp lications for interaction and collaborative learning in computer conferences. International journal of educational telecommunications , 1 (2/3), 147 – 166. 65 Gunawardena, C. N. and Zittle, F. J. (1997) Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a com puter - mediated conferencing environment. The American journal of distance education , 11 (3), 8 – 26. Henninger, M. and Viswanathan, V. (2004) Social presence in online tutoring: what we know and what we should know. In: P. Gerjets, P. A. Kirschner, J. Elen a nd R. Joiner (eds.). Proceedings of the first joint meeting of the EARLI SIGs Instructional Design and Learning and Instruction with Computers (CD - ROM) . Tuebingen : Knowledge Media Research Center. Henri, F. (1992) Computer conferencing and content analysi s. In: A. R. Kaye (ed.). Collaborative learning through computer conferencing . Heidelberg: Springer, 117 – 136. Herring, R. (1987) Looking at interaction . Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the e and Instruction, San Anto nio , March. Unpublished. Hillman, D. C. A., Wills, D. J. and Gunawardena, C. N. (1994) Learner - interface inte raction in distance education: a n extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. American journal of distance education , 8 (2), 30 – 42. Hiltz, S. (1986) The virtual classroom: using computer mediated communications for university teaching. Journal of communications , 36 (2), 95 – 104. Holmberg, B. (2005) The evolution, principles and practices of distance education . Oldenburg: Carl vo n Ossietzky Universität. Hooper, S. and Rieber, L. P. (1995) Teaching with technology. In: A. C. Orstein (ed.). Teaching: t heory into practice . Needham Heights: Allyn and Bacon, 154 – 170. Hsu, S., Marques, O., Khalid Hamza, M. and Alhalabi, B. (1999) How t o design a virtual classroom: 10 easy steps to follow. THE Journal , 27 (2), 96 – 109. Hutchinson, D. (2007) Teaching practices for effective cooperative learning in an online learning environment (OLE). Journal of information systems education , 18 , 357 – 367. Imig, S. (2010) Innovative writing instruction: writing rewired - teaching writing in an online setting. English journal , 99 (3), 80 – 83. 66 Jonassen, D. (ed.) (1988) Instructional designs for microcomputer courseware . Hillsdale : Lawrence Erlbaum. Jung, L . (2001 ) Build ing a theoretical framework of w eb - based instruction in the context of distance education. British journal of educational technology , 52 (5), 525 – 534. Kahn, W. A. (2001) Holding environments at work. Journal of applied behavioral science , 37 , 260 – 27 9. Kahveci, M. (2007) An i nstrument development: interactivity survey (the IS). In: R. Carlsen et al. (eds.). Proceedings of society for information technology & teacher education international conference . Chesapeake : AACE, 809 – 819. Kerka, S. (1996) Distan ce learning, the Internet and the world wide web . [Online]. Available from: http://www.ericdigests.org/1997 - 1/distance.html [Accessed 28 January 2013]. Kim , J. (2011 ) Developing an instrument to measure social presence in distance higher education. British journal of educational t echnology , 42 (5), 763 – 777. Kirschner, P., Strijbos, J., Kreijns, K. and Beers, P. J. (2004) Designing electronic collaborative learning environments. Educational technology research and development , 52 (3), 47 – 66. Ko, C. - J. (2012) A case study of language learners' social presence in synchronous CMC. ReCALL , 24 (1), 66 – 84. Kontos, G. and Mizell, A. P. (2005) The global quiz bowl: competing and cooperating through compressed video. TechTrends: l inking r esearch & p ractice to i mprove l earning , 49 (6), 16 – 20. Education and information technologies , 16 (4), 365 – 381 . Kreijns, K., Kirschner, P. and Jochems, W. (2003) Identifying the pitfalls for soci al interaction in computer - supported collaborative learning environm ents: a review of the research. Computers in human behavior , 19 , 335 – 353. 67 Krieger, J. D. (2002) Teacher/student interactions in public elementary schools when class size is factor . Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid - South Educational Research Association, Chattanooga, November 6 – 9. Unpublished . Kupczynski, L., Mundy, M. A. and Maxwell, G. (2012) Faculty perceptions of cooperative learning and traditional discussion strategies in online courses. Turkish online journal of distance education , 13 (2), 84 – 95. Kvale, S. (1989) Issues of validity in qualitative research . Lund : Chartwell Bratt. Lavolette, E., Venable, M. A., Gose, E. and Huang, E. (2010) Comparing synchronous virtual classrooms: student, instructor and course designer p erspectives. TechTrends: linking research and practice to improve l earning , 54 (5), 54 – 61. Lever - Duffy, J. and McDonald, J. B. (2007) Teaching and learning with technology . 3rd ed., Boston, MA: Allyn & B acon. Levy, M. and Stockwell, G. (2006) CALL d imensions: options and issues in computer assisted language learning . Mahwah : Lawrence Erlbaum. Ligorio, M. B. and van Veen, K. (2006) Constructing a successful cross - national virtual learning environment in primary and secondary education. AACE j ournal , 14 (2), 103 – 128. Lincoln, Y. S. and Guba, E. (1985) Naturalistic enquiry . Beverly Hills : SAGE. Li ttle, C. B., Titarenko, L. and Bergelson, M. (2005) Creating a successful international distance - learning classroom. Teaching sociology , 33 (4), 355 – 370. Lonie, A. - L. and Andrews, T. (2009) Creating a rich learning environment for remote postgraduate learn ers. Education in rural Australia , 19 (1), 3 – 13. Lowenthal, P. R. (2010) The evolution and influence of social presence theory on online learning. In: T. T. Kidd (ed.). Online education and adult learning: new frontiers for teaching p ractices . Hershey : IGI Global, 124 – 134. 68 Lu, Y. (2011) Using a virtual classroom to teach online mathematics . [Online]. Available from: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED519767.pdf [Accessed: 12 February 2013] . Mahesh, V. and McIsaac, M. S. (1999) Distance education: learner - teacher interaction and time spent by t eaching . Proceedings of selected research and development papers presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 21st, Houston , February 10 – 14. Unpublished. Marshall, C. and Rossman, G. B. (1995) Designing qualitative research . 2nd ed., London: SAGE. Martin, F., Parker, M. A. and Deale, D. (2012) Examining the interactivity of synchronous virtual c lassrooms. The international review of research in open and distance l earni ng , 13 (3), 227 – 260. Maxwell, J. A. (1992) Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard educational review , 62 (3), 279 – 300. McBrien, J. L., Jones, P. and Cheng, R. (2009) Virtual spaces: employing a synchronous online classroom to facilitat e student engagement in online learning. The international review of research in open and distance learning, 10 (3), 1 – 17. Merrick, S. (2005) Videoconferencing for p rimary and secondary schools – where are we [white p aper]? [Online]. http://www.educationfo rministry.org/pdfs/Whitepaper_Video_Conferencing_f.pdf [Accessed 28 January 2013] . Miles, M. B. and Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook . Thousand Oaks : SAGE. Moore, M. G. (1983) On a theory of independent s tudy. In: D. Seward, D. Keegan and B. Holmberg (eds.). Distance education: international perspectives . London: Croom Helm, 68 – 94. Moore, M. G. (1989) Editorial: three types of interaction . The American journal of distance education , 3 (2), 1 – 6. 69 Moore, M. G. (1993) Theory of transactional distance. In: D. Keeg an (e d.). principles of distance education . New York: Routledge, 22 – 38. Moore, M. G. and Kearsley, G. (1996) Distance education: a systems view . Belmont: Wadsworth . Morris, F. (2005) Child - to - child interaction and corrective feedback in a computer mediated L2 class. Language learning & technology, 9 (1), 29 – 45. Mountain, L. A. (2009) Evidence based videoconferencing: results of a series of quasi - experimental replication studies . DPhill. University of Albany. Muirhead, B. and Juwah, C (2004) Interactivity in computer - mediated coll ege and university education: a recent review of the literature. Educational technology & society , 7 (1), 12 – 20. Mulrine, A. (2003) Skipping the formaldehyde: virtual frog, videoconferencing teacher – and vital lessons. U.S. news & world r eport , 135 (13), 64. Mu lrine, C. F. (2007) Creating a virtual learning environment for gifted and talented l earners. Gifted child t oday , 30 (2), 37 – 40. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (2013) Reduce screen time . [Online]. Available online: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health/public/heart/obesity/wecan/reduce - screen - time/index.htm [Accessed 14 February 2013]. Norton, M. F. (2001) Teaching in the virtual classroom. Journal of instruction delivery systems , 15 (3), 21 – 25. Offir, B. and Lev, J. (2000) Constructing an aid for evaluating teacher - learner interactions in distance learning. Education media international , 37 (2), 91 – 97 . Oli ver, S. W. (2011) Evaluating student experiences from the Professional Human Resources Certification Course at Villanova University . PhD. University of Pennsylvania. Pachnowski, L. M. (2002) Virtual field trips through videoconferencing. Learning & leading with technology , 29 (6), 10 – 13. 70 Palloff, R. M. and Pratt, K. (2007) Building online learning communities: effective strategies for the virtual classroom. San Francisco : Jossey - Bass. Parker, M. A. and Martin, F. (2010) Synchronous virtual classrooms: student perceptions from an online and blended education course . Proceeding of the International Conference on Technol ogy for Education, Mumbai , July . Unpublished. Parker, M. A., Grace, E. R. and Martin, F. (2010) Do you teach in a Virtual Classroom? Measu ring student’s perceptions of the features and characteristics. International journal of instructional technology and distance l earning , 7 (12), 17 – 28. Parsad, B. and Lewis, L. (2008) Distance education at degree - granting postsecondary i nstitutions: 2006 – 0 7 (NCES 2009 – 044) . Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Patterson, L. M., Carrillo, P. B. and Salina s, R. S. (2012) Lessons from a global learning virtual c lassroom. Journal of studies in international e ducation , 16 (2), 182 – 197. Patton, M. (2004) Qualitative research & evaluation methods . 3rd ed., Thousand Oaks : SAGE. Picciano, A. G. and Seaman, J. (2009) K - 12 online learning: a 2008 follow - up of the survey of U.S. school dis trict administrators . [Online] . Available from: http://sloanconsortium.org/sites/default/files/k - 12_online_learning_2008.pdf [Accessed 15 February 2013] . Powers, S. M. and Mitchell, J. (1997) Student perceptions and performance in a virtual classroom envir onment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago , March. Unpublished. Powers, S. M., Davis, M. and Torrence, E. (1999) Person - environment interac tion in the virtual classroom: a n initial examination . P roce edings of selected research and development papers presented at the National Co nvention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology, 21st, Houston, February 10 – 14. Unpublished. 71 Prestera, G. and Moller, L. (2001) Facilitating async hronous distance learning: exploiting opportunities for knowledge building in asynchronous distance learning environments . Conference proceedings from Mid - South Instructional Technology Conference, Middle Tennessee St ate University, Murfreesboro, April 7 – 1 0. Unpublished. Punch, K. F. (2009) Research methods in education . London: SAGE. Punch, K. F. (2005) Introduction to social research: quantitative and qualitative approaches . 2nd ed., London: SAGE. Rajasingham, L. (1996) The search. Journal of distance learning , 2 (1), 26 – 33. Ramaswami, R. ( 2009) Even! But no longer o dd. T HE j ournal , 36 (5), 38 – 44. Rao, K. (2007) Distance learning in Micronesia: participants’ experiences in a virtual classroom using synchronous technologies. Innovate: journal of online e ducation , 4 (1). Rich, R. L. (2011) A f ramework for synchronous web - based professional development: measuring the impact of webinar instruction . DEd, University of the Pacific Stockton. Richards, L. (2009) Handling qualitative data: a practical guide . 2n d ed. , London: SAGE. Richardson, J. C. and Swan, K. (2003) Examining social presence in online courses in relation to students' perceived learning and satisfaction. Journal of asynchronous learning networks , 7 (1), 68 – 88. Richey, R. (1996) Robert M. Gagne' s impact on instructional design theory and practice of the future . Paper presented at the National Convention of the Association for Educational Communicati ons and Technology, Indianapolis . Unpublished. Ritchie , J . and Lewis , J . (eds . ) (2003) Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers . London: SAGE. Roblyer, M. D. and Wiencke, W. R. (2003) Design and use of a rubric to assess and encourage interactive qualities in distance courses. The American journal of distance ed ucation , 17 (2), 77 – 97. 72 Roblyer, M. D., Freeman, J., Donaldson, M. B. and Maddox, M. (2007) A comparison of outcomes of virtual school courses offered in synchronous and asynchronous formats. and higher education , 10 (4), 261 – 268. Robson, C. (2002) Real world research . 2nd ed., Oxford: Blackwell. Rose, E. (1999) Deconstructing interactivity in educational computing. Educational technology , 39 (1), 43 – 49. Rourke, L., Anderson, T., Garrison, R. and Archer, W. (1999) Assessing social presence in asynchronous text - based computer conferencing. Journal of distance education, 14 (2), 50 – 71. Russo, T. and Benson, S. (2005) Learning with invisible others: perceptio ns of online presence and their relationship to cognitive and affective learning. Educational technology & society , 8 (1), 54 – 62. Sahin , S. (2008) Cake batter rheology. In: S. G. Sumnu and S. Sahin (eds.). Food engineering aspects of baking sweet goods . Ho boken: CRC, 99 – 117. Salomon, G. (1998) Novel constructivist learning environments and novel technologies: some issues to be concerned with. Research dialogue in learning and instruction , 1 , 3 – 12. Sawyer, J. M. (1997) Interweaving face - to - face student conta ct with an online class presentation format. [Online]. In: Trends and issues in online instruction , Honolulu , April 1 – 3 . Available from: http://tcc.kcc.hawaii.edu/previous/TCC% 201997/sawyer.html [Accessed 16 January 2013] . Schullo, S. J. (2005) An analy sis of pedagogical strategies: u sing synchronous web - based course systems in the online classroom . PhD. University of South Florida. Sembor, E. C. (1997) Videoconferencing in Connecticut . Social e ducation , 61 (3), 154 – 159. Short, J., Williams, E. and Christie , B. (1976) The social psychology of telecommunications . London: John Wiley & Sons. Silverman, D. (2005) Doing qualitative research . 2nd ed. , London: SAGE. 73 Silverman, D. (2010) Doing qualitative research . 3rd ed., London: SAGE. So, H. and Brush, T . (2008) Student perceptions of collaborative learning, social presence and satisfaction in a blended learning environment: relationships and critical factors. Computers and education , 51 (1), 318 – 336. Social Research Association (2003) . [Online]. Available from: http://the - sra.org.uk/wp - . Social Research Association (2004) RESPECT c ode of practice for socio - economic research . [Online]. Available from: http://the - sra.org.uk/wp - conten t/uploads/respect_code.pdf [Accessed 08 February 2013] . Stahl, G., Koschmann, T. and Suthers, D. (2006). Computer - supported collaborative learning: an historical perspective. In: R. K. Sawyer (ed.). Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences . Cambridge, E ngland : Cambridge University Press, 409 – 426. Stuber - McEwen, D., Wiseley, P. and Hoggatt, S. (2009) Point, click, and cheat: frequency and type of academic dishonesty in the virtual classroom. Online journal of distance learning administration , 12 (3), 1 – 10 . Sugar, W. A. and Bonk, C. J. (1995) World forum communications: analyses of student and mentor interactions. In: M. R. Simonson (ed.). Proceedings of the 1995 Annual National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology . Ma dison : OmniPress. Swan, K. and Shih, L. F. (2005) On the nature and development of social presence in online course discussions. Journal of asynchronous learning networks , 9 (3), 115 – 136. Taylor, A. and McQuiggan, C. (2008) Faculty development programming: if we build it, will they come? EDUCAUSE q uarterly , 31 (3), 28 – 37. The Oxford English Dictionary. (2010) 10th ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press. 74 Torrens, K. M. and Amador, J. A. (2012) Taking your course online: an interdisciplinary j ourney. [Online]. Available from: http://www.infoagepub.com/products/Taking - Your - Course - Online [Accessed 04 May 2013] . Townes - Young, K. and Ewing, V. (2005) NASA LIVE creating a global classroom. THE j ournal , 33 (4), 43 – 45. Tracy, S. J. (2010) Qualitative quality: eight ''B ig - Tent'' criteria for excellent qualitative research. Qualitative inquiry , 16 , 837 – 850. Tu, C. H. (2000) On - Line learning migration: f rom social learning theory to social presence theory in CMC environment. , 23 (1), 27 – 37. Tu, C. H. and McIssac, M. (2002) The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American journal of distance education , 16 (3), 131 – 150. Tung, F. - W. and Deng, Y. - S. (2006) Designing social presence in e - learning environments: testing the effect of interactivity on children. Interactive l earning e nvironments , 14 (3), 251 – 264. Vess, D. (2004) History in the digital age: a study of the impact of interactive resources on student learning. The history teacher , 37 , 385 – 400. Vygotsky, L. (1978). . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Wagner, E. D. (1997) Interactivity: from agents to outcomes. New directions for teaching and lear ning , 71 , 19 – 26. Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F. and Park, D. W. (1994) Interpersonal effects in computer - mediated communication: a meta - analysis of social and antisocial communication. Communication research , 21 (4), 460 – 4 87. Wang, Y. - M. (1999) Online co nference: a participant’s perspective. THE. j ournal , 26 (8), 70 – 76. 75 Wei, C. - W., Chen, N. - S. and Kinshuk (2012) A model for social presence in online classrooms. Educational technology research and development , 60 (3), 529 – 545. Weinel, M., Bannert , M., Zumb ach, J., Hoppe, H. U. and Malzahn, N. (2011) A closer look on social presence as a causing factor in computer - mediated collaboration. Computers in human b ehavior , 27 (1), 513 – 521. Wilson B. G. (1996) Constructivist learning environments: case studies in in structional design. Englewood Cliffs : Educational Technology Publications. Woodruff, M. and Mosby, J. (1996) A brief des cription of videoconferencing: v ideoconferencing in the classroom and library . [Online]. Available from: http://www.kn.pacbell.com/wired/vidconf/description.html [Accessed 20 January 2013] . Yacci, M. (2000) Interactivity demystified: a structural definition for distance education and intelligent computer - based instruction. Educational technology , 40 (4), 5 – 16 . Yenika - Agbaw, V. (2010) Teaching children’s literature online: modern technology and virtual classroom communities. New horizons in education , 58 (3), 111 – 117. Yin, R. K. (1989) Case study research: design and methods . Rev. ed. Newbury Park : SAGE. Yin, R . K. (2003) Case study research: design and methods . 3rd ed . , Thousand Oaks : SAGE. Yoon, S. W. and Johnson, S. D. (2008) Phases and patterns of group development in virtual learning teams. Educational technology, research and development , 56 (5), 595 – 618. Zhang, S. and Fulford, C. P. (1994) Are interaction time and psychological interactivity the same thing in the distance learning television classroom? Educational technology , 34 (6), 58 – 64. Zhu, E. (1996) Meaning negotiation , knowledge constructi on, and mentoring in a distance learning course. In: Proceedings of selected research and development presentations at the 1996 National Convention of the Association for Educational Communications and Technology , 18th , Indianapolis . Unpublished. 76 Appendices A. The concept of the v irtual c lassroom Though a vast amount of research has addressed the notion of the virtual classroom, there is a distinct lack of clarity and inconsistency in its definition. Thus, s ome authors ( e.g. Graziadei et al., 1997; Powers et al., 1999; Ashkeboussi, 2001; Aydin and Yuzer, 2006 ; Adewale, 2012 ) make no explicit distinction between the concepts of the virtual classroom and a virtual learning environment, or simply use these terms interchangeably. Others , w hen addressing the noti on of the virtual classroom , do not give a clear definition to this concept, yet still regard it as being connected or equal to distance learning (Beem , 2010) or a virtual learning environment ( Little, Titarenko and Bergelson, 2005 ; Taylor and McQuiggan , 2008; Stuber - McEwen, Wiseley and Hoggatt , 2009). Few authors associate the virtual classroom with predominantly asynchronous forms of distance learning , e.g. Imig, 2010 . Acc roding to Rajasingham (1996: 33), “a classroom is a commun ication system that makes it possible for a group of people to come together with the intention of learning something” (in Falck et al. , 1997: 216). This means that the traditional classroom can be viewed as a medium that allows for instruction to be deliv ered through lecturing and participants’ interactions (Ashkeboussi , 2001). In the virtual classroom, the computer takes the mediating role, providing access to learning and teaching practices available in the traditional classroom ( Hiltz, 1986; Hsu, Marque s, Khalid Hamza and Alhalabi, 1999 ). Falck et al . (1997 : 216) infer that the virtual aspect suggests “the environment creates for us an illusion as if we were in the real world …and the virtual classroom ‘feels and works like a real classroom’ in effect”. Clark and Kwinn (2007) point out two key similarities between face - to - face learning and distance learning in virtual classrooms. The first is that an instructor is present in the environment at the same time as the students. Another similarity is the high level of soc ial presence in the classroom, compared to levels of sociality in asynchronous forms of learning. Clark and Kwinn define social presence as “the extent to which the learning environment offers opportunities for social interactions, including ha nd shaking, eye contact, smiles, puzzled 77 LE looks, verbal exchanges, and so forth” (9). They also mention that despite the similarities mentioned, the virtual classroom is void of the body language available in face - to - face environments; however, this stateme nt will be challenged in the discussion be low on technology’s capacity to transmit non - verbal signals. At the same time, physical interaction , which is inherent in the traditional classroom (Kreijns et al., 2011) , has not yet been established in virtual se ttings, so the virtual classroom can only partly reconstruct the traditional classroom environment, which approaches but does not achieve the highest level of social presence. It can be summarised that the virtual classroom is a form of virtual learning environment that allows real - time interactions to be established at a level closely approaching the standard of interactions available in face - to - face settings. Consequently, it is arguable that virtual classrooms take the intermediate place between face - to - face and distance environments, allowing for the notion of ‘face - to - face ’ distance learning ( Figure 2 ). Figure 2 – Forms of learning and types of learning environments Sync. Async. F2FL PM TM Sync. – synchronous learning Async. – asynchronous learning PM – learning through physical medium TM – learning through technological medium F2FL – face - to - face learning DL – distance learning F2FDL – ‘face - to - face’ distance learnin g LE – learning environment VLE – virtual learning environment VCE – virtual classroom environment VLE VCE F2FDL DL 78 The fact that both the instructor and the students meet in the virtual classroom at a designated time (Parker, Grace and Martin, 2010) highlights the syn chronous nature of the environment. However, due to inconsistencies surrounding the definition of this term, it seems to be good practice to explicitly specify which form of instruction is involved before the term is used. Some authors (Graziadei et al., 1 997; Aydin and Yuzer, 2006; Roblyer et al., 2007; Lonie and Andrews, 2009; Martin et al., 2012) do this by distinguishing between ‘synchronous’ and ‘asynchronous’ virtual classrooms or virtual learning environments. At the same time, instruction, rather t han the environment, can be defined as synchronous or asynchronous (Clark and Gibb, 2006; Lu, 2011). Therefore, when specifying what kind of learning is meant when the concept of the virtual classroom is used, the term ‘interactivity’ should characterise the type of learning , rather than the type of environment . Based on the analysis of relevant literature, this study views the virtual classroom as a form of virtual learning environment in which a synchronous form of learning is implemented. 79 B. Characteristics of interactive events Characteristics of interactive events Direction* Learner - Content [1][3][4]** Learner - Instructor [1][3][4] Learner - Learner [1][3][4] Learner - Interface [2][3][4] Nature Socio - Emotional/Social [4] Technical [5] On - Task/Off - task [4][5] Explicit/Implicit [31] Channels Body language/facial expressions/ other visual cues [19][24][25] (visual) Vocal intonations/cues [19][24] (audial) Physical contact [26] (physical) Smell [26] (olfactory) Role Procedural [6][7] Expository [6][7] Explanatory [6[[7] Cognitive [6][7] Criteria Rate/Duration [31] Lag time/Timely response/Immediacy [4][9][17][24][25] Coherence (perceived instructional value)/Productivity [8][9] Relevance [5][12] Flexibility [12] Accessibility [20] Understanding [16] Complexity [17] Privacy [23][21] Quality [5] Indicators of interactive events Indicators Learner engagement / Participation [4][5][8][28] Instructor engagement [4][8] Understanding/Clarity [5][11] Intimacy [14][15] Emotional expression [16][17][19] Efficiency of group work [16] Co - presence /C onnectedness/Sense of community [5][16][21][22][27] Mutual attention [16] Realism [18] Self - disclosure [5][19] 80 Continuing a thread/Quoting/Referring [19] Asking questions [5][19] Expressi ng views about others’ messages [19] Building on previous learning experience [29] Co - encouragement [5] Interactive actions Procedures Evaluation [10] Management [10][30] Resource support [10] Activities Presentation/Individual activities [5][12] Reflection /Clarification/Inference/Judgement [5][12][31][32] Experimenting [12] Informative feedback /Commenting [12][24][31][32] Self - assessment [12] Peer - evaluation [12] Observation and imitation [13] Collectiveness/ G roup work/Discussion/Debate [5][16][32] Scaffolding [32] Sharing [32] Individual and group responses /Using names [5] Events Gaining attention (reception) [29] Informing learners of the objective (expectancy) [29] Stimulating recall of prior learning (retrieval) [29] Presenting the stimulus (selective perception) [29] Providing learning guidance (semantic encoding) [29] Eliciting performance (responding) [29] Providing feedback (reinforcement) [29] Assessing performance (retrieval) [29] Enhancing reten tio n and transfer (generalization) [29] * The category was altered during data analysis and ultimately included the following items: Learner ↔ Content, Learner ↔ Instructor, Learner ↔ Learner, Instructor ↔ Content, Instructor ↔ Instructor, and Content ↔ Content. ** S ources : [1] Moore , 1993 [2] Hillman, Wills and Gunawardena , 1994 [3] McBrien, Jones and Cheng , 2009 [4] Chou , 2002 [5] Schullo , 2005 [6] Offir and Lev , 2000 81 [7] Wei , 2002 [8] Roblyer and Wiencke , 2004 [9] Yacci , 2000 [10] Kahn , 2001 [11] , 2009 [12] Sahin , 2008 [13] Bandura, 1986 [14] Short , Williams and Christie , 1976 [15] Argyle and Dean, 1965 [16] Kim , 2011 [17] Tu and Mclsaac , 2002 [18] Tung and Deng , 2006 [19] Rourke et al. , 1999 [20] Biocca and Harms, 2002 [21] Henninge r and Viswanathan, 2004 [22] Swan and Shih, 2005 [23] Tu , 2001 [24] Wei , 2012 [25] Ko , 2012 ., 2011 [27] Parker and Martin, 2010 [28] Rose , 1999 [29] Kahveci , 2007 [30] Wagner , 1994 [31] Henri , 1992 [32] Zhu , 1996 . 82 C . Teachers’ questionnaire [Part 1] Do you have experience of distance teaching and technology that allows you and your students to be present in the virtual classroom at the same time ?* [ ] No [ ] Yes, irregular / a few sessions [ ] Yes, regular / many sessions * i.e. you deliver lessons distantly, communicating with multiple students all interacting at the same time by Are these technologies used in your regular distance se ssions? Video: ( ) yes, by the teacher ( ) yes, by both the teacher and students ( ) no Audio: ( ) yes, by the teacher ( ) yes, by both the teacher and students ( ) no Text: ( ) yes, by the teacher ( ) yes, by both the teacher and students ( ) no Screen demonstration: ( ) yes, by the teacher ( ) yes, by both the teacher and students ( ) no What is the average quality of the internet connection in your distance sessions? ( ) High ( ) Low ( ) Changeable How many students are usually in your distance session groups ? [ ] 1 [ ] 2 to 8 [ ] 9 to 16 [ ] more than 16 To children of what educational level do you usually deliver distance sessions? [ ] Pre - school [ ] Primary school [ ] Secondary school How well do you and t he students in your distance learning groups know each other? [ ] The children and I know each other well [ ] The children know each other well, but I do not [ ] The children do not know each other, but I know most of them [ ] None of us know each other we ll [Part 2] Please describe one of your typical distance lessons in your own words . (Use as many words as you wish. You might like to include aims, contexts, conditions, arrangement issues, length, Which strategies (methods) do you think improve your lessons and in what way? Which strategies (methods) do you think interfere with your lessons and why? 83 D. Teacher’s checklist template Please tick all strategies that you follow in your practice of teaching in virtual en vironments with a synchronous mode of learning. Strategy Comments [ ] Strategy 1 [ ] Strategy … [ ] Strategy 154 84 E. Observation protocol template Strategy Evidence observed (time) Observer comments [ ] Strategy 1 [ ] Strategy … [ ] Strategy 154 85 F. Interview schedule Teacher’s interview: opening question : What do you think has changed since the implementation of the new strategies? [ Discuss the effects of each observed strategy separately. ] Children’s interview : guiding question s What changes have you noticed in this lesson compared to your previous lessons? session compared to previous sessions ? What was worse in this session compared to previous sessions ? 86 G . Comparative description of the survey cases Case IDs Way of d ata transmission Connection quality Number of children Participant familiarity in the sessions Level of education Specific features Screen Video Audio Text High qual. connection Low qual. connection 1 child 2 to 8 children 9 to 16 children More than 16 children Everyone know s each other Children know each other Teacher know the children No one know s each other Mixed or varied groups Preschool Primary school Secondary school Guest participation Intercultural participants Local and re mote children 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 AT01 V V V V V V V V V V V AT02 V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V AT03 V V V V V V V V V V AT04 V V V V V V V V V V AT05 V V V V V V V V V V V V AT06 V V V V V V V V V V V AT07 V V V V V V V V V V V V AT08 V V V ? V V V V V V V V V AT09 V V V V V V V V V V V AT10 V V V V V V V V V AT11 V V V V V V V V V AT12 V V V V V V V V V V V V AT13 V V V V V V V V V V V V AT14 V V V V V V V V V V AT15 V V V V V V V V V AT16 V V V V V V V V AT17 V V V V V V V V AT18 V V V V V V V V V V AT19* V V ? ? V V V V ? ? ? AT20 V V V V V V V V V AT21 V V V V V V V V AT22 V V V V V V V AT23 V Vt Vt V V V V V V V AT24 V Vt Vt V V V V V V V V AT25 V Vt Vt V V V V V V AT26 V Vt Vt V V V V V V V V V V 87 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 AT27 V Vt V V V V V V V AT28 V V V V V V V AT29 Vt Vt V V V V V V V V AT30 Vt Vt V V V V V AT31 Vt Vt Vt V ? ? V V V V V V AT32 Vt Vt Vt V V V V V V V ? ? ? ? ? V V AT33 V V V V V V V V V AT34 V V V V V V V AT35 V V V V V V AT36 V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V AT37 V V V V V V V V V V AT38 V V V V V V V V V AT39 V V V V V V V AT40 V V V V V V V V AT41* V V V V V V AT42* V V V V V AT43 V V V V V V AT44 Vt V V V V V V AT45 V ? ? V V V V V V V V AT46* V V V V V V AT47* V V V V V V AT48 V V V V V V V V – the characteristic is present in the case with relevance t o both students and teacher Vt – the characteristic is present in the case with rel evance to the teacher only * – no strategies were indicated by these cases. 88 H. CUREC app roval email 17 May 2013 10:05 Subject: Approval: CUREC Ivan Katlianik From: Catherine Walter catherine.walter@education.ox.acL-5;¤th;&#x-11e;rin;å.w;¦lt;&#x-3e-;r@4;ํu;&#x-9c4;¤ti;&#x-3on;&#x.-9o;&#xx-9.;꓄&#x.uk0;.uk To: Ivan Katlianik ivan.katlianik@education.ox.aciva;&#xn.ka;tl-;ian;&#xik@e;]uc;Ҥt;&#xi-3o;&#xn.ox;&#x-9.a;ӄ.;&#xuk00;.uk Cc: Chris Davies chris.davies@education.ox.acӄh;&#xr3is;&#x.dav;&#xi-10;äs@;ํu;-5a;ti-;on.;&#xox-9;&#x.a4c;.uk;.uk, Education Research Office research.office@education.ox.ac.ukre7;&#xse3a;r-6;Äh.;&#xof-6;ic5;ä@e;]u-;鱊ti-;on.;&#xox-9;&#x.a4c;.uk;&#x-900; Dear Ivan, Application Approval Title: The characteristics of synchronous interaction between children and teacher in virtual learning environments The above application, as per the atta ched documents, has been considered on behalf of the Departmental Research Ethics Committee (DREC) in accordance with the procedures laid down by the University for ethical approval of all research involving human participants. I am pleased to inform you t hat, on the basis of the information provided to DREC, the proposed research has been judged as meeting appropriate ethical standards, and accordingly, approval has been granted. If your research involves participants whose ability to give free and informe d consent is in question (this includes those under 18 and vulnerable adults), then it is advisable to read the following NSPCC professional reporting requirements for cases of suspected abuse http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/research/questions/reporting_chi ld_abuse_wda74908.html NB Please check with the Research Office that the Belarusian translations in these documents are all readable; some of them are apparently not in unicode and may not survive emailing between different computer systems. It is your re sponsibility to make sure that a readable version is deposited with the Research Office. Should there be any subsequent changes to the project which raise ethical issues not covered in the original application you should submit details to research.office@ education.ox.ac.uk for consideration. Good luck with your research study. Yours sincerely, Catherine Walter Member of DREC 89 I . L ist of strategies for enhancing the interactivity of synchronous distance learning Strategy Relevant / irrelevant conditions Supporting cases Contra - dictory cases 1 2 3 4 Preparation and training 1 minimise the class size Irrelevant conditions : one - way communication and/or text - based environment AT01, AT02, AT08, AT13, AT18, AT25, AT36, AT38 AT14, AT24, AT32 2 ensure interface accessibility and usability AT02, AT06, AT13, AT21, AT22, AT26, AT27, AT45 3 arrange adult's technical assistance for children Relevant condition : younger children AT13, AT16, AT22, AT25, AT26, AT27, AT30, AT32 4 be aware of technological conditions for all children AT08, AT09, AT13, AT17, AT25, AT27, AT29 5 ensure all children have their own supplementary materials Relevant condition : using supplementary materials AT06, AT15, AT24, AT28, AT34, AT48 6 turn on and set up the medium 10 - 15 minutes prior to the session AT03, AT12, AT14, AT31, AT33, AT44 7 maximise the image of the teacher's face Relevant condition: using video AT01, AT04, AT22, AT24, AT31, AT32 8 check the correctness and quality of all supplementary materials Relevant condition : using supplementary materials AT01, AT06, AT15, AT24, AT34 9 reduce background noises Relevant conditions: poor connection and/or poor audio recording devices AT01, AT06, AT20, AT22, AT30 10 reduce external distractive factors AT01, AT06, AT20, AT22, AT30 11 leave teacher’s contact information for all children AT01, AT09, AT12, AT25, AT34 12 introduce new technologies, tools, and AT01, AT13, AT17, AT27, AT33 90 1 2 3 4 13 establish clear rules for virtual classes AT03, AT04, AT18, AT21, AT33 14 be prepared for disconnection Relevant c ondition : poor connection AT08, AT09, AT18, AT20, AT32 15 encourage the use of large screens AT01, AT20, AT22, AT31 16 set up proper lighting Relevant condition : using video AT01, AT20, AT22, AT31 17 discuss the environment's limitations with children AT02, AT05, AT09, AT45 18 upload supplementary materials in advance Relevant condition : using supplementary materials AT06, AT15, AT24, AT34 19 ensure the quality of guests' connections are sufficient Relevant condition : remote presenter AT08, AT22, AT29, AT36 20 be aware of the limitations of children's physical settings AT08, AT25, AT27, AT29 21 have emergency tasks prepared AT09, AT24, AT26, AT28 22 ensure all class members have the necessary technical skills AT13, AT16, AT24, AT26 23 use existing and proven teaching materials AT15, AT31, AT37, AT44 24 avoid distractive medium designs and interface elements AT01, AT22, AT30 25 place camera in front of the face Relevant condition : using video AT01, AT22, AT31 26 encour age children to maintain an appropriate work environment AT02, AT06, AT22 27 establish a set of emergency commands that must be followed AT03, AT04, AT33 28 conduct at least one introductory virtual session AT03, AT08, AT17 29 promote using sound - isolating headphones Relevant condi tion : using audio AT06, AT30, AT39 30 agree with guests on the session’s schedule Relevant conditions: remote presenter AT07, AT14, AT24 91 1 2 3 4 31 set and test signal transition prior to learning sessions AT08, AT17, AT25 32 patterns on the screen Relevant conditions: poor connection and/or small screens AT09, AT25, AT28 33 utilise large graphical elements AT09, AT25, AT28 34 use sound isolating headphones in a room with more than one student Relevant conditions: using audio and student’s allocation in one physical room AT05, AT08, AT13 35 establish mood with the design of the medium Relevant condition : younger children AT18, AT21, AT26 36 use a high resol ution camera Relevant condition : using video AT01, AT31 37 use accessible forms of a medium AT02, AT14 38 use high quality audio recording device Relevant condition : using audio AT06, AT39 39 set the medium’s signal quality according to the technical characteristics of the less advanced computers in the class AT08, AT17 40 maximise the lowest quality of connection in the environment Relevant condition : varied levels of connection AT17, AT32 41 deal with technological issues out of session AT25, AT28 42 place camera at a distance and use zoom Relevant condition: using video AT01 Structure, content, and management 43 employ group work Relevant conditions: large - sized classes and/or local and remote students and/or newly introduced children AT02, AT04, AT07, AT13, AT14, AT17, AT24, AT25, AT32, AT38, AT40, AT45, AT48 AT26 92 1 2 3 4 44 be adaptive and dynamic in choosing AT01, AT02, AT07, AT08, AT09, AT11, AT15, AT21, AT25, AT32 45 encourage children to ask short questions in text Relevant condition : availability of text messaging AT07, AT13, AT17, AT29, AT39, AT40 AT29 46 objectively estimate the amount of content that can be delivered AT14, AT18, AT25, AT26, AT31, AT39 47 set flexible time boundaries in planning activities AT18, AT25, AT30, AT33, AT35, AT44 48 make ethical considerations AT02, AT09, AT13, AT22, AT29 49 plan and arrange post - session activities AT03, AT12, AT31, AT33, AT44 50 establish logical connections between pieces of information AT07, AT11, AT11, AT32, AT35 51 determine, and avoid exceeding, a reasonable level of instruction pace AT09, AT13, AT17, AT32, AT33 52 simplify technological components AT26, AT27, AT28, AT39, AT44 53 constantly check the quality of connection Relevant condition : varied connection quality AT02, AT07, AT20, AT25, AT32 54 enable students to leave questions after the session AT01, AT09, AT23, AT31 AT01 55 promote tasks that are interactive in nature AT02, AT15, AT21, AT32 56 make the beginning of the sessions clear AT03, AT22, AT27, AT48 57 invite guests to sessions AT05, AT14, AT20, AT38 58 combine familiar and unfamiliar children in one group Relevant conditions: local and remote groups of students and/or unfamiliar children AT07, AT08, AT12, AT13 59 ensure each raised question is solved AT07, AT11, AT11, AT35 60 actively encourage all students to participate AT08, AT09, AT13, AT21 93 1 2 3 4 61 progress/structure of the lesson AT09, AT11, AT35, AT45 62 provide equal opportunities for participation to all children AT09, AT12, AT13, AT27 63 have ways of contacting any student at any time during activities AT09, AT13, AT29, AT33 64 control the progress of the least advanced students AT09, AT14, AT30, AT32 65 adhere to the session plan and structure AT11, AT17, AT30, AT44 66 keep the session focused AT11, AT17, AT44 67 assign presenter roles to children AT11, AT25, AT28 68 don’t leave the classroom Relevant conditions: large - sized classes and/or younger children AT13, AT17, AT26, AT27 69 deny access to features not being used or being used inappropriately AT14, AT18, AT25, AT27 70 leave up to 30% of sessions time unreserved for any activity AT14, AT18, AT25, AT31 71 share and discuss the results of group work with the whole class AT01, AT17, AT24 72 allow children to stay in the virtual classroom after the session ends AT01, AT33, AT44 73 record all sessions and provide the students with access to them AT02, AT18, AT32 74 pay attention to children's non - verbal activities AT02, AT37, AT38 75 use text chat to clarify information Relevant conditions: poor connection and/or poor audio recording devices AT05, AT18, AT32 94 1 2 3 4 76 imply various external tools AT06, AT17, AT29 77 utilise different types of supplementary materials Relevant condition : using supplementary materials AT06, AT17, AT29 78 rely on traditional classroom strategies as long as they facilitate sessions AT09, AT14, AT27 79 take children's attention off technology AT09, AT26, AT28 80 assign group leaders AT12, AT14, AT21 81 minimise the amount of content AT14, AT18, AT26 82 combine motivated and unmotivated children in one group AT14, AT21, AT28 83 provide direct links to external tools and supplementary material Relevant condition : using supplementary materials AT14, AT22, AT48 84 h ave a clock on the screen or use some other reminder for deadlines AT15, AT24, AT25 85 only assign tasks that can be completed by all children AT16, AT24, AT26 86 prioritise audio quality Relevant condition : using audio AT18, AT21, AT30 87 be sensitive in addressing technical issues on a child's side AT20, AT25, AT30 88 encourage students not to run irrelevant software during sessions Relevant condition : poor connection AT20, AT40, AT43 89 reply to a few messages at a time AT34, AT39, AT45 90 stimulate interactions at the beginning of lesson AT02, AT20 91 be attentive to off - task text chat messages AT04, AT14 92 enable children to use chat at all times where possible Relevant condition : availability of text messaging AT05, AT09 95 1 2 3 4 93 change the composition of groups Irrelevant conditions : purposive groups formation or difficulties in rearranging groups AT05, AT14 AT21 94 limit one form of work to 10 - 15 minutes or break it into parts AT08, AT21 95 make short brakes during sessions Irrelevant conditions: effective work is established, and large - sized classes and/or small children AT08, AT21 AT13, AT26 96 replace questions with polls when possible Relevant condition : availability of polling AT09, AT14 97 continuously ensure that children are focused on the session AT11, AT45 98 assign individual tasks to children going ahead or behind the plan AT13, AT14 99 help guests to work with children Relevant condition : remote presenter AT14, AT20 100 change group leaders AT14, AT21 101 save chat history Relevant condition : availability of text messaging AT18, AT32 102 make use of the phone when appropriate AT20, AT24 103 avoid external tools Relevant conditions: younger students and/or poor connection AT22, AT24 104 devote equal time to distant and local children Relevant condition : local and remote groups of students AT05 105 provide equal treatment to distant and local children Relevant condition : local and remote groups of students AT05 106 give children time away from the teacher AT06 AT27, AT21 96 1 2 3 4 107 adopt the facilitative approach over instructional AT11 108 prioritise connection stability over quality Relevant conditions: poor connection or varied connection AT13 109 respond in text to save the message for future reference Relevant condition : availability of text messaging AT18 110 assign expert and learner roles to children based on their achievements AT21 Interplay and communication 111 call children by name AT05, AT08, AT12, AT27, AT31, AT38, AT40 112 be aware and make use of nonverbal messages Relevant conditions: good connection, and good video devices or good audio devices AT02, AT08, AT12, AT13, AT20, AT37 113 be responsive AT02, AT09, AT17, AT21, AT26, AT27 114 children aware that feelings exist in virtual environments AT02, AT08, AT12, AT20, AT26, AT37 115 constantly check for understanding AT03, AT13, AT18, AT27, AT38, AT48 116 encourage turning off microphones when not speaking Relevant condition : using audio AT06, AT12, AT13, AT17, AT36, AT40 AT04, AT06 117 quote only relevant passages of students’ messages and refer explicitly to the sender when replying AT02, AT13, AT25, AT33, AT40 118 make children see you or your picture AT04, AT05, AT24, AT30, AT32 AT09 119 have names on the screen AT05, AT08, AT12, AT31, AT40 120 establish a reasonable level of intimacy AT01, AT05, AT27, AT38 97 1 2 3 4 121 use abbreviations and emoticons Relevant condition : using text messaging AT02, AT12, AT20, AT33 122 look into camera when speaking Relevant condition : using video AT04, AT05, AT23, AT32 123 reduce simultaneous talking Relevant condition : using audio AT06, AT13, AT17, AT20 AT04, AT45 124 ensure the speaker is identifiable at all times Relevant conditions: using video and/or using audio and/or using text messaging AT06, AT13, AT38, AT40 125 enable students to ask questions AT07, AT09, AT31, AT32 126 maintain positive attitudes and relationships AT08, AT17, AT18, AT20 127 promote expressing feelings and emotions AT08, AT20, AT26, AT37 128 present yourself to the children Relevant condition : a teacher unfamiliar to the students AT11, AT12, AT31, AT43 129 be accessible to the children AT03, AT07, AT31 130 Remind the children that you can support them AT03, AT07, AT31 131 imply effective questioning and listening AT03, AT17, AT38 132 establish social and academic relationships offline Relevant conditions: long - term courses and/or one - way communication AT05, AT07, AT13 133 promote communication rather than discussion AT07, AT10, AT35 134 use private chat for discussion on sensitive issues Relevant condition : availability of private messaging AT15, AT44, AT45 135 respect children's privacy AT15, AT21, AT33 136 express a positive attitude to the environment AT18, AT20, AT30 137 provide children with summative reports Relevant condition : long - term courses AT01, AT15 98 1 2 3 4 138 provide a private messaging option Releva nt condition : availability of private messaging Irrelevant condition : learners are easily distracted AT06, AT38 AT20, AT45 139 continuously analyse the class’ attitude AT07, AT10 140 present unfamiliar children to each other prior to their first session Relevant conditions: local and remote groups of students or unfamiliar children AT07, AT37 141 supplement discussion with a text chat to obtain alternative opinions Relevant condition : availability of text messaging AT08, AT14 142 describe rather than criticise misbehaviour AT10, AT18 143 be a member rather than a teacher AT12, AT38 144 discuss off - session questions in the session AT15, AT32 145 enable students to use webcams in local groups Relevant condition : local and remote groups of students AT17, AT33 146 keep verbal and visual communication short Relevant conditions: poor connection, or poor video devices, or poor audio recording devices AT18, AT20 147 encourage students to view all participants as real people AT20, AT37 148 evaluate both academic results and children’s participation AT03 149 employ peer - evaluation AT10 150 share privately obtained data only upon children's permission AT15 99 1 2 3 4 Evaluation 151 control and analyse children's absence AT03, AT28, AT32, AT36, AT47 152 obtain children's feedback on sessions AT01, AT09, AT28 153 devote time to analysing the most and least successful sessions AT09, AT14, AT17 154 find out reasons for children's disconnection or attrition AT02, AT28 100 J . List of experimentally examined strategies and their effects Strategy Previous experience Experiment Interactivity effect Reported Observed Examined Observed Nature Comments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 4 V 5 V V 6 V V + 7 V V = 8 V 9 V V + 10 V 11 V 12 V 13 V 14 V V + 15 V 16 V 17 V 20 V V = 21 V V 22 V V 23 V V + 24 V 25 V 26 V 27 V V + 28 V 29 V V + 32 V V 33 V V 101 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 36 V V = insufficient connection quality 37 V 38 V 41 V 42 V 43 V V 44 V V 45 V 46 V 47 V V 48 V 49 V 50 V V 51 V V 52 V V + 53 V V + 54 V V + 55 V V 56 V 57 V 60 V V 62 V V 63 V V 65 V 67 V V 69 V 70 V V + 71 V V 72 V V 73 V V 74 V 75 V V + 76 V 79 V 80 V V 81 V V + to the detriment of the content depth 82 V 84 V V + 102 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 85 V 86 V V + 87 V 88 V V = difficult to monitor 89 V V = scattering the teacher's attention 90 V 91 V V 92 V V 94 V 95 V V 100 V 101 V 102 V 103 V V = 106 V 109 V 110 V V = 111 V V 112 V 113 V V 114 V 115 V 116 V V – children forget to turn the microphones on 117 V V 118 V V 119 V V 120 V 121 V V + 122 V 123 V V + 124 V V 126 V 127 V 129 V V 130 V V 131 V V + 133 V 135 V V 103 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 136 V 139 V 141 V 142 V V + 143 V 144 V V 146 V V + 147 V V = 148 V V + 149 V V + 150 V V + 151 V 152 V V + 154 V + – positive effect = – neutral effect – – negative effect 104 K . Perceived interactivity - related changes that occurred in the experimental case Theme Positive quote example(s) Negative quote example(s) Attitude “less tired at the end of the lesson” (BS02) “more interesting and fun” (BS04) “we used better headphones … , you hardly hear anything around you…, nothing distracts you ” (BS07) Clarity “could hear each other better” (BS07) “the voices were clearer” (BS01) “no echo this time” (BS03) “everyone’s voices sounded similar” (BS01) Content “understood the topic better” (BS08) “knew what to do each time” (BS04) Emotions “was cool w hen [the teacher]…used smileys” (BS05) Interface “the countdown …helped us…, we did it on time” (BS04) “liked that we did not have to leave the program” (BS02) “having to turn on microphones…annoyed me” (BS07) “we had to press the button before speaking…[which] was distract” (BS08) Interplay “we talked more than usual” (BS04) “was cool …when we evaluated each other” (BS04) “in these head speakers you only hear w h at others say” (BS01) “easier to talk” (BS04) Sense of authenticity “ the teacher’s picture was sometimes more realistic” (BS07) “felt more real” (BS07) “was more like a usual lesson” (BS02) “[the voices] sometimes sounded as if it was a robot speaking” (BS01) Stability “fewer stops” (BS03) “it acted up less” (BS04) Timing “finished on time” (BS02) “there was not such a fuss” (BS04) Overall: 9 Overall: 3