The Viability of Skype to Reduce Learner Perceived Sense of Isolation

Journal of Online Higher Education 2013 • December • Volume: 4 • Issue: 12

1

The Viability of Skype to Reduce Learner Perceived

Sense of Isolation

Dr. Donna Graham, Dr. Timothy Anderson and Deliesha Hassell

ABSTRACT Many online learners find it difficult to engage with other

learners, faculty, and staff and are left with a feeling of

isolation. Existing literature suggests that connecting

through peer-to-peer learning networks enables deeper

learning through discussion and improves retention. To

promote learner connectedness and reduce learner

perceptions of isolation, institutions are implementing

technology to allow learners to connect to others. Skype is

one of many tools that can be used in virtual communities

by institutions to encourage communication among

learners, faculty, and staff. A study of 111 virtual

community learners determined that learners did not

perceive the use of Skype as an effective tool to reduce the

perceived sense of isolation within a virtual community.

Specifically, a vast majority of participants reported a

negative perception or no perception that Skype could

reduce perceived isolation. Similar to other studies, the use

of Skype was low, but these results are explained through

the technology acceptance model. This model suggests

peoples’ perceptions of technology drive the decision to use

technology, leading to eventual acceptance or rejection of

technology.


2

The Viability of Skype to Reduce Learner Perceived Sense of Isolation

Introduction

Learner engagement is critical for productive learning, but many learners in online

learning environments have a difficult time engaging because they often feel isolated (Ryle &

Cumming, 2007). Learners not experienced in online communities need to learn “how” to

participate in these communities (Ryle & Cumming, 2007) and technology may assist these

learners. For the purposes of this study, the definition of learner isolation is a learner lacking

social and academic integration to his or her institution of higher learning (Tinto, 1975). Learner

isolation directly influences learner retention rates in higher education (Rovai, 2002) that is

amplified by the requirements of doctoral learning (Ali & Kohun, 2007) and further increased by

online programs (Berman, Grant, & Markette, 2012).

Factors facilitating learners’ sense of isolation include: (a) high levels of rigor not

experienced before (Ali & Kohun, 2007), (b) online learners sense of isolation from peers, which

is not as common by traditional learners (Radda, 2012), and (c) a large number of non-traditional

learners entering higher education who have little knowledge of an institution’s culture or online

learning platforms. Some institutions implement various technology tools and settings to address

learner isolation (Nichols, 2010). One such approach includes the creation of virtual

communities that foster opportunities for learners to develop a social presence through the

communication among peers and instructors (Oztok & Brett, 2011). The purpose of this study

was to assess how integrated technology, specifically Skype, promotes learner engagement.

Moody and Wieland (2010) stated that one tool that facilitates communication within

virtual communities is videoconferencing. Videoconferencing encourages learner participation


3

and engagement in the community (Moody & Wieland, 2010). A broad set of studies exploring

the relationship among the use of videoconferencing, Skype, and online learning communities

exist (Downes, 2010; Conrad & Donaldson, 2012; Tschofen & Mackness, 2012). However, as

with any technology-based educational tool, the tool is only effective if accepted by and used by

learners. To understand learner acceptance of tools such as Skype better, the technology

acceptance model (TAM) was applied in this study.

TAM is based on grounded theory to examine the determining factors for user choices to

accept or reject a particular e-learning technology. This model was proven effective by Šumak,

Heričko, and Pušnik (2011) in an assessment of 42 separate studies conducted to evaluate the

acceptance of technology. TAM is beneficial in facilitating the understanding of user behavior in

the use of information systems (Legris, Ingham, & Collerette, 2003). The theory of reasoned

behavior best describes attitude and behavior (Straub, 2009). This theory suggests peoples’

behavioral results from their attitudes about the expectation and the social standards about a

certain behavior. These attitudes are a result of perceptions about a technology or application,

and are affected more by the perceived ease of use than by perceived usefulness of the

application, which drives the intent to use the application (Straub, 2009). A learning theory

incorporating digital tools that invites both thinking and emotion into the learning process is

Connectivism (Bell, 2011).

Connectivism was the theoretical framework used for this study (Downes, 2008).

Connectivism is a theory characterized by self-paced, independent learning with opportunities

for peer-to-peer learning networks (Mallon, 2013). This theory is in alignment with this study

and Ryle and Cumming’s (2007) position that engagement through peer-to-peer online


4

interaction enables deeper learning through discussion and improves retention by increasing

motivation and reducing learner feelings of isolation (Ryle & Cumming, 2007).

Existing literature proves that a need exists to integrate learners socially to reduce levels

of isolation, which can increase retention rates (Rovai, 2002; Rovai, Wighting, & Lucking, 2004;

Tinto, 1975). When distance education began in the 1960s, the availability for learners to

correspond with instructors existed only through a system of postal mailing of assignments,

providing an inability to communicate with peers (Sumner, 2000). As technology advanced,

distance education leaders developed platforms to include technology-based tools aimed at

reducing isolation by connecting learners through virtual work spaces, instant messaging, and

video chat (Sumner, 2000). Despite these new tools embedded in the virtual learning

environment, doctoral retention rates remain at an average of 50% (Lovitts, 2001). This high

attrition rate can be attributed to learner experiences or expectations in the doctoral program

(Lovitts, 2001). Because learner isolation can have a direct impact on learners’ decisions to

continue with the program (Ali & Kohun, 2006), integration of tools to reduce isolation becomes

necessary.

Methodology

This quantitative study incorporated the use of an online survey to acquire doctoral

learner perceptions of Skype’s effectiveness in reducing a sense of isolation. The independent

variable, the use of Skype in the online doctoral community network, was assessed through the

collection of survey data that captured self-reported use of Skype. The dependent variable, the

perceived feeling of isolation, was assessed through the collection of survey data that collected

learner perception of isolation.


5

Participants of this study were members of a doctoral community from a university in the

Southwestern United States. This doctoral community is an online site open to doctoral learners

and contains forums, videos, and other resources necessary for effective online learning. A

message containing the requirements for participation in the study was posted to all learners, and

learners were notified of the study during a July 2013 doctoral residency. Participation in this

study was voluntary and the initial goal was 100 participants. The researchers reached 111

survey responses. A survey consisting of 14 closed -ended questions was available to all

participants for two weeks. In an effort to increase participation, a reminder posting in the virtual

learning community was posted to all participants one week into the data collection.

Problem Statement

It is currently not known if the use of Skype in a virtual community of scholars reduces

the perceptions of isolation by its members. Doctoral attrition rates have averaged 50% for the

past 50 years (Lovitts, 2001) and although many factors lead to doctoral attrition, Ali and Kohun

(2006) claimed that feelings of isolation greatly contribute to doctoral attrition. A gap in the

research exists that explores ways to reduce levels of online doctoral isolation by the use of

Skype in a virtual scholarly community, which may contribute to an increase in retention rates.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this quantitative study was to explore the viability of Skype in an online

community environment to reduce a sense of isolation for online doctoral learners. This study

defined the sense of isolation as the lack of meaningful social contacts (Ali & Kohun, 2007).

Social integration becomes paramount for learners when encountering new academic situations

or difficult problems (Hortulanus, Machielse, & Meeuwesen, 2006). Ali and Kohun (2007)

postulated that doctoral programs are known for fostering both of these factors, which increases


6

the chance of learners becoming isolated. Further, Berman Grant, & Markette (2012) suggested

that doctoral programs delivered in an online format can further exacerbate a sense of isolation.

This research adds to the body of knowledge surrounding the isolation in doctoral programs by

exploring the use of Skype in an online scholarly community as a tool to reduce online doctoral

learners’ perceived sense of isolation.

Research Questions and Hypotheses

The introduction of new educational tools continues through the online learning

environment as technology capabilities expand. One such tool is Skype in scholarly virtual

communities that allow online learners an opportunity to communicate with peers and

instructors. Developing a sense of community may reduce the levels of isolation and decrease

retention rates. Exploring online learner perceptions regarding the use of Skype to reduce online

doctoral learner isolation becomes necessary to validate this assumption. The following research

questions guided this quantitative study:

R1: To what extent, if any, does a virtual community of scholars perceive the use of Skype as

a tool to reduce isolation?

H1: Members of a virtual community of scholars perceived the use of SKYPE as tool to

reduce isolation.

H0: Members of a virtual community of scholars perceive no difference in the level of

isolation through the use of SKYPE.

R2: What are the perceived advantages by online doctoral learners, if any, of using Skype

within an online community?

H2: Doctoral learners perceive advantages through the use of SKYPE within an online

community.


7

H0: Doctoral learners perceive no advantages through the use of SKYPE within an online

community.

R3: What factors, if any, influence doctoral learners’ intent to use SKPE within a virtual

community of scholars?

H3: Factors influence doctoral learners’ intent to use SKYPE within a virtual community of

scholars?

H0: Factors do not influence doctoral learners’ intent to use SKYPE within a virtual

community of scholars?

Literature Highlights

Online Doctoral Learner Isolation

Originally, the definition of learner isolation was a learner lacking social and academic

integration with his or her institution of higher learning (Tinto, 1975). The development of this

theory was for face-to-face learning environments in which relationships require physical contact

with others. Later, Rovai (2002) applied this theory to online learning environments, and

determined that the development of virtual relationships by educational leaders could overcome

the physical aspect of the theory. Learner isolation is attributed to high attrition rates in both

traditional face-to-face and nontraditional online higher education settings (Rovai, 2002).

Existing literature supports these findings and claim that isolation in online learning

environments is more prevalent because the process to overcome this physical barrier is not an

easy task for online educators (Angelino & Natvig, 2007; Stavredes, 2011). For example,

Stavredes (2011) credited physical separation for the increased levels of online learner isolation,

which resulted in social gaps among online learners. Stelzer and Vogelzangs (1994) identified

the dimensions of online learner isolation as physiological and psychological. Bolinger and Inan


8

(2010) considered the physiological aspect of online learner isolation as the physical barrier

created by online learning, and the psychological aspect of online learner isolation extended

beyond the physical barrier to include online learners’ lack of relationships, communication, and

human contact.

Overcoming the physical barrier is not the only obstacle educational leaders must

overcome to reduce online learners of isolation. Online learners enroll in higher education

institutions with their own levels of self and social reliance (Gaillard-Kenney, Kent, Long, &

Ransdell, 2011). Self-reliance is the belief held by learners that they can rely heavily on their

own skills and knowledge to obtain academic success. Conversely, social-reliance is a belief held

by learners that their success depends, in part, upon access to other learners (Gallaird-Kenney et

al., 2011). Learners with increased levels of social-reliance may possess an increased intrinsic

desire to connect with other learners whereas learners with increased levels of self-reliance may

possess less of a desire to connect with others (Galliard-Kenney et al., 2011). Learners also bring

their own familiarity with technology (Prensky, 2001) that can affect online learners’ levels of

isolation. Familiarity with the perceived benefits of use of technology to connect online learners

virtually with others may hinder or encourage learners to use tools intended to connect online

learners across geographical lines (Sung-Youl, 2009). An online learner’s perception of how

technology connects online learners with others may affect the learner’s use of technology-based

tools such as Skype.

Lovitts (2001) concluded that learner isolation was the largest contributing factor in

attrition rates. Online doctoral learner attrition rates are between 10 and 50% higher than

traditional on-ground doctoral learners (Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2011). Some educators attribute

this phenomenon to the ideology that doctoral learning differs greatly from graduate learning in


9

rigor. This transition may be more difficult for online learners than on-ground learners and even

more difficult for isolated learners (Ali & Kohun, 2007). Further, Ali and Kohun (2007)

determined that isolation in doctoral learners leading to attrition occurs through a variety of

stages; (a) integration into the educational environment while enrolling into a program, (b)

research immersion for the first year of the program when the learner immerses in research

courses with rigor not experienced before resulting in learner isolation from peers, (c) the second

year through doctoral candidacy requires the development of the proposal in which isolates

doctoral learners and reduces opportunity for learners to vent frustrations about this rigorous

process, and (d) the dissertation phase in which learners rely heavily on an advisor that they may

clash with, creating the necessity to solicit answers about the dissertation process from others,

which cannot occur with the isolated learner (Ali & Kohun, 2007). From this literature, one can

conclude that the need to provide avenues to reduce doctoral learners’ sense of isolation is

crucial throughout the doctoral learning process to reduce attrition rates.

How to Reduce Online Doctoral Learner Isolation

Although the physiological dimension of isolation is important to reduce isolation, the

psychological dimension, including the ability to develop relationships, communicate, and have

human contact is more important (Bollinger & Inan, 2012). Opportunities for online learners to

develop a social presence can remove these psychological barriers. Short, Williams, and Christie

(1976) defined the social presence theory as the prominence of people collaborating and the

relationships that ensue. Cobb (2009) offered a more current view of social presence with

respect to online learning as the ability to perceive other learners as real in mediated

communication.


10

Oztok & Brett (2011) suggested that more current definitions of social presence take into

account that many factors can produce or support the development of social presence in online

learning environments. These factors include differing media, communicative patterns, and

attributes of the community where learners develop relationships. Lee and McLoughlin (2010)

further communicated three main difficulties that learners have in the development of a social

presence in online learning; (a) a lack of opportunities for online learners to develop a sense of

belonging among peers, which are more accessible in traditional forms of face-to-face learning,

results in decreased levels of enthusiasm and motivation, (b) large number of learners entering

the higher education institution’s online programs may not be familiar with the institution’s

culture, (c) many online learners enrolled in online courses have little to no knowledge of the

online learning platforms.

Often, authors focus on the relationship between social presence and a sense of

community in online learning environments (Oztok & Brett, 2011). Dixson (2010) developed

and administered a survey to online learners to determine what engaged online learners to

become a part of the community. Dixson (2010) determined that the development of a social

presence occurred through the implementation of multiple opportunities to communicate with

peers and instructors. Moody and Wieland (2010) further explained that when multiple learners

become involved in an educational interaction, the potential to develop a social presence

emerges. When examining if videoconferencing could develop a social presence, Moody and

Wieland (2010) discovered online learners not only built a social presence but also developed

time management and preparation skills. As a result, methods to enhance the social presence in

online learning environments exist that can reduce isolation among online learners to retain

learners at higher rates than isolated learners.


11

Virtual Scholarly Communities

The feeling of isolation among online doctoral learners contributes greatly to the high

attrition rates of these learners (Ali & Kohun, 2006). Institutions can provide opportunities for

online learners to integrate socially as a method to reduce perceptions of isolation. Virtual

scholarly communities are relatively new in their development and act as a learner driven virtual

community designed to assist online doctoral learners in the successful completion of the

learners’ programs of study and their dissertations (Berman, et al., 2012). Virtual scholarly

communities located outside the virtual classroom offer opportunities for all learners enrolled in

a doctoral program to share experiences and learn from one another (Radda, 2012). Further,

scholarly virtual communities provide a variety of support services to assess doctoral learners

through the research process, as well as opportunities for learners to post and receive feedback

from peers and faculty members on prospective research ideas (Berman et al., 2012). People

have used Skype as a tool to connect with others and it is unknown if the use of Skype in these

virtual scholarly communities reduces levels of online doctoral learner isolation.

Foundation of Connectivism

Connectivism is a theory characterized by self-paced, independent learning with

opportunities for peer-to-peer learning networks (Mallon, 2013). Siemens (2007) and Downes

(2008) first defined this learning theory in 2008 as a form of knowledge and instruction

grounded on the theory that knowledge is spread across networks. Siemens and Downes argued

that “learning is the process of building networks of information, contacts, and resources that are

applied to real problems” (Anderson & Dron, 2011, p. 87). These connectivist networks consist

of connections that allow learners the capability to build knowledge. Learning in a virtual


12

environment requires the key mechanisms of connectivism autonomy, connectedness, diversity,

and openness (Tschofen & Mackness, 2012).

The foundation of the connectivist theory is the result of a study that assessed a course

titled Connectivism & Connective Knowledge (CCK08), offered through the University of

Manitoba by Downes and Siemens (Downes, 2008). The course allowed 25 learners to register,

but left registration open for non-credit and eventually had 2,200 learners enrolled. Learners

were left to follow the curriculum, but needed to find alternative ways to share and learn in this

mass open online course (MOOC). The solutions embraced by learners included WIKIs, Skype,

webinars, and others that allowed learners to interact with other learners. According to Downes

(2008), many of the learners did not know which tools were going to be of value in solving

course problems, but the group helped define approaches to solving defined problems.

Downe’s (2008) article was written during the study, which was still in progress, and as

acknowledged by Downes, the dynamics of the course were ever changing. In Downe’s (2010)

follow-up article to his CCK08 study, he claimed that he encouraged all 2,200 learners to

participate and contribute to learning through various interactions. Downe’s recognized future

needs for software to assist in the facilitation of conversations between learners in a distributed

environment and reorienting learning tools.

In addressing Downe’s connectivist learning theory, Tschofen & Mackness (2012)

posited that three components of connectivism identified by Downes (2008), competence,

relatedness, and autonomy, directly relate to the psychological theory of self-determination.

Connectivism, as posited by the founders Siemens and Downes, describes how people learn in

the digital age. Online learners must connect through the network to find information. To support

the concept of connectivism is to support software to enable social connections and group


13

interactions. However, according to Conrad and Donaldson (2012), social software is often

missing from online course design.

According to Ravenscroft (2011), a networked social media landscape allows diverse

opinions communicated through dialogue and refined through discussion. Social media

landscapes also allow for learners to communicate using contemplation, explanation, and

negotiation to open and maintain learning relationships (Ravenscroft, 2011). Although deep

social dialogue is impermeable to change, Ravenscroft (2011) evaluated the social constructivist

concepts that highlight the importance of communication in learning. This evaluation leads to an

understanding of how digital learning communication can integrate within a discussion-rich

connectivist style.

Connectivist technology supports many models of learning and sways the development of

learning models. Anderson and Dron (2011) suggested if no methods for two-way dialogue

existed, the development of instruction that uses dialogue and conversation would not make

much sense and should inspire the creation of instruction to be self-contained. During the early

stages of online education, learning was believed to be an individual activity (Anderson & Dron,

2011). This belief made little difference if learning was through reading, watching a movie, or

mingling with a computer program in isolation or in the presence of other learners (Anderson &

Dron, 2011). However, more recently the third generation of distance education, also known as

connectivist pedagogy has become more prevalent.

Use of Skype in Distance Education

Asynchronous education is a self-paced form of distance education, often supplemented

by synchronous education, which relies on teacher-centered methods. Parker, Boase-Jelinek, and

Herrington’s (2011) research that assessed learner perceptions on using Skype to build a


14

community of learners found the users of Skype were more likely to employ the asynchronous

tools, such as discussion threads more than learners not using Skype. Although the study had a

low survey response rate, those who did respond indicated 47% of the study's SKYPE use was

for content-related discussions (chats); 53% used SKYPE for facilitation-related discussions

(Parker et al., 2011). In another study of 27 post-secondary learners from two e-learning courses,

(Murphy, Rodríguez-Manzanares, and Barbour (2011) found that asynchronous e-learning better

supported cognitive participation because it elevated reflection. However, synchronous e-

learning improved motivation better. The results also concluded that asynchronous learning

related to an increase of cognitive effort. This increase in cognitive effort may be a result of

learners having more time to reflect (Murphy et al., 2011). However, synchronous learning

methods appeared to support learner participation. This participation led to better motivation and

less ambiguity on assignments because synchronous learning tends to provide immediate

feedback.

In another study that evaluated the use of Skype to allow online learners to attend on-

ground classes, Skype was found to be a good tool to create personal relationships between

online and on-ground learners. The study looked at pairing a traditional doctoral learner with an

online learner to allow for full course participation by the online learners (Macharaschwili &

Coggin, 2013). The researchers classified this study as a blended approach using a "Skype-

buddy” system (Macharaschwili & Coggin, 2013). The purpose of Macharaschwili and Coggin's

(2013) study was to apply blended learning as a method to enhance interaction between online

learners, professors, and traditional learners. To deliver quality learning environment,

Macharaschwili and Coggin's (2013) suggested that interaction must be meaningful and

sustained where thoughts are communicated. However, during this study most of the chatting


15

within Skype was to resolve technical issues. Personal discussions not related to the course

accounted for 30% of the comments. Interestingly, only 14% of the chats related to course

participation (Macharaschwili & Coggin, 2013). The theme emerging from online interaction via

Skype was that Skype offered an opportunity for personal interaction. During course breaks, the

use of Skype allowed learners to converse about personal issues, such as favorite books or family

interactions allowing for personal connections (Macharaschwili & Coggin, 2013).

Technology Acceptance

Educational technology includes the strategies for planning, implementing, and assessing

the use of technology delivered to learners. Technology is not a new form of an education tool,

but the most common educational technologies implemented in colleges and universities are

founded on unsupported adult learning theories (Clark, 2009). These technologies are receiving

failing grades by the major scientific groups, such as the National Academy of Sciences (Clark,

2009). Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) argued that problem-based learning, also known as

discovery learning, has proven unsuccessful. Clark (2009) mirrors this concern and finds that

teaching research skills in a problem-based learning environment has proven faulty because the

assumption is that adult learners construct on what they already know. Clark (2009) argued that

expecting learners to struggle with problems through discovery or construction is not the best

way to instruct. The problem-based method of instruction is likened to an unguided or minimally

guided approach and only works for a small percentage of advanced learners (Clark, 2009).

Institutions implementing new educational technology should have a clear understanding

of adult learning theories to close the gaps. This is a key concept because few higher education

programs provide acceptable depth of training on the “design, evaluation, and interpretation of

learning and performance research” (Clark, 2009, p. 5). Researchers of higher education often


16

believe they know the solution to a problem so their focus is on the facts to convince

administrators to adopt their solution. This should not be the goal of technology implementation.

The beginning to any solution should be a clear description of the opportunity or problem, a

measurement of current development toward the objective, and an understanding of when the

goal is met (Clark, 2009). Technology acceptance model (TAM) is a respected ground theory for

examining the factors that sway the choice of users to accept or reject particular e-learning

technology. Šumak, Heričko, and Pušnik (2011) proved this model effective in a study conducted

to evaluate the acceptance of technology as described in 42 separate studies. The success of

implementing e-learning solutions is based on factors that influence users’ perceptions of the use

of technology. These factors include perception of use, attitude toward using, perceived ease of

use, behavioral intentions, and usage (Šumak, Heričko, & Pušnik, 2011).

When learners adopt information technology solutions, researchers can focus on one of

two acceptance criteria. The first is to focus on individual acceptance of technology and the

actual use, known as behavioral intention. The second research focus is on the implementation

success at the organizational level. Currently, TAM is the most commonly used theory to

measure both methods.

Perceptions toward technology. The technology acceptance model (TAM) is a theory

most applied when exploring why users decide to use or not use e-learning technologies (Šumak,

Heričko, & Pušnik, 2011). The TAM proved valuable in a series of studies conducted to assess

the acceptance of technology (Šumak et al., 2011). The factors of perception of use, perceived

ease use, attitude toward using, behavioral intentions, and actual use influence users’ decisions to

use or not use technology (Šumak et al., 2011; Legris, Ingham, & Collerette, 2003).

Understanding these factors is important because this study evaluated the viability of


17

implementing Skype into an online community in an effort to reduce the perception of isolation.

The assumption of this study was that learners would use Skype because they had a positive

perception of the software and the use of Skype was easy.

Perception of use and ease of use. Ease of use as defined by Davis (1989) is the amount

of physical and mental effort in combination with the level of learning required to use the

application. Researchers found a direct relationship between perceived use and attitude to use

(Straub, 2009; Šumak et al., 2011; Teo, 2011). This relationship suggests that perceived use has a

larger impact than any of the other factors on a user’s attitude toward the use of an e-learning

technology. Supporting this assumption, Davis’s 1989 study was influential in exploring the

effect of perceptions toward technology and the use of that technology (Straub, 2009). Davis

(1989) suggested that a user’s perceived usefulness and the perceived of ease of use affect users’

acceptance of technology. Davis (1989) studied four programs involving 152 users that assessed

learner perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. The results suggested that the perception

of use and self-reported use correlated substantially (r = .63, study 1) and predicted future use (r

= .85, study 2). Likewise, learners’ perception of the ease of use also significantly correlated

with actual use (r = .45, study1) and future use (r = .59, study 2). A notable conclusion from the

study was that perception of use had a considerably higher correlation with user behavior than

ease of use suggesting that ease of use may be a predictor to perceived use (Davis, 1989).

Davis’s study also concluded that learners choose to use or not use technology to the

extent they trust the software will support their efforts, characterized by Davis as perceived

usefulness (Davis, 1989). However, even if users perceive an application as useful, if it is

difficult to use, the benefits of use are offset by the effort to use the application. This suggests

that ease of use drives acceptance of the technology (Davis (1989).


18

Attitude toward use and behavioral intentions. The theory of reasoned behavior

suggests that behavior results from the attitude around the expectations for behavior. These

expectations are often the result of social standards that define acceptable behavior (Straub,

2009). In regard to technology, the perception of an application drives behavior to use or not use.

Straub (2009) suggested these behaviors to use technology are influenced more by the perceived

ease of use than by the perception of use. Legris et al. (2003) concluded that TAM assists in the

comprehension of behavior and the intent to use or not use technology. The literature suggesting

behavioral intention to use (BIU) correlates to actual use of technology (Teo, 2011) supports this

conclusion.

Use. A limitation related to TAM and technology use exists when measuring the use of

technology (Legris et al., 2003). The recognition of this limitation exists when collecting actual

use from self-reported statistics. Of the 22 studies evaluated by Legris et al. (2003), 11 calculated

use of technology through self-reported statistics. Self-reported use of technology is “relative”

because self-reported use is often inexact. The factors of extent of use and depth of use were

measured in this study to increase the accuracy of reported use of Skype for (Venkatesh, Thong,

& Xu, 2012).

Results

Participant responses to an online survey were analyzed to determine the actual use of

Skype and assess the perceptions of those participants using Skype in the community of scholars.

The survey produced 111 responses from a population of approximately 3,000 doctoral learners.

Of the 111 respondents, four indicated they used Skype in the virtual community of scholars and

107 indicated they did not use Skype in the virtual community.


19

The first research question focused on participant perceptions of the use of Skype as a

tool to reduce the feeling of isolation for online learners. Figure 1 shows results for this research

question derived from the assessment of question 12 from the online survey. The four

participants using Skype in the community of scholars suggested that two participants perceived

Skype to be very effective in reducing isolation, one perceived Skype to be somewhat effective,

and one indicated a neutral perception of Skype as a tool to reduce isolation.

Figure 1. Participant perception of the use of Skype as a tool to reduce the feeling of isolation for

online learners. n=4.

The second research question focused on the advantages of using Skype within the

community of scholars. Figure 2 shows the results from question 13 of the online survey. Of the

participants that indicated they used Skype in the virtual community, two suggested Skype very

effectively offered advantages of communicating and connecting with others. Further, one

participant indicated Skype to be very effective for learners to learn with one another, two

indicated Skype to be somewhat effective for learners to learn from others, and one participant

indicated a neutral perception.

0

1

2

3

Very effective Somewhat effective Neutral Somewhat ineffective Ineffective


20

Figure 2. Advantages of using Skype within an online community of scholars. n=4.

Research question three focused on the perceived advantages of using Skype in a virtual

community of scholars. Figure 3 shows the assessment of question 10 from the online survey

reporting that of the 111 participants, 106 reported they did not use Skype within the virtual

community. Of the 106 participants that did not use Skype within the community, 63 responded

they were unaware that Skype was available in the virtual scholarly community. The participants

indicating they were aware of Skype’s availability in the virtual community, 10 indicated they

did not like using Skype, 26 reported they did not to know anyone using Skype, and seven

reported they could not find other learners, faculty, or staff members using Skype.

Other factors that influence doctoral learners’ intent to use Skype in a virtual community

of scholars were the participants’ familiarity with Skype and participants’ familiarity with others

in the virtual community. Of the four participants that indicated they used Skype within the

virtual community, three indicated that familiarity with Skype was extremely important in their

intent to use Skype, and one indicated that familiarity with Skype was somewhat important. In

addition, one participant that familiarity with others on the virtual community was very

important and another participant reported that familiarity with others on the virtual community

was slightly important. Finally, one participant indicated that the unfamiliarity with Skype and

0

1

2

3

4

5

Learning with others Communicating with others Connecting with others

Ineffective Somewhat ineffective Neutral Somewhat effective Very effective


21

unfamiliarity with others in the community is extremely important contributing factors for

leaners’ intent not to use Skype.

Figure 3. Factors that influenced learners' not using Skype in the virtual community network.

n=106.

Discussion

Three videos were placed on the home page of the virtual community of scholars’

website three months prior to the announcement of the online survey. These videos were

instructions on creating a Skype account, adding a Skype ID to user virtual community profiles,

and how to start Skype from within the virtual community. However, of the 3,000 doctoral

learner members of the community, only approximately 100 learners viewed each video.

Although the videos were placed on the home page to promote visibility, 60% of participants

indicated they did not know that Skype existed in the virtual community.

During this study, learners, faculty, and staff responded to a one-question survey posted

April 2013 in the virtual community. The question asked community members if they ever used

Skype to initiate a video conference. From the 133 responses, 75 (56%) indicated yes, suggesting

that community members actively used Skype. However, the results of the survey from this study

revealed only 3.6% of community members used Skype within the virtual community and 22.7%

I did not know Skype was available in the DC network

I do not like using Skype I do not know anyone using Skype

I cannot find other learners, faculty, or staff using Skype

when I am online

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%


22

of community members used Skype outside the virtual community. The four participants

indicating they did use Skype in the virtual community were comprised one staff, one faculty,

and two doctoral learners. The research also assessed at the frequency of Skype use by those

participants indicating they used Skype. The faculty and both learner participants indicated rare

use of Skype in the virtual community (less than one-time per month) and the one staff member

responded a frequency of sometimes (between one and five times per month).

Answering research question one (1) took into account the low number of community

members viewing the Skype videos from the home page of the virtual community website, the

low number of participants using Skype within the virtual community, and the low frequency of

Skype use by those participants using Skype. The researchers conclude that the virtual

community members may not perceive Skype as a tool to reduce their perceived sense of

isolation. Even though 59.4% of learners reported they did not know Skype existed within the

virtual community, 9.4% reported they did not like using Skype and 31.1% reported they did not

know anyone using Skype or could not find others using Skype. Therefore, the null hypothesis,

members of a virtual community of scholars perceive no difference in the level of isolation

through the use of SKYPE, cannot be rejected. Future research could assess whether or not those

31.1% of users reached out to other community members to ask that others use Skype as a tool to

communicate within the virtual community.

Research question two (2) focused on the perceived advantages by online doctoral

leaners, if any, of using Skype within a virtual community. Again, the low response and

frequency of Skype use does not allow for a conclusive answer to this question. Therefore, the

null hypothesis, doctoral learners perceived no advantages through the use of SKYPE within an

online community, could not be rejected. Future research could ask all participants this question


23

instead of just participants using Skype. This should allow researchers to gather information on

the perceptions of participants not using Skype.

Research question three (3) centered on the factors that influence doctoral learners’ intent

to use Skype within a virtual community. The responses by the four participants to research

question 14 on the online survey were mixed, but learners perceived familiarity with as

extremely important by three participants and somewhat important by one participant. The

responses from learners not using Skype in conjunction with actual use of Skype, the hypothesis

that factors influence doctoral learners’ intent to use SKYPE within a virtual community of

scholars is accepted.

Conclusion

The technology acceptance model suggests the factors of perception of use, perceived

ease use, attitude toward using, behavioral intentions, and actual use influence users’ decisions to

use or not use technology (Šumak et al., 2011; Legris, Ingham, & Collerette, 2003). This

research suggests a couple of possibilities. The first stems from the result of learners not viewing

the Skype videos on the virtual community website. Future research needs to assess why only

approximately 100 of 3000 members viewed the videos. The low view rate may suggest a couple

things, the first is the virtual community does not have members looking for tools to

communicate with other members or second, members of the community do not perceive Skype

as an effective tool to reduce isolation. The second stems from the finding that only four of 111

participants used Skype in the virtual community. Of the participants who used Skype, the

response regarding the ability of Skype to reduce isolation was positive. The majority of learners

who did not use Skype indicated it was because they did not know that Skype was available and


24

not because of a resistance to the use of videoconferencing technology. The low use rate suggests

that learners may require additional notification of new technologies made available to them.


25

References

Ali, A. & Kohun, F. (2006). Dealing with isolation feelings in IS doctoral programs.

International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 1(12). 1-33.

Ali, A., & Kohun, F. (2007). Dealing with social isolation to minimize doctoral attrition -- A four

stage framework. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 233-49.

Anderson, T. & Dron, J. (2011). Three generations of distance education pedagogy. The

International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 12(3). 81-97.

Angelino, L. M., Natvig, D. (2009). A conceptual model for engagement of the online learner.

Journal of Educators Online, 6(1).

Bell, F. (2011). Connectivism: Its place in theory-Informed research and innovation in

technology-enabled learning. The International Review of Research in Open and

Distance Learning. 12(3).

Berman, R., Grant, G., & Markette, N.J. (2012). Doctoral community network: A case study of

the perceptions of doctoral learners regarding a private, scholarly learning community.

Journal of Educational Technology. 3(10), 1-11.

Bolliger, D. U., & Inan, F. A. (2012). Development and validation of the online student

connectedness survey (OSCS). International Review of Research In Open & Distance

Learning, 13(3), 41-65.

Clark, R. E. (2009). Constructivist theory applied to instruction: Success or failure? New York,

NY: Routledge, Taylor, and Francis.

Cobb, S. (2009). Social presence and online leaning: A current view from a research perspective.

Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(3), 241-254.


26

Conrad, R. & Donaldson, J. A. (2012). Transforming the online learner. 28th Annual Conference

on Distance Teaching & Learning. 1-5.

Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of

information technology. MIS Quarterly. 13(3). 319-340.

Dixson, M. D. (2010). Creating effective student engagement in online courses: What do

students find engaging?. Journal of The Scholarship of Teaching & Learning, 10(2), 1-

13.

Downes, S. (2008). Places to go: Connectivism & connective knowledge. Innovate. 5(1).

Downes, S. (2010). New technology supporting information learning. Journal of Emerging

Technologies in Web Intelligence. 2(1). 27-33.

Gaillard-Kenney, S., Kent, B., Long, J., & Ransdell, S. (2011). Digital immigrants fare better

than digital natives due to social reliance. British Journal of Educational Technology,

42(6), 931-938. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01137.

Hortulanus, R., Machielse, A., & Meeuwesen, L. (2006). Social isolation in modern society.

New York, NY: Routledge.

Kirschner, P. A. & Sweller, J. (2007). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work:

An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and

enquiry- based teaching. Educational Psychologist. 41(2). 75-86. doi:

10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.

Lee, M.J. & McLoughlin, C. (2010). Beyond distance and time constraints: Applyinh social

networking tools and web 2.0 approaches in distance education. In G. Veletsianos (Ed.),

Emerging Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 12 (2), 210-218.


27

Legris, P., Ingham, J. & Collerette, P. (2003). Why do people use information technology? A

critical review of the technology acceptance model. . 40. 101-204. doi: 10.1016/S0378-

7206(01)00143-4.

Lovitts, B. (2001). Leaving the ivory tower: The causes and consequences of departure from

doctoral study. Lanham, MD: Roman and Littlefield Publishing Group.

Macharaschwili, C. E. & Coggin, S. (2013). A Skype-buddy model for blended learning. Journal

of Interactive Learning Research. 24(2). 167-190.

Mallon, M. N. (2013). Extending the learning process: Using the theory of connectivism to

inspire student collaboration. Kansas Library Association College and University

Libraries Section Proceedings. 3. 18-27.

Moody, R. A., & Wieland, R. L. (2010). Using videoconferencing to establish and maintain a

social presence in online learning environments. Educational Considerations, 37(2), 18-

21.

Murphy, E., Rodríguez-Manzanares, M. A. & Barbour, M. (2011). Asynchronous and

synchronous online teaching: Perspectives of Canadian high school distance education

teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology. 42(4). 583-591. doi:

10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01112.x.

Nichols, M. (2010). Learner perceptions of support services and the influence of targeted

interventions on retention in distance education. Distance Education, 31(1), 93-113.

Oztok, M., & Brett, C. (2011). Social presence and online learning: A review of research.

Journal of Distance Education, 25(3), 1-10.


28

Parker, J., Boase-Jelinek, D. & Herrington, J. (2011). Perceptions and reflections: Using Skype

chat to build a community of learners. In: E-LEARN 2011 - World Conference on E-

Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare & Higher Education.. 18-21.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part one. On the Horizon, 9(1), 1-6.

Retrieved from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-

%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf.

Radda, H. (2012). From theory to practice to experience: Building scholarly learning

communities in nontraditional doctoral programs. Insight: A Journal of Scholarly

Teaching, 750-53.

Ravenscroft, A. (2011). Dialogue and connectivism: A new approach to understanding and

promoting dialogue-rich networked learning. International Review of Research in Open

and Distance Learning. 12(3). 139-160.

Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2011). Improving doctoral candidates’ persistence in the online

dissertation process. Informally published manuscript, School of Education, Liberty

University, United States.

Rovai, A.P. (2002). Building a sense of community at a distance. International Review of

Research in Open and Distance Learning, 3(1), 1-16.

Rovai, A. P., Wighting, M. J., & Lucking, R. (2004). Development, refinement, and validation of

a self-report measure for educational research. Internet and Higher Education, 7(4), 263-

280.

Ryle, A., & Cumming, K. (2007). Reflections on engagement in online learning communities.

International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning, 3(3), 35-46.

http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf

http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf


29

Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications.

London: John Wiley & Sons.

Siemens, G. (2007). Connectivism: Creating a learning ecology in distributed environments. In

T. Hug (Ed.), Didactics of microlearning: Concepts, discourses and examples. Munster,

Germany: Waxmann Verlag.

Stavredes, T. (2011, December). Overcoming physical separation in the online environment to

help learners persist. InSight: A Journal of Scholarly Teaching. 9-13.

Stelzer, M, & Vogelzangs, I. (1994). Isolation and motivation in on-line and distance learning

Straub, E. T. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future direction for

informal learning. Review of Educational Research. 79(2). 625-649. doi:

10.3102100346543.

Šumak, B., Heričko, M. & Pušnik, M. (2011). A meta-analysis of e-learning technology

acceptance: The role of user types and e-learning technology types. Computers in Human

Behavior. 27(6). 2067-2077. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.005.

Sumner, J. (2000). Serving the system: A Critical history of distance education. Open Learning,

15 (3). Retrieved from http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/copl20/current.

Sung Youl, P. (2009). An analysis of the technology acceptance model in understanding

university students' behavioral intention to use e-Learning. Journal of Educational

Technology & Society, 12(3), 150-162.

Teo, T. (2011). Continuing the intention-usage debate in technology acceptance research: An

empirical study. International Journal of Instructional Media. 38(4). 327-334.

Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent students and

reduce attrition rates. The Journal of Educators Online, 4(2), 1-14.

http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/copl20/current


30

Tschofen, C. & Mackness, J. (2012). Connectivism and dimensions of individual experience. The

International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. 13(1). 124-143.

Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of information

technology: Extending the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology. MIS

Quarterly. 36(1). 157-178.


31

Authors’ Biographies:

Dr. Donna Graham is a university professor, dissertation chair, methodologist, content

expert and residency instructor in Education and Research with Grand Canyon University and

serves as a faculty member at other universities. Dr. Graham holds a B.A. in Psychology and

Education from Rosemont College, a M.S. in Counseling from Villanova University, a M.Ed in

Educational Technology from Rosemont College and a Doctorate in Philosophy from Capella

University. Dr. Graham is editor of the peer-reviewed journal – JOET (Journal of Educational

Technology).

Dr. Timothy Anderson is a 25-year veteran of information technology and founder of

Millennium III Educational Solutions, LLC. He has taught undergraduate and graduate learners

in business and information technology for more than 11 years. His interest areas are educational

technology, implementation of technology, and various learning theories. He has presented

topics related to technology solutions, such as LitAssist, for assisting learners through the review

of literature at several local and international conferences. Dr. Anderson received his Ed.D from

Grand Canyon University and MBA and BA degrees in Business from University of Phoenix.

Dr. Anderson can be reached at [email protected].

Deliesha Hassell is currently a secondary public school educator and a doctoral learner in

Grand Canyon University’s Organization Leadership program with an emphasis in Higher

Education Leadership. Ms. Hassell holds a BA in History from the University of Houston and a

M.Ed. in Higher Education Student Services from Abilene Christian University. She has worked

in various higher education student services departments such as outreach and retention,

enrollment services, and academic advising. Her research interests include identifying strategic

https://bl2prd0712.outlook.com/owa/redir.aspx?C=NiY06lkMrUGNf5sG0BEi7cfZpVDEhtAIP0iRIbPnkF-NEBjgFiiMNFkQQw2AqX9VemLU-ecsYrg.&URL=mailto%3atanderson%40miii.co


32

social integration approaches to develop community among virtual learners and discovering

methods to increase retention rates among adult learners enrolled in virtual higher education

programs.

The Viability of Skype to Reduce Learner Perceived Sense of Isolation

Documents

Transcript of The Viability of Skype to Reduce Learner Perceived Sense of Isolation